Mark K 2
Well-Known Member
[Broken External Image]:
Mitt's storm survival tips
- Thread starter Mark K 2
- Start date
Help Support Ford SportTrac Forum:
Jerry Gerner 2
Well-Known Member
:bwahaha::rofl:
Richard McAlister
Well-Known Member
Actually, I don't find #6 & #7 funny at all. As one of the 53%, I am tired of the Dems forcing me to pay for the 47% who don't/won't take care of themselves.
:banghead:
:banghead:
Jim Upton
Active Member
Right on rmac!! Couldnt agree more!!!
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
This sounds closer to Obama's storm survival tips.
#8 is undeniably an Obama "tip". #11 sounds like Obama as well.
#2 doesn't make sense for Romney, he's the guy who said the "if you're looking for free stuff that you don't have to pay for then I'm not your guy" sound bite that has been making the rounds for a good while now.
What does #5 have to do with Romney?
#8 is undeniably an Obama "tip". #11 sounds like Obama as well.
#2 doesn't make sense for Romney, he's the guy who said the "if you're looking for free stuff that you don't have to pay for then I'm not your guy" sound bite that has been making the rounds for a good while now.
What does #5 have to do with Romney?
Robert Thomas
Well-Known Member
And What Are The Storm Tips form one living in the White House?
1. Stay put I have thousands of people protecting me.:fire:
2. If I have damage, I will get more money from China.:throwup:
3. Don't worry about the car, Helios or planes they arn't mine.:grin:
4. Disaster equals opportunity.:sad:
5. Find me a unaffected golf course in Las Vegas.:banana:
6. My prayers go out to those who plan to vote for me.:back2topic:
7. I will get you to Ohio to vote if you plan to vote for me.:back2topic:
8. If anyone survives I will take credit for it. If anyone dies we will investigate after the election.:supercool:
9. If you need food don't call me, eat your dog.:btddhorse:
10. Chill out we will get to you after we take care of New Orleans.:cheeky:
11. If you are on Staten Island and need food or water. Run the marathon, we will be handing out free stuff at the 26 mile mark in New Jersey.:love:
12. Don''t be a victim. Loot from the rich, EFMA will give you a prepaid motel, a prepaid credit card, free gas, and lots of other free stuff. :haveabeer: See 6 and 7.
1. Stay put I have thousands of people protecting me.:fire:
2. If I have damage, I will get more money from China.:throwup:
3. Don't worry about the car, Helios or planes they arn't mine.:grin:
4. Disaster equals opportunity.:sad:
5. Find me a unaffected golf course in Las Vegas.:banana:
6. My prayers go out to those who plan to vote for me.:back2topic:
7. I will get you to Ohio to vote if you plan to vote for me.:back2topic:
8. If anyone survives I will take credit for it. If anyone dies we will investigate after the election.:supercool:
9. If you need food don't call me, eat your dog.:btddhorse:
10. Chill out we will get to you after we take care of New Orleans.:cheeky:
11. If you are on Staten Island and need food or water. Run the marathon, we will be handing out free stuff at the 26 mile mark in New Jersey.:love:
12. Don''t be a victim. Loot from the rich, EFMA will give you a prepaid motel, a prepaid credit card, free gas, and lots of other free stuff. :haveabeer: See 6 and 7.
Frank screwyourednecks
Well-Known Member
Yeah unemployment is 47 percent now... Fantasyland
Frank,
What's your point??????????????? Did someone just wake you up and you needed to blurt out something? :smack:
Go back to sleep....The world was doing so much better when you were sleeping.
...Rich
What's your point??????????????? Did someone just wake you up and you needed to blurt out something? :smack:
Go back to sleep....The world was doing so much better when you were sleeping.
...Rich
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Frank is here today to stir the pot. He is feeling froggy. If Mitt wins tonight we will see if he shows his face tomorrow.
As far as I am concerned, he and others can feel free to gloat all they want if their guy wins by a landslide. I don't see that happening, though.
This country has gone to sh!t primarily because of the weak-minded that are easily programmed by their party, their ideologies, and the mass media. The fact that the last several elections have been so close is proof that we have a bunch of sheep at the two ends of the spectrum and very few in the middle actually wanting to work together to solve problems. It's more about political power and getting elected, and staying elected, and the threats involved with that (most of the so-called issues are nothing of the kind) than in running the country for the good of the people.
TJR
As far as I am concerned, he and others can feel free to gloat all they want if their guy wins by a landslide. I don't see that happening, though.
This country has gone to sh!t primarily because of the weak-minded that are easily programmed by their party, their ideologies, and the mass media. The fact that the last several elections have been so close is proof that we have a bunch of sheep at the two ends of the spectrum and very few in the middle actually wanting to work together to solve problems. It's more about political power and getting elected, and staying elected, and the threats involved with that (most of the so-called issues are nothing of the kind) than in running the country for the good of the people.
TJR
Last edited by a moderator:
TJR,
I will never accept any Presidential candidate winning by a landslide when our election system allows the Electoral College to override the popular vote. The Electoral College is something that has outlived it's usefulness and now only allows candidates to target specific states to campaign.
The Electoral College is just a political sham...It allows the politicians to more easily target their message to specific states where they need their electoral votes. Even if the candidate gets one more vote than the other, he gets all the electoral votes and that simply throws all the votes for the other candidate in the trash can.
With current transportation, candidate have been known to appear and campaign in 4-5 states in a single day and still have time to appear on all the talk shows.
I would prefer to wait until the next day to find out who won...after all the votes from all the states are tallied (including Hawaii) and the one with the most individual votes, wins. Also, we need to stop the media from speculating or speculating who the winner is until all the votes are counted and finalized.
...Rich
I will never accept any Presidential candidate winning by a landslide when our election system allows the Electoral College to override the popular vote. The Electoral College is something that has outlived it's usefulness and now only allows candidates to target specific states to campaign.
The Electoral College is just a political sham...It allows the politicians to more easily target their message to specific states where they need their electoral votes. Even if the candidate gets one more vote than the other, he gets all the electoral votes and that simply throws all the votes for the other candidate in the trash can.
With current transportation, candidate have been known to appear and campaign in 4-5 states in a single day and still have time to appear on all the talk shows.
I would prefer to wait until the next day to find out who won...after all the votes from all the states are tallied (including Hawaii) and the one with the most individual votes, wins. Also, we need to stop the media from speculating or speculating who the winner is until all the votes are counted and finalized.
...Rich
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Richard L,
I agree, the electoral college usefulness has run its course. I wonder how likely it is for a candidate to win the popular vote by a landslide and lose the EC vote? Could happen, I guess, but unlikely. More likely is a loss at the EC level but a PV win.
I agree, the electoral college usefulness has run its course. I wonder how likely it is for a candidate to win the popular vote by a landslide and lose the EC vote? Could happen, I guess, but unlikely. More likely is a loss at the EC level but a PV win.
Andy Chase
Well-Known Member
With the EC votes, it makes me feel that my vote in MN weighs less than Joe Schmo from CA. It should just be the popular vote.:soap:
Thomas Rogers
Well-Known Member
Andy, it's not just a feeling...its the reality. Your vote does weigh less.
Oh, wait, comparing and contrasting the relative importance of votes might make people who had some voting tragedy in their past upset. Maybe we shouldn't discuss such things.
TJR
Oh, wait, comparing and contrasting the relative importance of votes might make people who had some voting tragedy in their past upset. Maybe we shouldn't discuss such things.
TJR
TJR,
Yes I think it is possible for a candidate to win by a landslide of Electoral Vote but the loser could have had significantly more of the popular vote.
ie: The winning Presidential candidate wins nearly all the states in a landslide of Electoral Votes but only wins each state by a very small handful of votes (say less than 50 votes per state). While on the other hand, the loser only wins a few states, but by a huge landslide of several million votes in each state that he won. In that scenario, the loser could have several million more votes than the winner, but lost the election in an apparent landslide of Electoral Votes.
Probably won't happen in our life time, but then again, maybe it will??? Right now the nation is almost evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, and the winner of the Popular Vote has already lost a Presidential election because of the Electoral Vote system.
Electoral College has got to go. Any one who defends it, can't explain it, or justify why we need it?
....Rich
Yes I think it is possible for a candidate to win by a landslide of Electoral Vote but the loser could have had significantly more of the popular vote.
ie: The winning Presidential candidate wins nearly all the states in a landslide of Electoral Votes but only wins each state by a very small handful of votes (say less than 50 votes per state). While on the other hand, the loser only wins a few states, but by a huge landslide of several million votes in each state that he won. In that scenario, the loser could have several million more votes than the winner, but lost the election in an apparent landslide of Electoral Votes.
Probably won't happen in our life time, but then again, maybe it will??? Right now the nation is almost evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, and the winner of the Popular Vote has already lost a Presidential election because of the Electoral Vote system.
Electoral College has got to go. Any one who defends it, can't explain it, or justify why we need it?
....Rich
Last edited by a moderator:
Bill V
Well-Known Member
Andy, actually, your vote here in MN matters MORE than a vote by Joe Schmo in CA, as a vote in MN had a far higher chance of swinging the result here than a vote in CA has of swinging the vote there.
TJR, I don't think it's right to say that the EC usefulness has run its course, simply because many even in the founding fathers days felt it had no usefulness back then.
Note that the "winner take all" system is not mandated--states can choose how to allocate their electoral votes. According to a story I saw this morning on CBS's Sunday Morning program this past Sunday, there is a movement in many states--in fact, several states have already adopted it into legislation--to change the way their electoral votes are cast, such that they go to whichever candidate wins the majority of the national vote. The caveat--the change only goes into effect once enough states pass the legislation that the number of electoral votes exceeds 270. If that happens, even though the electoral college would still exist, it would be rendered irrelevant. So if you think the electoral college is a bad idea, push this legislation in your state.
TJR, I don't think it's right to say that the EC usefulness has run its course, simply because many even in the founding fathers days felt it had no usefulness back then.
Note that the "winner take all" system is not mandated--states can choose how to allocate their electoral votes. According to a story I saw this morning on CBS's Sunday Morning program this past Sunday, there is a movement in many states--in fact, several states have already adopted it into legislation--to change the way their electoral votes are cast, such that they go to whichever candidate wins the majority of the national vote. The caveat--the change only goes into effect once enough states pass the legislation that the number of electoral votes exceeds 270. If that happens, even though the electoral college would still exist, it would be rendered irrelevant. So if you think the electoral college is a bad idea, push this legislation in your state.
Frank screwyourednecks
Well-Known Member
LOL
Andy Chase
Well-Known Member
Bill V, if I were the only voter in MN to vote I would only accomadate for I think 10 electorals. If Joe Schmo is the only voter in CA for the same race, he'd be accountable for 55 electrorals. But if it were popular vote, my vote would carry the same weight as his.
Kevin Lang
Well-Known Member
I wish that other states would, if we have to keep the Electoral College system, do what Maine and Nebraska do and allocate their electoral votes based upon the popular vote in each congressional district and the senatorial vote goes to the statewide popular vote winner.
I'd really like to see the removal of voting rights for DC residentsbanghead and the revocation of voting privileges from those who get direct payouts from the government to sustain them. That one is a complicated idea but IMO if the Federal Government is giving you an ObamaPhone (or other bribe) then the State should be restricting your voting privileges.
I'd really like to see the removal of voting rights for DC residents
banghead and the revocation of voting privileges from those who get direct payouts from the government to sustain them. That one is a complicated idea but IMO if the Federal Government is giving you an ObamaPhone (or other bribe) then the State should be restricting your voting privileges.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bill V
Well-Known Member
True--but you're not the only voter in CA or MN, so your statement is irrelevant. What matters is. Whether you live in a state whose contest is close enough to be swung by a small number of votes. By your argument, in 2000, the most important votes would have been those cast in California--but we all know that the day after the election, no one cared how any individual in Cali voted. Whereas everyone was critically interested in every single Florida ballot.
