Democrats vote on November 5!

[Lonewulf]

Not sure if someone's brought this up already.

Yeap. According to this.

This has more information.

According to all common sense, logic, media, and laws, this is all BS.

I've seen a few blogs posting this around as well, declaring "DEMOCRATS CAN'T TAKE A JOKE LOL", and "ACORN DID VOTER FRAUD SO WE CAN TOO LOL" kinds of posts. Not to mention seemingly intentional, honest attempts at fooling voters.

Truly disgusting. People will do anything when they get desperate.

I'm getting less and less respect for the human race as my days draw on. They say that a cynic is a burned idealist; I'm thinking this is becoming all too true.

Remember: Just 3 days to stop the Obama Nation!



I find it funny how many conservatives parade around justice, patriotism, and good ol' values won by soldiers -- then simultaneously turn around and spit in the face of the very values they claim to uphold; actually attempting to sabotage the election process that creates the "democratic" part of the "democracy" they want to send people to war for. I guess you can die for it, but you can't uphold it.

Not that I'm saying that all conservatives are doing this; but enough conservatives are leaping upon this "joke" to make me disgusted.

 

[leftysergeant]

I think that anyone posting such rubbish should be hunted down, their houses burned and their computers smashed across their heads. They are terroists. They are not fit to live in America. They are stupid, vain and selfish.

(But what would I expect from Republicans and Freepers?)

 

[Lonewulf]

I noticed one vote for "Democrats can't take a joke!"

I didn't create the poll to harass anyone, but jeez.

I hope they can find a way to defend such a thing in this thread. Voter fraud is a joke? Or is it only a joke if it's against the "other side"?

 

[Oliver]

I don't get the OP's joke. Election fraud isn't a laughing matter for anyone
with some degree of morality.

 

[Lonewulf]

I don't get the OP's joke.

I wasn't actually making one, in case it wasn't clear. (Just saying, with this language, it sounds like you said "the original poster's joke")

Election fraud isn't a laughing matter for anyone
with some degree of morality.

I agree with you on this. But there are many out there actually claiming that it IS a joke, and that democrats can't take it. There's already voters (as in, people voting on the poll in this thread) saying that democrats can't get the joke behind it all.

Seriously -- how CAN it be considered a joke? Can someone please explain this to me?

 

[leftysergeant]

Seriously -- how CAN it be considered a joke? Can someone please explain this to me?

I will lay at least part of the blame on a certain fat, deaf, under-educated, sexually dysfunctional, misogynistic fool with his own radio show and a drug problem. Anyone who listens to him (and there are apparently enough morons out there listening to him to make him think he is worth over a million bucks a year) and actually believes him to be at least as smart as Trig Palin would probably think this is funny.

 

[Oliver]

I wasn't actually making one, in case it wasn't clear. (Just saying, with this language, it sounds like you said "the original poster's joke")

I agree with you on this. But there are many out there actually claiming that it IS a joke, and that democrats can't take it. There's already voters (as in, people voting on the poll in this thread) saying that democrats can't get the joke behind it all.

Seriously -- how CAN it be considered a joke? Can someone please explain this to me?

Reps at this point are desperate. I don't really care about their
irrational responses at this point of the election, neither should
you - it's irrelevant unless it's getting ugly and promoting violence
or election fraud.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Here's a related story:
The dirty tricks are starting even earlier than usual this year. According to the Philadelphia Daily News, "An anonymous flier circulating in African-American neighborhoods in North and West Philadelphia states that voters who are facing outstanding arrest warrants or who have unpaid traffic tickets may be arrested at the polls on Election Day." The Daily News, 10/4/08

 

[Lonewulf]

Here's a related story:
The dirty tricks are starting even earlier than usual this year. According to the Philadelphia Daily News, "An anonymous flier circulating in African-American neighborhoods in North and West Philadelphia states that voters who are facing outstanding arrest warrants or who have unpaid traffic tickets may be arrested at the polls on Election Day." The Daily News, 10/4/08

If the arrest warrant is truly outstanding, I'm sure they'd already be afraid of that anyways.

Still, very dirty.

 

[Jeff Corey]

Reps at this point are desperate. I don't really care about their
irrational responses at this point of the election, neither should
you - it's irrelevant unless it's getting ugly and promoting violence
or election fraud.

Not according to this law:
REP. EMANUEL, SEN. OBAMA PRAISE PASSAGE OF DECEPTIVE PRACTICES BILL
Article from: US Fed News Service, Including US State News Article date: June 25, 2007

Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill. (5th CD), issued the following press release: Today, Rep. Rahm Emanuel (IL-5) praised the passage of the Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act (H.R. 1281), a bill that will prohibit and punish deceptive practices that seek to intimidate or mislead voters in an effort to keep voters away from the polls on Election Day. Sen. Barack Obama (IL) introduced Deceptive Practices and Voter Intimidation Prevention Act, (S. 453), in the Senate on January 31, 2007.

The "...mislead voters in an effort to keep voters away from the polls on Election Day." seems relevant.

 

[Wildy]

This is one of the stupidest things that I could hear.

The sad thing is that there would be people out there stupid enough who would believe such a thing.

On a side note, I bet that this will not appear on Conservapedia's examples of "deceit".

 

[Lonewulf]

Yet two more people voted that democrats can't take a joke, and yet will not explain their vote response.

I'll ask once more:

What part of this is a "joke"? Why is it funny?

This is one of the stupidest things that I could hear.

The sad thing is that there would be people out there stupid enough who would believe such a thing.

On a side note, I bet that this will not appear on Conservapedia's examples of "deceit".

The problem I have is how official they attempted to make it look.

Seriously, it's not like it's an internet rumor. They put real effort into this.

And yet, it's "funny".

That's so funny! HAHAHAHA, those crazy Republicans! Trying to get people to not vote, totally spitting on the name of the democracy they claim to support. HAHAHAH!

I just wiped a tear from my eye. WOO-EE, you guys sure need to make more jokes like this!

Only, you know, have the courage to actually show yourselves so we know who the jokesters are. You'll be famous!

 

[Magyar]

I am kind of torn between the idea that people who put this kind of crap out there even remotely consider themselves patriots. I think they are not much better than terrorists.

On the other hand I am kind of feeling like if you are SO stupid and uninformed about this countries electoral process as to fall for this, maybe you shouldn't vote.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Say, each time the treasury issues redesigned currency my local radio station morning zoo tells me the old version is null and void.

Y'know, they can't say it on the radio if it wasn't true.

 

[Lonewulf]

A democratic vote either works the way it's supposed to, or it doesn't work at all. If you're able and registered to vote, you're allowed to vote. Period. You have a voice. Period. It doesn't matter how stupid people consider you, it doesn't matter how ill informed you are (and I wouldn't personally know the details about how can and can't change the registration date myself, but I still consider myself above average in education), you GET TO VOTE. Period.

Anyone who thinks anything less doesn't want a democratic vote, they want something else. And if they truly want something else, then they should either campaign a change in the system, or they should live somewhere else. To purposefully sabotage the system "because dumb people shouldn't vote" also shouldn't be able to vote. Because they just committed a crime, and I doubt they would want criminals to be able to vote. Not sure if it would be a felony, but hey... their logic, their rules.

There really shouldn't be anything controversial about this, especially if anyone is going to claim that we should respect "patriotism" or "American values". They don't want "American values" -- they want to live somewhere where the people DON'T have a say.

 

[Meadmaker]

I wasn't actually making one, in case it wasn't clear. ....Seriously -- how CAN it be considered a joke? Can someone please explain this to me?

It is a joke. I'll try to explain.

This sort of humor is found all over the place. The basic genre is making fun of other people's stupidity, whether that stupidity is real or imagined. In order to fall for this sort of announcement, you would have to be very, very, stupid. Despite its official looking appearance, no one with an ounce of knowledge of how we run elections could possibly fall for this. So, imagining someone actually believing it gives a humorous image. You picture an absolute moron showing up at his local elementary school on Wednesday morning asking where they can find the voting booths. Incredibly, someone, somewhere in Virginia, will probably do it.

There's a related style of humor which depends on a sort of temporary gullibility. It's a bit funnier, because it is intended to be temporary. I am not so fond of this style of humor, because I fall for it all the time. True story: In college, a girlfriend was talking to me about jokes and she said, "Well, did you know that the word 'gullible' isn't in the dictionary?" I dutifully looked puzzled and said, "Really?" As she laughed, I realized that once again, I had been caught. Fortunately, laughter is a very effective form of aphrodisiac among young people, and all hurt feelings were quickly forgotten.

With this message, the jokester pictures someone reading this official form of announcement, checking their calendars, maybe making arrangements to come in late Wednesday instead of Tuesday, before they finally say, "Wait a minute...".and realize the joke.

It's really a bit like a political form of "candid camera". I liked Candid Camera when I was a small child, but one day I realized that their jokes were just realistic enough that someone might believe them and do something rash, and someone could get hurt.

I voted "no strong feelings", but I had to think about it. In a different mood, I could have voted "Democrats can't take a joke." For my money, the thing that makes it not very funny is that it looks so real. I think if just a few more obviously satirical touches would have been added, it could have been funny.

 

[Lonewulf]

With this message, the jokester pictures someone reading this official form of announcement, checking their calendars, maybe making arrangements to come in late Wednesday instead of Tuesday, before they finally say, "Wait a minute...".and realize the joke.

Intending to make a million dollars with your mind-reading ability here, Mead?

Or do you have evidence that you can claim this a surety, instead of obvious speculation?

For what it's worth, I appreciate that you have the courage to actually explain your opinion. But I'm afraid that even after your explanation, it falls a bit short of justifying such behavior, and it relies on far too much speculation.

For my money, the thing that makes it not very funny is that it looks so real. I think if just a few more obviously satirical touches would have been added, it could have been funny.

The reason why, is because obviously satirical touches would have pointed it to being a joke, instead of a deliberate attempt to fool people.


EDIT: I have a question I want to post to the people who claim that the people who would be fooled are "very very very very stupid people that don't know anything about the election process".

First of all, do you think that political education is top of the class in the United States? Because I don't see much evidence of that.

Second of all, how do you have to be "very very very stupid" to not realize that the page is not official? While I would definitely be suspicious, if I didn't have access to the internet, I could see how some might be fooled. Especially if others kept insisting that it was valid (as is being purported over and over again by some conservatives).

Can someone explain this in small enough words for someone as stupid as me to understand? kthx.

 

[Wildy]

I don't see this as a joke.

Then again "Joke" (well more literally "Chaser-style prank") was used by Jackie Kelly after her husband and a Liberal official handed out fake pamphlets that stated that Labor would forgive the Bali bombers and that they supported Islamic extremism. And to make it worse, the husband of the running Liberal candidate at the time Karen Chijoff was found to have been involved.

Needless to say it didn't go down well with people.

Neither were The Chaser.

Jackie Kelly won a "Mal Award":



And Karen Chijoff had fun at a polling booth:

 

[Meadmaker]

Intending to make a million dollars with your mind-reading ability here, Mead?

Or do you have evidence that you can claim this a surety, instead of obvious speculation?

For what it's worth, I appreciate that you have the courage to actually explain your opinion. But I'm afraid that even after your explanation, it falls a bit short of justifying such behavior, and it relies on far too much speculation.

The reason why, is because obviously satirical touches would have pointed it to being a joke, instead of a deliberate attempt to fool people.

Oh, please. Your conclusion that this is a deliberate attempt to mislead Democratic voters is a result of astute analysis, but my conclusion that this is a joke relies too much on speculation? Why is one conclusion mind reading, and the other not?

EDIT: I have a question I want to post to the people who claim that the people who would be fooled are "very very very very stupid people that don't know anything about the election process".

There are two obvious reasons: 1) The Constitution says the election will be held on a Tuesday. This message directs people to show up after the election is over.

2) The sorting process to decide who votes on which day requires you to declare your support for a particular candidate. This is rather contrary to the concept of a secret ballot. Only an idiot would think that there are two different voting procedures based on which candidates are being supported.

2a) Even if you were fooled briefly, a basic question about what to do if voting for some Republicans and some Democrats would make you realize that this was not legitimate.

2b) Even if you didn't understand the concept of a split ticket, you would probably understand third party candidates, who are not mentioned at all.

In short, a minimal amount of thought is necessary to reveal the ruse.

First of all, do you think that political education is top of the class in the United States? Because I don't see much evidence of that.

Indeed no. Perhaps "stupid" is the wrong word. "Ignorant" or "uneducated" mght be better. Of course, this is probably part of the design in the humor of the jokester who created this memo. He probably thinks the public schools have done such a dismal job of educating the public that some morons would actually not realize just how outrageously ridiculous this announcement actually was. Perhaps he finds humor in the concept that the liberals who controlled public education (this is in his mind, whether or not its true) would have done such an awful job that their citizens can't even tell truth from falsehood. It adds the humorous element of seeing a rival group hoisted by their own petard. Republican voters, presumably, are too smart to fall for such a thing, but he finds humor in the possibility that Democratic voters might actually fall prey to this.




Second of all, how do you have to be "very very very stupid" to not realize that the page is not official? While I would definitely be suspicious, if I didn't have access to the internet, I could see how some might be fooled. Especially if others kept insisting that it was valid (as is being purported over and over again by some conservatives).

Can someone explain this in small enough words for someone as stupid as me to understand? kthx.[/QUOTE]

 

[Lonewulf]

Oh, please. Your conclusion that this is a deliberate attempt to mislead Democratic voters is a result of astute analysis, but my conclusion that this is a joke relies too much on speculation? Why is one conclusion mind reading, and the other not?

Because it's obvious they went through some lengths to make the document look official.

It's obvious to anyone with half a brain.

Also, I called it "conclusion mind reading" because you stated it as a fact, not as "I think it is...", and deliberately pointed out what the person was actually thinking.

I know what you're thinking now...

Furthermore, it could very well have simply been an incompetent attempt to fool people. However, until I have evidence that it wasn't a legitimate attempt to fool people, I don't see why I should see it as anything but. Neither does the U.S. government, as stated by law, this is a class 1 misdemeanor. Rather nasty for a "simple joke".

There are two obvious reasons: 1) The Constitution says the election will be held on a Tuesday. This message directs people to show up after the election is over.

You're right; everyone knows every word of the Constitution. In fact, the Constitution has never been misquoted before...

Here's a newsflash: Not everyone knows every bit of the constitution, and it isn't exactly drilled into people half as much as I think it should be. Taking advantage of people's ignorance (which has already been noted to be a real problem in the United States, several times) and then calling it a "joke" really sounds as low as you can get, to me.

2) The sorting process to decide who votes on which day requires you to declare your support for a particular candidate. This is rather contrary to the concept of a secret ballot. Only an idiot would think that there are two different voting procedures based on which candidates are being supported.

That's a point, actually.

2a) Even if you were fooled briefly, a basic question about what to do if voting for some Republicans and some Democrats would make you realize that this was not legitimate.

Okay.

2b) Even if you didn't understand the concept of a split ticket, you would probably understand third party candidates, who are not mentioned at all.

Third party candidates are almost never mentioned at all. I'm pretty sure that there are many in the U.S. that hardly know much of anything about their existence.

Newsflash: There's a lot of people that don't keep up with politics out there in the U.S., and education could really be better overall.



You were right about this issue requiring only a minimum amount of thought. However, after putting a minimum amount of thought into this issue, I've discovered that it still doesn't add up.