Yeap here I am as predicted, Something is fucking wrong folks!

[Battleborne]

You are absolutely correct...........

i wouldn't care if shes a man or woman. i wouldn't vote for him/her. i agree that the media is all over fact that shes a woman.. and actually i think this helps stir women to vote for her. my Mother for example a hard right republican voting for her simple because shes a woman. It makes me think media is doing it on purpous to drum up women to vote for her. They dont say even close to as much about obama MLK JFK similarities and the phenomena's of a black man in a state like NH and Iowa that is predominantly white going out in record number to vote for his message of hope and unity.

It is called the proverbial 'reverse psychology syndrome'...darlas rants in here bare witness to this phenomenom!

 

[blackascoal]

Listen, I’m going to make one last attempt to be clear.
I have no idea where you got the idea that I am a Hillary supporter. I never have been. Have you read none of my previous posts for months now?
I never accused you of being sexist, what happened from my view, was that when I was writing about the obvious, overt, and disgusting sexism that has surrounded her this week, you took that to mean that 1) I am a hillary supporter and 2) that I was claiming you couldn’t be against Hillary and not be a sexist.

I have been writing about the sexism that has been in the media, all morning. And it’s been on this board. And I’M NOT GOING TO SIT STILL FOR IT.
Why you have decided to object to that, I have no idea. Why you have made that about Obama, I don’t know. Why you think I was accusing you of being a sexist, no idea.

I have always been an Edwards supporter. In my view, there is very little difference between Hillary and Obama. But I see both of their negatives, not just Obama’s, not just Hillary’s. Further, say what you will, out of the three, the troops will be home fastest under Edwards. This, by their own words. And the only one who is definitely going to bring them all home, immediately, is Kucinich, so why don’t we knock off this holier than thou stuff over the war?

As a woman, I’m going to continue to write about and confront the overt and socially acceptable sexism I have been seeing. And if you haven’t been seeing it, you haven’t wanted to see it. I don’t feel like being quiet about it. That doesn’t mean that I have ever supported Hillary’s war votes. Do you believe that Chris Matthews claimed that Hillary only had her Senate seat because her husband was unfaithful, over Iraq? Do you believe that several men on MSNBC claimed that Hillary lost because she sounds like a nagging wife was about Iraq?
None of this was about Iraq.

Remember ME .. I argue against sexism on this board all the time.

If you remember my earlier posts, I have argued against any sexism about Clinton, but being anti-Hillary is not the same as being sexist .. just as being anti-Obama is not the same as being racist.

It's clear that I'm not getting through to you and I'd rather pass and withhold comment than to upset a friend.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Listen, I’m going to make one last attempt to be clear.
I have no idea where you got the idea that I am a Hillary supporter. I never have been. Have you read none of my previous posts for months now?
I never accused you of being sexist, what happened from my view, was that when I was writing about the obvious, overt, and disgusting sexism that has surrounded her this week, you took that to mean that 1) I am a hillary supporter and 2) that I was claiming you couldn’t be against Hillary and not be a sexist.

I have been writing about the sexism that has been in the media, all morning. And it’s been on this board. And I’M NOT GOING TO SIT STILL FOR IT.
Why you have decided to object to that, I have no idea. Why you have made that about Obama, I don’t know. Why you think I was accusing you of being a sexist, no idea.

I have always been an Edwards supporter. In my view, there is very little difference between Hillary and Obama. But I see both of their negatives, not just Obama’s, not just Hillary’s. Further, say what you will, out of the three, the troops will be home fastest under Edwards. This, by their own words. And the only one who is definitely going to bring them all home, immediately, is Kucinich, so why don’t we knock off this holier than thou stuff over the war?

As a woman, I’m going to continue to write about and confront the overt and socially acceptable sexism I have been seeing. And if you haven’t been seeing it, you haven’t wanted to see it. I don’t feel like being quiet about it. That doesn’t mean that I have ever supported Hillary’s war votes. Do you believe that Chris Matthews claimed that Hillary only had her Senate seat because her husband was unfaithful, over Iraq? Do you believe that several men on MSNBC claimed that Hillary lost because she sounds like a nagging wife was about Iraq?
None of this was about Iraq.

1) I don't buy this whole the sexist bastards are ganging up on poor little Hillary for one second. She plays the gender card every chance she gets. Her complete arrogance is what ticks a lot of people off. Similar to how Rudy pisses a lot of people off for the same reason.

2) YOU are playing the "oh they are picking on her because she is a woman" card over and over again today. Which to me is extremely SEXIST of you to assume. Too many times have I heard that crap tossed out in place of the more likely reason. She is seen as a threat by the other candidates, thus the Edwards kissing Obamas ass and double teaming her moment.

3) Yes, there are idiots in the media that are quite obviously letting their bias show. She is certainly more scrutinized than the other Dem candidates. But I believe that has less to do with her being a woman and more to do with her "I have 35 years experience type lines".... one.... its bullshit, she doesn't ahve 35 years experiience. and two... she is the most experienced dem, the media has known her a long time... knows her style, knows her tricks, knows her weaknesses and strengths. Since true journalism is a thing of the past, they are going with the quick easy sensationalistic stories....and the easiest stories come from subjects you know the best.

4) We may disagree on this, but in my opinion, if you vote for Hillary solely because of a perceived "sexist attack" then it is indeed a mindless vote. Because she stands for many things you proclaim yourself opposed to. Obamas ducking the vote has nothing to do with her voting twice for authorization of force. Something I know you hate.

 

[Bonestorm]

i wouldn't care if shes a man or woman. i wouldn't vote for him/her. i agree that the media is all over fact that shes a woman.. and actually i think this helps stir women to vote for her. my Mother for example a hard right republican voting for her simple because shes a woman. It makes me think media is doing it on purpous to drum up women to vote for her. They dont say even close to as much about obama MLK JFK similarities and the phenomena's of a black man in a state like NH and Iowa that is predominantly white going out in record number to vote for his message of hope and unity.

instead the story is about a poor woman shedding a tear in a cafe in yet another Hillary clinton personality transformation... as if thats more important then the story of indi's, pubs, whites, blacks, Asians, Latinos.. inning up behind Obama.

Clinton Derangement Syndrome strikes again!

 

[Cancel7]

Remember ME .. I argue against sexism on this board all the time.

If you remember my earlier posts, I have argued against any sexism about Clinton, but being anti-Hillary is not the same as being sexist .. just as being anti-Obama is not the same as being racist.

It's clear that I'm not getting through to you and I'd rather pass and withhold comment than to upset a friend.

But I totally agree with this bac.

 

[Cancel7]

1) I don't buy this whole the sexist bastards are ganging up on poor little Hillary for one second. She plays the gender card every chance she gets. Her complete arrogance is what ticks a lot of people off. Similar to how Rudy pisses a lot of people off for the same reason.

2) YOU are playing the "oh they are picking on her because she is a woman" card over and over again today. Which to me is extremely SEXIST of you to assume. Too many times have I heard that crap tossed out in place of the more likely reason. She is seen as a threat by the other candidates, thus the Edwards kissing Obamas ass and double teaming her moment.

3) Yes, there are idiots in the media that are quite obviously letting their bias show. She is certainly more scrutinized than the other Dem candidates. But I believe that has less to do with her being a woman and more to do with her "I have 35 years experience type lines".... one.... its bullshit, she doesn't ahve 35 years experiience. and two... she is the most experienced dem, the media has known her a long time... knows her style, knows her tricks, knows her weaknesses and strengths. Since true journalism is a thing of the past, they are going with the quick easy sensationalistic stories....and the easiest stories come from subjects you know the best.

4) We may disagree on this, but in my opinion, if you vote for Hillary solely because of a perceived "sexist attack" then it is indeed a mindless vote. Because she stands for many things you proclaim yourself opposed to. Obamas ducking the vote has nothing to do with her voting twice for authorization of force. Something I know you hate.

I don't give a shit what you buy, I'm not selling anything SF.

You want to keep saying over and over that it's bullshit that if you don't vote for HIllary you're sexist. See, I'm not retarded I already know that.

You are hiding behind that so as to cover for the fact, that many hate her exactly because they are sexists.

Don't ever gloss over what is going on in the media as " a few idiots'. that's bullshit. It was the main narrative and it drove women out to vote. Keep it up.

 

[DigitalDave]

I think chap is right on something. The media is playing the sexism card right now to purposelly get Hillary votes. I don't necessarily think its so she can win, its to create a story for the next few months 'Hillary vs Obama'. Obama was predicted to just mop the floor with Hillary, that woul dbe no fun. Gotta create a story, lets offend some people, get them pissed so they go vote for Hillary.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I don't give a shit what you buy, I'm not selling anything SF.

You want to keep saying over and over that it's bullshit that if you don't vote for HIllary you're sexist. See, I'm not retarded I already know that.

You are hiding behind that so as to cover for the fact, that many hate her exactly because they are sexists.

Don't ever gloss over what is going on in the media as " a few idiots'. that's bullshit. It was the main narrative and it drove women out to vote. Keep it up.

That is exactly what I am not buying Darla. That there are "many out there who will vote against her because they are sexist". Are there some out there who will vote that way.... yes, without question. But you appear to be making out to be the vast quantity of men that are voting that way. That is what I do not buy.

Again, yes the media was all over her. I didn't hear to many women crying foul when the media was all hyping the inevitability of the Clinton reign. So I really don't give a fuck if they hammer her when she is down. I don't think it is sexist in nature (for the most part).

 

[Cancel7]

That is exactly what I am not buying Darla. That there are "many out there who will vote against her because they are sexist". Are there some out there who will vote that way.... yes, without question. But you appear to be making out to be the vast quantity of men that are voting that way. That is what I do not buy.

Again, yes the media was all over her. I didn't hear to many women crying foul when the media was all hyping the inevitability of the Clinton reign. So I really don't give a fuck if they hammer her when she is down. I don't think it is sexist in nature (for the most part).

Of course you don't think so. You can't think so. That might force you to ask some actually tough questions.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Of course you don't think so. You can't think so. That might force you to ask some actually tough questions.

Right.... because if I don't share YOUR OPINION on these events then I must of course be closed minded. What a load of crap that is.

 

[Cancel7]

I think chap is right on something. The media is playing the sexism card right now to purposelly get Hillary votes. I don't necessarily think its so she can win, its to create a story for the next few months 'Hillary vs Obama'. Obama was predicted to just mop the floor with Hillary, that woul dbe no fun. Gotta create a story, lets offend some people, get them pissed so they go vote for Hillary.

LOL. You guys are too funny.

There's no "media sexism card".

The media is largely made up of a bunch of men over 50 who are actually sexists.

 

[DigitalDave]

LOL. You guys are too funny.

There's no "media sexism card".

The media is largely made up of a bunch of men over 50 who are actually sexists.

The ones that get the most views are sexist. The most outreagous ones usually do get attention.

O'Rielly, Matthews, Hannity... I would say they are.. Hell even Coulter isn't too happy about being a woman so she grew an adam's apple.

 

[Cypress]

I think chap is right on something. The media is playing the sexism card right now to purposelly get Hillary votes. I don't necessarily think its so she can win, its to create a story for the next few months 'Hillary vs Obama'. Obama was predicted to just mop the floor with Hillary, that woul dbe no fun. Gotta create a story, lets offend some people, get them pissed so they go vote for Hillary.

I think chap is right on something. The media is playing the sexism card right now to purposelly get Hillary vote

LOL

They're treating her the same in 2008, that they did in 1998 and in 1994....with contempt.

 

[gonzojournals]

Yeah, I'm going to start believing you people when you accuse a vote in your candidate's favour of voting fraud...then I will take this seriously...until then, you are just angry losers (and this is coming from a person that is completely alienated by this year's choice of candidates).

 

[Cancel7]

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5530

Iowa ran fine without these machines. Now we have a primary which uses these pieces of shit to count and all of the sudden exit polls dont match the results again.

FUCKING A when is America going to realise what is going on here?


ballots are counted in New Hampshire, largely on Diebold optical-scan voting systems, wholly controlled and programmed by a very very bad company named LHS Associates.

Those Diebold op-scan machines are the exact same ones that were hacked in the HBO documentary, Hacking Democracy. See the previous report, as I recommend, which also includes a video of that hack, and footage of the guy who runs LHS Associates.

That said, the the pre-election pollster's numbers (NOTE: that's not Exit Polls, but Pre-Election Polls!) were dead-on, for the most part, on the Republican side, as well as on the Democratic side. Except in the do-or-die (for Hillary) Clinton v. Obama race. I'm watching MSNBC right now, and they all seem to agree that the results, for the moment, defy explanation.

"While I have no evidence at this time --- let me repeat, no evidence at this time --- of chicanery, what we do know is that chicanery, with this particular voting system, is not particularly difficult. "

Desh, let me know if any evidence ever turns up.

 

[Cancel7]

Vote Fraud Expert Warns Of New Hampshire Chicanery
Key vulnerabilities of Diebold machine identified within ten minutes by programmer

"It's not who votes that counts. It's who counts the votes." Joseph Stalin.

Vote fraud expert Bev Harris has warned that New Hampshire's electronic voting machines are wide open to fraud and that even modestly skilled computer programmers were able to identify key vulnerabilities within ten minutes of assessing them as key Democrat and Republican primaries unfold today.

The contract for programming all of New Hampshire's Diebold voting machines, which combined will count 81 per cent of the vote today, is owned by LHS Associates, which also holds the contracts for Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Vermont.

LHS is owned by John Silvestro, who has been at the center of a long-running public dispute in trying to deflect accusations made by hacker Harri Hursti that the machines can easily be rigged.

"The exact same make, model and version hacked in the Black Box Voting project in Leon County is used throughout New Hampshire, where about 45 percent of elections administrators hand count paper ballots at the polling place, with the remaining locations all using the Diebold version 1.94w optical scan machine," writes Harris.

One area of disagreement between Hursti and Silvestro was the amount of expertise needed to exploit the Diebold 1.94w optical scan system. Silvestro claimed (in a strange contortion of reasoning) that he doesn't hire very skilled programmers, implying that this makes New Hampshire elections more secure.

Hursti pointed out that hiring programmers with a lack of knowledge is generally not considered a security feature, and also that an average high schooler can learn to exploit the system in two days to two weeks.

After purchasing a Diebold 1.94w machine, a computer repair shop employee picked at random by Black Box Voting was able to zero in on the system's vulnerable memory card within just ten minutes.

Harris points out that LHS is a private company that will count over four fifths of the New Hampshire vote with no oversight whatsoever.

LHS is not subject to public records requirements, as the government is, at least, not in New Hampshire. The control over memory card contents is absolute; when cards malfunction or get lost, LHS brings the replacements.

Since LHS maintains the machines, repairs the machines, and replaces the machines -- often on Election Day -- when they malfunction, they have intimate access to the chips, sockets, ports, communications devices and other electronic components.

A recent CNN report featured on Lou Dobbs' show highlights just how easy it is to hack a voting machine and change how votes are tallied with just rudimentary programming skills. Experts warn that it takes only a minute for an unsupervised machine to be inserted with a virus and hacked.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2008/010808_vote_fraud.htm

For those who don't know who Hurtsi is or how he proved the software in these machines have been PURPOSEFULLY coded for fraud ..

Google: Leon County Hack

I know about Diebold, and I look forward to the day, which is coming, when those machines are gone.

But...there is still no evidence whatsoever that there was any fraud in THIS election.

Here is what I think happened: Older women, (by which I mean women out of their 20's, but mostly, 40 and up), became infuriated by what they saw on tv all week. I know that I did, and I'm not a Hillary supporter. That's why those pre-election polls were off. That was one part of this. The other part of this was that white men (mostly men I think) lied to both pre-election pollsters, and also to exist pollsters and said they had voted for Obama. Plenty of them actually voted for John McCain. Would you want to admit that? No, I am being serious. But mostly they lied because of race.

This result was driven by closet racists, and pissed off old-guard feminists.

That said, if any evidence to the contary surfaces? I am completely open to reading and evaluating it.

 

[Cancel7]

They will choose Hillary and McCain for us and then McCain will win the election.

Its already desided and your input menas nothing unless you dont use machines.

Fuck ,Fuck ,Fuck damnit.

I though we had a chance to end this but it aint gonna happen. We are screwed.

Who is they?

If the Clintons can fix the primary, why would I believe they are going to lay back and allow the republicans to steal the general?

Sorry, this just doesn't make any sense to me Desh.

 

[Cancel7]

Stop being an intentional idiot.

I'm not saying it's a vast conspiracy. I'm saying that he got 2 point race results 2 days in a row before the nation's first primary, and chose not to report it because it wasn't a "3 day trend".

That's beyond fucking stupid. Zogby should be taken to a shed somewhere and shot.

Independent primary voters in New Hampshire were relying on polls to cast tactical votes yesterday. As is suggested by Zogby in the article, they would have likely voted differently if they had seen that the Clinton-Obama race was going to be so tight.

Sometimes it's not intentional with him YL. You know how RJS says he is an amiable idiot? I mean, that's harsh, but I'm just saying, sometimes, it's not intentional with him.