It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NY Times -- Hillary Could Win Well Before November 8th Thanks To Early Voting.

page: 2
24
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 04:19 PM
link   
Thank heavens we in Canada don't have the tough choices ahead of us. We already anointed a useless twit as PM with 35% of the popular vote. North America is doomed.




posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 04:20 PM
link   
I wonder how long until western "elections" start to look like this?



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

Hillary won 2016 way back in 2008.
But everyone knows that already.

This thing that we have going on right now is just a viral campaign for Donald's new reality series.

It's called " F them all to death!" Or something.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: carewemust

Wow you guys are getting REALLY desperate. Trying a cheap attempt to confuse people to not go out and vote. Just because the Times pointed out that its POSSIBLE that the election would be sewn up with early voting doesn't mean anyone believes it would happen.

Yep. Typical Republicans. They don't have enough faith in their political positions to win at the ballot box, so they'd rather resort to voter suppression techniques. Pathetic.

And for everyone else in this thread, you might want to check your local laws about "electoral fraud". Some examples of "electoral fraud" include things like giving out wrong dates for voter registration deadlines, wrong dates for when to vote, wrong locals for where to vote, and far more. They're typically all crimes, so I'd be careful or suggesting or following any forms of electoral fraud.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   
YEP...typical DNC people who doubt THERE is another world outside their beliefs..usdefensewatch.com...

Trump leads ,NOT hitlary
edit on 11-10-2016 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 05:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: carewemust

Wow you guys are getting REALLY desperate. Trying a cheap attempt to confuse people to not go out and vote. Just because the Times pointed out that its POSSIBLE that the election would be sewn up with early voting doesn't mean anyone believes it would happen.

Yep. Typical Republicans. They don't have enough faith in their political positions to win at the ballot box, so they'd rather resort to voter suppression techniques. Pathetic.


Do you guys really think someone will not vote because of this thread? Even if Hillary has not actually been declared the winner through absentee voting before then?

Or are you feigning outrage?

Honestly, I think if you guys are that worried someone is going to take this OP seriously and not vote...it is the NYT you should take it up with. Or the TWO PARTIES -- they are responsible for disenfranchising hundreds of millions of voters.

The OP was being obnoxious and I read it all as an attempt at humor. I really thought that was blatantly obvious. Blatantly.



ETA: And I don't support Trump or Clinton. I am thinking I need to make this my signature, lately. The OP was trying to be funny.
edit on 11-10-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 05:20 PM
link   
I've seen the same headline on MSN, and CNBC so far...
It's spreading wide and far in the MSM, this same headline.

MSN LINK:

Early Voting Could Hand Election to Clinton Well Before Nov. 8



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 06:15 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

2 things.

1. There's no outrage in my post. But I also have just as much of a right to voice my opinion as everyone else does. So what's the problem here?

2. You conveniently ignored the 2nd half of my post, which is pointing out that electoral fraud is a crime so people should be careful with some of their suggestions. Just as I pointed out that local and state laws vary on what is legal and illegal when it comes to filming things at voting booths in this thread (HERE).

This is especially ironic seeing as I've spent quite a lot of time recently in another thread where people are saying that Muslims should speak up about possible suspicious behavior that we see. "See something, say something" right? So here I am, seeing & pointing out to everyone that some of the things mentioned here can lead to literal crimes (electoral fraud). Yet you're complaining about that! LOL
edit on 11-10-2016 by enlightenedservant because: clarification ftw



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 06:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: MotherMayEye

2 things.

1. There's no outrage in my post. But I also have just as much of a right to voice my opinion as everyone else does. So what's the problem here?

2. You conveniently ignored the 2nd half of my post, which is pointing out that electoral fraud is a crime so people should be careful with some of their suggestions. Just as I pointed out that local and state laws vary on what is legal and illegal when it comes to filming things at voting booths in this thread (HERE).

This is especially ironic seeing as I've spent quite a lot of time recently in another thread where people are saying that Muslims should speak up about possible suspicious behavior that we see. So here I am, pointing out to everyone that some of the things mentioned here can lead to literal crimes (electoral fraud). Yet you're complaining about that! LOL



I was really just addressing the first part of your comment because it's been brought up a few times now in this thread. That's why I appeared to ignore the rest.

I didn't see the OP's suggestion as anything resembling being serious. But I do think an argument could be made to all the outlets reporting this story. It's possible it could dissuade people from voting. The OP? Nah.

See something...say something...to the media outlets with huge readership. I think the OP was obviously being facetious, but ok...you think you saw something. I'll concede to that. That's why I asked if you guys were being serious.
edit on 11-10-2016 by MotherMayEye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: MotherMayEye

2 things.

1. There's no outrage in my post. But I also have just as much of a right to voice my opinion as everyone else does. So what's the problem here?

2. You conveniently ignored the 2nd half of my post, which is pointing out that electoral fraud is a crime so people should be careful with some of their suggestions. Just as I pointed out that local and state laws vary on what is legal and illegal when it comes to filming things at voting booths in this thread (HERE).

This is especially ironic seeing as I've spent quite a lot of time recently in another thread where people are saying that Muslims should speak up about possible suspicious behavior that we see. So here I am, pointing out to everyone that some of the things mentioned here can lead to literal crimes (electoral fraud). Yet you're complaining about that! LOL



I was really just addressing the first part of your comment because it's been brought up a few times now in this thread. That's why I appeared to ignore the rest.

Fair enough. I made that part of my post because a lot of people complain about "voter fraud" while ignoring that "electoral fraud" is far more prevalent. And trying to trick voters not to show up (like what's alluded to in the OP) is a form of voter suppression (by definition, it's trying to suppress the number of votes for their opponent). And since he/she was specifically telling Hillary's supporters not to show up to vote, I concluded that he/she was another Republican that was trying to suppress the vote of non-Republicans.



I didn't see the OP's suggestion as anything resembling being serious. But I do think an argument could be made to all the outlets reporting this story. It's possible it could dissuade people from voting. The OP? Nah.

I can agree with that. Just as all political polls are put out to sway or confirm public opinions on issues, I can agree that these types of articles can also be used to sway or confirm public opinions. But they also don't directly tell voters for a specific candidate not to vote, like the OP does.

For the record, the Hillary camp did some of these same tactics against Bernie and his supporters (like myself). They also tried to get Bernie to drop out of the race. And I'm sure you saw the numerous threads here on ATS about all of the times they kept pushing the "insurmountable Hillary superdelegate lead", which was meant to get us to lose hope. So I can understand where you're coming from with this point.



See something...say something...to the media outlets with huge readership. I think the OP was obviously being facetious, but ok...you think you saw something. I'll concede to that. That's why I asked if you guys were being serious.

But it isn't the media outlets who would be committing a possible crime by pushing electoral fraud in this case. I'd rather point out to people beforehand that something they're contemplating is potentially illegal, rather than wait for them to actually do it first. Ironically, that's my also part of my own interpretation of my religion. I'll try to prevent people from committing a sin or crime; but if they do it anyway, they're on their own & have to deal with the consequences themselves.



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 08:07 PM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

Oops you got the news wrong my friend, didn't you hear, Hillary already won the elections and already is seating in the square office.




posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 09:29 PM
link   
If I was Trump and lose the election, I'd buy them and fire everyone, then write it off on my taxes for 20yrs.

Same with the rest of the yellow journals.








edit on 10 11 2016 by burgerbuddy because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 11 2016 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: jjkenobi
The networks will already call the key states for the Democrat early in the hopes Republican voters don't even bother going to the polls.

How can Trump keep dead Demmycrats from going to the polls?


Don't worry, 100 or so "undead" Democrats out of 100 million voters won't make any difference.

Maybe the Florida SoS can deliver that State again ... that would at least be 29 votes for Mr. T.


edit on 11-10-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1   >>

log in

join