Conquer Club

mpjh wrote:Did you all know that Obama won the election? He won with over a 7 million vote margin, more than any president since LBJ. He won with the votes of all races and all sexes. He is our next president.

Actually, it was 8.5 million votes.

did you know that only 32 percent of the population eligible to vote actually voted for him?

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_eligible_voters_are_registered_to_vote_in_the_united_states wrote: There are 207,643,594 eligible voters in the U.S. The census bureau estimates as of July have the US total population at 303,824,640. As of the 2006 general election the Voting Age Population (all adults) was 225,964,346 whereas the Voter Eligible Population (adults - ineligible people like felons or non-citizens) was 207,643,594.

BO: 66,882,230
JM: 58,343,671

So, the percentage of eligible voters that BO won by is only 3 percent.

(66,882,230 / 207,643,594)


huh, watch this:
66,882,230 votes for BO:
divided by:
125,225,901 total votes for the two candidates combined
----------------------------------------------
0.53

Of actual voters that voted for either BO or JM, a total number of votes between the 2 are which, divided by BO's count turns up the percentage of 53 percent.

Now you do some math. Check the numbers against eligible voters between then and now for each and every election then show percentages. Then you can jump up and down if you want. but the numbers show me that turn out was not all that great. better than in the past, but still just under half of the eligible voters in America still don't give a shit.

black elk speaks wrote:but still just under half of the eligible voters in America still don't give a shit.

I don't need to check numbers to know that. In general, America is too busy watching TV and eating Cheetos™ to be bothered with small things like which asshole is running the country. That said, of the people who do care, at least a little, about the future of the country, a good deal of them supported Obama.

Frigidus wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:but still just under half of the eligible voters in America still don't give a shit.

I don't need to check numbers to know that. In general, America is too busy watching TV and eating Cheetos™ to be bothered with small things like which asshole is running the country. That said, of the people who do care, at least a little, about the future of the country, a good deal of them supported Obama.

yeah, that would be the ignorant fucks that never gave a damn about the election before, and were told who to vote for (pssst... that would be BO)

Thank you Acorn!

black elk speaks wrote:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_eligible_voters_are_registered_to_vote_in_the_united_states wrote: There are 207,643,594 eligible voters in the U.S. The census bureau estimates as of July have the US total population at 303,824,640. As of the 2006 general election the Voting Age Population (all adults) was 225,964,346 whereas the Voter Eligible Population (adults - ineligible people like felons or non-citizens) was 207,643,594.

BO: 66,882,230
JM: 58,343,671

So, the percentage of eligible voters that BO won by is only 3 percent.

(66,882,230 / 207,643,594)


huh, watch this:
66,882,230 votes for BO:
divided by:
125,225,901 total votes for the two candidates combined
----------------------------------------------
0.53

Of actual voters that voted for either BO or JM, a total number of votes between the 2 are which, divided by BO's count turns up the percentage of 53 percent.

Now you do some math. Check the numbers against eligible voters between then and now for each and every election then show percentages. Then you can jump up and down if you want. but the numbers show me that turn out was not all that great. better than in the past, but still just under half of the eligible voters in America still don't give a shit.

Speaking of ignorant fucks, you should check your numbers again. 125,225,901 votes from 207,643,594 eligible voters results in a 60.3% turonout. Just under half? Also, expressing the margin as a percentage of total eligible voters a pointless. If I perform the same calculation for McCain (58,343,671 / 207,643,594), my result is a meagre 28%. How then can you use this sort of calculation to assert that Obama won by three percent? It's completely ridiculous. What if we check McCain's votes expressed as a percentage of Obama's? Only 87% - Obama must have won by 13% then, right? Can't argue with the numbers! Unless, that is, we check Obama's votes as a percentage of McCain's and get a result of 114.6%. Hmmm...

The only ignorant fucker here is BES, the fake native American, who can't get over losing, and can only attach racist interpretations to Obama's victory.

PopeBenXVI wrote:Double Wrong

I love your debating-skills.

Jolly Roger wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_eligible_voters_are_registered_to_vote_in_the_united_states wrote: There are 207,643,594 eligible voters in the U.S. The census bureau estimates as of July have the US total population at 303,824,640. As of the 2006 general election the Voting Age Population (all adults) was 225,964,346 whereas the Voter Eligible Population (adults - ineligible people like felons or non-citizens) was 207,643,594.

BO: 66,882,230
JM: 58,343,671

So, the percentage of eligible voters that BO won by is only 3 percent.

(66,882,230 / 207,643,594)


huh, watch this:
66,882,230 votes for BO:
divided by:
125,225,901 total votes for the two candidates combined
----------------------------------------------
0.53

Of actual voters that voted for either BO or JM, a total number of votes between the 2 are which, divided by BO's count turns up the percentage of 53 percent.

Now you do some math. Check the numbers against eligible voters between then and now for each and every election then show percentages. Then you can jump up and down if you want. but the numbers show me that turn out was not all that great. better than in the past, but still just under half of the eligible voters in America still don't give a shit.

Speaking of ignorant fucks, you should check your numbers again. 125,225,901 votes from 207,643,594 eligible voters results in a 60.3% turonout. Just under half? Also, expressing the margin as a percentage of total eligible voters a pointless. If I perform the same calculation for McCain (58,343,671 / 207,643,594), my result is a meagre 28%. How then can you use this sort of calculation to assert that Obama won by three percent? It's completely ridiculous. What if we check McCain's votes expressed as a percentage of Obama's? Only 87% - Obama must have won by 13% then, right? Can't argue with the numbers! Unless, that is, we check Obama's votes as a percentage of McCain's and get a result of 114.6%. Hmmm...

If you read my statement while thinking, it says "better than in the past, but still just under half of the eligible voters in America still don't give a shit." Suggesting that they didn't care enough to come out and vote.

My post means to highlight that only about 30 percent of actual eligible voters supported Obama. This means that our leader was selected by only 1/3 of the eligible population.

the rest of your post is nonsense. You have numbers inverted or something...

Thank you very much.

[EDIT: I shouldn't call you stupid]

black elk speaks wrote: If you read my statement while thinking, it says "better than in the past, but still just under half of the eligible voters in America still don't give a shit." Suggesting that they didn't care enough to come out and vote.

My post means to highlight that only about 30 percent of actual eligible voters supported Obama. This means that our leader was selected by only 1/3 of the eligible population.

Thank you very much.

If you read my statement while thinking, you'll note that your own numbers show 39.7% did not come out to vote. Many of these people may have actually turned up to vote but had their ballots rejected for one reason or another while many others may have been too ill to vote. Your statement that just under half just didn't give a shit is incorrect.

With respect to your second statement, what's your point?

Jolly Roger wrote:

black elk speaks wrote: If you read my statement while thinking, it says "better than in the past, but still just under half of the eligible voters in America still don't give a shit." Suggesting that they didn't care enough to come out and vote.

My post means to highlight that only about 30 percent of actual eligible voters supported Obama. This means that our leader was selected by only 1/3 of the eligible population.

Thank you very much.

If you read my statement while thinking, you'll note that your own numbers show 39.7% did not come out to vote. Many of these people may have actually turned up to vote but had their ballots rejected for one reason or another while many others may have been too ill to vote. Your statement that just under half just didn't give a shit is incorrect.

With respect to your second statement, what's your point?

point is in blue.

Also, I want mjph to calculate population percentages to see if his calculations (which were off my a million and a half tostart with) hold true when you mount the numbers into percentages rather than raw numbers. America is significantly larger since LBJ in terms of population and that should be taken into account when you see someone win an election by something like 6 percent of the vote.

A quick comical interlude:

Q: Why have Americans chosen Obama to be their first African-American President?

A: Because the majority of Americans believe that Ireland is in Africa.

mandalorian2298 wrote:A quick comical interlude:

Q: Why have Americans chosen Obama to be their first African-American President?

A: Because the majority of Americans believe that Ireland is in Africa.

African American leads one to think of the descendants of slaves or those that have lost their specific African heritage and roots. BO is actually a Kenyan America. This only proves the point that he is not even qualified to fit into the labels that African Americans give him. He isn't African American, as in descendant from slaves nor is he even black, he is half black and half white, but raised by whites.

black elk speaks wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:A quick comical interlude:

Q: Why have Americans chosen Obama to be their first African-American President?

A: Because the majority of Americans believe that Ireland is in Africa.

African American leads one to think of the descendants of slaves or those that have lost their specific African heritage and roots. BO is actually a Kenyan America. This only proves the point that he is not even qualified to fit into the labels that African Americans give him. He isn't African American, as in descendant from slaves nor is he even black, he is half black and half white, but raised by whites.

That is why USA is considered to be the Land of Freedom: Anyone, no matter the race, can become the President of USA, as long as he's white enough.

mandalorian2298 wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:A quick comical interlude:

Q: Why have Americans chosen Obama to be their first African-American President?

A: Because the majority of Americans believe that Ireland is in Africa.

African American leads one to think of the descendants of slaves or those that have lost their specific African heritage and roots. BO is actually a Kenyan America. This only proves the point that he is not even qualified to fit into the labels that African Americans give him. He isn't African American, as in descendant from slaves nor is he even black, he is half black and half white, but raised by whites.

That is why USA is considered to be the Land of Freedom: Anyone, no matter the race, can become the President of USA, as long as he's white enough.

Well... technically, no. You have to be born here, which is one possible reason that BO could be ejected from office. If it is determined that he was not born here... Bye-bye BO

Yeah, Palin thought Africa was a country and not a continent.

black elk speaks wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:A quick comical interlude:

Q: Why have Americans chosen Obama to be their first African-American President?

A: Because the majority of Americans believe that Ireland is in Africa.

African American leads one to think of the descendants of slaves or those that have lost their specific African heritage and roots. BO is actually a Kenyan America. This only proves the point that he is not even qualified to fit into the labels that African Americans give him. He isn't African American, as in descendant from slaves nor is he even black, he is half black and half white, but raised by whites.

That is why USA is considered to be the Land of Freedom: Anyone, no matter the race, can become the President of USA, as long as he's white enough.

Well... technically, no. You have to be born here, which is one possible reason that BO could be ejected from office. If it is determined that he was not born here... Bye-bye BO

youd be so much more respectable if you could offer legitamate criticsm out side of the whole birth cirtificate or collectivism is slavery line.

BES cannot do anything legitimate, he is a fake shaman.

got tonkaed wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:A quick comical interlude:

Q: Why have Americans chosen Obama to be their first African-American President?

A: Because the majority of Americans believe that Ireland is in Africa.

African American leads one to think of the descendants of slaves or those that have lost their specific African heritage and roots. BO is actually a Kenyan America. This only proves the point that he is not even qualified to fit into the labels that African Americans give him. He isn't African American, as in descendant from slaves nor is he even black, he is half black and half white, but raised by whites.

That is why USA is considered to be the Land of Freedom: Anyone, no matter the race, can become the President of USA, as long as he's white enough.

Well... technically, no. You have to be born here, which is one possible reason that BO could be ejected from office. If it is determined that he was not born here... Bye-bye BO

youd be so much more respectable if you could offer legitamate criticsm out side of the whole birth cirtificate or collectivism is slavery line.

Why?

Clearly, I think that questions about his origins and questionable relationships with known terrorists and his socialist agenda are perfectly valid reasons not to accept him as president of the united states. Especially if he is in violation of article 2 of the US Constitution, a document that BO has clearly expressed contempt for by suggesting that it needs to tell us what government should do for people...

I don't give a f*ck, that bastard moron is no more my president than G.W Bush. I would spit on his shoes were he standing in front of me and I would hope that he caught cold as a result of it. The man is an impostor and he is not the "bringer of change" that he said he would be. His cabinet will be comprised of so many Clintonites that it is going to be business as usual.

Maybe you just arent reading what I am saying... I have given a plethora or reasons outside of these two.

My, my, such bitterness. You must be one of those clinging to your guns in the woods.

mpjh wrote:BES cannot do anything legitimate, he is a fake shaman.

shut up shit house... the only reason I let you live here is because you can get me the best peyote.

Fresh from my back yard.

got tonkaed wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:

black elk speaks wrote:

mandalorian2298 wrote:A quick comical interlude:

Q: Why have Americans chosen Obama to be their first African-American President?

A: Because the majority of Americans believe that Ireland is in Africa.

African American leads one to think of the descendants of slaves or those that have lost their specific African heritage and roots. BO is actually a Kenyan America. This only proves the point that he is not even qualified to fit into the labels that African Americans give him. He isn't African American, as in descendant from slaves nor is he even black, he is half black and half white, but raised by whites.

That is why USA is considered to be the Land of Freedom: Anyone, no matter the race, can become the President of USA, as long as he's white enough.

Well... technically, no. You have to be born here, which is one possible reason that BO could be ejected from office. If it is determined that he was not born here... Bye-bye BO

youd be so much more respectable if you could offer legitamate criticsm out side of the whole birth cirtificate or collectivism is slavery line.

Tsk tsk Tonka. Someone's place of birth is the only relevant qualification for leading a nation.

I mean, where there any other requirements, do you suppose that Georgie boy would ever get the job.

Btw BES, real shamans refer to Meskalito as Meskalito, not as 'peyote'.

i dont disagree that much of his cabinet is disappointing so far. Perhaps i dont read everythign you post, but enough of it is still muck that i have yet to see few legit reasons from you to hold off on supporting the early regime. Obviously though more could have been done in terms of early selections for leadership positions.

Edit...

i cant control everything people in my country have done. It doesnt make me less of an internet champion though that the US botched an election 8 years back.

mandalorian2298 wrote:
Tsk tsk Tonka. Someone's place of birth is the only relevant qualification for leading a nation.

I mean, where there any other requirements, do you suppose that Georgie boy would ever get the job.

Btw BES, real shamans refer to Meskalito as Meskalito, not as 'peyote'.

Ah, you got me... I don't really live on a reservation

but there are other qualifications for Pres...

* be a natural-born citizen of the United States;
* be at least thirty-five years old;
* have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years.

got tonkaed wrote:i dont disagree that much of his cabinet is disappointing so far. Perhaps i dont read everythign you post, but enough of it is still muck that i have yet to see few legit reasons from you to hold off on supporting the early regime. Obviously though more could have been done in terms of early selections for leadership positions.

Edit...

i cant control everything people in my country have done. It doesnt make me less of an internet champion though that the US botched an election 8 years back.

And 4 years back... and this one too... I just can't see Barak doing anything but fail... the best thing that he could do would be to FIRE Bernakie (sp?) and get the government out of the way of the free market. He has no faith in that department, so its a bunch of government intervention and a stagnant economy for us

the problem is at least under your understanding is you are so far free market libertarianism that you will have hard time seeing government interaction in any sphere as a good thing, where there are a variety of areas in which the gov. could be involved in beneficial ways to the economy. Im sure ive said it before, you spend too much time in ideology land.