SoldiersMum wrote:

Stormstrike wrote:
The media had a fondness for McCain back when he could try to call himself a "maverick," but their praise became muted and died out very quickly once it became clear he was the one who'd face their beloved Obama. It doesn't help the conservative cause at all to ape delusional liberal claims that McCain stole elections with the help of "the MSM." Please let the liberals be the nuts.

The MSM was declaring McCain the Republican nominee even before the very first primary.  Did you see or hear anything ever about a speech Duncan Hunter made to anyone?  How about Tom Tancredo?  Was any speech covered that Thompson gave, particularly the really good one in SC?  How many times did they use the word "cult" to describe Romney's religion? Of course the MSM shaped the primary.  

And..I don't believe I said McCain stole the election and if you read that, then you misunderstood.  What I said was those voter machines might have assisted in his win and what I meant was that the Democrats who are basically in charge of the voting in this country put the fix in.  If you don't believe that one, ask in November which party your poll workers belong to.  In my district, which is predominately Republican, there is not one person working the polls who is a Republican.  These people have been there for years and they replace them with another Dem when one of them leaves.   Those people have direct control over who gets to vote.  I've heard this story from many people from many states some where very questionable people were allowed to vote.  

I don't think this is nuts.  Speaking of the voter machines and the actual voting process I think is a topic of conversation.  Just tell me this..what if it's true?  What if elections are being manipulated?  Would you think not talking about it would make everything ok?  What does it say about the direction the country is headed if the elections are being maniupulated?  Do you really think the United States of America should be using paperless, programmable voting machines that were purchased from Venezuella? I know for a fact that in 2006 voter machines in Philadelphia were loaded with thousands of votes prior to the election.  How many other machines across the country might also have started out with thousands of votes before voting even began?   How do you think Hugo Chavez managed to get reelected?

Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo are both congressmen. No one knows who Hunter is, and Tancredo has a bad habit of saying stupid things. On top of that, no congressman has made the jump directly to the White House since Kennedy.

Again, there's not really any doubt the media liked John McCain, but there were no other candidates who earned the enthusiasm of the base. If there had been, McCain wouldn't have the nomination.

As for the bizarre voter fraud/manipulation theories, not even the most far-right websites have accused the McCain camp of stealing votes, and it still sounds like a liberal conspiracy theory transposed to fit a conservative's paranoia. You could make that accusation against any candidate if you're going to make it without any proof or any legitimate claims.

The U.S. didn't buy voting machines from Venezuela. A Venezuelan company wrote voting machine computer code and later bought a U.S. company that manufactures voting machines.

So what you're saying is this:

- The clever Venezuelans wrote malicious code to sway American elections
- The Venezuelans were so clever that when they wrote the code in 2003, they foresaw a successful John McCain nomination bid in 2008 and included surreptitious code to add to his vote tally
- The Venezuelans, known for their mastery of networking and infiltration, are able to regularly access non-networked voting machines

But wait, if they were so ingenious, why wouldn't they just use their super code to sway the general election in favor or any Democraft candidate in 2008? And why stop with '08? The Venezuelans could be choosing our next president for decades!

But seriously, how ridiculous and insane does that sound?

Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo are both congressmen. No one knows who Hunter is, and Tancredo has a bad habit of saying stupid things. On top of that, no congressman has made the jump directly to the White House since Kennedy.

Kennedy wasn't a Congressman.  He was a Senator.  You're right about Congressmen not being elected.  I think only one ever went directly from being a Representative to President and you are right the last President to go from Congress to President was  Kennedy when you consider the House and the Senate as being Congress.   The people never learned who either of them are since the press didn't cover them.  Even in the debates, they were asked fewer questions and actually didn't even need to be in any of them.

Again, there's not really any doubt the media liked John McCain, but there were no other candidates who earned the enthusiasm of the base. If there had been, McCain wouldn't have the nomination.

That's just the problem.  McCain never had the enthusiasm of the base either and he still doesn't.  How would anyone else garner the enthusiasm of the base when the MSM covered them the way they did?  There are so many people who do not get on their computers, go to libraries or research candidates; they rely on the MSM, hence John McCain became the frontrunner.

As for the bizarre voter fraud/manipulation theories, not even the most far-right websites have accused the McCain camp of stealing votes, and it still sounds like a liberal conspiracy theory transposed to fit a conservative's paranoia. You could make that accusation against any candidate if you're going to make it without any proof or any legitimate claims.

Again, I never said John McCain participated in voter fraud.  I put forward the idea that Democrats fixed the primaries for John McCain.

The U.S. didn't buy voting machines from Venezuela. A Venezuelan company wrote voting machine computer code and later bought a U.S. company that manufactures voting machines.

Duh, aren't you the master of double speak.

So what you're saying is this:

- The clever Venezuelans wrote malicious code to sway American elections
- The Venezuelans were so clever that when they wrote the code in 2003, they foresaw a successful John McCain nomination bid in 2008 and included surreptitious code to add to his vote tally
- The Venezuelans, known for their mastery of networking and infiltration, are able to regularly access non-networked voting machines

No, that's not what I'm saying.  I'm saying we bought programmable, paperless machines from a country where the President won thru fraud.  In no way did I say Hugo Chavez tampered with our election.  I said the new voter machines are tamperable and even gave you an example, Philadelphia.

But wait, if they were so ingenious, why wouldn't they just use their super code to sway the general election in favor or any Democraft candidate in 2008? And why stop with '08? The Venezuelans could be choosing our next president for decades!

But seriously, how ridiculous and insane does that sound?

Those are your words, not mine...more twisting.  Now that's the liberal way of addressing an issue.  The fact that we bought those machines from Hugo Chavez who won his election thru voter fraud just says the machines are capable of being manipulated.  Afterall, there is no paper trail and every single election requires programming of these machines.  The possibility of voter fraud is huge and it is a topic worthy of discussion.  

You never addressed my questions and in fact just think we shouldn't discuss this.  Since basically you just want to say the entire issue is insane and ridiculous, I guess you think I am insane and ridiculous.  Try to answer my questions without twisting what I asked:


What if it's true?  What if elections are being manipulated?  Would everything be ok if we just didn't talk about it?  What does it say about the direction the country is headed if the elections are being maniupulated?  What about registration fraud, especially by organizations like ACORN?  What about poll workers allowing people to vote who are not even citizens?  What about dead people voting?  Do you really think the United States of America should be using paperless, programmable voting machines that were purchased from Venezuella?  

bedbug wrote:

SoldiersMum wrote:This question is: Who is more likely to cost McCain the election?

The answer of course is: McCain.

Exactly. He is running a pathetic campaign. If McCain is elected it will be because BHO lost, not because McCain won.

roger that.

well i don't know.  The fact that McCain is hitting with some pretty effective ads is making a lot of conservatives happy and as a side effect opening up the eyes of a lot of folk that call themselves independent.    I don't like either but McCain has more experience, not to mention character.

Calypso Jones wrote:well i don't know.  The fact that McCain is hitting with some pretty effective ads is making a lot of conservatives happy and as a side effect opening up the eyes of a lot of folk that call themselves independent.    I don't like either but McCain has more experience, not to mention character.

awww..but he hasn't named his VP yet..

So you think Obama's gonna win it heh?   And he's gonna win it because certain groups on the right won't vote for mccain?   That doesn't say much for your guy does it.    And by the way, Obama's looking more like a cry baby every day.   You conveniently point to McCain's flubs but you ignore the pith poor showing of your messiah at Saddleback the other nite.

Calypso Jones wrote:well i don't know.  The fact that McCain is hitting with some pretty effective ads is making a lot of conservatives happy and as a side effect opening up the eyes of a lot of folk that call themselves independent.    I don't like either but McCain has more experience, not to mention character.

Some conservatives won't vote for McCain based on images created by an advertising agency, but actually want conservative policies, both in his voting record (too late!) and campain promises (still waiting).

Free2Choose wrote:

Calypso Jones wrote:well i don't know.  The fact that McCain is hitting with some pretty effective ads is making a lot of conservatives happy and as a side effect opening up the eyes of a lot of folk that call themselves independent.    I don't like either but McCain has more experience, not to mention character.

Some conservatives won't vote for McCain based on images created by an advertising agency, but actually want conservative policies, both in his voting record (too late!) and campain promises (still waiting).

i'm sorry.  What?   some conservatives won't vote for mccain based on images created by an advertising agency.  So were these images bad or what?   I'm sorry. This doesn't make sense to me.

SoldiersMum wrote:
Again, I never said John McCain participated in voter fraud.  I put forward the idea that Democrats fixed the primaries for John McCain.

Which would require the same supposed shadowy ties to Hugo Chavez and logic-defying mastery of hacking that extends -- unbelievably -- to remotely manipulating machines that aren't even networked.

SoldiersMum wrote:Duh, aren't you the master of double speak.

No, I'm pointing out the difference between the hardware vendor (American) and the software vendor (Venezuelan) at the time most of the voting machines were purchased. It wasn't until later that the Venezuelan company bought out the American company. That happens all the time in business.

But even putting aside some insane conspiracy by Democrats and Venezuelan software engineers, there's an important distinction between saying "the voting machines" came from Venezuela (they didn't) and the software was written by Venezuelan developers. (It was.)

You're putting out this theory that, after agreeing to conspire with Democrats and steal American elections, the Venezuelan software engineers were somehow able to write a program that lets them manipulate elections. Not only did they manage that, according to you, but they were so resourceful and had such incredible foresight that, in 2003 or earlier, they were able to predict the field of candidates in 2008's Republican primaries and select John McCain as the preferable candidate for the Democrats to face in the general election. So, according to your theory, they manipulated the votes in favor of McCain, at the behest of the Democrats.

Question for you: Wouldn't it be simpler for these god-like Venezuelan programmers to save themselves the trouble and just tip the votes in favor of any Democrat in the general election?

SoldiersMum wrote:No, that's not what I'm saying.  I'm saying we bought programmable, paperless machines from a country where the President won thru fraud.  In no way did I say Hugo Chavez tampered with our election.  I said the new voter machines are tamperable and even gave you an example, Philadelphia.

You're saying a Venezuelan company has supposed ties to Hugo Chavez and, as a result, is working with Democrats to sway American elections. Of course you can tamper with voting machines. How does that support an insane theory that Democrats are using the machines to chalk up votes for John McCain, the one Republican who actually has some appeal to center-left voters and can actually hurt them? It doesn't even make sense.

SoldiersMum wrote:Those are your words, not mine...more twisting.  Now that's the liberal way of addressing an issue.  The fact that we bought those machines from Hugo Chavez who won his election thru voter fraud just says the machines are capable of being manipulated.  Afterall, there is no paper trail and every single election requires programming of these machines.  The possibility of voter fraud is huge and it is a topic worthy of discussion.  

You never addressed my questions and in fact just think we shouldn't discuss this.  Since basically you just want to say the entire issue is insane and ridiculous, I guess you think I am insane and ridiculous.  Try to answer my questions without twisting what I asked:


What if it's true?  What if elections are being manipulated?  Would everything be ok if we just didn't talk about it?  What does it say about the direction the country is headed if the elections are being maniupulated?  What about registration fraud, especially by organizations like ACORN?  What about poll workers allowing people to vote who are not even citizens?  What about dead people voting?  Do you really think the United States of America should be using paperless, programmable voting machines that were purchased from Venezuella?  

As I said, tin foil hat conspiracy theories and wild, baseless accusations of voter fraud are the domain of liberals, and not just any liberals -- the aging, baby-boomer, Indy Media-loving, Air America-listening, America-hating "progressives," the type of people who watch films showing "the truth about 9/11" in the basements of Unitarian Universalist churches.

Do you really want to be associated with those people?

If there were credible claims of voter fraud, of course it would be a serious topic of discussion. But so far all I've heard from you is a hilariously paranoid theory involving precognitive Venezuelans and a supposed army of Democrat poll workers bent on ruining the democratic process so that they can elect...John McCain.

Of course, if you're just trolling, then I've wasted my time writing three responses to you, but if you really believe what you're saying, then I really don't know what to say.

Who's more likely to cost McCain the election?  Well it Won't be Joe Biden.