Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

"I voted for Obama a couple times!"

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 12:21 AM
link   
Click Here for Video on National Review

The reply by the CNN reporter?


I think that's against the law but that's OK!


Here is a Youtube Video of the Same Segment:



This is outrageous.


[edit on 5-11-2008 by CreeWolf]




posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 12:40 AM
link   
I happened to catch this one live on CNN earlier today. I honestly think the reporter just had no idea what to say, I know I would have been caught way off guard by a guy telling me openly and on national television that he voted a couple of times. They did cue back to the studio after that, though, so maybe they tried to hide this guy's mistake of saying it's ok.

That said, I think CNN should still give this reporter a pretty severe punishment. It's not acceptable to, as a reporter, say "It's okay" to a blatantly illegal act such as voting multiple times. But I still think that based on the reporters demeanor, he was probably just caught too off guard to know what to say in this situation. But I could be wrong, I'm just giving him the benefit of the doubt. As far as the voter goes, damn you!



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 12:45 AM
link   
There was a caller on the Allan Handleman radio show this afternoon who said that when he showed up to vote he found his name and address and it showed that he had already voted via absentee ballot.

He contacted the voting administration by telephone and after four hours he managed to straighten things out and prove that he was who he said and in fact had not voted yet.

Now here is the scary part. He said that his name and address were used to register a vote for Barack Obama....and the absentee ballot was sent in from an address inside of the UK.


Something to think about, this makes me wonder how many times something like this must have been repeated today all over the country.

These elections are very sketchy to say the least



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 12:54 AM
link   
I could be wrong, but maybe since they were talking about the line being long and he had to come back, that he meant he "had to come back to vote a couple of times" because each time he came the line was still too long so he left and came back to try again??

Dang that was one heck of a run on sentence, but does anyone else catch my drift?

[edit on 5-11-2008 by rosesposes]
Sorry, I curse like a sailor, had to edit...3 times. lol
[edit on 5-11-2008 by rosesposes]

[edit on 5-11-2008 by rosesposes]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 12:57 AM
link   
Yes, I was about to post exactly what you just did. Funny, that reporter looked like he was about to get jacked. lol

I think he meant "I had to come back a couple of times before I could vote"
Really, how often do you get interviewed by CNN, I would have messed it up to.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Zenagain]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:01 AM
link   
reply to post by BlackOps719
 


We had a couple of similar calls come in to a local Talk Radio program here in Des Moines Mac's World saying that they were turned away because they voted Absentee. The callers were insistent that they did not and both filled out provisional ballots.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by CreeWolf]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by rosesposes
 

Even the CNN reporter caught it. I don't even think it was a Freudian Slip with that smirk on the guys face while saying it. But, I suppose it might be possible, like 2% Milk.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:25 AM
link   
Forgive the impending sarcasm. Know that it's not personal, and even though things have finally gone my way, I believe just as much now as before that we need to overhaul the system and watch 50-75% of our incumbents instantly go down in flames. That being said...

Oh, I'm sorry, is our election system full of dangerous gaping holes that should have been fixed 8 years ago? I wanted to tell you earlier, but you thought your party won the last two elections and I didn't want to take that away from you.
Sincerely,
The Other Half



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:28 AM
link   
It's ironic that it's outrageous, it's unfortunate that this is not a problem... the popular vote won and the electoral vote won for Obama by a large margin. As much as people want to make a story of this it does not matter and it should. Isn't it about time that we do away with the electoral college? The person I voted for won and won by a large margin, so much so that McCain conceded. It is over but, lets get it right so that a person like Bush does not get elected (like in 2000) again against the peoples better judgment.

Even if the person I don't want to win wins, so long as the public decided it, it is fair. Lets get rid of these machines that leave people with questionable results and get paper scanned and stored for the public to look up. Let's fix this so we don't have these issues. We can damn sure count paper money, we can count paper ballots and make sure what ever happened here does not if the public vote actually decides.

Right now as it stands he can vote for anyone 100000000000000 times and as long as the electoral colledge is around IT DOES NOT MATTER!



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I see Sinn Fein idea of
vote early and vote often has been exported to the US.


It seemed like the the guy was j/k the reporter who did say that it
"WAS ILLEGAL"



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by dalek
 


Did I say that it does mot matter! see Bush 2000. Electoral college......



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   
The electoral college should have gone the way of the dinosaur decades ago. It serves no useful purpose whatsoever except to unfairly sway election results based on some idiotic point system that nobody seems to really understand.


If we are going to have a Democracy then let it be a true Democracy free from the binds of this make believe electoral college nonsense. Let the popular vote stand as the election decider and not some archaic system that no longer holds relevance.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by BlackOps719
 


Amen let's get rid of this ugly step child that was enacted in the 1700's. I really couldn't agree more! Lets give third party candidates a fair run. I am all about what America wants as a whole.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:06 AM
link   
Back when the system of Electoral Colleges was enacted, they didn't have all these fancy computer gadgets, networks, and instantaneous results. I agree with it needing to be eliminated. I also agree with what Vagabond had to say but for some reason my fancy computer gadget won't let me reply directly to his post!



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:11 AM
link   
The electoral college exists in order to level the playing field a bit between the states. The number of electoral votes for each state is equivalent to senators (2 per state) + congressmen (based on population) If they got rid of the electoral college, then the higher population states such as New York and California would carry even more relative weight than they already do, and the lower population states like Alaska and Montana would become almost entirely irrelevant.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Indevolatile
 


So what you are trying to say is that people in the city are misguided and don't deserve the same vote (per person) as farmers in Montana?



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:19 AM
link   



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:21 AM
link   
No, I was explaining why the electoral college exists and how it operates. Here's my source:

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:24 AM
link   
So how does the wikipedia article change what every person as a singular person have the right to say? This is a sincere question as I have lived in a country region and a metropolis region.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:31 AM
link   
Maybe this explains it better than I can:




James Madison argued that the Constitution was designed to be a mixture of state-based and population-based government. The Congress would have two houses, one state-based (Senate) and the other population-based (House of Representatives) in character, while the President would be elected by a mixture of the two modes, giving some electoral power to the states and some to the people in general. Both the Congress and the President would be elected by mixed state-based and population-based means.






top topics



 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join