CrimsonWeltall

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 07:19 PM) Given that there's been only a handful of times that a president has won the electoral college but not the general, and usually it's not even close, I don't think this is some massive problem that needs to be changed. 4 times out of 57 is a failure rate of 7%. That's awfully bad for the single most important election the country has.

QUOTE (Reddy @ Nov 7, 2012 -> 08:05 PM) that... was... my point. how does a national popular vote FIX that? Why is it important that we fix that? Why should a tiny population of North Dakotans be really important?

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 11:26 PM) It was only 27 seconds long. That being said. I hate fast zombies. Fast zombies can be done well. I liked 28 Days Later. But these aren't even fast zombies...they're like superhuman insect-swarm zombies. This movie looks nothing like what the book is supposed to be (which includes slow zombies).

I hope no one was anticipating the World War Z movie...because you won't be any more. http://www.etonline.com/movies/126557_Excl...ar_Z/index.html

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 05:02 PM) Again, there has to be a viable 3rd party first, and right now, there isn't. They aren't even on half the states ballots, and until something can be done about that, they will never be viable. Something has to be done about that, too...ballot access shouldn't be a thing like it is. I'm not saying it should allow for unlimited candidness, but it shouldn't be so hard to get a few alternates from D or R onto them. Gary Johnson is on 47 ballots. Jill Stein is on 42.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 03:58 PM) There has to be a viable 3rd party first. How does a 3rd party becoming viable without people starting to show support for one? They're not going to magically get 25% of the vote appearing overnight.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 04:52 PM) To play devils advocate, it shows a vote of no confidence, and if enough of said voters stop showing up, it allows an entry point into the political system for a viable 3rd party. If 20% of the people vote, and 80% are no longer showing up...that's a pretty huge slice of pie another party can rise up and grab. Then wouldn't it make sense to just go ahead and vote 3rd party?

QUOTE (Jake @ Nov 6, 2012 -> 03:03 PM) We begin a new tomorrow, tomorrow. How the hell could you want a President that says that? What a procrastinator

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 07:36 PM)

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 07:24 PM)

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 06:37 PM) Oh that was so awesome.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 04:13 PM) You'd need to get 100% of the vote in the top 40 metropolitan areas to reach a majority of voters. To put more realistically, one party would have to win EVERY metropolitan area in the country 60-40 to win the election. This would include "big cities" like -Casper, Wyoming -Lewiston, Idaho -Great Falls, Montana -Danville, Illinois

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Nov 5, 2012 -> 03:07 PM) This union is called the United States of America. Not the United couple of states that have massive populations of America. This system silences EVERY voice from states with low populations, as they're easily drowned out by the major metropolitan areas. For example, California, Chicago, Texas and New York -- by themselves -- could possibly quash the voices of the remaining 46 states You'd need to get 100% of the vote in the top 40 metropolitan areas to reach a majority of voters.

Wreck-It Ralph is awesome

It's not in any way absurd to show gratitude for a favor.

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3...129030711_o.jpg stickin with the classics ...or making a costume for $5 last minute

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Oct 25, 2012 -> 07:33 PM) I will take the exact opposite. Romney with 300+ Electorals and 4+% popular vote advantage. I see Obama winning PA and NV. Doesn't that require Romney to win every swing state plus a number of solidly blue states? http://americanresearchgroup.com/ev/

QUOTE (vandy125 @ Oct 23, 2012 -> 08:22 PM) There are some interesting statistics out there. In the whole US population, 80% lives in Urban locations. It would be very easy to override any concerns that a rural area would have (ie farming). What actions might a President take to screw over rural areas?

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 23, 2012 -> 05:05 PM) @AnnCoulter: I highly approve of Romney's decision to be kind and gentle to the retard Gettin kind desperate with the trolling there. I guess she hasn't had any headlines recently. Does she have a new book coming out she needs some spotlight for?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 23, 2012 -> 03:05 PM) Of those three, only the 88 one fits in the pattern of what we got this year. I don't see how Binders compares to either experience, or are you better than foru years ago. Those are real election issues. Bayonets are not. The youth and experience quote was a joke, not a real election issue.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 18, 2012 -> 08:31 PM) You can separate the racial component from the citizenship issue. Virtually no chance the citizenship "issue" would have existed without the racial component.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 17, 2012 -> 01:29 PM) I don't think either will get much of a bump from this because the focus will be on the moderator and the awful format of the debate. Part of it is that both of these guys are in full attack mode and if you don't get the last word, you're farked. So you have to butt in.

http://www.romneytaxplan.com/ heh

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Oct 10, 2012 -> 08:42 PM) This is from the P-S paper: 1960, when the US was a Communist country that punished rich people for being successful!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 10, 2012 -> 07:24 PM) By making up a scenario that doesn't exist in reality. Great. That is superhelpful Just because it's exaggerated doesn't mean it doesn't have a point. The rich in the US pay a larger percentage of total taxes than the rich elsewhere NOT because of the tax system, but because the income gap in the US is far wider.