PDA

View Full Version : Obama's First Election



mikesilvia
10-05-2011, 10:25 AM
http://mediamatters.org/research/200806020007

It is TOUGH to find this video anywhere. I can't find it on YouTube. A great video by CNN showing how Obama won his first election by challenging signatures ensuring that he was the only candidate on the ballot. I think the video gives you a peak into his world and how he runs his Presidency. Basically, speak about choice and everyone has a voice, but in reality rub out opposing voices anyway you can.

Hilfiger1975
10-05-2011, 10:28 AM
Sorta like how the voting machines/ballot cards in Ohio was rigged/tampered for Bush? I'm sure that was the only state it happened in though...:winking0071:

sanfran22
10-05-2011, 10:40 AM
Sorta like how the voting machines/ballot cards in Ohio was rigged/tampered for Bush? I'm sure that was the only state it happened in though...:winking0071:

Yeah, keep telling yourself that.....lol

Hilfiger1975
10-05-2011, 10:43 AM
Yeah, keep telling yourself that.....lol
Be more specific, please?

pghin08
10-05-2011, 10:46 AM
Oh come on, election fraud can be proven no matter what party and what election. Democrats cried under Bush, Republicans cry under Obama. Get over it.

Star_Cards
10-05-2011, 10:48 AM
I haven't read this whole article yet, but if the signatures were obtained or bought against the rules then why should they not be dismissed. I'm not sure if paying people to sign a petition to be able to run for elected office is legal in that forum or not. Nor do I know if a signature from someone not registered or from that district counts, but if it doesn't then it seems like this guy shouldn't have been able to run if he fudged the signatures.

sanfran22
10-05-2011, 10:48 AM
Be more specific, please?

You need to define what you think happened in Ohio.....

mrveggieman
10-05-2011, 10:50 AM
We wont even go there with the debacle in Florida with Jeb and George Bush.

Star_Cards
10-05-2011, 11:08 AM
UGH. IHow about read this article and discuss that? From what I see there are actual items you can bring up to say that maybe those signatures shouldn't have counted, but no, the thread goes to bush did it.

Hilfiger1975
10-05-2011, 11:17 AM
You need to define what you think happened in Ohio.....
I know what happened, do you? Then once they proved that actually the boxes was indeed "tampered" with. Ohio turned around and bought more boxes from the same ballot box supplier...check it out it's awesome read and video...

AUTaxMan
10-05-2011, 11:20 AM
I know what happened, do you?

You cannot talk in generalities and then demand specifics. You started the discussion on Ohio. Bring some facts to the table.

Hilfiger1975
10-05-2011, 11:22 AM
UGH. IHow about read this article and discuss that? From what I see there are actual items you can bring up to say that maybe those signatures shouldn't have counted, but no, the thread goes to bush did it.
Isn't that how we argue about politics? One side says something then another side of "organized/labeled" people counters with what the other side did?

sanfran22
10-05-2011, 11:23 AM
I know what happened, do you? Then once they proved that actually the boxes was indeed "tampered" with. Ohio turned around and bought more boxes from the same ballot box supplier...check it out it's awesome read and video...

Yes, I know that story, as well as the not having enough boxes, no transportation and suppressing the inner city vote ect. Who did they prove tampered with the boxes???

ensbergcollector
10-05-2011, 11:35 AM
again we return to the "i won't address the issue at hand so i will just claim the other guy did it too, thus making it ok"

mrveggieman
10-05-2011, 12:48 PM
again we return to the "i won't address the issue at hand so i will just claim the other guy did it too, thus making it ok"


No it's not ok when either side does it. The point I'm making is everyone likes to call out obama but no one says a thing about the republicans when they do the same things that obama is/was accused of.

pghin08
10-05-2011, 12:51 PM
Not it's not ok when either side does it. The point I'm making is everyone likes to call out obama but no one says a thing about the republicans when they do the same things that obama is/was accused of.

That's not true. If you were alive during the 2000 and 2004 elections, Dems cried foul about both of them, and in a big way.

My point is this:

THIS IS NOT NEW. NOR IS IT EXCLUSIVE TO ONE PARTY.

Everyone should stop treating it like it is.

ensbergcollector
10-05-2011, 12:52 PM
Not it's not ok when either side does it. The point I'm making is everyone likes to call out obama but no one says a thing about the republicans when they do the same things that obama is/was accused of.

ok, a few things. Seeing as how you weren't even here until after obama was president, how do you know no one says a thing? This board was full the entire time bush was president of thread knocking him and things he had done. And for the most part, those of us here, responded to the accusation. Some we defended, some we agreed he was wrong on, but never was our response "democrats do it too." So I'm sorry, but your statement holds no water.

And I'm sorry. when obama is accused of something, no one addresses the point. No one says, yeah, that's messed up. They say "bush did it too" and "no one said anything when bush did it."

So please, be willing to deal with the accusation. People's inability to address the issue at hand only shows the bias.

ensbergcollector
10-05-2011, 12:55 PM
That's not true. If you were alive during the 2000 and 2004 elections, Dems cried foul about both of them, and in a big way.

My point is this:

THIS IS NOT NEW. NOR IS IT EXCLUSIVE TO ONE PARTY.

Everyone should stop treating it like it is.

come on man, that's like saying let's not talk about the murder that took place last night because murders have happened before. I don't care if every republican who ever won an election cheated, that does not mean we shouldn't be allowed to talk about whether or not a particular democrat cheated.

pghin08
10-05-2011, 01:03 PM
come on man, that's like saying let's not talk about the murder that took place last night because murders have happened before. I don't care if every republican who ever won an election cheated, that does not mean we shouldn't be allowed to talk about whether or not a particular democrat cheated.

That's not my point. I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it. I'm saying that it's ridiculous to treat it like it's something brand new, and that it's exclusive to one party. When Mike originally posted it, he posted it as being a "insight into how Obama runs the country". By that logic, it's an insight into how Bush ran the country, and everybody else who's ever been accused of election fraud (which is most Presidents).

I'm DEFINITELY not saying to disregard it, I'm just pointing out how insane it is to use it for any partisan tug-of-war, because both sides do it equally.

ensbergcollector
10-05-2011, 01:08 PM
That's not my point. I'm not saying we shouldn't talk about it. I'm saying that it's ridiculous to treat it like it's something brand new, and that it's exclusive to one party. When Mike originally posted it, he posted it as being a "insight into how Obama runs the country". By that logic, it's an insight into how Bush ran the country, and everybody else who's ever been accused of election fraud (which is most Presidents).

I'm DEFINITELY not saying to disregard it, I'm just pointing out how insane it is to use it for any partisan tug-of-war, because both sides do it equally.

but for 8 years it was treated like an insight into how bush ran the country. No one on the left was saying "it's ridiculous to treat it like it's something brand new, and that it's exclusive to one party" but now that it is obama in office we want to take that attitude with it.

pghin08
10-05-2011, 01:14 PM
but for 8 years it was treated like an insight into how bush ran the country. No one on the left was saying "it's ridiculous to treat it like it's something brand new, and that it's exclusive to one party" but now that it is obama in office we want to take that attitude with it.

I can only speak for myself here, but I was saying exactly that during the whole Bush election fraud scandals. Which is: "Why are people surprised?" And yes, while no one on the left was saying that it was new, people on the right were. That's why it's ridiculous to me that people are trying to make this stuff a partisan issue. It's like a murderer standing in judgement of another murderer, you both killed, you're both awful for doing it, period.

mikesilvia
10-05-2011, 02:36 PM
Trying to stay on topic ...

The point is you had an incumbent that was in office for 5 years. I'm 100% certain Obama's signatures were not 100% valid, but the other three candidates simply didn't have the money to hire lawyers and staffers to check signatures.

In my view this is an attack on low-income candidates and against choice. Should a signature be thrown out because someone who has a low education may have signed a candidate sheet vice printing? Or someone that doesn't speak English signs vice printing? Or they changed their address or got married so their last name changed?

Notice that the people running against Obama were heroes in their neighborhoods as community volunteers and activists?

If a Republican did this technique to minority Democrats it would be marked down as racists and an attack on minorities and limiting choice. Since Obama did it, the horse blinders go on and Bush's name gets throw around.

Seriously, if a Democrats is caught speeding can Democrats admit that he/she was speeding? Vice saying Republicans speed so it's ok?

Star_Cards
10-05-2011, 02:41 PM
Isn't that how we argue about politics? One side says something then another side of "organized/labeled" people counters with what the other side did?

sadly that is how it typically goes.

Star_Cards
10-05-2011, 02:44 PM
ok, a few things. Seeing as how you weren't even here until after obama was president, how do you know no one says a thing? This board was full the entire time bush was president of thread knocking him and things he had done. And for the most part, those of us here, responded to the accusation. Some we defended, some we agreed he was wrong on, but never was our response "democrats do it too." So I'm sorry, but your statement holds no water.

And I'm sorry. when obama is accused of something, no one addresses the point. No one says, yeah, that's messed up. They say "bush did it too" and "no one said anything when bush did it."

So please, be willing to deal with the accusation. People's inability to address the issue at hand only shows the bias.


this isn't completely true. Some hold even the guys they vote for to the fire if they do something wrong. True a lot do, on both sides, but some don't blindly favor the guys they vote for... At least I don't.

Star_Cards
10-05-2011, 02:51 PM
Trying to stay on topic ...

The point is you had an incumbent that was in office for 5 years. I'm 100% certain Obama's signatures were not 100% valid, but the other three candidates simply didn't have the money to hire lawyers and staffers to check signatures.

In my view this is an attack on low-income candidates and against choice. Should a signature be thrown out because someone who has a low education may have signed a candidate sheet vice printing? Or someone that doesn't speak English signs vice printing? Or they changed their address or got married so their last name changed?

Notice that the people running against Obama were heroes in their neighborhoods as community volunteers and activists?

If a Republican did this technique to minority Democrats it would be marked down as racists and an attack on minorities and limiting choice. Since Obama did it, the horse blinders go on and Bush's name gets throw around.

Seriously, if a Democrats is caught speeding can Democrats admit that he/she was speeding? Vice saying Republicans speed so it's ok?

Don't act like this doesn't go both ways. It's not just a Dem happening. It may annoy you more when it's a Rep as you are more sided with them but it's a two way street. No matter how it happens I hate the hypocrisy when people yell from the roof tops when it's an opposing politician and sweeps it under the rug when it's their own. It happens more times than not too and it shows that situation plays into lot of people's opinions.

If it is the case that in this specific article that Obama did the same thing and was the only one that had the finances to fight the others isn't that a big reason for campaign finance reform.

If you have two candidates and one has more money, should the candidate with more money not do things within the rules just because his opponent doesn't have the funds? Maybe each candidate should have the right to check these petitions to get on the ballot no matter their funding.

Hilfiger1975
10-05-2011, 10:13 PM
Yes, I know that story, as well as the not having enough boxes, no transportation and suppressing the inner city vote ect. Who did they prove tampered with the boxes???
You might want to read and watch a video on how the hard drives could be altered also...

sanfran22
10-05-2011, 10:15 PM
You might want to read and watch a video on how the hard drives could be altered also...
But I'm asking you, who do you claim specifically did this? Is this like all the dead people voting for Obama in Cuyahoga county??LOL.

mikesilvia
10-05-2011, 10:41 PM
Don't act like this doesn't go both ways. It's not just a Dem happening. It may annoy you more when it's a Rep as you are more sided with them but it's a two way street. No matter how it happens I hate the hypocrisy when people yell from the roof tops when it's an opposing politician and sweeps it under the rug when it's their own. It happens more times than not too and it shows that situation plays into lot of people's opinions.

Ok, show me where a Republican has done it. I'm open to see it.

Star_Cards
10-06-2011, 11:08 AM
Ok, show me where a Republican has done it. I'm open to see it.

Do you want evidence of a Rep questioning signatures of an opponent to get on the ballot or voter fraud in general?

sanfran22
10-06-2011, 11:52 AM
Do you want evidence of a Rep questioning signatures of an opponent to get on the ballot or voter fraud in general?

Sounds like he want's a proven case of repubs cheating...at least thats how I read it.

Star_Cards
10-06-2011, 12:07 PM
Sounds like he want's a proven case of repubs cheating...at least thats how I read it.

I don't have exact references or proof of voter fraud, but I'm not naive enough to think neither party has done it in any sort of election.

as for calling challenging signatures to get on a ballot "cheating", it sounds like that is an action that can be and is used by candidates and is within the rules. I would not call a challenge of an opponents signatures cheating no matter which party the candidate was affiliated with.

mikesilvia
10-06-2011, 12:41 PM
Silly me for wanting to see facts. Just because you say, "both sides do it." Doesn't make it right or a fact. Show me a high level Republican that has gotten to office like President Obama did. Questioning signatures is one thing, but rubbing out all three opponents to include an incumbent is unprecedented. I'll wait for an example, but I won't be holding my breath. :)

mikesilvia
10-06-2011, 12:43 PM
Also, I'm 100% certain that if a white Republican eliminated African American candidates the way Obama did the video would have 10 million views on YouTube.

mrveggieman
10-06-2011, 12:49 PM
Also, I'm 100% certain that if a white Republican eliminated African American candidates the way Obama did the video would have 10 million views on YouTube.


Sorry Mike try again. Youtube did not come out until 2005 after gwb had already stole 2 elections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube

sanfran22
10-06-2011, 12:57 PM
Sorry Mike try again. Youtube did not come out until 2005 after gwb had already stole 2 elections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube

where did he say anything about Bush. He said white republican. That could be any time frame.....You gotta slow down and read the response before you get all excited with your zingers..:winking0071:

duane1969
10-06-2011, 01:30 PM
Sorry Mike try again. Youtube did not come out until 2005 after gwb had already stole 2 elections.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/YouTube

Did you even read his post? You are getting as bad as GBM, reading one thing and then saying that something else was said.

Star_Cards
10-06-2011, 01:50 PM
Silly me for wanting to see facts. Just because you say, "both sides do it." Doesn't make it right or a fact. Show me a high level Republican that has gotten to office like President Obama did. Questioning signatures is one thing, but rubbing out all three opponents to include an incumbent is unprecedented. I'll wait for an example, but I won't be holding my breath. :)

I don't have the knowledge nor the time to look at high up politicians to see. So yes I won't have any facts. Nor did I say it was proven that both sides have done it. I never claimed as much. I'm just saying I'm not naive enough to 100% say that no republican has done something like this.

mrveggieman
10-06-2011, 02:06 PM
where did he say anything about Bush. He said white republican. That could be any time frame.....You gotta slow down and read the response before you get all excited with your zingers..:winking0071:


Please correct me if I'm wrong but the last time I checked gwb is white and he is a republican, is he not? He was also accused of election fraud, was he not? He last stole the presidential election in 2004 prior to youtube.

duane1969
10-06-2011, 02:11 PM
Please correct me if I'm wrong but the last time I checked gwb is white and he is a republican, is he not? He was also accused of election fraud, was he not? He last stole the presidential election in 2004 prior to youtube.

You applied the GWB aspect. He was generalizing.

mikesilvia
10-06-2011, 02:50 PM
Sorry Mike try again. Youtube did not come out until 2005 after gwb had already stole 2 elections.

He stole the election? With what a pistol?

Last I looked THOUSANDS of election officials certified the results and even the most left-wing papers like the NY Times and LA Times investigated the elections and certified Bush as President. Google it sometime. I know .. I know ... silly facts.

Just because you say something a million times, doesn't make it fact. The problem is people think the popular election is more important than the electoral vote. Then the silly constitution gets in the way. Our election process is not American Idol, it's a federalist system with 50 states voting. There was no election stolen, just people used to voting for American Idol complaining because they don't understand how the election system in the U.S works.

mrveggieman
10-06-2011, 02:59 PM
He stole the election? With what a pistol?

Last I looked THOUSANDS of election officials certified the results and even the most left-wing papers like the NY Times and LA Times investigated the elections and certified Bush as President. Google it sometime. I know .. I know ... silly facts.

Just because you say something a million times, doesn't make it fact. The problem is people think the popular election is more important than the electoral vote. Then the silly constitution gets in the way. Our election process is not American Idol, it's a federalist system with 50 states voting. There was no election stolen, just people used to voting for American Idol complaining because they don't understand how the election system in the U.S works.


I'm not exactly who you are referring to with the american idol remark because I don't watch it and I am aware that we elect our presidents by an electorial college system and not a popular vote. That is exactly why states like Florida in 2000 who's governor back then was Jeb Bush (GWB's baby brother) can do a lot of underhanded things to ensure that bush won that state getting the neccessary votes he needed to "win" the election. I am an educated man mike so please come at me with a better argument. :winking0071:

sanfran22
10-06-2011, 03:04 PM
I'm not exactly who you are referring to with the american idol remark because I don't watch it and I am aware that we elect our presidents by an electorial college system and not a popular vote. That is exactly why states like Florida in 2000 who's governor back then was Jeb Bush (GWB's baby brother) can do a lot of underhanded things to ensure that bush won that state getting the neccessary votes he needed to "win" the election. I am an educated man mike so please come at me with a better argument. :winking0071:

Lol is all I gotta say about this......... can I ask where you were educated out of curiosity? You don't have to answer if you don't want....:party0048:

mikesilvia
10-06-2011, 03:13 PM
I'm not exactly who you are referring to with the american idol remark because I don't watch it and I am aware that we elect our presidents by an electorial college system and not a popular vote. That is exactly why states like Florida in 2000 who's governor back then was Jeb Bush (GWB's baby brother) can do a lot of underhanded things to ensure that bush won that state getting the neccessary votes he needed to "win" the election. I am an educated man mike so please come at me with a better argument. :winking0071:

You are making this conclusion: Brother is governor so it is proof that the election was cheated. This assumption would put so many people away in jail based on assumption like that. Someone stole a car from the Ford Parking lot. Mike was there that day and his brother works there so Mike stole the car.

Gore took his case to several courts and all certified the election to Bush. Are you saying that Gore didn't bring as much proof as possible? The NYT and LA times, both backed Gore and certified the election to Bush.

It's silly to use analogies that "Bush stole the election because his brother was Governor." Without proof and facts you are simply smearing the name of a lot of people.

mikesilvia
10-06-2011, 03:15 PM
As far as the American Idol remark that wasn't pointed at you. In America more young people vote for American Idol than for President. So, they only voting system they know is a popular vote where you get to vote over and over and the winner takes all. They have no clue what the electoral college is and too many have never read the constitution.

mrveggieman
10-06-2011, 03:27 PM
As far as the American Idol remark that wasn't pointed at you. In America more young people vote for American Idol than for President. So, they only voting system they know is a popular vote where you get to vote over and over and the winner takes all. They have no clue what the electoral college is and too many have never read the constitution.


Sad but true. SMH

mikesilvia
10-06-2011, 03:51 PM
So, I'll try to get back on point.

I'll repeat my main point. In my view Obama's election for that state senate seat in Illinois was REAL class warfare. He was an educated, well-to-do man with DEEP pockets backing him that could afford lawyers to throw out vote after vote. His opponents (to include an incumbent that already was relected once) didn't have the same amount of resources. I can't prove it but I have a feeling that many of Obama's signatures would have been thrown out if scrutinized. Then Obama runs on the "every vote must count" platform when running for Senate and eventually President. Every vote must count FOR HIM, but not his opponents.

As the video stated, what he did was NOT illegal, just very questionable for someone that believes in the "spirit" of Democracy. Notice what the Obama aids said? He said that it was their job to avoid spending money on an election if you could just remove your competition on technicalities. Basically, his election was the same as Saddam Hussein's. Who do you want to vote for?


Barrack Obama
Barrack Obama

mrveggieman
10-06-2011, 04:05 PM
So, I'll try to get back on point.

I'll repeat my main point. In my view Obama's election for that state senate seat in Illinois was REAL class warfare. He was an educated, well-to-do man with DEEP pockets backing him that could afford lawyers to throw out vote after vote. His opponents (to include an incumbent that already was relected once) didn't have the same amount of resources. I can't prove it but I have a feeling that many of Obama's signatures would have been thrown out if scrutinized. Then Obama runs on the "every vote must count" platform when running for Senate and eventually President. Every vote must count FOR HIM, but not his opponents.

As the video stated, what he did was NOT illegal, just very questionable for someone that believes in the "spirit" of Democracy. Notice what the Obama aids said? He said that it was their job to avoid spending money on an election if you could just remove your competition on technicalities. Basically, his election was the same as Saddam Hussein's. Who do you want to vote for?


Barrack Obama
Barrack Obama



Othe politicians from both parties have also been accused of questionable election tatics. My first question to you is why are you only calling out obama? My second question is what do you propose be done about election fraud by canidates?

mikesilvia
10-06-2011, 04:52 PM
Othe politicians from both parties have also been accused of questionable election tatics. My first question to you is why are you only calling out obama? My second question is what do you propose be done about election fraud by canidates?

I posted up this video because I've mentioned it over the years and NO has ever seen it. The other day I mentioned it to someone while talking politics and they hadn't heard of it either so I thought I post it again in this forum.

I'd call out ANYONE that performed illegal or questionable campaign tactics. I know dirty politics get played on both side. No one party has a monopoly on illegal or questionable tactics.

I think for the most part our local, state and federal government does enough to fight election fraud. Obviously, there are still dead people and illegals voting and other forms of fraud. Unfortunately, we can only reduce it, not eliminate it.

pghin08
10-06-2011, 10:27 PM
You are making this conclusion: Brother is governor so it is proof that the election was cheated. This assumption would put so many people away in jail based on assumption like that. Someone stole a car from the Ford Parking lot. Mike was there that day and his brother works there so Mike stole the car.

Gore took his case to several courts and all certified the election to Bush. Are you saying that Gore didn't bring as much proof as possible? The NYT and LA times, both backed Gore and certified the election to Bush.

It's silly to use analogies that "Bush stole the election because his brother was Governor." Without proof and facts you are simply smearing the name of a lot of people.

It IS kind of crappy that when the Supreme Court ruled on Gore v. Bush, they said their ruling was "limited to the present circumstance", so basically saying that their ruling on this case didn't ever apply again.