45
   

Turning The Ballot Box Against Republicans

 
 
Blickers
 
  4  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 11:33 am
@TheCobbler,
Quote Cobbler:
Quote:
I am not an expert but I think we can take the house this next election also.

It will be tough, ( so many entrenched Republicans), but there is real division and possibly chaos in the Republican Party right now. So anything is possible.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 12:25 pm
@TheCobbler,
It's possible but not highly probable. There is a certain amount of "your Rep is a crook, mine brings home the bacon" going around. The only way Democrats win elections is with big turnouts. The GOP wins in low turnouts. Presidential elections generally have big turnouts and off year elections don't. We need a galvanizing candidate and I worry that Hillary's negative rating will not help with that. That's why I want Bernie in the game until the convention. He's bringing out new voters to register and we need those voters to vote in Congressional elections.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 12:26 pm
@TheCobbler,
Its a good list, but one that resembles Bernie than Hillary.
0 Replies
 
TheCobbler
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 01:56 pm
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xlt1/v/t1.0-0/p480x480/13092174_10153572336761769_6288097189926905612_n.jpg?oh=421e869b259a8e1174d02c7d25c801c3&oe=57B00774
0 Replies
 
TheCobbler
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 02:45 pm
Puerto Rico Will Begin Cracking Down on Churches That Violate Non-Profit Rules
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/04/23/puerto-rico-will-begin-cracking-down-on-churches-that-violate-non-profit-rules/
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 03:46 pm
@TheCobbler,
Now if we'd do the same here on the mainland.
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  4  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 07:40 pm
Agree with almost all the list except the one about taxing churches. I am against that. As the Supreme Court has ruled, the power to tax is the power to destroy, (due to inability to pay taxes), and a once wealthy congregation that has since shrunk in size might be forced out of its home for hundreds of years due to inability to pay taxes.

That is not separation of church and state, and also not right.
0 Replies
 
TheCobbler
 
  5  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 09:34 pm
https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p480x480/13055498_1340090189350958_4189968180943242498_n.jpg?oh=2578f328d25bdef2420eba0021b0a247&oe=5772ABD8

I have never watched one episode of The Apprentice.. (too boring).

I like Trump as a reality star actor but not at all as a presidential candidate.

cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 09:41 pm
@TheCobbler,
The problems with the Obama economy are 1. stagnant salaries, 2. increased student debt, 3. fewer homes sold, and 4. people quit looking for jobs.
Blickers
 
  5  
Reply Sat 23 Apr, 2016 10:41 pm
@cicerone imposter,
When Obama took office, the country had LOST 6 Million jobs the previous year-in fact, 2.6 Million jobs the previous quarter. The first step is to replace all those lost jobs. It took a few years to get the ball rolling, and now we are gaining 2.5 Million jobs a year.

New jobs and salaries are not separate issues. If people have been out of work for a long time, they will take a job which pays a little less than the job they had. With all these new jobs being added, it is not surprising that salaries are not going up much. New workers usually get paid a little less than workers who have been on the job for awhile and gotten raises. It takes an economy that is REALLY in gear to create a large number of new jobs AND increase salaries at the same time.

Example: In Q4 2008, weekly earnings actually jumped up. But we lost 2.6 Million Full Time jobs. Why? Because there were so many layoffs, the principle of "last hired, first fired" kicked in and the lesser workers went, while the people who had been with the company for years stayed. These people were higher paid than the people who were let go, so the weekly earnings for Full Time workers went up. Even though 2.6 Million people lost their Full Time job that quarter.

Right now salaries are about where they were, inflation-adjusted, just before the crash. Eventually the earnings will rise, but it's more important to keep adding on workers.
bobsal u1553115
 
  5  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 04:29 am
@Blickers,
It amazes me how good the economy is (except for some of the middle class) and how brainwashed a lot of us are in believing its not. Its paralleled by those who believe the US military has been degraded since 2008, when in fact its moved from being equal to the next ten biggest militaries put together to being the equal the next eleven.

I'd give Obama another term. But I'd also give him a functioning Congress finally.
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 05:06 am
The Story of the Great Brooklyn Voter Purge Keeps Getting Weirder
Some 120,000 people couldn't vote. What happened?


http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2016/04/new-york-primary-voter-purge

The first head has rolled after more than 100,000 voters were mistakenly purged from the Brooklyn voter rolls ahead of this week's New York primary, which handed Hillary Clinton a much-needed win over Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. Diane Haslett-Rudiano, the chief clerk of the New York Board of Elections, was suspended...

Anonymous city elections officials said Haslett-Rudiano, who was in charge of the city's Republican voter rolls, had been "scapegoated," according to the New York Post. "It sounds like they cut a deal to make the Republican the scapegoat and protect Betty Ann," an anonymous Democratic elected official from Brooklyn told the Post, referring to Betty Ann Canizio, who was in charge of the Democratic voter rolls.

According to the Daily News, a building she owned on the Upper West Side of Manhattan was the subject of more than 20 Department of Buildings violations over the years after she'd let it fall into disrepair. The building, which she reportedly bought for $5,000 in 1976, was sold in 2014 for $6.6 million.

"If that had not happened, would that have changed the outcome of the election?" she asked. "It may have. And so long as that's out there as a question, I think we're looking at some deep fundamental questions about how we conduct our elections systematically, and what it is that we need to do to ensure that we're not left with so severe a level of doubt in that process."

Additionally, "Bombshell report accuses Mayor Bill de Blasio of coordinating possible illegal fundraising scheme"
http://abc7ny.com/politics/bombshell-report-accuses-mayor-bill-de-blasio-of-coordinating-possible-illegal-fundraising-scheme/1306163/

In a damning eight page memo obtained by the Daily News, and posted in full on the newspaper's website, the lead investigator said, 'the review revealed a pattern consistent with coordinated fundraising and expenditure of funds to evade contribution limits, for purpose of funneling contributions that exceeded contribution limits."

According to the Daily News, the memo was delivered to the Elections Board in January, and recommended the Manhattan DA investigate City Hall for 'willful and flagrant violations' of state election law.


revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 07:24 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
The Board of Elections' chief investigator is saying the mayor and his team were behind a criminal effort to help elect Democrats to the state Senate in 2014, and in return for contributions, deep-pocketed donors could potentially reap benefits from the de Blasio Administration.


As for the question of the democrat Betty Ann Canizio selling her building in 2014 and she did that to help Hillary win the NY election in 2016, good grief Charlie Brown.
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  4  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 07:53 am
@bobsal u1553115,
By all means, investigate the purges of the voters rolls. But keep in mind, only 120,000 people were knocked off their party's membership, making them ineligible to vote in the primary. Hillary won by 290,000 votes, so she wins by a wide margin anyway. But by all means, keep digging for the truth about what happened there.
revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 09:28 am
@Blickers,
What gets me is they actually think Betty Ann Canizio actually sold her building in 2014 just to help Hillary chances in NY in 2016 when she made such a huge profit. I mean apparently she made no improvements on it, she only paid 5,000 dollars on it and got 6.6 million dollars for her "investment" back in 2014. The chances of Bernie winning NY was always small, why would someone pay that much money for a building just to help Hillary in a state which has always been favorable to Hillary anyway starting back when she was a senator of NY?

0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 10:11 am
Apparently the New York Daily news got it wrong, Haslett owned the building not Betty Ann Canizio. Canizio says she was a Sanders' supporter. But of course that don't go with the conspiracy theory.

Quote:
Haslett-Rudiano came under scrutiny in 2013 for refusing to sell a townhouse that many said was becoming a health and safety hazard, New York Daily News reported. She bought the townhouse in 1976 for $5,000 and it was worth $5.5 million in 2013. But she wouldn’t sell it because of an emotional attachment. She owed $12,000 in back taxes on the house, located on W. 76th St., and violations were piling up.

New York Daily News said the house had broken windows covered by boards, dirty water pooling on the patio, and it was overrun by rats and frequently visited by vagrants. City Councilwoman Gale Brewer said that Haslett-Rudiano was “a very bad example of home ownership and public servant responsiveness. She’s not somebody who should be either owning property or, in my opinion, (be a supervisor) of the Board of Elections.”

Haslett-Rudiano was having trouble letting the property go because her late husband had always wanted to renovate it. She said his dreams were wrapped up in that building. She ultimately sold the building for $6.6 million in 2014.


source

I still think it is ridiculous to think someone only sold a building worth crap for 6.6 million dollars only to help Hillary. I think it more likely, she was careless and incompetent, she apparently missed some steps when cleaning out records.

Quote:
1. Haslett-Rudiano Was Suspended For Possibly Skipping Required Steps When Cleaning Voter Records

Haslett-Rudiano, 73, wasn’t fired but she was suspended without pay, according to NBC New York. The suspension will stay in place while an internal probe is conducted to determine what happened that caused over 100,000 voters’ registrations to be purged in Brooklyn.

According to New York Daily News, she may have made an error when cleaning up the voting books. She may have skipped a required step that would have stopped the computer system from purging eligible voters.

Haslett-Rudiano is also the Republican Commissioner for the Board of Elections’ Overseas and Military Voter Services.

According to the New York Daily News, Haslett-Rudiano worked for the BOE since 1999 and made $113,000 a year.


Blickers
 
  3  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 01:25 pm
@revelette2,
Quote revellete:
Quote:
I still think it is ridiculous to think someone only sold a building worth crap for 6.6 million dollars only to help Hillary.


What does Haslett selling the house have to do with Hillary?
ossobuco
 
  3  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 02:49 pm
@bobsal u1553115,
Me too.
0 Replies
 
revelette2
 
  3  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 03:14 pm
@Blickers,
Quote:
What does Haslett selling the house have to do with Hillary?


You may well ask.

This was their thinking. from bobsol link.

Quote:
Anonymous city elections officials said Haslett-Rudiano, who was in charge of the city's Republican voter rolls, had been "scapegoated," according to the New York Post. "It sounds like they cut a deal to make the Republican the scapegoat and protect Betty Ann," an anonymous Democratic elected official from Brooklyn told the Post, referring to Betty Ann Canizio, who was in charge of the Democratic voter rolls.

According to the Daily News, a building she owned on the Upper West Side of Manhattan was the subject of more than 20 Department of Buildings violations over the years after she'd let it fall into disrepair. The building, which she reportedly bought for $5,000 in 1976, was sold in 2014 for $6.6 million.

"If that had not happened, would that have changed the outcome of the election?" she asked. "It may have. And so long as that's out there as a question, I think we're looking at some deep fundamental questions about how we conduct our elections systematically, and what it is that we need to do to ensure that we're not left with so severe a level of doubt in that process."


Only it Haslett's building, not Canizio's. Canizio says she was a Sander's supporter. The whole conspiracy theory is crazy and par for the course of this election. I guess they think someone bought Canizo's (only it is Haslett's building) building back in 2014 for a whopping 6.6 million dollars to throw that counties' votes towards Hillary's way in 2016.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  6  
Reply Sun 24 Apr, 2016 09:39 pm
http://i.imgur.com/ukSRkvo.jpg
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.24 seconds on 12/21/2024 at 02:35:50