Young grashoppah, you must realize that spelling 'poll' correctly is a no-no on the interwebz. It must be pole or poal or pohl or whatever.
Originally posted by: Young Grasshopper
LOL @ 'poal'. That's an epic fail if I ever saw one.
Originally posted by: Arkaign
Originally posted by: Young Grasshopper
LOL @ 'poal'. That's an epic fail if I ever saw one.
Young grashoppah, you must realize that spelling 'poll' correctly is a no-no on the interwebz. It must be pole or poal or pohl or whatever.
Originally posted by: dainthomas
Originally posted by: Grunt03
I would kick them all out of the witehouse and move in the Girls Next Door.......
Hef '08!
He'd replace the anti-aircraft guns on the roof with hot tubs, put a clothing-optional slip-n-slide on the front lawn, and install spinning beds and mirrored ceilings in all the bedrooms. THAT is change I can believe in!
I wonder if the Sands has a helo pad on the roof that can handle Marine One?
Originally posted by: jonks
Yes but I'd give it to George W. Bush.
Wait we already did that.
Originally posted by: PokerGuy
Originally posted by: dainthomas
Originally posted by: Grunt03
I would kick them all out of the witehouse and move in the Girls Next Door.......
Hef '08!
He'd replace the anti-aircraft guns on the roof with hot tubs, put a clothing-optional slip-n-slide on the front lawn, and install spinning beds and mirrored ceilings in all the bedrooms. THAT is change I can believe in!
I wonder if the Sands has a helo pad on the roof that can handle Marine One?
Now this is a platform I could endorse!
I can only imagine the parties at the convention and after the victory
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: dphantom
This is interesting though scientifically invalid. It seems the Obama supporters are more willing to destroy the fundamental principle upon which we rely to ensure free and open elections simply to get their candidate elected.
It's a 2:1 (wouldn't:would) ratio for both candidates as of this post.
Originally posted by: XMan
Victory isn't worth losing your principles.
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: dphantom
This is interesting though scientifically invalid. It seems the Obama supporters are more willing to destroy the fundamental principle upon which we rely to ensure free and open elections simply to get their candidate elected.
It's a 2:1 (wouldn't:would) ratio for both candidates as of this post.
As of this post, nearly half of McCain supporters would fix the election for their candidate (7 of 17), but only about one third of Obama supporters (16 of 44) would fix it for Obama.
Do you find this scientifically invalid poll more or less interesting now?
Originally posted by: dphantom
This is interesting though scientifically invalid. It seems the Obama supporters are more willing to destroy the fundamental principle upon which we rely to ensure free and open elections simply to get their candidate elected.
Now before anyone goes off the deep end, I would attribute the 7 so far who would rig the election in favor of Obama to not be representative of Democarats, but rather the kook fringe element like the moveon.orgies.
And it bears repeating that these types of polls are anecdotal only and represent no supportible conclusions.
I am dissapointed in the 2 who would rig the election in favor of McCain. Conservatives must have higher standards than that.
Originally posted by: dphantom
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: dphantom
This is interesting though scientifically invalid. It seems the Obama supporters are more willing to destroy the fundamental principle upon which we rely to ensure free and open elections simply to get their candidate elected.
It's a 2:1 (wouldn't:would) ratio for both candidates as of this post.
As of this post, nearly half of McCain supporters would fix the election for their candidate (7 of 17), but only about one third of Obama supporters (16 of 44) would fix it for Obama.
Do you find this scientifically invalid poll more or less interesting now?
If you would actually read a post, you would see the qualifier I put in and the results as of the posting. No, I don't find it MORE interesting, I find anyone who would willingly rig an elecoriginal tion distrurbing. The poll is invalid, who knows maybe dems are rigging the republican results and repubs the dems.
The point I am making and you are missing is that anyone would seriously consider rigging an election and think it is ok. That completely undermines our form of government.
Originally posted by: PokerGuy
Hypothetically speadking, if someone (perhaps Diebold ) offered a way for you to rig the election, with no chance of ever getting found out or caught, would you do it? Would you have your candidate 'win'?
Just for clarification, you would not have the option of first seeing who would actually win to determine if you wanted to "change" the results or not.