backtop


Print 209 comment(s) - last by corduroygt.. on Nov 11 at 12:06 PM

The U.S. 2012 election night was the most tweeted event in the country's political history

A Twitter post by newly re-elected President Barack Obama scored the title of most popular tweet last night, further marking the power of social networks in the elections (and just about everything we do). 

At 11:16 p.m. EST last night, Obama posted a tweet that said "Four more years," which included a picture of him hugging his wife, Michelle Obama. Just 22 minutes after this was posted, it became the most retweeted tweet in history. As of this morning, it nearly tripled at more than 635,000 retweets. 


Another tweet from Obama last night quickly became the second most-tweeted post. The tweet said, "This happened because of you. Thank you."

This further proves that social networking (in this case, mainly Twitter) plays a major role in several sectors of our lives. We don't just use it to tell the world that we ate a bowl of macaroni and cheese anymore -- its power is leveraged to help presidents win elections.

According to Rachael Horwitz, a Twitter spokeswoman, there were 31 million tweets related to the election last night (23 million of these were between 6 p.m. and midnight EST alone). Only minutes after Obama's win, there was a peak of 327,000 tweets per minute. Horwitz said the U.S. 2012 election night was the most tweeted event in the country's political history.

"Twitter brought people closer to almost every aspect of the election this year," said Horwitz. "From breaking news, to sharing the experience of watching the debates, to interacting directly with the candidates, Twitter became a kind of nationwide caucus."  

Source: Twitter



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Why Most Tech Site Users Hate Social Media
By aurareturn on 11/7/2012 2:31:19 PM , Rating: 4
Why tech site users hate social media:

-they are mostly real geeks or semi-geeks in real life
-geeks aren't very social thus, geeks don't use FB/Twiter
-geeks are jealous when they see hot people posting pictures on beaches, clubs, etc.
-geeks are pretty closed minded about what they like and don't like.




RE: Why Most Tech Site Users Hate Social Media
By BillyBatson on 11/7/2012 2:42:14 PM , Rating: 3
I might be a nerd or geek or whatever you call it but I'm extremely social personally friends with thousands of people, amazing close friends, work, dating a gorgeous girl, I go out ALL the time from Hollywood to Vegas to clubs and raves etc etc. those are the EXACT reasons why I hate certain social sites like FB and twitter, BECAUSE IT ISN'T NEEDED! I don't need FB to be invited anywhere, to get actuall calls and txts from people, to share pictures with friends.
But I have seen drama, friends fight, people in relationships fight, people post inappropriate pictures and status's, have seen people get stalked... What good have I seen? FB helps families keep in touch.... But emails can do that too.
Have you see the FB episode of South Park? It shows the exact opposite of all the reasons you mentioned for actually having fb.


By xti on 11/7/2012 3:24:16 PM , Rating: 2
i dont need 300hp in my car either. It doesnt even necessarily get me to my destination faster, with traffic and whatnot.


RE: Why Most Tech Site Users Hate Social Media
By WW102 on 11/7/2012 4:17:48 PM , Rating: 4
And yet you post on here how amazing your social life is?


By BillyBatson on 11/7/2012 7:25:18 PM , Rating: 3
If someone is inferring that I don't have one, sure why not


RE: Why Most Tech Site Users Hate Social Media
By 91TTZ on 11/7/2012 3:47:00 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
-geeks aren't very social thus, geeks don't use FB/Twiter


I'm going to call bullshit on this one. While I'm actually hanging out with my friends in person, I see a lot of people being a recluse in their own house just posting meaningless stuff online. If I'm socializing in real life, how would I not be considered social compared to a person who doesn't leave their house and instead browses Facebook all day and gets no exercise. Have you seen how out of shape people are nowadays?


RE: Why Most Tech Site Users Hate Social Media
By xti on 11/7/2012 4:00:45 PM , Rating: 1
if it is meaningless, why did you see the need to friend/follow them?


RE: Why Most Tech Site Users Hate Social Media
By 91TTZ on 11/7/2012 4:28:00 PM , Rating: 2
Here's how it usually goes: I get a friend request from someone I went to school with in 1994. I accept to be nice and then I'm barraged with pictures of their kids, opinions about politics, or updates of what kind of dog food they're buying.


By xti on 11/7/2012 4:54:13 PM , Rating: 2
you have control over what your timeline shows. stop passing the buck.


By Helbore on 11/7/2012 6:40:34 PM , Rating: 3
As a self-confessed geek, I'd like to say that I saw the funny side. You need to add "geeks take things far too seriously for anyone to accept their friend requests," to that list. ;)


By inperfectdarkness on 11/8/2012 3:43:15 AM , Rating: 3
I hate social media because it focuses popular attention on the banal and trite--rather than on subjects of substance and enduring benefit. Maybe if historical studies were the most popular tweet subject in the world--THEN I'd be in favor of social-media.

The problem is, social media proves that people are more concerned with how many corns were in a Kardashian's stool, than they are with knowing the impact of the Magna-Carta or the words of Thomas Paine. I reject social media because it has made the erosion of national intelligence accute.

You can take your BS arguments about "asocial-behiavior" and shove them.


By NellyFromMA on 11/8/2012 1:55:16 PM , Rating: 2
Lol, he's not describing all 'geeks' (the term has broadened quite a bit...) but rather the type that will reflexively post on this very forum every single time anythign social media related is 'reported' on with nonsense such as 'this is why id on't use fb/twitter/anyhting i dissaprove of that makes you inferior'.

Lol, who knew he'd generate an entirely different reflexive response mess


By Flunk on 11/8/2012 5:02:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
-they are mostly real geeks or semi-geeks in real life


Who cares.

quote:
-geeks aren't very social thus, geeks don't use FB/Twiter


Yes, probably.

quote:
-geeks are jealous when they see hot people posting pictures on beaches, clubs, etc.


Probably not, geeks don't do those things because they don't want to.

quote:
geeks are pretty closed minded about what they like and don't like.


Yes, and so is everyone else. It's clear you have an anti-geek bias.

Yes, techies don't like social media and that's why there is a negative tone in the tech media. But it's not because of "jealousy", it's because we really do think that social media is worthless and stupid.

P.S. If you're only friends with people on facebook and never hang out, you're NOT friends.


By just4U on 11/9/2012 10:55:53 AM , Rating: 2
I would say that the reason why tech site users are not sold on places like Facebook/Twitter and the like is because they have been there. They know the pitfalls of social media (in all it's variations)

I watch people using their phones in ways that I used applications 15 years ago.. as if it was a new thing. It's not, it's simply more portable and more accessable now so their finally showing interest in such things. Meanwhile, I've moved on.


Good job Tiffany!
By MadMan007 on 11/7/2012 2:52:57 PM , Rating: 2
You are learning from Mick well Tiffany...pieces that are polarized and guaranteed to begin partisan arguments are the way to big page hit counts!




RE: Good job Tiffany!
By YashBudini on 11/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: Good job Tiffany!
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 5:31:40 PM , Rating: 3
I like Reclaimer too. I admire his passion for our country. I wish more people were like that.


RE: Good job Tiffany!
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:50:13 PM , Rating: 3
If that's passion then the terrorists are full of passion as well. There's also the "I'm right no matter what you say attitude." I can't tell from here if he clicks his heels together when he says that. The constant ad hominem attacks while whining like a crybaby when it happens to him? Two faced, no other conclusion possible.


RE: Good job Tiffany!
By ditkahead on 11/8/2012 2:13:16 AM , Rating: 2
How is this any diferent than any post you have ever posted, lmfao. I love when simple minded extremists acuse others of what they by enlarge are guilty of themselves.

I'm not saying he's always right, but his opinions come from love of country, yours from hatred of it.


RE: Good job Tiffany!
By YashBudini on 11/8/2012 11:19:30 AM , Rating: 2
I've never said anything positive about the left, both parties are complete losers. People who stay in the 2 party system are mere cult followers.

Different enough for you?

quote:
yours from hatred of it.

Your misconception doesn't impress. I look for justice and ethics, allowing bad management in the name of party unity is poor judgement, if any.

quote:
but his opinions come from love of country

Are you sure?

quote:
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Talk:Sinclair_Lewis

quote:
Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power.

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/b/benito...

quote:
Corporations are people too.

Mitt Romney
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/11/news/la-pn...


RE: Good job Tiffany!
By KoolAidMan1 on 11/7/2012 11:56:59 PM , Rating: 2
Do you share his passion for thick juicy cock?


RE: Good job Tiffany!
By ditkahead on 11/8/2012 2:14:35 AM , Rating: 2
Knowledge from experience?


RE: Good job Tiffany!
By FITCamaro on 11/7/2012 8:43:21 PM , Rating: 4
Was just a matter of time before they got an article in about the election.

Tiffany doesn't even have the balls to post like Jason does.


RE: Good job Tiffany!
By topkill on 11/9/2012 2:40:38 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Tiffany doesn't even have the balls to post like Jason does.


Pun intended? ROFLMAO


RE: Good job Tiffany!
By Flunk on 11/8/2012 5:04:15 PM , Rating: 2
I suspected they were the same person for quite a while... I'm still not 100% sure.


The DJIA tells a lot
By Beenthere on 11/7/2012 9:49:55 PM , Rating: 5
With a 312 point drop in the Dow today, it's pretty clear what investors think of Bama's second term in office.




RE: The DJIA tells a lot
By Nutzo on 11/8/2012 4:01:03 PM , Rating: 2
And another 96 points down today (as of 1:00PM PST)

Companies are already starting to lay off people since there is now no chance of relief from all the Obama care mandates and taxes.

Just be glad you don’t live in California. The Democrats have now completed their takeover of the state with their new 2/3 majority in both the state senate and assembly, along with holding every major state wide office. This means that they can pass ANY tax increase or other wacko bill they want, and there is nothing the Republicans or the people can do about it.

Might be a good time to invest in moving companies that specialize in moving people and companies out of California.



Momentous
By KFZ on 11/7/2012 5:01:13 PM , Rating: 2
Now post the many, many pages of pre-election tweets describing threats to riot and plots to assassinate Mitt Romney should he have won the election, and the racist Twitter army that assailed Stacey Dash for not voting with her skin color.

Do not be naive. Twitter is simply the quickest, most convenient way to spread messages like communicable diseases. It's relevance is proportional to the quality of the messages, which are typically comparable, in terms of usefulness, to that of used sweat rags.




RE: Momentous
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 5:32:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It's relevance is proportional to the quality of the messages, which are typically comparable, in terms of usefulness, to that of used sweat rags.
Damn! LOL!


RE: Momentous
By tamalero on 11/9/2012 10:58:33 AM , Rating: 2
just like the million of "Im moving to X if obama wins" and they describe far more socialist countries than Obama's policies? (like australia or canada)

I mean.. seriously?


By 91TTZ on 11/7/2012 3:43:13 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
We don't just use it to tell the world that we ate a bowl of macaroni and cheese anymore -- its power is leveraged to help presidents win elections.


You jumped from the fact that people posted their reactions to the election on Twitter to the claim that Twitter helped him win the election. This is not necessarily the case. Twitter is mostly used by younger (college age) people, and they lean Democrat anyway. I don't think that social media really changed anything in this regard.




By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:46:42 PM , Rating: 2
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/09/david-sie...

And this guy actually believe he's a patriotic American.




win
By dwighty on 11/9/2012 5:25:35 AM , Rating: 2
Love my job, since I've been bringing in $82h… I sit at home, music playing while I work in front of my new iMac that I got now that I'm making it online…Fox92DOtc om




By darkfalz on 11/9/2012 12:33:06 PM , Rating: 2
You made your bed Americans, now lay in it. You're going to need that free contraception and a lot of lube.




Adding Insult to Injury...
By Arsynic on 11/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By geddarkstorm on 11/7/2012 2:18:12 PM , Rating: 3
I wonder how Reclaimer is doing. Can't imagine what last night was like.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 11/7/2012 2:21:52 PM , Rating: 2
I was wondering the same thing myself. I hope he's alright, and not passed out drunk face down in a San Francisco alley.

That being said, it was a tough loss for Romney, and his concession speech seemed sincere. That speech must have been whipped up in record time because he said yesterday afternoon that he only wrote one speech -- an acceptance speech.

http://i.imgur.com/Jp3aH.gif


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By geddarkstorm on 11/7/2012 2:31:18 PM , Rating: 2
I'd heard that too, and his speech was by far the best concession speech I've ever listened to. From a guy who was so sure of himself, he handled the fall with aplomb.

Also that picture.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By BillyBatson on 11/7/2012 2:35:20 PM , Rating: 1
That's funny I've actually told reclaimer before I hope that exact thing happens to him. He's from frisco? Hard to believe such a person could be from Cali.

They talked about Mit (which like Colbert said, isn't even a name) having only written 1 speech. What does that say about him as a president? Someone who thinks about the future and all possibilities would have been prepared with both speeches even if filled with false hopes of actually winning. Mit (can I call him Mitchel? At least it's a name) had lost this race before he was ever even a candidate, not sure how he fooled some Americans for voting for him when see interview and debate were filled with lies, no answers, and a fake smile that makes him look like he's perpetually on Valium.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 11/7/2012 2:38:54 PM , Rating: 2
I was just joking, I don't think Reclaimer is from CA. I think he's from Charlotte... or maybe it was South Carolina. That could have been FitCamaro though.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Samus on 11/7/2012 2:57:49 PM , Rating: 2
Yea, I don't think Reclaimer would ever go to California. Too many "hippies" for him.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Solandri on 11/7/2012 4:08:41 PM , Rating: 2
I think it may be the other way around. With all the complaining he does about California, I'm pretty sure he lives there or used to live there and has personal experience with it.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By MrBlastman on 11/7/2012 3:06:05 PM , Rating: 2
Romney is a scumbag, make no mistake, but Obama is worse. Interestingly enough, though, I voted for neither of them. I went Libertarian this time around with hopes they might get to 5% to secure Federal funding and perhaps, more importantly, recognition by the media in major debates to end this two-party circus.

In my state, Georgia, it didn't really matter who I voted for. Romney was going to win here no matter what.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Arsynic on 11/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Iaiken on 11/7/2012 3:52:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Libertarians need to infiltrate the Republican party and hijack it and push out all of the social cons, fiscal retards and war mongers.


You mean like how the religious right seized control of the Republican policy making engine during the late 1970's? That would be interesting, but it's probably a lot harder than it sounds...


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By 91TTZ on 11/7/2012 3:50:26 PM , Rating: 2
You're a fool if you believe someone when they claim that they only plan for complete victory. Anyone who makes it that far in a competition must be a good planner, which means having contingency plans for every foreseeable scenario.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Dr of crap on 11/7/2012 2:49:05 PM , Rating: 2
Really!
It's political, you think they DIDN'T have both speeches written?
Sincere? - he's a politican, he CAN'T be sincere.

What happened to the Libaterian party, that's the important part of the whole process. Did they get the %5?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Iaiken on 11/7/2012 3:55:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Did they get the %5?


Gary Johnson barely even got 1%...


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 4:06:34 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder how Roseanne Barr did i bet she got 2% of the vote(she is less nutty than the Libertarians)


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By tayb on 11/7/2012 4:33:51 PM , Rating: 4
Libertarians are nutty? Why? Because they have the crazy belief that other people are not their property?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By 91TTZ on 11/7/2012 4:52:30 PM , Rating: 2
Please explain the nutty beliefs of Gary Johnson and the Libertarians.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 5:35:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'd like to hear this as well.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 6:06:35 PM , Rating: 2
Isolationism - whacky
Legalized dangerous controlled substances - Crazy
Fair tax - economic suicide
Abolition of the Selective Service System - really?

Some of the platform would be attractive honestly if Unicorns were real! The platform has no basis in reality at all. My favorite part is the flying of the gadsen flag..if the movement is so special come up with your own damn flag design.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 6:58:13 PM , Rating: 2
How about some explanations?

Isolationism - Total is not realistic plus it just doesn't work (see WWII) BUT why not some amount of retraction from the world affairs? I don't like the "world's police" role honestly. Would prefer to see most foreign bases closed too and a downscale of the military as a result of no longer being the "world's police".

Legalized dangerous controlled substances - Driving drunk is dangerous but alcohol is still legal. Why not other drugs too? Won't see me smoking pot as a result of legalization of certain drugs but why not (all would not be realistic IMO)?

Fair tax - Why would it be suicide? I have reasons why it wouldn't be but your answer is no better.

Abolition of the Selective Service System - Why do we have drafts? If you don't want to fight for your country (religion, pacifist, etc), you shouldn't have to IMO. Freedom ain't free but it shouldn't be forced either. If you want to die, that's on you.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 6:59:12 PM , Rating: 2
Oops, should be NO reasons on the fair tax.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By tayb on 11/7/2012 7:11:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Isolationism - whacky


You're confusing non-interventionism with isolationism. Common mistake. They aren't the same. The founders of this country preached non-interventionism. You know the whole "avoid foreign entanglements" stuff. I thought you guys liked the Constitution??

quote:
Legalized dangerous controlled substances - Crazy


Alcohol is a dangerous substance. The marijuana arguments are old and tired. I hope you have something better.

quote:
Fair tax - economic suicide


Economic suicide? Says who?? Love to hear you explain that one... doubt you can since it sounds like you're repeating Faux News soundbites.

quote:
Abolition of the Selective Service System - really?


The US military has been 100% voluntary since 1973.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By 91TTZ on 11/9/2012 6:34:27 PM , Rating: 2
Not attacking other countries doesn't mean that you're isolationist.

Other countries have legalized controlled substances and they're doing ok. You can get pot at a coffee shop in Amsterdam, but it's not like that place has broken into riots over it.

We don't have a draft anymore. It was abolished in 1973.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 4:25:27 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I hope he's alright, and not passed out drunk face down in a San Francisco alley.

I'm sure you're concerned, given he accounts for an absolutely ludicrous 50+ postings a day and just about all the right wing political jihad posting masquerading as ordinary rhetoric.

http://i1171.photobucket.com/albums/r551/YashBudin...


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By web2dot0 on 11/7/2012 4:33:31 PM , Rating: 2
People who say that are insecure about themselves. That's what losers do. Bravado.

This is not a athletic contest. The decision was OUTSIDE of his control. It's not like he can wilt himself into a victory. That's not how elections work.

-----

Winners take into account of every eventualities and strategies. Obama hired smarter folks who rely on hard numbers to win this election. Math and arithmetic don't lie. Bravado and "loyal servants" do.

Game over for Romney, time to get back to his Bain Capital ways and avoid more taxes.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 5:00:52 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Obama hired smarter folks who rely on hard numbers to win this election.

Roger Ailes' contract has been renewed at Faux for 4 more years. Expect all the hatred those millions can buy.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By KCjoker on 11/7/2012 5:50:41 PM , Rating: 2
Avoid taxes? That's the kind of lie that Libs are known for. He paid everything that the Law requires. Not only did he pay 15% on the capital gains but he paid the same income tax rate on that money when he earned it.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:21:02 PM , Rating: 2
You based these remarks on what? Seeing his actual tax returns? Even Warren Buffet stated he paid a lower percentage of tax than his staff. The fact it's legal makes it what? President worthy? Yeah, Gordon Gekko for president.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By tayb on 11/7/2012 6:34:42 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Not only did he pay 15% on the capital gains but he paid the same income tax rate on that money when he earned it.


Individual capital gains are not double taxed. This is a complete lie perpetuated by the Republican party. Corporate taxes is the issue you're looking for, not capital gains. Individual Capital gains is just an income tax just like any other income tax. You have to make a gain, hence the name, to actually realize a tax.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Pneumothorax on 11/8/2012 12:42:58 AM , Rating: 2
Capital Gains are most certainly double tax. Unless you have daddy war bucks, the money that I've invested came from income that was already taxed >40% (yes that's federal + greedy CA income taxes added together for my tax bracket) before I can even invest it. Then the money I made from that already taxed income is taxed again after I cash out my investments.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By tayb on 11/8/2012 8:58:17 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Capital Gains are most certainly double tax.


No, they aren't. Capital gains is a tax on GAINS ONLY.

Step 1: I make $100 and I'm taxed 10% of my income. $90 to me $10 to the tax man.

Step 2: I invest $90 into the stock market. Stock market goes up 10% and I sell. $90 + 10% = $99

Step 3: I am taxed 10% on the GAINS ($9). $8.10 to me $0.90 to the tax man.

Step 4: I end up with $98.10

Please show me where the double taxation of the original income occurred. This is absolutely no different than being taxed on your regular salary and then being taxed on a bonus. It's all income, it doesn't matter where it comes from. As I said before, the problem you're looking for is corporate taxes.

If during step 2 the stock market went down I don't owe the tax man any money. Actually, I am eligible for a capital LOSS tax break.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Proposer88 on 11/7/2012 5:11:39 PM , Rating: 2
Hahahahaha!!! The poor Reclaimer posts dozens of messages every day and suddenly he disappears from DailyTech
He must be hiding under a rock, crying :-)


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By BillyBatson on 11/7/2012 2:23:46 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't want Obama as president but Obama is the FAR better candidate. Romney was just a talking robotic bobblehead that said anything he could to win over anyone who just didn't like Obama. Romney would have made a HORRIBLE president, he never knew what he was talking about, he flipflopped how many dozens of times, and is nothing but a cheap used car salesman.
And I really wasn't comfortable with the idea of having a Mormon as president, it's not even a real religion, what's next a scientologist like Tom Cruise running for president?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By geddarkstorm on 11/7/2012 2:26:57 PM , Rating: 2
One of these days we'll get good candidates to pick between. Hopefully before I finish genetically engineering pigs to fly.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By MadMan007 on 11/7/2012 3:01:49 PM , Rating: 2
The race is on. Once you've got those flying pigs ready, let us know so we can vote for them!


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By MrBlastman on 11/7/2012 3:12:49 PM , Rating: 2
We won't get good candidates until people learn to start thinking outside the sphere and look at independents. Having independents that aren't bat-crap crazy would be helpful, too. There were a couple this time around that weren't loons but the rest were just nuts.

Still, independents need more recognition and inclusion on the public scene. It won't happen, though. The media planned for Romney to win from the start. They pushed him down the public throat because they realized how polarizing he would be versus Obama.

Everyone in America lost this time around due to sheer ignorance. Obama becoming president is not a win for anyone. The people have lost because, as you point out--we need good candidates for a change to pick from.

When the primaries are rigged by the media it makes it extremely difficult for this to occur. When a candidates party in the primary tries to assassinate their character (see Cain) it only makes it more painful.

The system is screwed up. Maybe Americans deserve Obama. They actually do. I don't think we'll learn a lesson from it. People will still show up at the polls asking questions like a friend of mine overheard... questions like:

"What's write-in mean on the ballot?"

"Who should I vote for?"

"What candidates are running again?"

Yes. America has become that bad.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By xti on 11/7/2012 3:38:44 PM , Rating: 2
good candidates will happen as soon as GOP realizes they are out of touch with americans.

< 30% of latino voters...yeah, no way you gonna win with that stat. As soon as GOP realize that you cant pick what nationality vagina you can come out of and learn to give a little on their outdated, stubborn ways, then that group will lean republican. I mean hispanics tend to try to save money (cuz they have 104949875 generations of poverty behind them they are learning from) and they are catholics... should be easy but nooooooo...lol.

when they can provide good competition, the others will as well, and meet closer in the middle. THink Intel vs AMD.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Ammohunt on 11/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Camikazi on 11/7/2012 9:59:13 PM , Rating: 2
Latinos are more than just Mexican.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Pneumothorax on 11/8/2012 12:44:49 AM , Rating: 2
The vast majority of them sure are. And they're importing their crappy style of government too.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Nutzo on 11/8/2012 4:27:13 PM , Rating: 2
I can turn that around and say that as long as latino voters continue to vote against thier own values and interests, they will continue to suffer from high unemployment and crime rates.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By web2dot0 on 11/7/2012 4:36:11 PM , Rating: 2
Please provide a name of a candidate? Done with your complaining yet?

The system is flawed, but being cynical doesn't help.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 4:48:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Please provide a name of a candidate?

How? They were all but shut out of this election. In 2008 a poll showed 60% of Americans wanted 3rd party candidates at the presidential debates. Ron Paul was showing some genuine popularity, whether or not anyone agrees. But he made an excellent point about the presidential debates. There's a 2 man team that determines who will debate, 1 democrat and 1 republican. IE the others are shut out, a clear example of limiting free speech. People should be upset about how the alternatives were all swept under the rug, but for some reason they aren't.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By MrBlastman on 11/7/2012 11:46:33 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly. It is a sham how independents aren't represented in the debates. The whole system is broken. I was hoping the libertarians would at least get 5% but it appears they didn't.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Ringold on 11/8/2012 6:25:38 AM , Rating: 2
The Tea Party has the economic policy half of the libertarian belief system. Liberterians need to come out of the wilderness and do the nation a huge favor by re-engaging inside the Republican party and wage some holy war against the evangelical's for the soul of the party.

A socially liberal/moderate, fiscally conservative Republican Party would be the only way forward that I can see. It's what the Tories are trying back in the motherland, could work here too. It'll never happen if nobody steps forward, though, and trying to rail against the "system" is as useful as tilting at windmills in the real world. System can be fixed later, for now we're stuck with what we've got.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By MrBlastman on 11/8/2012 3:22:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
A socially liberal/moderate, fiscally conservative Republican Party would be the only way forward that I can see.


That is a good point you make and is precisely why I stopped identifying with the Republican party a while back. They became far too extreme, socially to the right. It disgusted me. The fiscal part, however, I'm with. I've always been fiscally conservative.

Socially though, there comes a point where you have to wash out the religious influences and reach a common middle ground. The problem is most of the extremely religious will throw their arms up in the air and gasp that it isn't possible, as they'd be forced to compromise their biblical beliefs.

Take my Wife, for example; she is very religious and teaches at a Christian school. I tried to explain to her some of my views and she got upset at first. She shouted at me that what I was saying was heresy. The tidbit she was most inflamed about was my stance on marriage. I told her about how two states voted the gays being able to Marry--and told her this is precisely why religion should be separate from government. She didn't like that--her parents are also extreme here.

After some coaxing and explaining to her about how when you marry, you have to apply for a "Marriage License," it immediately puts the term "Marriage" within the State authority. It distances the term from religion when done so and thus endangers the Chuch beliefs on marriage. I told her--there's a better solution. Instead of applying for a "marriage license," instead, make everyone apply for a "civil union" license. At that point, anyone and everyone would be treated equally under the tax law. It also would remove the term "marriage" from State control. If someone wanted to receive the title "married," they would then need to seek out a religious institution and via ceremony, be bestowed that title.

It didn't take long for her to see the point. I had immediately converted a far-right religious person to a moderate point of view. I convinced her I preserved her religious belief while at the same time reaching a societal compromise in a very difficult issue... ending a lot of the shenanigans. While it isn't a perfect plan, it would go a lot further than where we are right now.

So, it can be done. And as you point out,

quote:
Liberterians need to come out of the wilderness and do the nation a huge favor by re-engaging inside the Republican party and wage some holy war against the evangelical's for the soul of the party


It can be done delicately, but with great effect and simultaneously preserve the existing voter base while adding marginals back into the party.

If the Republican party would attempt to do this, I think it would be a huge help to them. It would also be a huge help to America--and allow us to align back towards the middle road where most of the benefit to our country occurs.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Nutzo on 11/8/2012 4:23:32 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, but Social liberalism and Fiscal conservatism are incompatible.

Social liberalism (do whatever you want) leads to people making poor choices that end up destroying their or people’s lives, and then they expect the government to bail them out. That leads to more government and spending.

As for gay marriage, the problem is that they want to change the definition of marriage to try and legitimize their “choice”. It’s not as much about legal protections as it is about forcing other to accept their “lifestyle choice”. They can force through all the laws they want, but it will never be accepted by a large portion of the population.

However, as much as I disagree with thier lifestyle, they should call it something else like a "civil union". If they had done that, it’s likely that they would already have the legal protection they say they wanted in most states, and possibly even at a federal level.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By powerwerds on 11/9/2012 5:27:39 AM , Rating: 2
There is no reason for you to feel sorry to the OP. His aspirations are not incompatible. There is much sorrow, however, that could be felt for the level of intellect you displayed in what I believe you assume to be a cogent refutation of his sentiments.

Actually digest what he is suggesting to see the legitimate outcome of the union of ideals.

A fiscally conservative social liberal, even if as you say, does whatever he wants such that he has no other outcome but to make choices that inevitably destroy him or those around him, still is fiscally concervative.

Accepting your worst definition of a social liberal in the consideration of a fiscally conservative social liberal, they or the people they affect, at most just die, not lead to bigger government and more deficit spending.

Their fiscally conservative principles would preclude them from the expectation of a life coddle from the government, because a life coddle costs money, and they don't want the government to spend money it doesn't have.

Now imagine a definition of a social liberal akin with a reality as possible as yours, a sentient capable of functioning on a path not arriving at destruction. A person with socially liberal as well as fiscally conservative principles, now that they are freed from certain eventual obsolescence, can actually exist as societal functionaries.

So they want public education, government help for the justly sick and needy, a choice after inception, gay rights, or whatever liberal social concerns they may have, addressed, they still don't want to bankrupt the nation.

What is the problem? I rather like the combination.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 11/7/2012 2:31:19 PM , Rating: 1
Why should his religion matter? Quite frankly, I think it should be taken completely off the table -- WHO CARES? It's his business. America is a country of different religions and beliefs, so I "try" not to disparage someone from believing in something different from me.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By ClownPuncher on 11/7/2012 2:42:17 PM , Rating: 3
You'd vote for a Scientologist or a Millerite?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 11/7/2012 2:52:34 PM , Rating: 2
Depends on what their political ideals are. As long as their political beliefs are put front and center and they aren't trying to force their religious beliefs on me, I'm all ears.

Heck, wasn't there a Muslim guy elected to congress a while back? I remember many people went ape**** over that.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By ClownPuncher on 11/7/2012 3:11:58 PM , Rating: 2
Of course. But you'll still have some preconception based on how you view the religion the candidate adheres to. Especially unconventional ones.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By MrBlastman on 11/7/2012 3:16:00 PM , Rating: 2
Brandon--I think Scientology immediately rules any candidate out, though.

Hubbard admitted the fastest way to become wealthy was to create a religion. He then did just that. It is probably one of the only 100% fictitious religions (and can be proven from quotes of the founder) that is widely accepted.

How someone can support and moreso believe in that excrement is enough to intellectually bin any and all of their credibility.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Motoman on 11/7/2012 3:46:13 PM , Rating: 5
Silly person. All religions are 100% fiction. It's just that some of them have been fiction for a very long time.

All hail Flying Spaghetti Monster!


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By heerohawwah on 11/7/2012 4:56:57 PM , Rating: 1
So if 100% of all religions are 100% fiction; that would also include Atheism, as it is a religion as well. It also happens to be the ONLY religion on the planet which, as you have said, which unilaterally declares that all aspects of all other religions as being false... hence why it's primarily a religion for prejudice/religious racist people, who sadly, like Richard Dawkins are so ignorant, short sighted, and arrogant they actually believe their opinion is intelligent and valid... when in reality it's just another form racism.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By tayb on 11/7/2012 5:07:03 PM , Rating: 2
Why do people continually want to think that "atheism" is a religion? The term "atheist" was made up by believers, not "atheists." "Atheists" are more accurately titled anti-theists. Anti-theism is an idea, not a religion.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 5:07:04 PM , Rating: 2
Have you ever seen an atheist kill somebody in the name of their alleged religion? Has anybody?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Manch on 11/7/2012 6:21:50 PM , Rating: 2
This damn arguement again. Here you go:

Alfred Kinsey ( I dont know that he killed anybody but he did some pretty sick stuff)

Napolean - he claimed that “all religions have been made by men”.

Than Swe - see Myanmar/Burma

Kim Jong - NK nuff said

Jeffery Dahmer - infamous serial killer and atheist sentenced to 900 years in prison, said “if a person doesn’t think that there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges?”.

Jim Jones - He said that he “took the church and used the church to bring people to atheism”. Largest mass civilian casualty prior to 9/11

Mussolini - is notorious for his war crimes as a Fascist dictator during World War II. As a young man he openly declared his atheism, and in his early career as a politician was openly anti-clerical. Also hates Jews

Mao Zedong

Pol Pot

Joseph Stalin - Estimates of the number of deaths range from 2.5 million to 10 million. The famine was caused by direct political and administrative decisions. In addition to the famine, Stalin ordered purges within the Soviet Union of any person deemed to be an enemy of the state (i.e. capitalists, theists). In total, estimates of the total number murdered under Stalin’s reign, range from 10 million to 60 million. His government promoted atheism with mass propaganda in school, and held a terror campaign against the religious. He crushed the Russian Orthodox Church, leveling thousands of churches and shooting more than 100,000 priests, monks and nuns between 1937 and 1938.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By heerohawwah on 11/7/2012 6:23:40 PM , Rating: 2
Yes they have. Hitler for example, the best evolutionist of all time. Darwin also, while he did not himself kill anyone, encouraged and even requested the murder of aboriginals in search of the infamous 'missing link'.
Also even a short overview of Stalinism, and the extermination of everyone who wasn't an Atheist in Russia is a plain example. China also did the same thing during its social revolution.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:53:38 PM , Rating: 2
OK fine, so you've proven what? That atheists are human?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Manch on 11/8/2012 4:19:32 PM , Rating: 2
He proved that your assertion is wrong


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Etsp on 11/7/2012 5:08:45 PM , Rating: 2
I used to agree with that, that atheism is simply another belief system. But, it's not. It's a disbelief system.

Simply: Don't believe in anything that has no physical evidence or irrefutable proof.

There is no physical evidence or irrefutable proof that any higher power or afterlife exists. Ergo, do not believe in a higher power or afterlife. Do not make decisions based upon the assumption that a higher power or afterlife exists.

That some vocal atheists seem just as rabid as religious fundamentalists does not mean that they are somehow the same thing. That phenomenon is just an aspect of the human condition. You'll find vocal extremists in any movement.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By heerohawwah on 11/7/2012 6:36:11 PM , Rating: 2
I'm afraid there is an enormous amount of evidence to the contrary. Atheism is not about disbelief, rather it is about simple denial. And its a denial not based in logic or reason but irrational distain or hate of other people. Even a simple glance at Atheism reveals a huge number issues, for example, Atheism denies all of the following concepts:
Love, Peace, Honor, Glory, Justice, Faith, Hope, Good, Evil, etc... really any moral concept, and also fails completely to provided any reason for or purpose of life. It also fails even further and has no explaination to how or why life exists in the first place.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Motoman on 11/7/2012 8:37:38 PM , Rating: 2
Sorry, you've missed on every single point. You are 100% upside down.

Since you've now proven, beyond the shadow of a doubt, to be a horrifically ignorant, hateful person, there is no longer any point in talking to you.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By B3an on 11/7/2012 10:42:35 PM , Rating: 1
There wasn't any point in talking to him already. He's clearly religious, and hateful like most of them (how ironic he thinks atheists are the hateful ones). You can't have a reasonable conversation with an adult who believes in fairy tales.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Asetha on 11/7/2012 11:44:30 PM , Rating: 1
I didn't see anything in the above quote that was hateful.

I read your post to be a concession speech, as you didn't address anything he wrote.

My $.02.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By corduroygt on 11/8/12, Rating: 0
RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By JPForums on 11/8/2012 1:21:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All religions are 100% fiction. It's just that some of them have been fiction for a very long time.


That is quite the self serving statement. Lets evaluate Judaism as it is one of the oldest religions and its name is relatively well know in English speaking nations. There are quite a number of historically accurate places, people, and events present in their religious text. The Babylonian, Persian, and Roman empires existed. The history of enslavement and restoration of the tribes or Israel are not based in fiction. There is also evidence that King David was a real person. There are corroborating sources suggesting King Solomon did in fact exist and was extremely wealthy as depicted and built a temple lined with gold that was (as apparently predicted) demolished leaving no stone unturned (to get the gold). That's just a few of the established historical facts contained in Jewish religious text.

How about Christianity. Most (all?) of the above applies to Christianity as well. Though you can add King Herod and Pontius Pilate to the list. A man named Jesus did in fact exist, declared himself the son of God, and got hung on a cross (a common form of execution back then) for disrupting the peace. A real guy named Peter did in fact associate with him before hand and afterwards lead a real group of people in a real place call Jerusalem.

Unfortunately, I don't know much of eastern Asian history. I do however know that Muhammad was a real religious militant leader who united the Arabian peninsula under Islam. Jesus (see above) was also considered a prophet by Muslims.

It is clear you don't believe some of the written events of these religions. No doubt you dispute what some of the people in the texts say or teach. However, you are at odds with the historical community to say all of the places, people, and events written in these religious texts are fictitious. Interestingly, religious texts are some of the most historically precise (not to be confused with historically accurate) ancient texts we know of. It shouldn't be surprising, religious leaders back then probably guarded their texts even more than they do now.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By tayb on 11/7/2012 4:58:36 PM , Rating: 2
How is scientology any less wacky than any other religion? The first chapter in the bible has a talking snake and "special fruits" from "forbidden trees."

Mark my words, give scientology enough time and it will be just as accepted as any other religion. It's already happened/happening with the mormon religion.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 5:44:49 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
"special fruits"
Those were the first gays.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Ammohunt on 11/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By BillyBatson on 11/7/2012 3:16:14 PM , Rating: 2
Brandon, I don't want to come off as someone who hates others based on religion, race, even sexuality. As far as Morons go one of my best friends on the world (who is a member of anandtech and works for MS) is Mormon. I've been to heir temple, I've gone through all he Mormon lessons (stopped at the point where I would have been baptized), and I hold no dislike towards them. Also to put it out there I was born Christian and my family overall is very religious however I do not believe in any higher being, but agree the bible can teach people good things. I was also in th USAF so i love our country. That being said on a personal basis I would have no issues with Mit being Mormon not as friends not if in business with him, never. However being Presidet of the United States a president should follow our core values and beliefs. On top of that I don't consider Mormonism to be a real religion along with Scientology. The Mormon church is one of the fastest growing in the world and having a president in the seat would add some sort of false credibility to their religion and garner extra attention.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By ClownPuncher on 11/7/2012 3:25:58 PM , Rating: 2
So, since he isn't a Freemason, you'd never vote for him?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Etsp on 11/7/2012 4:58:10 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I was also in th USAF so i love our country.
Nidal Malik Hasan was in the Army. I don't hear anyone claiming that he loves our country. Your logic is broken. Please, recognize that fact.

Not to mention, you claim one of your best friends is Mormon, but at the same time you claim Mormons have core values and beliefs that are dissimilar to most American's beliefs.

Does your close friend not deserve to have his core values and beliefs represented in the White House? Is he somehow not an American because he is Mormon?

How are you close friends with someone with who's core values differ so far from your own? You can fundamentally disagree with someone and still respect them. It's much, much harder to be close friends with that kind of barrier though.

I honestly don't care what religion a candidate follows, so long as they aren't a fundamentalist and aren't trying to pass laws to force that religion upon the American people.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By BillyBatson on 11/7/2012 7:42:14 PM , Rating: 2
I wasn't inferring that I love our country just because I served. I said I love our country SO I served.

Did I say because he is one of my best friends that we have similar core beliefs? I did not. They are different, so different that for the first 5 years of friendship he never spoke of his religion or the things he would or would not do in his daily life. We spoke about it briefly I learned about it and we never spoke of it again.

No, I do not believe my friend should have his Mormon core values and beliefs represented in the White House. Ever. For the rest of all eternity. I hope the Book of Mormon becomes an ancient book of fiction deep in a library that no one ever checks out. Yet he is still an American yes but happens to be a minority American when it comes to his beliefs.

It's never been a barrier. We respect one another he knows I have no beliefs and he thinks that's crazy, and I think his beliefs are far more ridiculous than most religions out there and he's crazy for that, but he's an intelligent logical person and isn't a subject that changed our views of one another.

If he ever ran for president I actually would not vote for him based on religion alone just like if I ever ran for president I can expect the majority of Americans not to vote for me just because I'm a "godless heathen"


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Etsp on 11/7/2012 11:45:40 PM , Rating: 1
That's not what you said, but it's probably what you meant.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By BillyBatson on 11/9/2012 11:23:18 AM , Rating: 2
Put a coma after USAF and it's exactly what I said. You guys saw what you wanted to see and my tone was lost in translation, but I definitely said it the way I meant it.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 5:12:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I've been to heir temple,

Temple? Fortress is more like it.

http://www.ldschurchtemples.com/saltlake/images/sa...

Did Jesus ever say take all the contributions you collect in my name and build as many huge castles as possible?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By jabberwolf on 11/7/2012 2:32:25 PM , Rating: 1
Yeah because some business guy who made 100d of milliond, had great education in his state, increased job growth from 50th to 27th in ranking - yeah he sucks.

Much better we have a tool that raises the debt to 16 trillion, lies about wanting to cut it more, lies abut the cost of healthcare, lies about creating jobs (halting pipeline, offshore drilling, oil permits - oh and makes a deal with petrobras instead) -- MUCH BETTER!

This is why America is turning into greece, we have retards that are rooting for popularity rather than function!


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By jabberwolf on 11/7/2012 2:33:08 PM , Rating: 2
Bloody s/d key! lol


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/7/2012 2:48:52 PM , Rating: 5
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." -Winston Churchill

If and when that quote is no longer true, you might finally have some progress. Until then, it's just a "who will give me more of what I think I deserve" style of election. Hence why candidates always overpromise and undeliver. If someone attempted to run a campaign on promises that they know they could hold, they would never be elected.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Manch on 11/7/2012 6:26:36 PM , Rating: 3
Well the Entitlement Generation has spoken so to all of you that have worked your fingers to the bone for what you have, prepare to give some of it up so they can do nothing.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 4:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
I plan on becoming a good socialist i have zero incentive to be successful or strive for anything better now; where's my gubmnt check?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By ClownPuncher on 11/7/2012 4:14:39 PM , Rating: 2
Your grammar is bringing down the proletariat!


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 4:57:05 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
where's my gubmnt check?

Try declaring yourself a corporation, you'll get a really big one.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 5:58:21 PM , Rating: 2
Nah its easier to sit on my ass and let the bourgeoisie pay for my living viva la che!


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:16:59 PM , Rating: 1
That's just shows how narrow minded you've made yourself. Corporate welfare are big bucks. But hey, continue to behave this way, show the world your great right wing work ethic. Because after all, if you didn't have hypocrisy you'd have nothing at all.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 6:23:43 PM , Rating: 3
Wow have you ever had an original thought? are you capable of breaking away away from talking points? yeah i thought not.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:56:18 PM , Rating: 1
Translation - You have zero synaptic activity to address the issues raised. No need to comment, we already knew.

As for original thoughts, some questions you should ask yourself before asking others. Polly want a cracker?


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 9:00:38 PM , Rating: 3
Thats the best you can come up with? man you are good! your stunning intellect has me totally out matched! i am going to register Democrat next election you have me sold!


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 11:50:40 PM , Rating: 1
That's it Polly, echo my words from 2 hour prior.

quote:
you have me sold!

Oh, you're so sold and in so many ways you can't even imagine.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Asetha on 11/7/2012 11:46:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Try declaring yourself a green corporation


-fixed it for you.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Nutzo on 11/7/2012 4:12:45 PM , Rating: 1
Obama Better? Have you ever hear him talk without a teleprompter or multiple days of preparing for a debate?

The only thing Obama is better at is lying & deceiving people.

I guess you had no trouble with racism and hate america preached in Obama's church in Chicago.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Manch on 11/7/2012 6:04:39 PM , Rating: 2
always the "tolerant" ones bashing someones religion.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 4:42:55 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
... and the freeloaders that voted for him.

Yeah you're more of those guys that supports the people who have bank accounts in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands. How incredibly patriotic of you.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By Pneumothorax on 11/8/2012 12:47:04 AM , Rating: 4
Hey they earned that G___am money! Popping 8 kids out of a clown car vagina should not earn more money from the state.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/8/2012 11:22:59 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
a clown car vagina

You just had to bring up Sarah Palin didn't you? Just think she was almost 1 heartbeat away from the presidency.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By MartyLK on 11/7/2012 5:02:28 PM , Rating: 1
This response makes President Obama's victory that much sweeter to me. I used to be a Repub till they fucked the ever living bejeesus out of me because I disagreed with "Dubya's" war plans for Iraq.


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:23:57 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By marvdmartian on 11/8/2012 9:40:13 AM , Rating: 2
He's just another twit using twitter. No big deal!


RE: Adding Insult to Injury...
By talikarni on 11/8/2012 3:27:28 PM , Rating: 2
People are too dumb to realize that Obamas entire plan is to turn the US into a 3rd world nation. His history, his studies, his mentors, his associates, his illegal Executive Orders, his quiet support for (but pushed it aside, "he will have more flexibility after he is re-elected") then sudden open support after the election for UN laws to supersede the 2nd Amendment... the list goes on and on. None of it good for America. Free phones will be useless when most of the power grid is shut down thanks to him and his coal policies. DT will be useless except those 2 hours a day we have power due to federal power rationing.

I hate to be right but it is all coming whether you like it or not, agree with me or not, it is coming and soon!

http://www.redstate.com/jollygiantsd/2012/11/08/tr...


I've never used twitter
By BillyBatson on 11/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: I've never used twitter
By geddarkstorm on 11/7/2012 2:19:07 PM , Rating: 1
People like to be garrulous, and these websites give them that chance en mass. They'll never go away, in principle.


RE: I've never used twitter
By BillyBatson on 11/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: I've never used twitter
By BillyBatson on 11/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: I've never used twitter
By ClownPuncher on 11/7/2012 2:48:21 PM , Rating: 2
You were rated down because your post was as worthless as you feel social media is.


RE: I've never used twitter
By invidious on 11/7/2012 3:20:17 PM , Rating: 2
As much it displeases me I'm gonna have to agree. I dont like twitter and thus dont use it. But to deny that is has power and relivance to modern society is just ignorant.

For the president of the United States to be able to directly send messages instantly to millions of citizens without being filtered by news agencies or content provides if just staggeringly powerful. A complete game changer for politics and leadership in general.

The face that average people also use twitter to post about their mundane lives doesn't detract from that at all. The tool allows you as an end user to follow who you please. It's just like telivision, radio, internet, newspaper or any other media delivery mechanism, you don't have to like everything that is offered, just consume what you want to consume.


RE: I've never used twitter
By invidious on 11/7/2012 3:24:41 PM , Rating: 2
ugh, edit button please... corrected for your reading pleasure:

As much it displeases me I'm going to have to agree. I don’t like twitter and thus don’t use it. But to deny that is has power and relevance to modern society is just ignorant.

For the president of the United States to be able to directly send messages instantly to millions of citizens without being filtered by news agencies or content providers is just staggeringly powerful, a game changer for politics and leadership in general.

The fact that average people also use twitter to post about their mundane lives doesn't detract from that at all. The tool allows end users to follow who you please. It's just like television, radio, internet, newspaper or any other media delivery mechanism, you don't have to like everything that is offered, just consume what you want to consume.


RE: I've never used twitter
By 91TTZ on 11/7/2012 3:57:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
For the president of the United States to be able to directly send messages instantly to millions of citizens without being filtered by news agencies or content provides if just staggeringly powerful. A complete game changer for politics and leadership in general.


Please tell me how it's a complete game changer. I witnessed elections before social media was around, and I witness it now. Things remained the same.

Before, you had morons on both sides repeating what they heard on the radio, saw on TV, and read in the papers. Now, you have morons on both sides repeating what they heard on the radio, saw on TV, read in the papers, and read online.

They're still going to believe what they want to believe, regardless of where they see it.


RE: I've never used twitter
By xti on 11/7/2012 4:10:18 PM , Rating: 2
did you not see all the annoying people posting "GO VOTE" a fkn ton before the election? I would be surprised if it didnt at least spark voter turn out a bit.


RE: I've never used twitter
By 91TTZ on 11/7/2012 4:51:00 PM , Rating: 2
Sure, I saw that. And the result? None. Voter turnout has been declining over the years. We're nowhere near the levels we were in the 1800's.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/data/turnout.php


RE: I've never used twitter
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 11/7/2012 9:18:47 PM , Rating: 2
That's because less and less people care. When your choices are shit and shit, it really makes no difference who wins the election. Things will continue this way until this country reaches some sort of tipping point.


RE: I've never used twitter
By 91TTZ on 11/9/2012 6:35:12 PM , Rating: 2
I agree.


RE: I've never used twitter
By chang3d on 11/7/2012 3:32:00 PM , Rating: 2
Why the heck do you insist on making your opinions known globally through DailyTech? Hypocrisy is why you were down-rated. Hypocrites are the worst kind of people.


RE: I've never used twitter
By xti on 11/7/2012 3:27:06 PM , Rating: 2
nerds need to stop being so stereotypical and hating everythign trendy. its not like zuckerberg was a jock or something.

its just ironic that by abstaining from anything mainstream, it gets grouped into a 2nd level of mainstream.


RE: I've never used twitter
By 91TTZ on 11/7/2012 4:34:55 PM , Rating: 1
I don't hate mainstream stuff, in fact I like it when things I'm interested in become mainstream. But I'm not going to adjust what I like based on what's mainstream or not. If shitty music becomes mainstream I'm going to think it's shitty music.

I think once you learn critical thinking skills and learn to be truly objective you often lose touch with dumb people who cannot think that way.


RE: I've never used twitter
By xti on 11/7/2012 5:00:17 PM , Rating: 2
The OP posted "Twitter is just the status from Facebook. Both useless websites."...that screams hating it cuz its "in". It has obvious use even from it gives a boat load of people a job point of view.

But you are right, dont change an opinion just cuz something goes mainstream. Maybe critical thinking or whatever justification people make up to remove themselves from the masses can be valid, but its obvious that it doesnt get you elected.


Title should read
By Argon18 on 11/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: Title should read
By xti on 11/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: Title should read
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 3:49:58 PM , Rating: 1
Flip-flopping self made millionaire vs. Karl Marx protege, community organizer, Chicago, goon hmmm. What happens to you and others that voted for Obama in the next 4 years you deserve 100% see you on the soup line!


RE: Title should read
By xti on 11/7/2012 3:59:14 PM , Rating: 1
Your life will suck because you suck at life.

Not because some president or political leader at the top makes one decision vs another.


RE: Title should read
By Ammohunt on 11/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: Title should read
By xti on 11/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: Title should read
By vignyan on 11/7/2012 4:12:15 PM , Rating: 1
Morons like you are stereotyping republicans in the country.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 4:18:15 PM , Rating: 2
Precisely. Why they are tolerated remains one of life's mysteries. Like rape inception, it must be God's will.


RE: Title should read
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 5:54:03 PM , Rating: 2
May i ask what the hell are you talking about? you make no sense.


RE: Title should read
By xti on 11/7/2012 7:33:50 PM , Rating: 1
how do you not know what he is talking about? for someone who talks big, this should be easy dots to connect.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 7:50:43 PM , Rating: 1
He's obtained that special balance of arrogance, ignorance, and a large dose of Faux News to cement his ill conceived superiority into place.

http://i1171.photobucket.com/albums/r551/YashBudin...


RE: Title should read
By Ringold on 11/8/2012 6:17:31 AM , Rating: 3
Wow, the Marxists are really riled up and bold on the internets I see.

That's alright though. History's showing where the policies lead; your intellectual peers were on TV just yesterday throwing Molotov's at riot police in the streets of Athens; they apparently think money grows on trees if only its legislated to do so, so they're taking it out on cops. Here's a pro-tip though, on the house: Greece is tiny. The entire world, if it even wanted to, couldn't afford to bail out the US. If we fall down that path, it's game over, and the other lesson Europe's so kindly provided is that bond markets can move against a sovereign so fast that by the time politicians sense blood in the water, they're nearly bankrupt from soaring interest expense just on rolled over debt.

Good luck with that.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/8/2012 11:38:01 AM , Rating: 2
You really need to stay OT, your Marxist labels aren't part of this amusing thread.

quote:
throwing Molotov's at riot police in the streets of Athens; they apparently think money grows on trees

That just shows how incredibly narrow minded your understanding of international events is. There are a lot of old people that have committed suicide over there.

Over there they pay slightly higher property taxes if they have a swimming pool on their property. About 130 pools were on the books before their mess began. Aerial surveillance later showed about 13,000 swimming pools out there. Now you tell me, did they poor not declare their swimming pools or the rich?


RE: Title should read
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 5:52:18 PM , Rating: 2
You an apologist for the Republicans that it? please you are pathetic.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:12:37 PM , Rating: 1
There's no apology offered here, only an acknowledgement of an extremist. You're reading comprehension should expand to beyond what you hear on Faux news. Classes are available in your area. Post your email address and some of us will send you a quarter so you can go out and buy a clue.


RE: Title should read
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 6:17:57 PM , Rating: 2
Thanks! i am ready! have my Mao Suit sized and ready to go i am ready for re-education! see you there.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 7:00:33 PM , Rating: 2
Is that really the best you can do? The same old card carrying stuff by the first great pub fear monger, Joseph McCarthy?


RE: Title should read
By Asetha on 11/7/2012 11:50:19 PM , Rating: 1
McCarthy had one thing in common with Owebama. They're both demagogues.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/8/2012 11:30:09 AM , Rating: 2
Which president in the last 3 decades controlled his spending?

quote:
They're both demagogues.


Selective memory at best, considering it was not that long ago Bush and Cheney were asked to testify before Congress. And did they? Or did they behave like they were above the law?

More selective memory
quote:
When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejvyDn1TPr8
Here he is actually saying it.


RE: Title should read
By corduroygt on 11/11/2012 12:06:54 PM , Rating: 2
It must be driving your ilk FURIOUS that OBAMA won.
SUCK IT AHOLES. SUCK IT! SUCK IT! SUCK IT!
You dont' control the USA any more and you never will again!


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/12, Rating: -1
RE: Title should read
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 5:14:23 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Your irrational fear of socialism will simply lead you down the road to serfdom.
Extremism of ANY kind leads to subjugation whether left or right. That said, we're not socialist enough to fear it nor will we ever be. No reason for the fear.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 5:46:54 PM , Rating: 2
Well that's a thinking man's response, not someone who spends all their synaptic activity reloading.


RE: Title should read
By KCjoker on 11/7/2012 5:46:52 PM , Rating: 3
Please don't compare income tax rates to capital gains tax rates it just makes you look ignorant. There's a reason capital gains tax rates are lower. And Romney paid the income tax rate on the money when it was EARNED. I think the next 4 years will be horrible for the US but I hope I'm wrong...please prove me wrong Obama.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 5:51:11 PM , Rating: 2
Do you have any idea how many people have all their "earnings" as capital gains? But if it's all so palatable why hide the returns?


RE: Title should read
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 6:13:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Your irrational fear of socialism will simply lead you down the road to serfdom.


So i should embrace it and bend over? yeah no chance of that! you along with Europe, Canada and other countries might be perfectly happy living in their human zoo as property of the state. I promise you 51% of American would not be happy in that configuration.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 7:04:05 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So i should embrace it and bend over? yeah no chance of that!

Nobody said or suggested that you extremist simpleton. But please continue to bounce from 1 extreme to the other. After all that's why amusement parks were created in the first place.


RE: Title should read
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 9:05:33 PM , Rating: 2
Typical small minded leftist tactic can’t win an argument against simple logic so you rely on labels like extremist next i will be a racist! Then a homophobe! Really pathetic!


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/8/2012 11:41:42 AM , Rating: 2
You've offered nothing here besides your over overinflated opinion. Not one fact, not one link. And the proof that you have an overinflated opinion comes from your own remark about being convinced to vote for the other cult. Really you seem to have mistaken me for someone who cares which way you point your penis extender.


RE: Title should read
By web2dot0 on 11/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: Title should read
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 6:29:00 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Let me guess, you want to "take your country back"? hahahaha.


Nope my country doesn't exist any-more its been slowly dieing for quite sometime now the final nail in the coffin was hammered in yesterday. I am going to grab some popcorn and watch another 4 years of gridlock cause people to tear this place apart.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 7:05:59 PM , Rating: 2
How will you find the time? You don't watch "Red Dawn" 10 times a day?


RE: Title should read
By Ammohunt on 11/7/2012 9:09:34 PM , Rating: 3
Like I have said I am going full on Liberal you have convinced me! I quit my job and going on unemployment! I am life on Julia incarnate just with a penis! Government handouts here I come! There is such a thing as a free lunch in America now and I want mine!


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 11:34:07 PM , Rating: 1
I don't vote democratic you simpleton. But you're so narrow minded and full of hate you can't see anything other than us versus them.


RE: Title should read
By Pneumothorax on 11/8/2012 12:46:04 AM , Rating: 2
The Dems are just as bad...


RE: Title should read
By corduroygt on 11/8/2012 11:04:37 AM , Rating: 2
Republican salt is so tasty


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/8/2012 11:43:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Dems are just as bad...

They're both cults. No news here.


RE: Title should read
By ClownPuncher on 11/7/2012 3:42:25 PM , Rating: 2
Romney just wasn't a strong candidate. Sucks, but that's what happens when the GOP thinks that's their best bet.


RE: Title should read
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 5:16:52 PM , Rating: 3
Really? Romney was a very strong candidate. I guess you didn't notice how close the race was. It was not near the landslide of Obama's first term.


RE: Title should read
By ClownPuncher on 11/7/2012 5:51:20 PM , Rating: 2
No, he definitely wasn't a strong candidate. Obama just happens to be a very weak one as well. Our current president squeaked by barely on the general election due to Romney being someone hardly anyone could relate to.

Basically, they both suck but one had a slight lead in popularity.


RE: Title should read
By LRonaldHubbs on 11/8/2012 7:51:44 AM , Rating: 3
First of all, it wasn't a close race. 2000 was a close race. Obama won this 332 to 206. The media were calling this a close race, and pundits were accusing anyone who said otherwise of liberal bias. But then there's this guy you might have heard of, named Nate Silver...math FTW.

Secondly, Romney was not in any way a strong candidate. A strong candidate is charismatic, likable, and has solid identifiable principles that he sticks to. Romney was none of those things, and if John Kerry was a flip-flopper, then Romney running on the Republican ticket is possibly the most ironic choice ever.

That said, both major candidates were scumbags. The fact that Obama won by so much shows how bad of a candidate Romney really was.


RE: Title should read
By corduroygt on 11/8/2012 11:07:00 AM , Rating: 2
He could not win an election where the incumbent president had 8% unemployment and massive deficits. Speaks volumes about how weak of a candidate Romney was. If the Repubs can't even come close in an election under these circumstances, just what kind of elections can they win?


RE: Title should read
By web2dot0 on 11/7/12, Rating: 0
RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 4:34:35 PM , Rating: 2
The next 4 years will be nothing more than continued deadlock. That's what happens when doing what's good for the country overall is trumped by the need to be 100% anti-center (let alone 100% anti-left)100% of the time. Had Obama suggested the exact same tax cuts as Bush he would have been criticized for being fiscally irresponsible. It's no longer about what the bill is, it's only about the source and how to put them in their place. This past episode of 60 Minutes pretty much verified that, with confirmations from both the right and the left.


RE: Title should read
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 5:25:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The next 4 years will be nothing more than continued deadlock.
I'm hoping not but it probably will be. At least Boehner has already said he's ready compromise to get things done.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/08/us/politics/back...


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:08:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm hoping not but it probably will be.

I hope not as well, but I'm not holding me breath. After all the local Murdoch "news" here didn't even have any election coverage this morning on the front page.

But it would be good at some point to realize that the people will not look at simply saying no to everything based on its original as a positive step.


RE: Title should read
By tayb on 11/7/2012 4:31:31 PM , Rating: 2
If Republicans ever want to take the White House back they're going to have to completely blow up their social policy stances and start over. Catering to the whims of white christians isn't a ticket to the white house any longer. If Mitt Romney would have moved to the left on abortion, gay marriage, immigration, and contraceptives he would have won by a healthy margin. A majority of voters thought Romney would have done a better job with the economy, it was the social issues that killed him.

I don't even understand the reasoning for taking such far right stances on social issues. Did he think that if he moved to the left christians would jump ship and vote Obama?


RE: Title should read
By 91TTZ on 11/7/2012 5:00:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I don't even understand the reasoning for taking such far right stances on social issues. Did he think that if he moved to the left christians would jump ship and vote Obama?


I don't understand that either. I guess they figured that they've shored up the ultra-religious voting block and they won't want to abandon that. In the past that tactic has won them elections, but not any more.


RE: Title should read
By Spuke on 11/7/2012 5:29:48 PM , Rating: 2
He took that stance because he has to cater to the tea party. Unfortunately, any Republican candidate is going to have to do that. He should've picked something to be moderate on even if it came after the nomination. Sucks cause the guy really is a moderate.


RE: Title should read
By retrospooty on 11/7/2012 5:32:55 PM , Rating: 2
They have some serious issues on national elections. They have to cater to the extreme right and somehow not alienate Blacks, Women and Latino's in the process. Good luck with that.

It's just seen as too much of a "white male" party. I mean, I know it isnt like that, but even looking at the crowd at the Romney rally yesterday when he gave his concession speach, it looked like a freegin Nazi party meeting. I know its not like that, but there was just a whole lot of white and very little of anything else.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:03:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I mean, I know it isnt like that,

Of course not, both wives and mistresses are in there as well.


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/7/2012 6:00:06 PM , Rating: 2
In this area a locale republican just lost after many years of solid service. It was suggested that despite his positive accomplishments he lost because he voted yes for gay marriage.

Amazing how some can get rid of a good candidate based solely on 1 issue and what should have been a non-government issue. The government should not be in the marriage business. Not exactly the kind of tolerance preached by Jesus either.

quote:
I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.

Ghandi
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/m/mahatma...


RE: Title should read
By YashBudini on 11/8/2012 11:45:40 AM , Rating: 2
So Ammo and Ringold, explain how the above post makes me a socialist.


RE: Title should read
By Pneumothorax on 11/8/2012 12:56:56 AM , Rating: 2
Say Mitt just cloned Obama's social positions? You seriously think he would've attracted more Latino/Black votes? You think he would've gotten even 10% of the black vote? When women even gave Obama a higher edge on 'fixing' the economy? Obama won, because he's the 'Candy Man'. 'Reaching out to Latino/Women voters would require the Republican party promising free amnesty and NO CUTS to entitlements and just 'taxing' the rich. These points are what attracts the voter blocks that Romney lost.


RE: Title should read
By corduroygt on 11/8/2012 11:09:28 AM , Rating: 2
It would have given him more votes in the greatest voter block there is, which is women, and could indeed have tipped the election or at least made it much closer.


RE: Title should read
By tayb on 11/8/2012 5:08:24 PM , Rating: 2
That's crap.

He didn't even need to touch entitlement or immigration to win the election. Just shutting up about women's rights, abortion, and gay marriage would have been enough. But no, Mitt has to cater to the radical right and promise to overturn Roe v Wade.


RE: Title should read
By AstroCreep on 11/7/2012 4:39:20 PM , Rating: 2
So that we didn't have to go back to 2004 and repeat the last eight years and be in the same position we are now in 2020? Yeah, I'll go with that.


“And I don't know why [Apple is] acting like it’s superior. I don't even get it. What are they trying to say?” -- Bill Gates on the Mac ads

Did You Partake in "Black Friday/Thursday"?
Did You Partake in "Black Friday/Thursday"? 





0 Comments












botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki