Karl`s PC Help Forums Last active: Never
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

In memory of Karl Davis, founder of this board, who made his final journey 12th June 2007

Post Reply
Who Can Post? All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username   Need to register?
Password:   Forgot password?
Subject: (optional)
Icon: [*]
Formatting Mode:

Insert Bold text Insert Italicised text Insert Underlined text Insert Centered text Insert a Hyperlink Insert E-mail Hyperlink Insert an Image Insert Code Formatted text Insert Quoted text Insert List
HTML is Off
Smilies are On
BB Code is On
[img] Code is On
:) :( :D ;)
:cool: :o shocked_yellow :P
confused2 smokin: waveysmiley waggyfinger
brshteeth nananana lips_sealed kewl_glasses
Show All Smilies

Disable Smilies?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email on reply?
The file size of the attachment must be under 200K.
Do not preview if you have attached an image.

Topic Review

[*] posted on 19-1-2008 at 21:28
Yesterday, a Spanish-language ad was being broadcast every half-hour saying that Hillary Clinton's people tried to stop ordinary workers from voting, but that Obama was the candidate who supported common people. I might have thought Hillary would lose from the bad publicity and harsh ads.

However, early returns have her leading Obama.

Reports say the number of casino workers who voted in the at-work-campus sites is low. One blogger remarked it turned out to be a lot of fuss over few votes. But, it did show how the Clinton people will try to block people from voting if they think it will be to their own advantage.

The Republican caucuses were held earlier, and Romney will be the winner. Not all the votes are counted, but so far he has more than all the other candidates put together. His record so far: first place in three states, second place in two.

South Carolina is still voting. Based on predictive polls, McCain or Huckabee is most likely to win, followed by the other; Romeny and Thompson are polling close to each other for third place. However, as poorly as some polls have been this year, there may be a surprise.

[*] posted on 18-1-2008 at 01:31
In sparsely-populated Nevada (which holds caucus Saturday), a good number of voters live in Las Vegas. Many of them are employed in hotel-casinoes with restaurants.

To make it easier for such workers to be able to caucus, some caucus sites were designated in buildings where they work.

A teachers' union filed to try to get a court order to change this, to make the workers have to leave and go to another location to caucus. (This would mean that fewer of them could vote in the caucus. Everybody would have to get transportation to the caucus sites. If the transportation there plus caucus time plus transporation back took longer than they would be allowed away from work, they could not vote.)

Why would anyone want to make it harder for them to vote? Well, the cullinary workers union has recently endorsed Obama. If those workers favor him, others who work in the same complexes probably mostly favor him, too. It would be to the Clinton campaign's advantage if fewer of them voted.

Bill Clinton has declared they have nothing to do with the lawsut to make it harder for those people to vote. But, the suit was brought by a union that has been supporting Hillary, and the lawyers who pressed for the court order are a legal firm with ties to the Clintons.

HA HA, they lost the suit, after getting a good dose of bad publicity for it. Trying to win by making it physically hard for people to vote against you is undemocratic.waggyfinger