Bruce Dazzling wrote:I can't vouch for the veracity of this, there appears to be a weird jump cut at :04, but here you go.
Published on Nov 6, 2012
My wife and I went to the voting booths this morning before work. There were 4 older ladies running the show and 3 voting booths that are similar to a science fair project in how they fold up. They had an oval VOTE logo on top center and a cartridge slot on the left that the volunteers used to start your ballot.
I initially selected Obama but Romney was highlighted. I assumed it was being picky so I deselected Romney and tried Obama again, this time more carefully, and still got Romney. Being a software developer, I immediately went into troubleshoot mode. I first thought the calibration was off and tried selecting Jill Stein to actually highlight Obama. Nope. Jill Stein was selected just fine. Next I deselected her and started at the top of Romney's name and started tapping very closely together to find the 'active areas'. From the top of Romney's button down to the bottom of the black checkbox beside Obama's name was all active for Romney. From the bottom of that same checkbox to the bottom of the Obama button (basically a small white sliver) is what let me choose Obama. Stein's button was fine. All other buttons worked fine.
I asked the voters on either side of me if they had any problems and they reported they did not. I then called over a volunteer to have a look at it. She him hawed for a bit then calmly said "It's nothing to worry about, everything will be OK." and went back to what she was doing. I then recorded this video.
There is a lot of speculation that the footage is edited. I'm not a video guy, but if it's possible to prove whether a video has been altered or not, I will GLADLY provide the raw footage to anyone who is willing to do so. The jumping frames are a result of the shitty camera app on my Android phone, nothing more.
"Arrogance is experiential and environmental in cause. Human experience can make and unmake arrogance. Ours is about to get unmade."
NBC News confirmed that the machine has been taken off line.
What a relief!
The System works!
“The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.” ― Joan Robinson
the machine has been taken off line. the machine has been taken off line. the machine has been taken off line. the machine has been taken off line. the machine has been taken off line.
That is all.
America is a fucked society because there is no room for essential human dignity. Its all about what you have, not who you are.--Joe Hillshoist
In the final days before Tuesday’s election, most of the focus will be on those likely to cast votes. But a sizable minority of adults choose not to vote or are unable to vote. By their absence, they also will affect the outcome. Nonvoters are numerous; in 2008, they constituted about 43% of the voting age population.
Nonvoters favor Barack Obama over Mitt Romney by a wide margin (59% to 24%). While most nonvoters (64%) have a favorable view of Obama, just half as many (32%) view Romney favorably.
By contrast, likely voters are evenly divided in Pew Research’s most recent national survey (47% Obama, 47% Romney). Nearly identical percentages of likely voters view Obama and Romney favorably (51% Obama, 52% Romney).
A plurality of nonvoters are independents (44%); 29% identify as Democrats and just 17% as Republicans. Likely voters include about the same percentages of Democrats (35%) as Republicans (34%); 27% of likely voters are independents.
About half of nonvoters (52%) either identify as Democrats or lean Democratic; only 27% identify as Republicans or lean Republican. Likely voters’ leaned party identification is evenly divided: 47% identify with the Republican Party or lean toward the GOP, while the same percentage identify as Democrats or lean Democratic. However, just a quarter of nonvoters describe their political views as liberal; that is little different from the percentage of liberals among likely voters (20%). But nonvoters are far less likely than voters to describe their political views as conservative (28% vs. 44% of likely voters).
As might be expected, nonvoters express very little interest in politics or the election. A third of nonvoters say they are registered to vote. But they are far less likely than voters to give a lot of thought to the election and follow public affairs. Demographic Differences Between Voters, Nonvoters
Nonvoters are younger, less educated and less affluent than are likely voters. More than a third (36%) of nonvoters are younger than 30, compared with just 13% of likely voters.
Just 13% of nonvoters are college graduates and about the same percentage (14%) have family incomes of $75,000 or more. Among likely voters, 38% are college graduates and a third (33%) have family incomes of $75,000 or more.
While most voters are married, most nonvoters are not. Nearly two-thirds (64%) of nonvoters are unmarried, compared with 40% of likely voters.
Nonvoters also are much more likely than voters to be Hispanic: 21% of nonvoters are Hispanic, which is three times the percentage of Hispanics among likely voters (7%). About six-in-ten (59%) nonvoters are white non-Hispanics. By contrast, white non-Hispanics make up about three quarters (74%) of likely voters. Nonvoters and Voters on the Issues
Nonvoters express more liberal opinions than voters on a wide range of domestic and foreign policy issues. But the differences are far less pronounced on social issues, such as gay marriage and abortion.
Far more nonvoters than voters favor activist government. About half of nonvoters (52%) say the government should do more to solve problems, while 40% say the government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals. The balance of opinion is reversed among likely voters: 56% say the government is doing too much, while 39% say the government should do more to solve problems.
By 46% to 31%, more nonvoters favor keeping the 2010 health care law in place than repealing the law; 23% do not express an opinion. Voters are more evenly divided, with 49% favoring the law’s repeal and 43% saying it should remain in place; just 8% do not express an opinion.
There are smaller differences in the opinions of voters and nonvoters on tax policy: 55% of nonvoters and 51% of likely voters say it would better for the economy to maintain current tax rates on income under $250,000 while raising taxes on income about that level. A third of nonvoters, and 42% of likely voters say it would better to lower tax rates for all Americans by 20%, while limiting some tax deductions.
On foreign policy, a clear majority of likely voters (56%) favor withdrawing U.S. forces from Afghanistan as soon as possible; 40% say they should remain until the situation there is stabilized. Support for an immediate withdrawal is even more widespread among nonvoters (67% favor).
Nonvoters also are less supportive of taking hard line against Iran’s nuclear program: 45% say it is more important to take a firm stand against Iran, while 40% say it is more important to avoid a military conflict with Iran. Among likely voters, 62% favor taking a firm stand against Iran while just 31% say it is more important to avoid a military conflict.
On gay marriage and abortion, however, there are at most modest differences between nonvoters and likely voters. And there are no significant differences in opinions about the impact of immigrants on the country.
Identical percentages of nonvoters and likely voters favor allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally (49% each). Somewhat fewer nonvoters oppose gay marriage (36% vs. 42% of voters ), while more have no opinion (15% vs. 9%).
Nonvoters have the same views on abortion as likely voters: 54% of nonvoters say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while 39% say it should be illegal in all or most cases. Among likely voters, 55% favor legal abortion in all or most cases; 38% say it should be mostly illegal.
Like voters, nonvoters express mixed opinions about the impact of the growing population of immigrants on the U.S.: 27% say it has been a change for the better, 34% a change for the worse, while 34% say it has not made much difference.
seemslikeadream wrote:AS IN 2000, ELECTION DAY FALLS ON ‘MERCURY IN RETROGRADE’
Astrologers are watching Election Day with caution because at 6:05 p.m., on the East Coast, the planet Mercury will go into retrograde motion, a time of confusion and miscommunication.
The last time a presidential election was held during Mercury Retrogade was in 2000.
Curious. Well the elite do take their occult beliefs seriously.
This was the morning of 9/11 in astrology terms
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
Both astrological positions and the dates of US presidential elections under the constitution of 1787 can be worked out to the day and minute, thousands of years in advance - millions, in fact, except that eventually there will be changes in the orbits of planets and the durations of Earth days and years, either gradually or suddenly due to astronomical events. So to map that out means your top-level occult controllers have some serious mojo going. We should surrender immediately to their awesomeness.
Last edited by JackRiddler on Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.
To Justice my maker from on high did incline: I am by virtue of its might divine, The highest Wisdom and the first Love.
seemslikeadream wrote:Astrologers are watching Election Day with caution because at 6:05 p.m., on the East Coast, the planet Mercury will go into retrograde motion, a time of confusion and miscommunication.
The last time a presidential election was held during Mercury Retrogade was in 2000.
Curious. Well the elite do take their occult beliefs seriously.
There's nothing elite or occult about it. It's a real event which happens 3-4 times a year, and I do expect miscommunication and possible delays.
This was the morning of 9/11 in astrology terms.
This statement is just ignorant. Those two glyphs stand for the signs of Gemini and Saggitarius, which are opposite each other in any and all horoscope charts. On that day, Saturn opposed Pluto in those signs, which is one of many aspects in the chart, and naturally open to various interpretations.
Last edited by Perelandra on Tue Nov 06, 2012 3:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
“The past is never dead. It's not even past.” - William Faulkner
How about Social Security? Parents' medicare? Our shitty 401Ks, again?
fyi, those are doomed regardless. be thankful for the time you had together! imo.
Social Security is in more danger than there's any reason for it to be. But if it were presently politically possible to doom it, it would already be gone, given what a high-profile, high-priority goal getting rid of it has been over (especially) the last ten years for (especially) the GOP.
As a purely demographic matter, they kind of have to try to kill it now in order to have any hope of success. But the truth is that it's been a real challenge as well as a real political disadvantage for them. Accepting its demise in advance unnecessarily just helps them.
“If someone comes out of a liquor store with a weapon and 50 dollars in cash I don’t care if a Drone kills him or a policeman kills him.” -- Rand Paul
The 2012 election is Tuesday. We face a choice between Barack Obama, a candidate whose Presidency we can examine and evaluate, and Mitt Romney, who is a dangerous cipher. My argument – made last week in “Progressive Case Against Obama “, is that progressives should evaluate these risks honestly, with a clear-headed analysis of Obama’s track record.This piece sparked a massive debate that has had both Obama loyalists and Republicans resort to outlandish name-calling , evidently as a result of their unwillingness or inability to address the issues raised.
It is remarkable to see the level to which Obama defenders have sunk. Let’s start with a basic problem – why is Obama in a tight race? Mitt Romney is more caricature than candidate, a horrifically cartoonish plutocrat whose campaign is staffed by people that allow secret tapings of obviously offensive statements. The Republican base finds Romney uninspiring, and Romney has been unable to provide one good reason to choose him except that he is not the incumbent. Yet, Barack Obama is in a dog fight with this clown. Why? It isn’t because a few critics are writing articles in places like Salon. The answer, if you look at the data, is that Barack Obama has been a terrible President and an enemy to progressives. Unemployment is high. American household income since the recovery started in 2009 has dropped 5% . Poverty has increased substantially. Home equity – the main store of wealth for the middle class – has dropped by $5-7 trillion, in contrast to the increase in financial asset values held by Obama’s friends and donors. And this was done explicitly through Obama’s policies.
Obama came into office with a massive mandate, overwhelming control of Congress, hundreds of billions of TARP money to play with, the ability to prosecute Wall Street executives and break their power, and the opportunity for a massive stimulus. Most importantly, the country was willing to follow – the public believed his calls for change. Yet, instead of restructuring the economy and doing obvious things like hardening infrastructure against global warming, he entrenched oligarchy. This was explicit. Obama broke a whole series of campaign promises that would have helped the middle class. These promises would have reduced household debt, raised the minimum wage, stopped outsourcing, and protected workers. He broke these promises for a reason – Barack Obama uses his power for what he believes in, and Barack Obama is a conservative technocrat. Obama sided with Wall Street. He probably made the foreclosure crisis worse with a series of programs designed to help banks but marketed to help homeowners. These were his policies, they reflected the views of his most valued advisors like Robert Rubin and his Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. Moreover, he’s proud of this record – the only mistake he cites in his first term is inadequately communicating how effective he has been, focusing too much on getting the policy right.
And the result is inequality in income gains that is higher than that under George W. Bush. Most of Obama’s defenders refuse to acknowledge Obama’s role in this policy mess. He deserves credit for the auto bailout, but when it comes to the bank bailouts, hey he’s just one man. What could we possibly expect? Yet, reelecting this man to a Presidency that is hamstrung by the system is the most important thing in the world. In other words, just as they’ve been arguing for years, Obama is both entirely powerless and utterly essential.
Let’s examine a few articles to see the contortions certain progressives go to in order to defend Obama’s policies.
Everyone realizes that as of tomorrow it's all Christmas music and Christmas commercials from here on? That's something to look forward to!
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
On the eve of election, I'd like to share with you a quote from Daniel Webster. He spoke these stirring and memorable words at a public meeting in Virginia in October 1840:
Daniel Webster wrote:Impress upon children the truth that the exercise of the elective franchise is a social duty of as solemn a nature as man can be called to perform; that a man may not innocently trifle with his vote; that every elector is a trustee as well for others as himself and that every measure he supports has an important bearing on the interests of others as well as on his own.
That was then. Times change, however, and now the only sane and sensible advice to your children is: Fuck the fucking fuckers before the fucking fuckers fuck you. In 2012, casting a vote is trifling with the vote.
"Ich kann gar nicht so viel fressen, wie ich kotzen möchte." - Max Liebermann,, Berlin, 1933
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." - Richard Feynman, NYC, 1966
NeonLX wrote:the machine has been taken off line. the machine has been taken off line. the machine has been taken off line. the machine has been taken off line. the machine has been taken off line.
