The Great Liberal Freakout of 2016

[teachercd]

Let's see, a millenial would be around 36-40 years old right now. Let's say their parents were 25 or so when they were born. So, their parents would be 55-60 now. That puts them as teenagers around 1970.

 

Yeah....older generations have a lot to brag about over millenials as far as appearing to be worth a crap.

 

Every generation looks at the ones coming behind them and thinks their worthless, lazy and disrespectful.

 

They forget what they were like at the same age.

Yep!!!

 

Its like the first time you find out your parents drank in high school or smoked pot or partied in their frat...because for the longest time you only heard how hard they worked and how hard they had it.

[Count 'Bility]

............

 

 

Im about 90% sure i know what the actual def is. But I'll wait.

 

And for one, yes, i know that am a millennial. Which, when he defines it, whether it be right or wrong, will point out why sweeping generalizations continue to be the problem in all this.

[BigRedBuster]

So....Cornstar.....

 

You have the stage.

[knapplc]

* Sweeping generalizations about Apostrophists are OK though.

[BigRedBuster]

* Sweeping generalizations about Apostrophists are OK though.

*Only if you're a commakazi

[Count 'Bility]

* Sweeping generalizations about Apostrophists are OK though.

it's pretty black and white whether youre an apostrophist or not and what you actually stand for.

[knapplc]

 

* Sweeping generalizations about Apostrophists are OK though.

it's pretty black and white whether youre an apostrophist or not and what you actually stand for.

 

 

I stand for the National Anthem.

[Count 'Bility]

 

 

* Sweeping generalizations about Apostrophists are OK though.

it's pretty black and white whether youre an apostrophist or not and what you actually stand for.

 

 

I stand for the National Anthem.

 

Knapp'lc

 

has a good ring to it.

[TGHusker]

 

 

* Sweeping generalizations about Apostrophists are OK though.

it's pretty black and white whether youre an apostrophist or not and what you actually stand for.

 

 

I stand for the National Anthem.

 

Good one.

[TGHusker]

Speaking of freak-out - what do you think of the Jill Stein recounts in Wisc and possibly Mich? Too late in Penn.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pennsylvania-state-department-says-stein-missed-recount-deadline/article/2608305

 

Stein's comments: "We must recount the votes so we can build trust in our election system," Stein said in a written statement. "We need to verify the vote in this and every election so that Americans of all parties can be sure we have a fair, secure and accurate voting system.”

http://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/11/28/elections-staff-layout-recount-timeline/94539210/

 

 

My opinion? Glad you asked. I think it is a total waste of time and money (Sorus's most likely) just to try to embarrass Trump or get the election thrown into the House - just to add to the 'illegitimacy' of the Trump election. No way any state gets turned around in a recount.

 

 

Dem hypocrisy on recounts:

http://freebeacon.com/politics/marc-elias-hypocrite-election-recounts/

 

Hillary Clinton’s lawyer Marc Elias announced over the weekend that the Clinton campaign would participate in the Wisconsin election recount even as he actively fights against recount efforts in a North Carolina governor’s race where the margin of victory was less than 5,000 votes.

Green Party presidential candidate Jill Stein has raised millions to fund recount efforts in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan based on claims that voting systems in the states were hacked. Elias said the campaign had failed to find any “evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology” but would be joining the recount efforts nonetheless.

In North Carolina, where Republican Gov. Pat McCrory filed for a recount after he lost to Democrat Roy Cooper by just 4,772 votes, Elias is singing a different tune.

[It'sNotAFakeID]

This is partially tangent to the topic at hand, but wasn't North Carolina trying to pass voting laws that would have a disproportionate effect on African-American voters, or put another way, that were deliberately targeting African-American voters? Thankfully that law was struck down to prevent its use on Election Day.

 

Regarding the recounts, I think the integrity of the vote matters, and if either side has cause to doubt the results, they should be contested. Especially when the results are so close. For example, it wouldn't make sense for Hillary to contest Alabama where she lost by 600,000 votes. In the same vein, it wouldn't make sense for President-elect Trump to contest California where he lost by 3.4 million votes. So, if recounts are going to become a thing, how big of a gap is too wide to contest? 70,000? 100,000? 250,000?

 

About the integrity of the vote, Republicans introduce legislation to protect the integrity of the vote in the name of preventing voter fraud, which depending on the source is either a big problem, or hardly a problem at all. From a costs and benefits perspective, it doesn't make sense for the individual voter to commit voter fraud. The benefit is one additional, non-impact vote at the cost of a $10,000 fine and 5 years in jail. It's hard for me to imagine voter fraud being a major threat to vote integrity.

 

On the other hand, voter suppression presents a very real threat to the integrity of the vote, and the GOP has become master manipulators at voter suppression. The GOP knows it doesn't do well with African-American voters, so rather than comprising their party platform to win their support, they find ways to prevent them from voting in the first place, through gerrymandering, voting ID legislation, etc... And don't think Democrats are innocent from voter suppression either.

 

Therein lies the problem: the parties are too focused on introducing legislation that restricts members of the other team from voting rather than introducing legislation that wins the support of the other team's constituents.

 

One last thing, I think Election Day should be a national holiday. Don't go to work, don't take your children to school. Get out there, do your civic duty that might take at most half the day, and vote. I'm sick of seeing more people shopping on Black Friday (coincidentally not a work day for most people) than voting.

[BigRedBuster]

So...I guess Cornstar doesn't know???

[Count 'Bility]

If youre gonna recount, then recount them all. all 50 states. Careful what you wish for.

[knapplc]

If youre gonna recount, then recount them all. all 50 states. Careful what you wish for.

 

I agree with this. Without any kind of evidence or proof, this smacks of sour grapes more than a concern about constitutional protections.

 

We do verify votes already, though. The process is being finalized in dozens of states as we speak.

[Count 'Bility]

 

If youre gonna recount, then recount them all. all 50 states. Careful what you wish for.

 

I agree with this. Without any kind of evidence or proof, this smacks of sour grapes more than a concern about constitutional protections.

 

We do verify votes already, though. The process is being finalized in dozens of states as we speak.

 

Yeah. Wasnt it announced like Michigan just finally went official this morning or yesterday or something?