Who do you support for Governor in Oh...
xgdkygfch

Cincinnati, OH

#25895 Feb 22, 2014
me too

“Meh.”

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#25897 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
First of all, what "means testing" would exclude anybody that takes an interest in country, politics and policies from voting? Because I think that's what you're after here.
Like I said earlier, I should be means tested if it were up to me to choose a pitcher or quarterback for either of our sports teams. I don't know squat about sports and I certainly don't follow it. If it were an option, I might pick a guy that dresses good, looks good or muscular. I might pick him because his wife is hot or he tells funny jokes. But I wouldn't have the capability to pick a sports figure based on his accomplishments, record or ability to forward our team. I don't know enough about it, and certainly wouldn't be disappointed if I were means tested out the door. Me not having a say-so would be the best thing for our teams.
As far as early voting goes, being able to register and vote the same day doesn't give our poll workers enough time to verify who it is that's voting. Not that it means they won't do some leg work later. I don't know how that process of same day voting works. But what I will say is that if you don't take voting serious enough to attend on the normal voting day, or make arrangements to absentee vote if you can't make it on voting day, you are probably not all that interested in voting, nor have the knowledge to make a sound decision when voting.
People like myself (and I'm sure many others here) make sure they are there to vote because the future of our country means that much to us be it a liberal, conservative or Libertarian. It's important to us. We understand the issues and what's at stake. Many voters in America know more about their favorite American Idol contestant than their Congress person, Senator and even presidential choices. But not us in these political blogs. We spend our time here instead of the television discussing issues, learning things from other people, reading links and doing our own research.
People are more worried about disenfranchising an individual voter than they are disenfranchising all citizens of this country by electing pinheads they knew nothing about. What did Obama have to offer that Hillary didn't? She had eight years in the White House and eight years in the Senate. Sixteen years of federal government experience, and people picked a community organizer based on Hope and Change???? Does that sound like an informed electorate to you?
Hrm, I'm still not sure I'm managing to ask things in a way that makes you able to understand.

You talked, very concretely, about how early voting and registration on the day HAD RESULTED IN greater voter fraud. Can you talk about the evidence that lead you to understand this? Or is it just something you've extrapolated from your feelings that "As far as early voting goes, being able to register and vote the same day doesn't give our poll workers enough time to verify who it is that's voting." I may have mistaken a general statement as an actual claim that fraud had occurred, you may have intended to say that it is just that you feel fraud would be more likely?

Do you think/feel/know that fraud occurred, or were you just trying to say that you feel it would be more likely in these contexts? Would evidence help you feel that you were making better informed claims?

Historically means testing for voting has excluded large groups of the population. I'm not sure if you clearly understand that or are able to contextualize your suggested hurdles (which were tax payments and a comprehension test) within this context? If you need help, I'm happy to talk more about means test to vote that have been present in the American system in the past. There have been a number of exclusions which have excluded potential voters throughout the history of voting.

Since: Jan 13

Lexington, KY

#25900 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
The only people I would like to see excluded from voting are working aged non-taxpayers, illegal voters, and people that have no idea of what they are voting on or for. I know that will never happen, but it's just how I feel.
Voter fraud is one of those things that can't be proven until somebody is caught. In other words, if I go to your car every night and steal one gallon of gasoline, I may be able to do that for months or years because it's not very noticeable. But once I'm caught, I'm only guilty of stealing one gallon of gasoline that night.
So am I speculating on same day voter fraud? Yes I am. Again, it can't be voter fraud until somebody is actually caught doing it. But I see the opportunity. I've seen some very shady people in front of me at my voting place come in with a utility bill and actually got to vote. That utility bill could have been stolen out of somebody's mailbox, thrown in the trash, been altered using scanning and printing devices. It's not proof-positive of somebody's identification.
Bottom line is this: I want to see honest elections no matter who wins. We have stringent regulations when it comes to purchasing cigarettes, alcohol, getting an ATM card, cashing a check, yet for some reason, we have willy-nilly requirements when it comes to voting. This is what I want to see stopped.
Just out of curiosity how can you determine a persons knowledge or lack thereof on the issues that are to be voted on and the people running for office. Is a test required or perhaps a short quiz before a person can exercise their right to vote.

Since: Jan 13

Nicholasville, KY

#25902 Feb 22, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I would love to see that, but of course, it will never happen.
Again I reiterate: we had two candidates on the Democrat side running for the presidential nomination. One was a community organizer, and the other had 16 years of experience in federal politics. The Democrats chose the one with the least experience, ideas or knowledge.
When the general election came up, one candidate was a war hero, a man that suffered injuries while being a POW for several years. A man that had extensive experience in the Senate. But we chose the community organizer.
That being said, don't you think we should have some sort of test to determine the political intelligence of the voter?
Perhaps we can use the same test on those who voted against homosexuals getting married.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#25904 Feb 23, 2014
joanna50 wrote:
<quoted text>Perhaps we can use the same test on those who voted against homosexuals getting married.
why?

it would appear at face value that same sex marriage is 100% political, and deliberately in the face of citizens to distract them.

Everyone is limited to marriage of the opposite sex by law. Everyone.

If you want a same sex relationship with strings attached like a marriage license, then you need to form a legal partnership with your partner.

A legal partnership with a lover or business partner has the strings you claim you want to have in your relationship.

All the political posturing proves either laziness, or being a legal couple is not what the adgenda is.

In 1 month all same sex couples can have the exact strings a marriage license provides.

Go for it........just end the stupidity and slap in the face of all married couples of re-defining words.

Since: Jan 13

Nicholasville, KY

#25905 Feb 23, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
why?
it would appear at face value that same sex marriage is 100% political, and deliberately in the face of citizens to distract them.
Everyone is limited to marriage of the opposite sex by law. Everyone.
If you want a same sex relationship with strings attached like a marriage license, then you need to form a legal partnership with your partner.
A legal partnership with a lover or business partner has the strings you claim you want to have in your relationship.
All the political posturing proves either laziness, or being a legal couple is not what the adgenda is.
In 1 month all same sex couples can have the exact strings a marriage license provides.
Go for it........just end the stupidity and slap in the face of all married couples of re-defining words.
How can I form a legal partnership and same sex marriage isn't political at least it wasn't until it got so much opposition. You are wrong and nobody is trying to downgrade traditional marriage except for the ones who take it for granted and straight couples are the ones infamous for that. You tell me how I can partner up with the same benefits as marriage.
Reality Check

Van Wert, OH

#25906 Feb 23, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
why?
it would appear at face value that same sex marriage is 100% political, and deliberately in the face of citizens to distract them.
Everyone is limited to marriage of the opposite sex by law. Everyone.
If you want a same sex relationship with strings attached like a marriage license, then you need to form a legal partnership with your partner.
A legal partnership with a lover or business partner has the strings you claim you want to have in your relationship.
All the political posturing proves either laziness, or being a legal couple is not what the adgenda is.
In 1 month all same sex couples can have the exact strings a marriage license provides.
Go for it........just end the stupidity and slap in the face of all married couples of re-defining words.
Pipe down and get your lazyass to church with the rest of the "morally superior" bigots, you cannibalistic lying scumbag...
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25907 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
I would love to see that, but of course, it will never happen.
Again I reiterate: we had two candidates on the Democrat side running for the presidential nomination. One was a community organizer, and the other had 16 years of experience in federal politics. The Democrats chose the one with the least experience, ideas or knowledge.
When the general election came up, one candidate was a war hero, a man that suffered injuries while being a POW for several years. A man that had extensive experience in the Senate. But we chose the community organizer.
That being said, don't you think we should have some sort of test to determine the political intelligence of the voter?
You'll probably regret that testing idea, especially in the southern states.
The GOP has turned into 3 gallons of crazy stupid stuffed in a 2 gallon bucket...with a broken handle, and it shows everyday just about everytime they open their mouths and speak. Party leadership even tutors and warns them, but they can't stop or help themselves. Hard to hide the obvious.
They claim there is no bigotry in the GOP and there can't be because:
They are concerned about protecting the religious freedom of Jeebus.
They are concerned about protecting ladyparts.
They are concerned about making sure that voter fraud doesn't occur with minorities.
They are concerned with making sure that gays don't have miserable marriages like us straight folks.
They are concerned that the non-aborted fetus does not have adequate food, shelter or education.
They can't be bigoted because they are only looking out for A Murika's best interests.
Reality Check

Van Wert, OH

#25908 Feb 23, 2014
woo-boy wrote:
<quoted text>You'll probably regret that testing idea, especially in the southern states.
The GOP has turned into 3 gallons of crazy stupid stuffed in a 2 gallon bucket...with a broken handle, and it shows everyday just about everytime they open their mouths and speak. Party leadership even tutors and warns them, but they can't stop or help themselves. Hard to hide the obvious.
They claim there is no bigotry in the GOP and there can't be because:
They are concerned about protecting the religious freedom of Jeebus.
They are concerned about protecting ladyparts.
They are concerned about making sure that voter fraud doesn't occur with minorities.
They are concerned with making sure that gays don't have miserable marriages like us straight folks.
They are concerned that the non-aborted fetus does not have adequate food, shelter or education.
They can't be bigoted because they are only looking out for A Murika's best interests.
Funny how XXX CLAIMS to be concerned with the "political intelligence of voters", but still believes in Obamaphones, fake birth certificates, and invisible commies, huh?
Gotta love how these maniacal conservatives always whine about the "big bad gubment" overstepping it's bounds, unless they're telling us who to marry, which religion we should teach in public schools, how to reproduce, or how to vote...
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25910 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
The only people I would like to see excluded from voting are working aged non-taxpayers, illegal voters, and people that have no idea of what they are voting on or for. I know that will never happen, but it's just how I feel.
Voter fraud is one of those things that can't be proven until somebody is caught. In other words, if I go to your car every night and steal one gallon of gasoline, I may be able to do that for months or years because it's not very noticeable. But once I'm caught, I'm only guilty of stealing one gallon of gasoline that night.
So am I speculating on same day voter fraud? Yes I am. Again, it can't be voter fraud until somebody is actually caught doing it. But I see the opportunity. I've seen some very shady people in front of me at my voting place come in with a utility bill and actually got to vote. That utility bill could have been stolen out of somebody's mailbox, thrown in the trash, been altered using scanning and printing devices. It's not proof-positive of somebody's identification.
Bottom line is this: I want to see honest elections no matter who wins. We have stringent regulations when it comes to purchasing cigarettes, alcohol, getting an ATM card, cashing a check, yet for some reason, we have willy-nilly requirements when it comes to voting. This is what I want to see stopped.
Illegal voters are already not allowed to vote. I gave you the answer to the voter fraud claims and as always you tried to sidestep it and deflect away from the truth that you don't like. You know ,that election swaying fraud of 135 cases out of 5.6 MILLION votes cast.

www.nationalmemo.com/amazing-how-the-only-gro...

Now on this taxpayer thingy, paying taxes are paying taxes to create revenue for governemnt and public operations.
The next time I go anywhere to make any type of purchase(gas, appliances, materials, etc.) I can tell that cashier that I don't plan on voting this year or next so I don't have to pay any taxes on those items. I can refuse to pay my property taxes and levy money that was approved by the voters but seeing how I'm not going to vote means that I don't have to pay for that crap I didn't vote for. Gee, thanks for the heads up, gonna save me tons of money.
Oh now wait a minute. What happens to those all those rich people who have those gaggles of lawyers working for them to make sure that they pay no taxes? Never mind we all already know that they buy all of their votes. Only in 'Murika'
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25911 Feb 23, 2014
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>Funny how XXX CLAIMS to be concerned with the "political intelligence of voters", but still believes in Obamaphones, fake birth certificates, and invisible commies, huh?
Gotta love how these maniacal conservatives always whine about the "big bad gubment" overstepping it's bounds, unless they're telling us who to marry, which religion we should teach in public schools, how to reproduce, or how to vote...
And their all too STUPID to realize it.
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25912 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
So you got all that from people that are against abortion and FORCING insurance companies to provide birth control in all of their policies? All that from people trying to make elections honest and fair?
I think our citizens are beginning to see what's really going on here. Socialism (a word liberals don't like) is surfacing and everybody sees it. The most government dependents we've had on record or in the past few decades, the highest debt ever accumulated in the shortest amount of time, losing our three star credit rating for the first time in US history, a leader that was awarded liar of the year, median household incomes down by thousands of dollars, the most people dropping out of the job market, and the list goes on and on.
So these next two elections, people will have a choice: continue with more government force and takeover of private industry, or return to pro-business policies and less government dependency.
Tough choice, huh?
You had a real hard time in school staying focused on one subject at a time huh? As usual off on a whole other tangent that most of has been proven false then and it's still false now. But you are good at grasping at straws.

Pro business policies-SERIOUS- we all see how well that is working out. You mean being totally owned by Big Business, you're just too dumb to realize it.

Since: Jan 13

Lexington, KY

#25914 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed. Everybody should have some knowledge on what or who they are voting for. However in the case of SSM, it would probably have resulted in an even stronger opposition.
I seriously doubt that.
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25916 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
We've seen pro business policies? Not lately we haven't. We have the most anti-business President in our lifetime running things now. How's that working out for us?
There is nothing false about what I'm saying. Anytime you need evidence of what I'm saying, just ask. DumBama is everything I wrote and more. It's just that you're too dumb to realize it.
If you want it to look like the air in China then you just keep voting for the GOP business policies. Take a few healthy deep breaths of that. I'd rather not. Just like the majority of the rest of the country. Go get you a few gulps of that North Carolina water too while you're at it. ENJOY!
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25917 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. Illegals are not allowed to vote here. Well did you ever consider illegals are not supposed to be living here either, but they are? Brilliant comment.
Speaking of brilliant, don't you read anybody else's post but your own? I said that you can't make the case of voter fraud until somebody is actually caught. This is very difficult to do when you have 5 million people voting. For all we know, thousands could be cheating the system right now and never be detected because security in our voting is so lax.
Why do you think your politicians are so against honest elections, spoon feeding you with this minority BS? It's because they know there is a lot of cheating in our elections and they like it that way. My Lord man, wake up. Don't bells or whistles go off in your head when politicians are making the case that they are against making elections more honest???
Help me out folks. Who sang the song "Paranoia Will Destroy Ya"?
Canton

Canton, OH

#25918 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. Illegals are not allowed to vote here. Well did you ever consider illegals are not supposed to be living here either, but they are? Brilliant comment.
Speaking of brilliant, don't you read anybody else's post but your own? I said that you can't make the case of voter fraud until somebody is actually caught. This is very difficult to do when you have 5 million people voting. For all we know, thousands could be cheating the system right now and never be detected because security in our voting is so lax.
Why do you think your politicians are so against honest elections, spoon feeding you with this minority BS? It's because they know there is a lot of cheating in our elections and they like it that way. My Lord man, wake up. Don't bells or whistles go off in your head when politicians are making the case that they are against making elections more honest???
I think the REAL question is, who has been paying those illegals bills for that last 20 years? Here's a hint...Around here, we mow our own lawns and clean our own houses...now about that GOP state of Texas...
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25921 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? I seem to remember not having any problem with the air or water while Bush and the Republicans were running the whole show. I don't remember us being like China either.
Now let's see, what administration was it that phased out the good light bulbs in this country? What administration was it when they lowered sulfur content in diesel fuel that made it way more expensive than gasoline and still is today?
When you find the answers let us know. You're not going to like them and they will further show just how un-informed you really are. It would help if you learned something on your own and not Fux Yea Were Liars News.
woo-boy

Waverly, OH

#25922 Feb 23, 2014
xxxrayted wrote:
<quoted text>
Really? I seem to remember not having any problem with the air or water while Bush and the Republicans were running the whole show. I don't remember us being like China either.
Now let's see, what administration was it that phased out the good light bulbs in this country? What administration was it when they lowered sulfur content in diesel fuel that made it way more expensive than gasoline and still is today?
Just like Richard Nixon didn't start the EPA (ooh, and just with an ink pen) and the rivers up there never caught fire.
Reality Check

Van Wert, OH

#25923 Feb 23, 2014
woo-boy wrote:
<quoted text>When you find the answers let us know. You're not going to like them and they will further show just how un-informed you really are. It would help if you learned something on your own and not Fux Yea Were Liars News.
You're asking an uneducated corporate cheerleader to learn things on his own and stop listening to his fear-mongering has-been posterboys? Good luck. ROFLMAO
If it wasn't for Rush the liar Limbaugh, the truck driving slumlord weather expert wouldn't know what to think...
Helengur

Pittsburgh, PA

#25924 Feb 23, 2014

How about That? not Stoke he terrible

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Muslims beat woman for wearing bikini French ou... 6 hr Pope Che Reagan C... 47
Poll Panty hose vs bare skin What is your preference? 7 hr Seriouslady 153
Pull your pants up. 7 hr Seriouslady 21
For Cat Lovers Only! 7 hr Doc 179
What does anyone know about a guy named Da'Wayn... 7 hr Pam 3
News Dive team wants to raise dam in effort to find ... 8 hr jesse 7
ayfkm? 9 hr cowboy heroes 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages