If Clinton Does Win

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

18 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Please explain how this guy is "disreputable"

Ohh that's easy, he's saying things that fly in the face of the Narrative the Demobublicans want you to buy.

[skliss]

"Maybe so - but he has also been known to be insulting and thin skinned."

That's Obama...

[bee]

2 hours ago, Lord Fedorable said:

Ohh that's easy, he's saying things that fly in the face of the Narrative the Demobublicans want you to buy.

.

haha 

 the epic 2016 battle - depublicals  v deplorables

.

[ninjadude]

On 10/30/2016 at 6:09 PM, rashore said:

Well ninja... Medicare and medicaid covers 32% of the population. That plus the 20% Obamacare. And about 13% are still uninsured according to estimates... would mean 65% of the public on government insurance be it medicare, medicaid, or Obamacare or are uninsured. That leaves 35% of people that either get their private insurance through an employer, or utilize other state insurance programs for their healthcare.

https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/images-reports/new-census-estimates-show-3-million-more-americans-had-health-insurance-coverage-2012/image003.gif

Edited October 31, 2016 by ninjadude

[F3SS]

16 hours ago, Astra. said:

Hi Dingo,

I thought the people did have another option. Jill Stein jumps to mind and somebody else? ...I'm not sure if that would make much of a difference in concerns with the two major parties. Unlike us - they also have the option of not having to vote. 

Someone might come along and explain things a little more where their other options are concerned. 

What's the penalty for not voting? Surely you can outright refuse?

[Astra.]

16 minutes ago, F3SS said:

What's the penalty for not voting? Surely you can outright refuse?

Hey F3SS,

Well this basically sums it up if we don't vote in this country.

Electors who fail to vote at an election and do not provide a valid and sufficient reason for such failure, will be fined. The penalty for first time offenders is $20, and this increases to $50 if you have previously paid a penalty or been convicted of this offence.

1. To pay a $20 fine or ...
2. Provide a valid reason why you haven’t cast a vote.
“If somebody says they didn’t feel like it, it’s not a valid reason,”
If you provide a valid reason instead of paying the $20 fine, it will be judged by an AEC official as to whether they believe your excuse is legitimate.
You could expect to find out if you evaded the fine in the “vicinity of a month or two”.
“If, within the time period specified on the notice, you fail to reply, cannot provide a valid and sufficient reason or decline to pay the $20 penalty, then the matter may be referred to a court,”.

“If the matter is dealt with in court and you are found guilty, you may be fined up to $180 plus court costs and a criminal conviction may be recorded against you.”

@ I personally feel it's 'over the top'. But that's how the Government does things here.

[ChrLzs]

17 minutes ago, F3SS said:

What's the penalty for not voting? Surely you can outright refuse?

{beaten by Astra}

It's only $20..  Plus, you are invited to give a reason for not attending a voting station or doing a postal/absentee vote, and the first fine is not all that often applied, I have it on good authority (cough) ..  Thing is, there is nothing stopping you just getting your name crossed off and then simply not voting - given it is secret ballot there is no way for them to check, and as far as I am aware it is not actually illegal to improperly fill out your voting paper.

While neither system is without issues, I like the idea of compulsory voting as it helps reduce the possibility of an angry and perhaps horribly ill-informed or motivated-in-a-bad-way large group of people skewing the result...  Given that nowadays everyone seems horribly angry about everything, that possibility seems to me to be a big one, and given the two choices you guys have...well, excuse me while I vomit.

 

[preacherman76]

11 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

{beaten by Astra}

It's only $20..  Plus, you are invited to give a reason for not attending a voting station or doing a postal/absentee vote, and the first fine is not all that often applied, I have it on good authority (cough) ..  Thing is, there is nothing stopping you just getting your name crossed off and then simply not voting - given it is secret ballot there is no way for them to check, and as far as I am aware it is not actually illegal to improperly fill out your voting paper.

While neither system is without issues, I like the idea of compulsory voting as it helps reduce the possibility of an angry and perhaps horribly ill-informed or motivated-in-a-bad-way large group of people skewing the result...  Given that nowadays everyone seems horribly angry about everything, that possibility seems to me to be a big one, and given the two choices you guys have...well, excuse me while I vomit.

 

I can kinda dig what you are saying. I didn't know not voting was a crime there. Without any further understanding, my initial reaction is I wouldn't feel very comfortable making people vote in a election they care nothing about, and hence probably even know what or who they are voting for.  

[Paranormal Panther]

10 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

I can kinda dig what you are saying. I didn't know not voting was a crime there. Without any further understanding, my initial reaction is I wouldn't feel very comfortable making people vote in a election they care nothing about, and hence probably even know what or who they are voting for.  

I don't like it. We have a lot of ignorant citizens, and they don't need to vote. Many of these nitwits might even support someone because of their gender or race. Others follow the "sage" advice of clueless celebrities.

[ChrLzs]

4 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

I don't like it. We have a lot of ignorant citizens, and they don't need to vote. Many of these nitwits might even support someone because of their gender or race. Others follow the "sage" advice of clueless celebrities.

Wow, talk about a slippery slope.... IQ tests before voting, perhaps?  Follow that white rabbit and you end up at a very bad place..

[Paranormal Panther]

1 minute ago, ChrLzs said:

Wow, talk about a slippery slope.... IQ tests before voting, perhaps?  Follow that white rabbit and you end up at a very bad place..

Your reply makes no sense. My point is that voting should be voluntary rather than mandatory. We have a lot of ignorant and uninformed citizens here. What's wrong with an informed electorate (wow!)?

[bmk1245]

2 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

Your reply makes no sense. My point is that voting should be voluntary rather than mandatory. We have a lot of ignorant and uninformed citizens here. What's wrong with an informed electorate (wow!)?

You see where problem is, don't yea?

[Paranormal Panther]

1 minute ago, bmk1245 said:

You see where problem is, don't yea?

I do. The problem is that clueless leftists play the "bigot card" when they can't handle the truth.

[Kurzweil]

22 hours ago, Astra. said:

Hey F3SS,

Well this basically sums it up if we don't vote in this country.

Electors who fail to vote at an election and do not provide a valid and sufficient reason for such failure, will be fined. The penalty for first time offenders is $20, and this increases to $50 if you have previously paid a penalty or been convicted of this offence.

1. To pay a $20 fine or ...
2. Provide a valid reason why you haven’t cast a vote.
“If somebody says they didn’t feel like it, it’s not a valid reason,”
If you provide a valid reason instead of paying the $20 fine, it will be judged by an AEC official as to whether they believe your excuse is legitimate.
You could expect to find out if you evaded the fine in the “vicinity of a month or two”.
“If, within the time period specified on the notice, you fail to reply, cannot provide a valid and sufficient reason or decline to pay the $20 penalty, then the matter may be referred to a court,”.

“If the matter is dealt with in court and you are found guilty, you may be fined up to $180 plus court costs and a criminal conviction may be recorded against you.”

@ I personally feel it's 'over the top'. But that's how the Government does things here.

Do you get fined if you take the ballot and spit on it because you believe none are worth voting for but at least you showed up?

[bmk1245]

1 minute ago, Paranormal Panther said:

I do. The problem is that clueless leftists play the "bigot card" when they can't handle the truth.

... and the truth being <please proceed>

[Paranormal Panther]

Just now, bmk1245 said:

... and the truth being <please proceed>

The truth is that many people vote for the wrong reasons. These people shouldn't vote.

[bmk1245]

4 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

The truth is that many people vote for the wrong reasons. These people shouldn't vote.

Ain't that nice? Voting for the wrong reasons? Just read BS you wrote once again, for f's sake...

[ChrLzs]

34 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

Your reply makes no sense. My point is that voting should be voluntary rather than mandatory. We have a lot of ignorant and uninformed citizens here. What's wrong with an informed electorate (wow!)?

So you don't see any problem with only 'motivated' people voting?  Your previous post (and to a lesser extent this one too) seemed to strongly imply that people of less than some level of intelligence should NOT be allowed to vote..  Perhaps I misread it... (now that I've read your next few posts, no I didn't)..

 

To Kurzweil, yes, you can do that (bit unhygienic tho..).  You get given the voting paper and your name is crossed off as having voted, then you walk up to a small cubicle to do whatever you like (or nothing) to the paper, and then you fold it and put it in a large box.

Aussies generally seem happy with the system, few people get fined, and I think the informal/invalid vote level is only about 5%, which is pretty impressive really, imo.  Especially given that informal votes includes not only the deliberately informal ones but also ones where the person makes an error that invalidates it (eg puts the number 1 against two different parties).

As a small example, I once missed out on voting as I got stuck on the freeway for over an hour due to a large accident and resulting traffic snarl and couldn't reach a voting location in time.  Because I was able to document what had happened and I showed that I had made a reasonable effort to vote but was prevented by circumstances beyond my control, they painlessly waived the fine.

Edited November 2, 2016 by ChrLzs

[Paranormal Panther]

11 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

Ain't that nice? Voting for the wrong reasons? Just read BS you wrote once again, for f's sake...

It's nice to have an informed electorate who vote for the right reasons. You shouldn't have a problem with that.

[Paranormal Panther]

6 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

So you don't see any problem with only 'motivated' people voting?  Your previous post (and to a lesser extent this one too) seemed to strongly imply that people of less than some level of intelligence should NOT be allowed to vote..  Perhaps I misread it... (now that I've read your next few posts, no I didn't)..

You're still misreading (misrepresenting) things. I'm talking about information, not intelligence, so there's no need for you to falsely fill in more blanks that have absolutely nothing to do with what I really mean.

[ellapenella]

On 10/30/2016 at 11:31 AM, and then said:

Frankly, Ellapennela, I don't think any of the main outlets, including Fox, are reliable any longer.  I used the word "humbled" euphemistically. I've gotten a little heat, lately, because I've let my anger get the best of me here at UM.  I think that the big media outlets have become so openly biased for the Left that they may not escape the growing anger of the people due to the policies of that Left.  There are millions of angry, frustrated and even frightened Americans after the last 8 years of "hope and change".  If that continues and the misery worsens, the media may find itself under attack as the most direct cause of that misery.  Think of it a moment.  How far could a candidate like HRC have gotten without the sycophantic cover of the media?  For that matter, the same could be said about Obama and even Trump.  The media owners select their candidate and give that candidate the coverage that the rest have to pay millions for... how are they NOT responsible for the condition of our politics today?  They are the cheerleaders of polarization and some day that will lead to violence on a large scale.  That's my opinion.  I don't call for that violence.

I don't appreciate that they deliberately put out lies but then retract them knowing and hoping that their lies  would become rumored to be seen or known as truth..in other worlds they're messing with the truth on purpose...

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/30/politics/donald-trump-write-in-ballots/

The above link was a lie that CNN retracted about Trump. They CNN knew it was a lie when they published it. 

 

 

[Astra.]

10 minutes ago, Kurzweil said:

Do you get fined if you take the ballot and spit on it because you believe none are worth voting for but at least you showed up?

That's rather dramatic Kurzweil. Who needs to spit on a ballot, when all you have to do is show up and have your name crossed off the electoral roll. What one does with the ballot after that - well..I guess that's up to them.

 

 

 

[CrimsonKing]

4 minutes ago, Paranormal Panther said:

You're still misreading (misrepresenting) things. I'm talking about information, not intelligence, so there's no need for you to falsely fill in more blanks that have absolutely nothing to do with what I really mean.

I think it's fair to put intelligence and informed into the same basket when it comes to voting here in the states...

I've heard far to many idiots vote Dem/Repub because their dad did,and his dad before that did,and so on...

I think it's time to retire the words Democrat and Republican from politics altogether because to many just see those two words and automatically tie themselves to said candidates platforms be damned...

[ellapenella]

On 10/30/2016 at 7:13 PM, Paranormal Panther said:

He lost family and relatives in the Holocaust. His detractors claim that he was complicit in the genocide by informing on individuals. His defenders claim that he was innocent in that he just tried to save his own young life by cooperating with the mass murderers. I can't condemn the boy, but I cannot trust the man.

Yeah. I think that from after that  he  was surrounded by the people who groomed him . I don't think he has a conscience,maybe he did at one time, only God knows I suppose.

[ellapenella]

On 10/31/2016 at 4:44 AM, Lord Fedorable said:

Ohh that's easy, he's saying things that fly in the face of the Narrative the Demobublicans want you to buy.

lol it's just missing some communism in there too...Demobublicanommies