Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Down

Author Topic: DROP THAT NAME  (Read 12092 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Cillaliz

  • Guest
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #210 on: November 02, 2010, 08:47:57 PM »

Tonight her friends left in time for her to see the very end, so I didn't need to take notes after all, :)
Logged

George

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 134460
  • A person should celebrate what passes by.
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #211 on: November 02, 2010, 08:48:08 PM »

Oh... Just checked... The polls in Bridgeport will now be open until 10:00pm.

*Apparently, the Connecticut election officials only ordered 21,000 ballots despite having over 63,000(!!!) registered voters.

That's one benefit of mail-in ballots...you can't run out with just one.

Or not be able to vote because you can't get off of work.

Yup.  I don't know if it's all of Washington state, but at least Thurston County switched to permanent mail-in ballots a few years ago.

Well...I thought we were mail-in only.  Here's a picture from KomoTV's website of people voting in person in Thurston County:


 
Logged
Voldemort is basically a middle school girl: he has a locket, a diary, a tiara, a ring, and is completely obsessed with a teenage boy.

Cillaliz

  • Guest
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #212 on: November 02, 2010, 09:06:13 PM »

Think I'm going to be up late. So far the three Iowa SCT Justices are losing retention over the gay marriage decision. I'm really concerned because my former co-worker and the first judge here to grant a divorce to a couple living in Iowa who had a civil union from Vermont is also losing retention at the moment.  This does not look good, but there are still a lot of votes to be counted
Logged

Cillaliz

  • Guest
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #213 on: November 02, 2010, 09:37:43 PM »

It's looking better for my friend, still lots out but at least the yesses are winning for him.  Unless something really changes, looks like all 3 IA Supreme court  justices are gone over the decision
Logged

Laura

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 21479
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #214 on: November 02, 2010, 09:37:50 PM »

It's amazing how quickly the election results come in.
Logged
"That's a lotta hamsters."

bk

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 136823
  • What is it, fish?
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #215 on: November 02, 2010, 09:46:22 PM »

We had a really fun rehearsal, then a singer auditioned for one of our upcoming shows, then The Singer came and we ran through more songs and are getting close to finalizing the list.  Then The Singer and I went out for dinner at the Studio Cafe - a totally gross but yummilicious meal consisting of wings and nachos.  Since we split everything right down the line I'm hoping that wasn't too crazy.  Now I'll check out some new Blu and Ray transfers, as I won't have time for a full motion picture viewing.  Also found out that we are VERY light in attendance tomorrow (a dinner party of five cancelled today - how annoying is THAT).
Logged

Cillaliz

  • Guest
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #216 on: November 02, 2010, 10:02:49 PM »

What a bunch of idiots.  They voted out three Iowa Supreme Court Justices and voted not to have a constitutional convention.  The goofy part of that is, the law won't change, just three new justices and three more people out of work.  If they really wanted to change the law, they need a constitutional convention.   I'm glad that wasn't approved, but this is the most absurd thing I've ever seen
Logged

George

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 134460
  • A person should celebrate what passes by.
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #217 on: November 02, 2010, 10:12:39 PM »

What a bunch of idiots.  They voted out three Iowa Supreme Court Justices and voted not to have a constitutional convention.  The goofy part of that is, the law won't change, just three new justices and three more people out of work.  If they really wanted to change the law, they need a constitutional convention.   I'm glad that wasn't approved, but this is the most absurd thing I've ever seen

Something similar happened here in Olympia.  There was a push to have a new library on the west side of Olympia.  There were two initiatives...one to create a special taxing district and another one to actually raise the money for the library.  They voted to create the special taxing district but NOT to raise the money to fund the library.  People just didn't understand what they were voting for.
Logged
Voldemort is basically a middle school girl: he has a locket, a diary, a tiara, a ring, and is completely obsessed with a teenage boy.

Cillaliz

  • Guest
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #218 on: November 02, 2010, 10:16:00 PM »

The problem is you can't just start getting rid of judges because you don't like one decision they make.  That undermines our whole system of government and has really long term ramifications. If the judges are truly unfit for office, then you vote not to retain.  This was a vote against their decision that our equal protection clause covers gay marriage.  It was blatant intimidation of judges.  It's outrageous.
Logged

Vincent

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #219 on: November 02, 2010, 11:39:00 PM »

Of course, only 25% of the precincts are reporting so far...

And earlier, they were calling races with only 10% of the votes tallied.  -Can someone please tell me how this works?  I know that early poll results can reflect the eventual outcome, but, still... ??? ??? ???

If someone is winning whom the pollsters want to win, they quickly claim a victory to prevent potential voters from going to the polls, thinking the race already lost for their own candidate.

That's why somepeople weren't declared winners until after 90% had been counted, and othere were declared winners after 10%.
Logged
I'm not drunk. I'm from Texas.

Vincent

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #220 on: November 02, 2010, 11:41:06 PM »

In regards to today's political discussions, well... Click below:

whatthef*ckhasobamadonesofar

I still don't understand how someone aged 19-26 can be considered a child - that's ridiculous.  I wonder...if they're married with kids, do their spouse and kiddies get insurance from the grandparents, too?
Logged
I'm not drunk. I'm from Texas.

Vincent

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 19
Re: DROP THAT NAME
« Reply #221 on: November 02, 2010, 11:42:30 PM »

The problem is you can't just start getting rid of judges because you don't like one decision they make.  That undermines our whole system of government and has really long term ramifications. If the judges are truly unfit for office, then you vote not to retain.  This was a vote against their decision that our equal protection clause covers gay marriage.  It was blatant intimidation of judges.  It's outrageous.

That's why people should have to have an IQ above a certain level before they're allowed to vote.
Logged
I'm not drunk. I'm from Texas.
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Up