if Obama loses the election, think Michelle will try to divorce him again? like when he lost to Bobby Rush?

^ The Donald Trump of Soxtalk

 

^^^

 

Gloria Allred of Soxtalk

^^^

 

Gloria Allred of Soxtalk

 

I look pretty darn good in a mini skirt.

I look pretty darn good in a mini skirt.

 

Pics or it didn't happen.

It's a shame that there are moms and dads with families who are suffering with cancer and other diseases, but Ann Coulter is healthy as can be.

 

 

Edited October 26, 201213 yr by Brian

It's a shame that there are moms and dads with families who are suffering with cancer and other diseases, but Ann Coulter is healthy as can be.

She's mentally ill though.

 

Wouldn't hurt her to eat something sometime...

Edited October 26, 201213 yr by MexSoxFan#1

Let's see how quickly this hurricane becomes a political issue.

Let's see how quickly this hurricane becomes a political issue.

 

You mean it isn't yet?

You mean it isn't yet?

It already is from surrogates but not directly from either campaign as far as I can tell.

It already is from surrogates but not directly from either campaign as far as I can tell.

 

All of the usual angles are there. Response, climate change, preparation, election distraction...

It's a good argument for early voting at least.

All of the usual angles are there. Response, climate change, preparation, election distraction...

Romney wanting to eliminate FEMA...

Romney wanting to eliminate FEMA...

exactly. this storm is totally pro-obama and i love it.

there is nothing to love about a hugely destructive storm

there is nothing to love about a hugely destructive storm

where is the like button?

there is nothing to love about a hugely destructive storm

dude i live in NYC. my family lives in Jersey.

 

I get it.

 

relax.

More from Eugene Volokh on the legality of employers threatening employees with their jobs based on their votes:

 

http://www.volokh.com/2012/10/29/firing-or...ed-on-his-vote/

 

I’ve recently heard some uncertainty about whether employers may fire employees based on how they voted, or threaten to fire them based on how they voted. The answer — based on my own research — is that all states have laws that ban this sort of conduct as to state elections, and the federal government has a law that bans this sort of conduct as to federal elections.

 

By the late 1860s, some states also barred discrimination based on past votes rather than just threats aimed at future votes. This was especially visible in a burst of such lawmaking in the Reconstruction-era South, triggered by the Republican concern that southern employers were pressuring their employees to vote against the Republicans. (In some instances, Union generals administering the military occupation of the South issued such rules as military orders, violations of which were triable before military commissions.)

 

Indeed, these laws were much more important before the late 1800s, when the secret ballot was widely adopted; today, one sees almost no prosecutions or lawsuits under these statutes, likely because employers don’t know how their employees vote. Still, if the question is whether American law bars employers from firing or threatening to fire their employees based on how the employees voted, the answer is almost uniformly “yes.”

I know there are aspects of this that are pro-Obama, but on the whole I have to think the likely outcome is a negative. Almost without fail, things that depress turnout hurt the Democrat. In this case, if the cities are affected the most, that's even worse for the D.

More from Eugene Volokh on the legality of employers threatening employees with their jobs based on their votes:

 

http://www.volokh.com/2012/10/29/firing-or...ed-on-his-vote/

more:

 

http://www.volokh.com/2012/10/29/employers...ate-is-elected/

 

bottom line:

 

4. All this means, I think, that employers remain largely free to argue to their employees how the employees should vote, and to warn of dire economic consequences for the employer — and therefore to the employees — if an election (whether union, local, state, or federal) comes out a particular way. The mere possibility that some employees will take any message from their employer as coercive does not strip the employer of its constitutional rights.

I know there are aspects of this that are pro-Obama, but on the whole I have to think the likely outcome is a negative. Almost without fail, things that depress turnout hurt the Democrat. In this case, if the cities are affected the most, that's even worse for the D.

you don't think the fact that all these people will be relying on FEMA, and Romney wants to cut funding to FEMA will effect anything? I think - if the President handles this well - it could be a big boon for the campaign.

Edited October 29, 201213 yr by Reddy

you don't think the fact that all these people will be relying on FEMA, and Romney wants to cut funding to FEMA will effect anything. I think - if the President handles this well - it could be a big boon for the campaign.

 

I realize this is a possibility -- it really depends on how much things have recovered by Nov. 6th. I've scanned the political thinkosphere (I just made up that term, thank you) and it seems like opinions and speculations are extremely mixed. Turnout theory would say that basically any obstruction to get to the polling place would lead to significantly reduced turnout...likely hurting the incumbent, especially in states where voting incentive is reduced due to the foreknowledge of the state's leaning. On the other hand, there is a good deal of research showing that a well-managed disaster leads to a measurable increase in positive feelings for political leaders. What is not definite is how quickly those feelings arise and whether that would apply in the volatile political climate immediately before an election.

 

The circumstance of a natural disaster occurring right before election day is pretty much unprecedented, so it will be anybody's guess what happens. Of course, there are also variables that could still change. President Obama still has to do the "handling" and it still has to be received well...not to mention the storm has to be as bad as hyped to be, while at the same time it probably can't be much worse than expected or there is a brand new batch of problems to deal with.

more:

 

http://www.volokh.com/2012/10/29/employers...ate-is-elected/

 

bottom line:

 

Your bottom line sums up how I feel

Your bottom line sums up how I feel

lol

lol

 

 

How's things up there?

How's things up there?

i'm fine - but lower manhattan is submerged. fortunately i live at one of the highest points on the island of manhattan. still have power too.