Election Day 2012

By K2 on November 6th, 2012 at 8:12 am EST

Finally! The day is here to elect a new President. No more crazy political adds, at least for awhile. Just be sure to exercise your right to vote today gang if you haven’t already. I already voted about three weeks ago (I love early voting) so I’m all set and wont have to wait in any lines. Today’s outcome should be pretty interesting; haven’t seen a race this close since G.W. Bush vs Gore back in 2000. This makes your vote that much more important, regardless of whether you think it’s gonna count or not. GO VOTE.

So who do you think is going to win? How close do you think it’s going to be? Feel free to discuss in the forum thread. Oh and by the way GO VOTE :)

Tags: , ,

12 thoughts on “Election Day 2012”


  1. Avatar K2 says:

    Something I found last night – a nice little interactive electoral college display that shows the different ways in which each candidate could win the election. It already takes into account states that are solid Democrat and solid GOP, so all that’s really left are the battleground states (seven plus two others in this map). Link:

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/11/02/us/politics/paths-to-the-white-house.html” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;

    So with the way things stand as of this post, Obama has 431 different outcomes that can ensure a win; Romney has 76. There’s five different ways there could be a tie, which would equate to a win for Romney but leave Biden as VP (if you don’t understand why this is, look up the rules in the Constitution that talk about it).

    So I was playing around with different combinations last night – if Obama wins Florida and Ohio, that’s it, all the rest could go to Romney, but he’ll be President for another four years. If Romney takes Florida, Ohio, Iowa and North Carolina he’ll pretty much clinch it, but there’s still wiggle room for Obama to win, and it could still be a tie.

    Gonna be a crazy day today :)

  2. Avatar KillerClown says:

    Well, let’s see how much farther Obama can push his anti-Constitution/anti-American agenda. I think I’m going to be sick.

  3. Avatar KillerClown says:

    There was nothing crazy nor conspiratorial about what I said.
    NDAA is anti-Constitution, specifically by request of the Obama administration. Public knowledge.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DNDHbT44cY” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;

  4. Avatar K2 says:

    Good job. You posted an edited video clip.

    Here’s a more broad explanation of the NDAA 2012 – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NDAA_2012” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;

    You realize that the indefinite detention without trial section already exists, right? It was passed by congress and the Bush administration in the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF) right after 9/11.

    YES, the govt having that kind of power is troubling. But get your facts straight before you start pointing fingers. I can’t control any of the extreme right/extreme left political bullshit that exists out there on the interwebs, but I sure as hell can control it here. Is Obama the best president we’ve ever had? No. Did he make mistakes during his first term? Yes, as has every president before him. But that doesn’t make him anti-American or anti-Constitution. For fucksake… turn off Fox News and quit listening to Limbaugh.

  5. Avatar KillerClown says:

    The only FOX station I watch is Fox19 with Ben Swann (and ONLY for the Reality Check segments) (They aren’t controlled by FOX, they are only an affiliate). Limbaugh is a moron, as is Beck, Jones, and pretty much every other talk show host. My link was directly recorded from CSPAN2 and, as far as I can tell, there were no edits, it does seem to be outdated a bit though.

    I am not extreme left, nor extreme right, I am a libertarian which is middle ground. Though I’m probably better summarized as ‘anti-2 party paradigm’, I didn’t even like Gary Johnson that much, you can pinpoint his corporately influenced ideas/suggestions pretty easily.

    From your link:
    "Although the White House[12] and Senate sponsors[13] maintain that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) already grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act states that Congress "affirms" this authority and makes specific provisions as to the exercise of that authority.[14][15] The detention provisions of the Act have received critical attention by, among others, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, and some media sources which are concerned about the scope of the President’s authority, including contentions that those whom they claim may be held indefinitely could include U.S. citizens arrested on American soil, including arrests by members of the Armed Forces.[16][17][18][19][20] The detention powers currently face legal challenge."

    AUMF:
    (a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force [b]against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons[/b], in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

    "(2) In 2004, the Supreme Court held in Hamdi v. Rumsfeld that the AUMF authorized the President to detain individuals, including a United States citizen captured in Afghanistan and later detained in the United States, legitimately determined to be ‘engaged in armed conflict against the United States’ until the end of hostilities, noting that ‘[W]e understand Congress’ grant of authority for the use of ‘necessary and appropriate force’ to include the authority to detain for the duration of the relevant conflict, and our understanding is based on longstanding law-of-war principles’.

    (3) [b]The Court reaffirmed the long-standing principle of American law that a United States citizen may not be detained in the United States pursuant to the AUMF without due process of law[/b]"

    NDAA:
    It is possible I may have misinterpreted (or such was altered/modified, as noted below) the sections, or or lack thereof, which I believed allowed for the detention without trial for American citizens [i]in the United States[/i], as the AUMF indefinite detention [i]is not[/i] applicable to American citizens within the United States. The toughest part of deciphering is sorting through the several different versions of NDAA that exist, most of which the proclaimed Section 1031 doesn’t relate to the accusations made (according to sources, the section 1031 referred to is 1021 in a previous format/wording).
    In NDAA 2012 – Sec. 1021. Affirmation of authority of the Armed Forces of the United States to detain covered persons pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force.
    In NDAA 2013 – SEC. 1031. FINDINGS ON DETENTION PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE ENACTED IN 2001, is related, but the wording within that and the 2 following sections appears to uphold that no US Citizen in the United States can be detained without trial.
    Note: According to several sources I’ve read so far, some of my information was outdated, and wording had been modified/included within the NDAA to not allow it [indefinite detention] to expand to US Citizens within the US.

    Indefinite detention of US Citizens WITHIN the US, is my primary focus, though indefinite detention of ANY American citizen is [essentially] anti-Constitutional. I will continue to look for information which graphs out how this applies fully, there HAS to be a reason for:
    ***"Americans have sought resistance of the NDAA through successful resolution campaigns in various states and municipalities. The state of Rhode Island, the Colorado counties of Wade, El Paso, and Fremont, as well as the municipalities of Northampton, MA. and Fairfax, CA, have all passed resolutions rejecting the indefinite detention provisions of the NDAA.[45] The Bill of Rights Defense Committee has launched a national campaign to mobilize individuals at the grassroots level to pass local and state resolutions voicing opposition to the NDAA. Campaigns have begun to grow in New York City, Miami and San Diego, among other cities and states". – From your link***
    If the courts have already ruled AUMF indefinite detention did not/could not apply to US Citizens within the US, then why would individual states now be passing such resolutions following the passing of NDAA?

    My point:
    Regardless of whatever wording any of the NDAA versions may, or may not, include, the point is that when the president takes office, he swears an oath to "preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States", not undermine it. I have seen video, though I have yet been able to find it again, where Obama stated [loosely] that he did not need to consider the constitutionality of ‘what he does’, that he would leave that for the Supreme Court (though that may have been related to Obamacare). When you swear the oath it means you HAVE to consider constitutionality. And though this is my opinion, I’m sure there are [b]plenty[/b] who would agree with that sentiment. That is primarily the attitude I refer to as ‘anti-Constitution/anti-American agenda’, I was in a rush yesterday, didn’t have time to copy/paste info, or to expand on my opinion.

    As I have said in the past:
    I have not attacked you, nor tried to make you look like some kind of fool, yet you have, on several occasions, attempted to attack me (my opinions or questions or concerns). Hell, as far as I recall, in the ~12 years I’ve known you I’ve never disrespected you in any way (outside of shooting you repeatedly in CS)(maybe you can include the issue we had when you came back to DAoC (HF guild on live servers, not private), but hell even Nad left you hanging on that :P). Also as noted in the past, I submit my opinions, or information I’ve come across only in hopes of inspiring others to research shit themselves, I WANT people to provide negation to some of the information I provide, it would make me feel considerably better about some of these topics.

    Removing several of you from my Facebook wasn’t an attempt to insult/attack/injure anyone, I’ve removed a good number of people who don’t care about the things I post, similarly I have removed people who I didn’t care what they post. Over the last couple years my ‘agenda’ with my Facebook page has changed, I don’t use it to display to others who my friends are, or what I do in my daily life, I use it to spread information.
    You may not think so, but the image you guys were all on was a direct attack/insult to someone like me, you don’t see me up there posting shit that says "nobody cares what you had for lunch" or "nobody cares about what you did with your family today" or "no person’s opinion has ever changed another person’s", because if I don’t care, or want to see it, I can easily solve the problem. I actually liked seeing many of those updates, especially from EML, many of his family-related posts tend to make one admire him.

  6. Avatar K2 says:

    omg KC… novel! :)

    I know you didn’t attack me or anyone here. But damn dude, calling the POTUS un-american and anti-constitutional smacks of extremism. It makes you sound like all the crazy fucks in the media and online.

    Another thing you need to remember – the AUMF, the NDAA, all of that has to go through both the house and the senate before it ever sees the presidents desk. And a majority in both houses approved it and it would have been a group of lawmakers who drafted it in the first place. So if you’re gonna call the president un-american and against the constitution, you need to lump all the legislators and senators (dem and GOP) along with. Have fun with that.

  7. Avatar KillerClown says:

    But, you should know that I would label many of those people as anti-American and/or anti-Constitution, too. Many of their actions and attempts at laws are. But also, to me, using such labels is all opinion, not necessarily on the extreme level, but on an ideological level.
    I believe in liberty, not this restricted every-other-way lifestyle that’s been gradually pushed into this country, especially over the last 100 years. Not the party-rule-changing-at-the-last-minute crap that’s goes on. Not the 2-party-paradigm they want to keep the majority of people trapped within. It’s scary to think about/understand the excessive amount of people who vote for a party, not for policies, but because "I’m a Democrat/Republican".

    Issues, such as: we have 5% of the worlds population, yet we house 25% of the prison population of the world, are a major concern to me. Many of these people in prisons are there for non-violent/drug-related crimes. Our laws say you can’t smoke marijuana (which has 0 known negative side-effects, has 0 deaths in 10’s of thousands of years, and possibly has medicinal uses that outweigh their manufactured counter-parts)… yet you can drink alcohol/smoke chemically altered tobacco (both of which kill 10’s of millions worldwide every year)? you can take all these Rx drugs that have significant amounts of negative side-effects (and kills significant amounts of people every year)? you can drink all the caffeine you want (also kills people, every year)?

    All government spending is a burden on taxpaying citizens, from police to military, from senate to house, etc. The primary reason all of these are a burden is the Federal Reserve system, our government borrows all of the money it spends, and ideally, has to be paid back with interest.
    So a little analogy for you: Let’s say you open the Federal Reserve (Day 1), you print your first $1 bill to loan to the government, the government now owes $1.10 to the Federal Reserve…where does the $.10 come from? You have to print another $1 to pay that $.10, but now you owe another $1.10. The FR system is a perpetual debt system, this is one of the primary reasons we have a $16 trillion debt and $121 trillion in unfunded liabilities. This doesn’t even touch on the fact we borrow $.43 out of every $1 the government spends from China.
    The constitution says only congress can print money, and they can only do such by backing it with gold or silver, because the founders knew about perpetual debt systems already, and of course, they tried to restrict such a system from this country.

    Things are getting ‘scary’. It really seems as though we are headed for another violent revolution, or civil war. According to some sources, the DHS has purchased some 1/2 billion rounds of ammo, for what? TSA is groping people, and kids, in airports every day, why? Americans have NEVER been known to use their children for ‘terroristic’ purposes, we aren’t strapping bombs to our kids sending them to the front lines, so why is it necessary to search children?
    Me and a few others actually went back and forth a little with a DHS employee on a Facebook post not long ago, she made claims such as ‘you don’t know how many white rednecks are out there blowing up buses’…Where? In the movies? I have not heard even 1 single news report of any such activity. Is this really the kind of shit they are ‘teaching’ these employees? If this kind of crap was really going down, it would be the headline in the news/papers on a daily basis.

    There are many levels I think on when it comes to life, this post may give you a small insight into some of the things I contemplate. (Plus I’ve been having conversations with friends/family all day today that have brought some of this back into my thoughts, so I am rambling a bit)

    What do you think about this new ordeal that’s going on, that all 50 states have petitions to secede [peacefully] from the U.S. (https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;), totaling over 660,000 signatures (as of earlier today)?

  8. Avatar K2 says:

    I saw the thing about the petitions. And I think Texas just got enough to warrant an official response from the white house (80k signatures). You’ll notice though that it’s your random citizen starting the petition – it’s not state sponsored and a lot of the signatures are from people that don’t even live in the state mentioned. I’m pretty sure a state wont allow itself to secede from the USA due to less than 1% of their population signing a petition. In fact I would imagine that would be a whole different and more serious process altogether that would be initiated by that states legislative body and/or governor. We should look it up… in fact I was discussing this with Spy-Man on his facebook feed last week. If you do some research on it, organizations from different states try to secede all the time, just that now you have an easily accessible website that lets anybody start a petition on anything they want.

    Last time any state seceded from the USA was during the civil war – the confederacy that was formed wasn’t even recognized legally by the united states nor by any foreign countries. The federal govt considered it rebellion, so of course war followed. Source – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secession_in_the_United_States” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false; – and scroll down to look at a history of state secession attempts.

    None of those petitions are going to be accepted or even taken seriously in my opinion.

    EDIT – bwahahah I just read on the huffington post that a group in Austin, TX started a white house petition to secede from Texas and stay part of the united states. Classic.

  9. Avatar KillerClown says:

    Yeah, I realize it is done by citizens, and that many of the signatures on all of the petitions are from other states, though Tx did have an assload of people from Tx sign.
    It only takes 25k signatures to ‘grant’ a response from the Obama administration, (according to the Chicago Tribune 7 states have hit that threshold) last I heard Tx had over 60k signatures though, you say 80k, that’s +20k since yesterday.
    You do also have to consider whatever amount of manipulation that has gone into the history books. Many people believe Lincoln was unconstitutional, though I think for the average person it’s a rather complex situation to pass a judgement in that way.
    Most people believe the civil war was strictly about slavery, while for the North it was primarily about keeping the Union together, for the South it did have a lot to do with slavery. Though, let’s be realistic, there has been a considerable amount of historical revisionism throughout the past, and that truly may alter our modern perception of the reasoning. (This is even noted on the Wikipedia article ‘American Civil War’)

    I do believe there would be a different, and more serious process, yes. But something of this nature could be the start of that process in current times. Many of the comments I have read about it believe that this is the final ‘peaceful’ step before a violent revolution. I have said it quite a few times, but I do hope things remain ‘peaceful’, just doesn’t seem like it will work out that way. The federal government seems to want to much control over people’s lives. They play favorites with corporations and banks, etc, essentially propping 1 up while letting another fall, would seem likely to be based on who donated the most to one’s campaign.

    And yes, there are all kinds of silly things that go on the petition site, and things that are started by organizations. But none of those other attempts have stirred up this much attention, except 1 or 2. Was reading through the different petitions last night, a good number of them are easily deniable based on the constitution, like one to ‘Make a law declaring it illegal to make fun of a religious leader’, the 1st Amendment stomps all over that. Secession is one of those grey areas though. Alaska courts held that it was illegal to secede, but Texas, having joined the Union in 1845, wanted to ensure that they could leave again if they chose to. Other states, like NC, actually have portions of their state constitution which state they cannot secede.

    I don’t particularly think seceding is the real solution, the real solution is to cut back on federal government and cut fed govt spending significantly, fixing the monetary system, and ending perpetual interventionist wars.

    We also have some new issues that are going, I think, to grow over the next few years. Namely such as the legalization of recreational use of marijuana that passed in 2 states during the voting. This may be the can of worms that actually gets something done in the area of marijuana.

    Been back and forth busy cooking supper and shit, so I may have skipped over something I meant to say or what-not, and I gotta leave for a few hours now, I’m sure I’ll read back over my post later and see if anything I left out.

  10. Avatar KillerClown says:

    Here’s some good ones, and by good, I mean funny. :lol:

    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/we-request-obama-be-impeached-following-reasons/cpk4V6zK” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;
    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/allow-alaska-secede-dysfunctional-union/hz9dc6H8” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;
    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/issue-executive-order-immediately-halting-deportations/mB3pyXQs” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;

    There are a few that request to secede a city (such as one for Austin) from a state (Texas in the previous example) to remain part of the U.S.
    There’s even a few to deport/exile people who signed petitions, lol. Yes, let’s forget about free speech.

    But back to the reality we call reality…
    This is a good watch, happened today (yesterday w/e). Part 1 of Ron Paul’s Farewell Speech (It’s not a 2 part video, just what he called part 1 of his farewell, not sure when he intends to do ‘Part 2’).

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOgg0LdgTD0” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;

    Also interesting:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALN7LTeLxtI” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;

  11. Avatar KillerClown says:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWGcyatZt-A” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6LPl0u9LlE” onclick=”window.open(this.href);return false;

Log in to leave a Comment