The Political Discussion Thread

[Coco Pops]

I watch the show Blue Bloods and in the 4th and 5th seasons "broken window" and "stop and frisk" have become topics that they have made a big part of a lot of episodes.

It's kind of controversial so I guess why it's in the show.

[garhkal]

So, when Trump whines about elections being rigged, that's okay with you, but Gore whining is not okay.

IMO the difference was Gore was more whining people didn't MARK balots properly prompting that whole Hanging Chad hoopla.. Trump is on about people illegally voting, voting more than once and the like...
One is fraud, the other is moaning about how someone voted..

As the article mentions, the machines being rigged are flipping Hillary votes to Trump votes. And the infamous Texas facebook post never claimed that vote flipping is happening. That post simply was a cautionary post reminding people to pay attention to what buttons they push because you can make the wrong choice if you are careless. Is that what you are talking about?

Strange.. When i first saw that texas issue it was the other way (trump to hillary switching by the machine which they finally benched). Strange one in georgia is now doing the other way...

Garhkal...just think for a second. What does negligable mean? It means that it won't impact the election. if these 3 million "voters" were located in one or two states, that'd be a problem. But they are spread out through 50 states. And in some of those states, the poll gap is so wide that even if they all went to the same person (Trump, Hillary, 3rd party) they would not make a difference. And in the swing states, the voting population in general is so large (like within the margin of error) that even if the fraudulent votes in that state all swing to one person, it still would not change the outcome. For example, how many of those 3 million are in PA? Or in Florida? Or in Virginia? Or in Ohio? They don't near the millions. Sure they are thousands, but then you also have to take into account who they end up being attached to.

Wht's negligible to YOU is not to me. Take one of hte races i was in FL for when i was stationed in Jacksonville. just over 4900 votes decided the winner. At a possible 1.8 milion fraudulent votes (going with trump's figures), that splits into 50 states as 36,000 per state.. So in that FL election, you BET it would have made a difference.

Same in some of the 'battle ground states' now where the lead is say 1.4% or so.. YES in many states which are solidly pro hillary or pro trump it won't.

It is...

Explain how so? And if THAT's intimidation, then why wasn't what the black panthers did back in 08/12 also seen as intimidation.? OR was it cause 'dey be black, da boss has their backs"??

[Coco Pops]

First off what is wrong with this picture

http://imgur.com/lyGB1js

Whte people holding up signs saying "Blacks for Trump"

Then an actual black person is at a Trump rally and gets kicked out.

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politi...otester-racism


I guess both things could be rigged.

[Gatefan1976]

IMO the difference was Gore was more whining people didn't MARK balots properly prompting that whole Hanging Chad hoopla.. Trump is on about people illegally voting, voting more than once and the like...
One is fraud, the other is moaning about how someone voted..

The recount in Florida was mandated by the law, not Gore.
Gore had also conceded before this came to light.

Strange.. When i first saw that texas issue it was the other way (trump to hillary switching by the machine which they finally benched). Strange one in georgia is now doing the other way...

So, is that fraud, or machine error?

Wht's negligible to YOU is not to me. Take one of hte races i was in FL for when i was stationed in Jacksonville. just over 4900 votes decided the winner. At a possible 1.8 milion fraudulent votes (going with trump's figures), that splits into 50 states as 36,000 per state.. So in that FL election, you BET it would have made a difference.

Ok, so, look at vote denial then. Killman provided stories about 2 counties (let alone states) having lost 120k in total because of voter denial. So, something that happens almost 4 times more often must be totally catastrophic.

Same in some of the 'battle ground states' now where the lead is say 1.4% or so.. YES in many states which are solidly pro hillary or pro trump it won't.

Worst case scenario was around 0.77% in total, so roughly twice as many "things" would have to happen to call the result into question.

Explain how so? And if THAT's intimidation, then why wasn't what the black panthers did back in 08/12 also seen as intimidation.? OR was it cause 'dey be black, da boss has their backs"??

Who is defending any kind of voter intimidation?
(And I think Tood was more responding to the "liberal media not covering it" actually)

[thekillman]

That sort of argument is imo the same BS i hear from people saying "Stop wasting time and effort cramping down on welfare fraud, or IRS tax return abuse/waste, the half a billion you might save is a drop in the bucket when compared TO ____ (insert what ever government program).."

It doesn't always work like that Garhkal. Especially since i suspect the Voter ID law will just be used as a band-aid to say "see people: we're fixing voter fraud!" and then completely ignore the rest.

Bigger problems exist due to clerical errors, different standards, etc. It's like trying to save pennies while systematic inefficiencies wastes millions. The problem with your argument is that people apply a false comparison. In this case, voter fraud is a thing that exists, and i suggest the effort be put to the biggest voter fraud problems first. What your comparison suggests is that we focus on a completely different thing unrelated to voter fraud.

The safety pyramid /broken window problem doesn't apply to everything. in this case, Voter ID will just serve as a way to feel that voting is better when it's not. it's just window dressing

So take voting away from the state and make it a federally run program?
Create yet another bloated federal department...

Standardize vote counting, what machines are used and the methodology. It doesn't have to be fully run on a federal level. But as Bush V Al gore showed, big vote discrepancies happen due to standardization differences. And since you hated such discrepancies when we talked about individual voter fraud, you should really be campaigning really hard to standardize voting.

I watch the show Blue Bloods and in the 4th and 5th seasons "broken window" and "stop and frisk" have become topics that they have made a big part of a lot of episodes.

It's kind of controversial so I guess why it's in the show.

I know it as the Safety Pyramid. Basically any gas or oil company mandates that low-level safety is followed (all cars parked with the nose pointing to the road, holding rails, etc). the idea is that for every death, there are 10 major injuries, 100 medium injuries, 1000 small injuries and 10 000 accidents without injury (largely arbitrary numbers, it's about the statistical breakdown). So if you cut down the minor accidents, the idea is that you also cut down the amount of larger incidents.

The question is of course what the cause and effect here is. Most injuries happen due to neglecting safety and continuously reminding people of it via small acts may help more than the statistical theory behind it.

I assume the broken window principle works the same way, but for crime awareness: by actively going after small crime it creates a sense of safety and deters criminals from (opportunistic) crime.

[Annoyed]

I'm curious. Do you have numbers I could see?

This what you have in mind? From 2012.
http://townsquarenewyork.com/new-yor...ial-elections/

[Annoyed]

I have 20 holidays + 7 extra days cause we work half hour longer than the max hours/week + a few official holidays (january 1, easter + easter monday, december 25, november 1 and 11, july 11 and 21, may 1 and some christian holiday I can never remember in may) - 10 unpaid emergency vacation days (f.e.: to take care of a sick family member).

And sick leave, first day of leave without a doctor's note, the rest with. Paid sick leave, I might add.

Thank you, unions.

That's my point. The govt. here doesn't have the authority to force a business to close or give workers the day off.
And effective unions are few and far between here these days, primarily government employees and other organizations that get their operating money from the govt.
This is why most private sector workers do not get Presidents day, Martin Luthor King day and a few others off while govt. employees do.
So, if the govt. does try to give election day off, you can bet that while the govt. employees will get the day off, most private sector workers won't. Think that might bias the results of an election towards those who favor big government?

[Coco Pops]

That's my point. The govt. here doesn't have the authority to force a business to close or give workers the day off.
And effective unions are few and far between here these days, primarily government employees and other organizations that get their operating money from the govt.
This is why most private sector workers do not get Presidents day, Martin Luthor King day and a few others off while govt. employees do.
So, if the govt. does try to give election day off, you can bet that while the govt. employees will get the day off, most private sector workers won't. Think that might bias the results of an election towards those who favor big government?

OK unions serve some good getting rights for their workers and such so why are some conservative governments, like ouors for instance against unions?

[Falcon Horus]

Apparently the emails under investigation are not Clinton's emails. Probably doesn't make for a good headline so let's make them Hillary's instead.

[SoulReaver]

Apparently the emails under investigation are not Clinton's emails

that's interesting but can u elaborate?

[Falcon Horus]

that's interesting but can u elaborate?

Here you go: Emails in Anthony Weiner Inquiry Jolt Hillary Clinton’s Campaign

The presidential campaign was rocked on Friday after federal law enforcement officials said that emails pertinent to the closed investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server were discovered on a computer belonging to Anthony D. Weiner, the estranged husband of a top Clinton aide.

In a letter to Congress, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, said the emails had surfaced in an unrelated case, which law enforcement officials said was an F.B.I. investigation into illicit text messages from Mr. Weiner to a 15-year-old girl in North Carolina. Mr. Weiner, a former Democratic congressman from New York, is married to Huma Abedin, the top aide.

[...]

[SGalisa]

Apparently the emails under investigation are not Clinton's emails. Probably doesn't make for a good headline so let's make them Hillary's instead.

that's interesting but can u elaborate?

Here you go: Emails in Anthony Weiner Inquiry Jolt Hillary Clinton’s Campaign

ahhh. FH beat me to it..
Well, here's some more.

FBI director Comey "may" also be in trouble, according to a VERY LARGE SUM of money going around right via his wife's hands possibily helping Hillary Clinton's direction .. what?! hush, hush money??!

"CHILLING: As FBI reopens Hillary case, LOOK what happens on campaign plane..."
By Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor
4:25pm October 28, 2016
(Copyright ©2016. AllenBWest.com. All rights reserved.)

Do you believe in "coincidences?"

They sure do seem to happen a lot for Democrat presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.

For example, what a stunning coincidence that former President Bill Clinton "happened" to run into Attorney General Loretta Lynch on the tarmac, just days before her FBI recommend no charges against Clinton's wife.

Or that the deputy director of the FBI, who helped lead the investigation into Hillary's private email scandal, is married to the Virginia state senate candidate that Hillary's BFF — Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe — gave nearly $500K to through his PAC. Oh yeah the same PAC for which Hillary Clinton herself — coincidentally, of course — raised more than $1 million, as the FBI investigation into her was underway.
. . .

But just let this sink in for a moment: the woman who could possibly be elected President of the United States in just 11 days appears to have simply cut off internet access to our media in order to protect herself. If you can’t control the content, just black out access altogether.
. . .

Okay, that was confusing. Below article is a bit more clarifying to what the new email investigation is about, sort of..

"BREAKING: FBI reopens Hillary email investigation, but NOT why you think..."
By Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor
2:08pm October 28, 2016
(Copyright ©2016. AllenBWest.com.)

. . .
{quote} More from Fox News:
FBI Director James Comey wrote in a letter to top members of Congress Friday that the bureau has "learned of the existence of emails that appear to be pertinent to the investigation."

Comey did not detail those emails, saying only that they surfaced "in connection with an unrelated case."

He said the FBI could not yet assess whether the new material is significant and he could not predict how long it will take to complete "this additional work."
. . . {end of Fox News quote}

Of course, we've just been learning more this week about the payoffs made to FBI associates from Hillary Clinton PACs, just to add to the American public's fallen trust in the FBI and Justice Department in general.
. . .

Other news *breaking* reports on the radio (heard on WABC, WCBS news), announced the reopening of investigations which included Anthony Weiner. Report also stated that there were "thousands" of emails on that phone / new investigation.. hmmm.. including some of the bleached out or missing 33,000 emails that were on Hillary's server, or above and beyond around and around the world such info went..?

Core of the accumulated news reports regarding this "reopened case", claimed the investigation was connected to former Democratic congressman Anthony Weiner, who is also the now estranged husband to Huma Abedin, who (Huma) is Hillary's BFF. Weiner was apparently using the same cell phone (blackberry?) for his porno romps that Huma Abedin was using that same phone to (possibly) converse with Hillary or Hillary's "pay for play" deals, etc. and/or other peeps.

Wow. What a nasty circle of events this is, if true! ..
. . . whooops!

[Falcon Horus]

Wow. What a nasty circle of events this is, if true! ..
. . . whooops!

I find it hilarious and quite telling that it has nothing to do with Hillary, but with other people related to her in some way. Working for or friends with.

Just goes to show how hard they have to scramble to find something substantial.

[Annoyed]

OK unions serve some good getting rights for their workers and such so why are some conservative governments, like ouors for instance against unions?

I actually have nothing whatsoever against unions in the private sector, with one glaring exception, where the govt. is involved.

If company A's product is overpriced or of low quality because their management knuckled under to absurd wage/compensation demands from their unions, I can always go buy that product from company B, C, or D. It's no skin off my nose if company A goes out of business.

The public sector is another situation completely. I cannot go purchase those products and services from another vendor. I'm forced to pay whatever rates the govt. has to set in order to pay the often exorbitant deals public employees have extorted from the govt. In deep blue states, very often the elected officials are very generous in what they offer the unions and the unions reciprocate by supporting those elected officials at the ballot box.

The glaring exception I referred to is of course, the automobile industry. GM & Chrysler* were on the ropes, largely due to the agreements they had signed with their unions. They simply couldn't afford to be competitive in the marketplace while paying $85 bucks an hour to the guy who pushes the broom.

But rather than go out of business, and letting someone buy the smoking remains of once-great companies for pennies on the dollar (which would have rendered those union contracts worthless) and run the business more efficiently, the govt. stepped in and bailed those two companies out.

Never mind that the Constitution does NOT grant the govt. the authority to bail out a private business, it's just wrong from an ethical standpoint as well. They screwed their company up, why shouldn't they pay for the mistake?

[Coco Pops]

I actually have nothing whatsoever against unions in the private sector, with one glaring exception, where the govt. is involved.

If company A's product is overpriced or of low quality because their management knuckled under to absurd wage/compensation demands from their unions, I can always go buy that product from company B, C, or D. It's no skin off my nose if company A goes out of business.

The public sector is another situation completely. I cannot go purchase those products and services from another vendor. I'm forced to pay whatever rates the govt. has to set in order to pay the often exorbitant deals public employees have extorted from the govt. In deep blue states, very often the elected officials are very generous in what they offer the unions and the unions reciprocate by supporting those elected officials at the ballot box.

The glaring exception I referred to is of course, the automobile industry. GM & Chrysler* were on the ropes, largely due to the agreements they had signed with their unions. They simply couldn't afford to be competitive in the marketplace while paying $85 bucks an hour to the guy who pushes the broom.

But rather than go out of business, and letting someone buy the smoking remains of once-great companies for pennies on the dollar (which would have rendered those union contracts worthless) and run the business more efficiently, the govt. stepped in and bailed those two companies out.

Never mind that the Constitution does NOT grant the govt. the authority to bail out a private business, it's just wrong from an ethical standpoint as well. They screwed their company up, why shouldn't they pay for the mistake?

I agree with that and you know the same thing happens to the banking sector. They screw up on their own and cause the GFC but the government bails them out because reasons. I think what you said should apply to the banks. Over here they get the same kind of special treatment.

I think unions are important as many of the rights people have at work were because of unions lobbying for those workers rights. But as I said howcome some governments like mine have a massive hard on to get rid of unions? Why?