The Massachusetts Legislature has approved a new law intended to bypass the Electoral College system and ensure that the winner of the presidential election is determined by the national popular vote.
“What we are submitting is the idea that the president should be selected by the majority of people in the United States of America,” Senator James B. Eldridge, an Acton Democrat, said before the Senate voted to enact the bill.
Under the new bill, he said, “Every vote will be of the same weight across the country.”
But Senate minority leader Richard Tisei said the state was meddling with a system that was “tried and true” since the founding of the country.
“We’ve had a lot of bad ideas come through this chamber over the years, but this is going to be one of the worst ideas that has surfaced and actually garnered some support,” said Tisei, who is also the Republican candidate for lieutenant governor.
The bill, which passed on a 28-to-9 vote, now heads to Democratic Governor Deval Patrick’s desk. The governor has said in the past that he supports the bill, said his spokeswoman Kim Haberlin.
Under the law, which was enacted by the House last week, all 12 of the state’s electoral votes would be awarded to the candidate who receives the most votes nationally.
Supporters are campaigning, state by state, to get such bills enacted. Once states accounting for a majority of the electoral votes (or 270 of 538) have enacted the laws, the candidate winning the most votes nationally would be assured a majority of Electoral College votes. That would hold true no matter how the other states vote and how their electoral votes are distributed.
Ed at Hot Air doesn’t think this such a big deal, based on the unlikelihood of its ultimate impact [which, as one commenter there notes, is hardly as statistically small as many seem to believe].
Me? I’m looking long term at the demographics — those Nishi is often so eager to supply — and I can see the contours of the gambit: a few million amnesty voters added to the roles — to go along with the population explosion among those groups most statistically likely to seek federal aid for daily living — would give the Democrats their permanent client-state majority (at least in the short run — which would give them time to lay the groundwork for the soft socialist system they wish to implement), with the last stumbling block toward disassembling the United States as a republican federation simply voted out of existence by Democrat legislatures.
After all: it’s a lot easier to set up a system that can ignore (and disenfranchise, both “legally” and not) the bitter clingers than it is to win them over. And just about every move the Democrats make suggest that it is this tack they hope to take — finally “legally” ridding themselves of those who stand in the way of their Utopian dreams of social engineering and micro-managing our lives from cradle to grave.
(Thanks to Jonah)
What fucking kind of doublespeak is this?
Under the new bill, he said, “Every vote will be of the same weight across the country.”
Unless you’re a voting in Mass. then you may as well just stay the fuck home.
ACK. Head ‘esplodes.
Who is behind this? Why do I smell George Soros?
One point I’ve never seen made in opposition to this scheme is that the E.C. stands as a bit of a fire-break against vote fraud. Stuffing the Chicago and Philly ballot boxes don’t necessarily put the statemongers over the top under the current system.
So I understand why Democrats want to obliterate the barriers.
Cordially…
From the article:
And mutatis mutandis
So we’ll have a toggle constitution, flipping now back, now forth, as power changes hands. Because power will change hands, won’t it?
Rick –
I had that paragraph in my first draft and removed it. To me, the fraud likelihood seems greater under such a new paradigm, but I couldn’t quite express why that may be. I have to think more on it.
i don’t see it
there are many states that won’t go for it
i hope
im from mass/deep blue
of course apathy might/ mm
whats the word?
whatever
ask someone who’s on the 20 dollar bill
stupid americans
“Why do I smell George Soros?”
– Maybe because he just naturally emits the stench of Marxist politics?
– Not to worry. Arizona is doing something about that Illegal vote thing.
Yeah, I can’t really see how this is ultimately constitutional. I know the states pick the manner by which their electors are decided upon, but, are they allowed to take other states voters into account when doing so? Doesn’t this rob their own citizens of due process somehow?
Maybe I’m not articulating theis well, but, I can see where they could apportion their elecotral votes, say, based on the popular vote, instead of a winner-take-all system. But, it seems that there is something completely wrong with awarding the electoral votes to the national popular vote winner. I mean, what if that candidate won virtually no votes in their state? Wouldn’t that be disenfranchising those voters.
This can’t pass constitutional muster. And anyway, I guarantee it will be repealed following the forst instance where true-blue Mass. votes overwhelmingly for a Democrat, but a Rethug! wins the popular vote nationwide.
These people are just still butt-hurt from the 2000 election, although, I see Jeff’s point about this being another back-door assault on our constitutional republic.
We need a lawyers opinion on this; a real constitutional scholar and not a wanna-be ideologue like Obama…
Perhaps they should abolish the Senate as well.
jeff g is thinking!
more roasted prostitutes on the fire!
let’s flip
heads it’s mine
tails u lose
Drat! Excuse the typos gang.
May as well, bh. Or at the very least make it so votes from the Senators from NY and CA carry more weight than those from, say, Idaho, or some other place nobody gives a shit about.
“We need a lawyers opinion on this”
Really? Has our politics sunk so low that the consent of the governed is to be predicated on a lawyers opinion?
well they’re not doing this for so the United States doesn’t become an increasingly rank piece of shit dirty socialist backwater laughingstock I don’t think so there must be some other reason
i like the prime
ministers questions on c span two
cuz they yell at each other
they/ the british/ used to ruledthe world
cuz of they’re navy
we got a navy
motherfucker!
pdbuttons,
I do not think Barry would handle “Question Time” very well at all.
“Has our politics sunk so low that the consent of the governed is to be predicated on a lawyers opinion?”
Not really sdferr, I meant to look into the legal precedents and the court’s findings surrounding election law, the electoral college, and electors to determine the constitutionality of this scheme and whether it could ultimately withstand a SCOTUS challenge.
I’m don’t believe I’m subordinating the consent of the governed to the opinions of lawyers, do you think I am?
I guess I’m reading too much into the term “need” Bob.
We already have a government of the lawyers, for the lawyers, by the lawyers already, “subordinating the consent of the governed to the opinions of lawyers” is somewhat of a moot point.
Already, already.
Makes sense to me!
Makes sense to me, too.
Oh, wait…
On the other hand, wouldn’t a perusal of the intentions of the framers be sufficient to determine the object they saw as they created the framework of executive election? Or at least be a ready to hand starting point for such a determination?
the tsu/sammy
was like
devastating
and the uss lincoln
or one of them big boats was heading
home and it turned and went
back and saved many lives
i,m proud of my country
and sandra bullock donated one or two million dollars
and when the shark press asked her about it she refused comment
class
Like this one, say?
Spiny,
That sounded like normal New York-ese to me, already!
sdferr,
I was talking more about scholarly analysis than “needing” an opinion. With access to the proper reference material, and the time to scrutinize those records, I’m sure we could build our own reasoned argument wit all of the usual and customary citations. I guess I was just being lazy :)
I offered it in the same vein I would expect a lawyer, or any other non-technical layperson, to come to me for the analysis of a hypothetical and possibly complex aerospace related matter.
and i read on an internet thing
some guy/sailor
whos was on the lincoln
and he said they gave up showers and rationed the water
cuz the knew about water and third world lack of
then dozens of snotty haired ex hippies flew in on helicopters from the un and had meetings and
more meetings
makes you want to holler
I see a positive. The passage of this bill in other states will make it easier to draw the borders for the coming civil war.
Mark Levin is a lawyer, isn’t he? I imagine he would have an opinion on the matter worth listening to…
Heh-heh. ;^)
The Founders have to think these clowns are clowns.
Other than that, it’s bad.
Perhaps sdferr, but, legal precedents also inform the court’s decisions, and who knows how many intervening cases have shaped contemporary thought. It’s also very possible that the intervening precedents were perversions of the founders intent, but I don’t know how to address that outside of legislation.
Which is why I thought the opinions of a lawyer would be helpful.
I am behind enemy lines and I think we’re running out of coffee
Perhaps our politics has sunk to a lowly point? Why not consider the possibility?
The framers themselves were some of them lawyers, some others planters, others businessmen, all apparently politicians in some sense they themselves had of the meaning of that term. Were they guided by a technique? Or were they guided by something else? Their experience of politics directly, say? Or their readings in political philosophy? Were they guided by — *gasp* — human reason allied with all manner of experience in law, history, philosophy, religion, citizenship and so on? We would not do ill, I think, to ponder what made them what they were, in order to figure out what they did.
Move East happy. Maybe you’ll see Juan Valdez on the way.
if we could all hold our mittens together
but not hunter mittens/ cuz they got a finger slot
and fingers are dangerous
they pick noses/ hopefully their own
and point at things
and give insults
but if we could hold mittens with one another
i’ll stop puking when i hear
that song imagine from that fat beatle
but about this I don’t think it’s constitionary not even a little… if a majority of people in a state votes for one cocksucker they can’t give the electoral votes to the other cocksucker…
well, they might could do it once.
– You know, the more I watch the subterfuge, deceit, and outright treasonous manipulations the Left is forced to practice in order to even try to game the system the more my admiration for the founders grows.
– They were some pretty smart dudes, I’ll tell you what.
I vote lowly point
*constitutionary*
Thank you for posting this Jeff. I tried to send this out to people in the ‘sphere where I thought it might get some more notice after Ed Morrissey it was ‘no big deal’ that my vote in MA has been nullified by the rest of the country. This hasn’t even been on the news here in MA as far as I’ve seen, and I’m really POed about it.
The “Panther Claws” (clause) which limits each precinct worker to a maximum of 2 batons/knives/2X4’s with nail sticking out/chains/9’s/tire irons seems like an olive branch though.
They have a whole website devoted to this ass-fucking plot. They have the nerve to have an image of the founding fathers/constitution at the top.
here.
You know, that sends you to the michigan page. But you can get everywhere from there.
A good reason why I can’t see this passing Constitutional muster.
Hey, I have no complaints about Ed. None at all.
i have my own island
rubber ducky has a vote
he/she sqeauks her/his vote
one squeak for more bubble bath
two squeaks for
not
that
much
the roasted prostitute coalition is getting powerful
i think they are plotting
im every inch a king
“I am behind enemy lines and I think we’re running out of coffee”
– Now, now, no complaining little trooper. The Left never guarantee’s punching your Starbucks card just because you agree to carry their water.
It has a link to a form letter you can send-on to your representative. I may have a spam filter for swear words, because I edited their suggested letter and now it won’t let me send it.
All valid points sdferr,
But, that doesn’t change the way the court functions, in mechanistic point of view, and they place weight on precedents over time.
All of the considerations you speak of are fine for us debating here, or in public arguments surrounding efforts to get laws like this repealed, or even simply as part of a larger discourse.
Simply put, yes, our system of government, the constitution, and many of the state constitutions as well, can be readily understood by reasonable, conscientious, disinterested (in the classical sense), readers. I wish more folks would do so. Maybe then, our representatives would consider and argue the constitutional merits of proposed legislation rather than appeal to emotion.
It’s clear to me, at least, that we wouldn’t even be talking about this, or be in the straits we are as a nation today, of more people took the interest in governance that the founders of our nation believed was part of each individuals civic duty.
But no, to come the long way around the bush :), I was only talking about how to challenge this seemingly unconstitutional law’s end run around the same document in court.
Not to go on a tangent, but I saw in the WSJ yesterday that the CEO of Starbucks is on the list for the top 20 most paid corporate types.
Funny that, huh? Or is it just me?
I think what’s more worrisome is that the article claims laws like this have already passed in several states. When was Katie Couric et al Alphabet network news* going to get around to covering it? When they finally get 270+ EVs worth of states also passing laws like this?
* – Of course the MFM wouldn’t report on this.
– The decision has come down on the Arizona immigration law.
– Parts will be taken out, but overall the important thing is the law will go into effect. No stay.
– America 3 – Bumbblefuck 0
Sounds to me like the decision will be very spinnable BBH.
Geez, I’m still seeing red so bad I can’t even type correctly. Pardon my typos in the above replies.
– Well of course they will ask for an immediate hearing on appeal in the 9th circuit. But based on recent rulings in that court, in spite of its history of Leftist leaning’s they has evidenced a pronounced rebellion about being seen as a tool of the Left, it’s anything but assured they will even issue a stay.
That’s fine Bob, to the extent that we take our politics as a thing determined ultimately by forces outside our hands, mechanistically so to speak, playing on your term there.
But, paraphrasing Justice Roberts’ statement, that if we would have an end to discrimination on the basis of race then we should stop discriminating on the basis of race, so I would propose that if we would seek to raise our politics from a lowly state, rather than “… wish more folks would do so” we simply begin to do so.
mexican busboys want to be waiters
for cheap canadien tips
Nice idea but a little late.
They blocked the Police’s ability to determine immigration status during an arrest pending the trial. So I expect a rush on ice cream stands.
Pending the trial associated with the Holder lawsuit that is.
the Democrats their permanent client-state majority (at least in the short run…)
Yes, we must all take heart at the fact that the whole system is poised to collapse in on itself, what with the massive unfunded liabilities all across the Western world.
They’re rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, folks. This country is too big for them to rely on the ensuing chaos to take power.
Enclaves like Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana? We’ll fend for ourselves, thankyouverymuch, and we’ve got the arms to keep the invaders out.
Well, after we evict the remaining moonbats, that is. They can all go back to Denver and Taos whence they came.
Drat! Excuse the typos gang.
Oh, I don’t think so! The typos gang must pay for its crimes!
What this means is Democrat candidates won’t have to spend as much time or money in Massachusetts as they do now.
Taos is a really fun place to ski.
Taos is a really fun place to ski.
Clearly code for killing Poles.
I never said I wanted our politics to be determined by forces outside our hands sdferr. I was only talking about the possibility of overturning what my intuition tells me may be an inconstitutional law, and wondering about the possibilities of it happening.
And if our politics have reached a lowly state then, yes, by talking openly about the issues here we are raising that state, by our own hands; just like Justice Roberts said when he spoke about eliminating race-based discrimination.
I’m not “wishing” for anything in particular, probably just choosing my words poorly today.
You are correct.
BBL.
Denounced!
Were they guided by — *gasp* — human reason allied with all manner of experience in law, history, philosophy, religion, citizenship and so on? We would not do ill, I think, to ponder what made them what they were, in order to figure out what they did.
Somebody is not up to speed on his Glenn Beck.
Glenn’s been addressing this point for awhile now, encouraging all of us to acquire the characteristics of the founders by boning up on that very law, history, philosophy, religion, citizenship, etc.
And by teaching it to our children, who will be the ones that rebuild the Republic. Our generation will not see it, but theirs might.
Not to go on a tangent, but I saw in the WSJ yesterday that the CEO of Starbucks is on the list for the top 20 most paid corporate types.
He’s got people paying $4.00 for a paper cup of burnt coffee that they used to get for under a buck with free refills in any diner. Guy’s worth every penny.
Oh, the vicious Pole-murdering JD is denounced. Not Bob.
“Somebody is not up to speed on his Glenn Beck.”
Glenn Beck can go fuck himself, since he isn’t up to speed on me.
There is in Article IV a clause guaranteeing to each State a republican form of government, which would seem to prohibit some forms of direct democracy, and in the one case of memory in which the Supreme Court considered a challenge to State action under this clause, the Court considered the matter a political issue, and our opponents would argue that the precedent is that the clause itself is non-justiciable. The funny thing is that those would be the same people who find every other issue properly decided by Courts.
What is odd is that this law really seems to strip the franchise from all Massachusetts voters, in that their votes are contingent upon other votes, and not really votes in se.
I believe there are states (Maine??) that split their electoral votes to match the proportions of the state popular vote, which I don’t have a major problem with (states get to select their electors by their own method). But basing your state’s electoral votes on how the national popular vote went?? Nuh-uh.
Glenn Beck can go fuck himself, since he isn’t up to speed on me.
wØØt!
Aren’t Poles white?
Aren’t Poles white?
Typical
my poles aren’t working
ask sonny chers second/ or third wife
or the kennedy babysitter
I thought I only killed brown people.
Tuesday July 17 In Convention:
Uh-oh.
So it begins, and the argument is hashed out over that and the next few days . . .
And the Poles:
– I think, as I understand it, she ruled that the police are not “required” to ask, but did not say they could not.
I believe there are states (Maine??) that split their electoral votes
Maine and Nebraska allow it, but it’s never happened.
Would it be reasonable to mention that Robert Maynard Hutchins was influential before Glenn Beck?
To flesh it out a bit further, the Great Books idea took hold at the U of C and St. John’s a bit earlier than modern talk radio.
(Which might be why some remarks could chafe even if they were intended innocently.)
why the fuck is our cocksucker attorney general guy in Cairo exactly?
“I never said I wanted our politics to be determined by forces outside our hands sdferr.”
And I didn’t say you did say that’s what you wanted Bob. But there is an implication abroad in the land — quite apart from you and I and our opinions — that the Constitution says what the Supreme Court of the United States determines it says, and that to their rulings all political powers must bow. So to the extent that this implication holds sway; further to the extent that the emplacement of these august persons is in a manner of speaking, at any one moment outside our hands, so to that extent citizens might think of such rulings as mechanistic, or following merely a procedural course, undetermined by themselves.
But the thinking it over part is, I think, never undetermined by themselves.
Yes, Glenn Beck is rather late to the party. But better late coming than never.
i worked with a polish peeps
they just got to amekka and they were happy and smiled alot
then i took his son to a midnight john waters movie
and we drank whiskey
and i haven’t heard from him since
i hope he stills smiles
He gave an address in Uganda just a couple of days ago hf.
Ignorance of our history will destroy this country. We are a republic and not a democracy. The founders feared the tryanny of the majority, and so should we. The Constitution proscribes a delicate balance of powers, not least of which between federal powers and state powers. The founders feared disunity, but feared blind or gerrymandered unity even more. The free citizen of Idaho must have the same weight as the free citizen of California. e pluribus unum does not mean what many think it means. The one is formed from the many, but the many never lose their individual identity or rights.
As long as we can also point out that Professor Hutchins is quite dead, I don’t see why not.
if a panda falls in the woods of uganda
and claps with one paw as he/she is falling down
would roasted prostitutes care?
do u?
So while we’re pointing out dead guys, how ’bout that James Madison? Dead! Deader than our bent doornail dead.
Bob Reed has it right:
“And anyway, I guarantee it will be repealed following the forst instance where true-blue Mass. votes overwhelmingly for a Democrat, but a Rethug! wins the popular vote nationwide.”
Remember, this is the state that changed the rules of replacing a US Senator when they thought John Kerry might win, and changed it back when Ted Kennedy died.
I’m not slagging off Beck in the least, Pablo. Hell, I’m a radio listener now and have previously expressed how I’m glad he’s asking people to read the relevant canon.
I’m explaining how it’s funny to mention Beck’s educational thrust like it’s an oversight to someone (sdferr) who studied within a pre-existing tradition decades earlier.
Big Bang Hunter
alppuccino
The way this San Francisco Chronic story spins it, the law has been effectively gutted. The law may go into effect, but there’s nothing to enforce.
Professor Hutchins is quite dead
Of all the sins he has in common with the authors in his canon, in this day and age that’s the only sin that isn’t mortal.
They change the laws on this stuff often, as noted by Mr Reed and the dog that is apparently not arthritic in the slightest. One wonders how they can be so transparently partisan and yet proclaim to be “public servants.” Then again, perhaps they never claim that.
I’m not sure authors would make good shot, since they are humans and therefore squishy.
i like short dead smart guys
who wrote smart stuff
but im a george washington fan
he was tall/ and mighty
so the myth sayeth
and he mapped shit
was a surveyor/
but if he was on survivor island
he would kick madisons ass/ and tom jefferson
and john adams
he was a giant
monmouth
“he would kick madisons ass”
Maybe, if he had a reason to. On the other hand, he may have preferred to spend his time drinking a pint of whiskey a day with him, smoking his pipe and shooting the shit.
Looks like a fed’ral judge has blocked part of the AZ illegal immigration enforcement law until a full trial takes place.
P’raps will Sheriff Joe pull an Andy Jackson and tell Miz Judge that she can enforce the block herself?
Unless I’m seriously misreading this, it also appears that U.S. District Judge Susan Bolton has blocked existing Federal law:
I’m not sure authors would make good shot, since they are humans and therefore squishy.
I tried to tell ’em just that!
sdferr, have you read Jack Rakove’s Revolutionaries yet?
walk through ur fears
george washinton would beat james madison ass
admit it
No Ernst, I haven’t. Had that come up before and I’m forgetting?
Indeed. And yet, heeeeeeee’s baaaaaaack!
I was just curious sdferr, as you seem to be an admirer of our fourth president. Rakove’s chapter on Madison is entitled “The Greatest Lawgiver of Modernity.”
Six foot eight, weighs a fucking ton.
Yeah, that was the episode with this exchange:
heeeeeeee’s baaaaaaack!
But is he out for revenge?
That George Washington song is my new bestest favorite.
some people just find it easier to relate to West Side Story
From listening to him on the radio show, that remark might have been humorously intended.
Nope, I heard it live. It expressed his honest feeling, and her’s.
Yes, self-deprecating humor at that. He does quite a lot of that.
i red/many biogrhpies of george
but the one was what best was
after te war as he crosed the bridge from newark to
north
there where seven virgins/ dressed in white
on a hillside
and they sang a song
“george washinton/the saviuor of our daughters”
Let me put it this way: he had a look on his face of a kid made to eat broccoli against his will and a tone in his voice of simple disdain. Sour face. He was saying, if I can avoid it, I will, because it isn’t fun or appealing in any way.
Maybe he’s a Marlowe man like myself.
Beck doesn’t like Shakespeare? Burn him at the stake.
Beck doesn’t like Shakespeare? Make him an advocate for a canon of knowledge.
Gore 2000? Bah, they’re still smarting over Nixon 1972, when a handful of uneducated rubes (MA voters) prevented ol’ Tricky Dick from getting a sweet 50-0 shutout. This new law will make it easier for such an Unprecedented Historic Event to actually occur in the future.
Wasn’t Soros funding a social justice Bible or something? That stinks too.
A shockingly bad idea, but I’m not sure how it could be unconstitutional.
Yes, this is going a bit off topic, but has there every been a better bit of bloody-minded hubris?
This came close though:
Again with the canons! Why are you people so violent?
every=ever, above.
Note to self: excessive Marlowe boosterism kills threads.
All of this Marlowe and Shakespeare talk made my blood pressure go down. Thanks.
“We need a lawyer’s opinion on this.”
What the hell for?
“Never ask a question you don’t want answered.”
And why the preoccupation with a chubby bald detective, anyway? There’s a plethora of fine quality early-’70s crime dramas to choose from. For example, I believe our Esteemed Host has repeatedly indicated a personal fondness for Rockford…
Ha! That was an excellent feint, Mr. Bradley.
i like a hawaii 5/0
my favorite actor is zulu
he played kono
he’s no chin ho kelly
but/ who is?
Wherein Tamerlain comes up in a discussion of the tyrant, see roughly pp 47 – 57
The only problem with Rockford is that he got knocked out by a blow to the head every other week. He’s probably got concussion-related issues, if not some serious motor-control problems.
Screw all y’all. Ironside was da man!!
He’s probably got concussion-related issues
He should’ve gone into a nice safe field… say, like quarterbacking the Cowboys, or playing center for the Flyers.
Ironside was gay.
sdferr, why do you hate
cripplespeople with disabilities? Haaaaater!!!!!11!!!1!Except for the threads, S. Crockett wasn’t gay, although he was Teflon through four seasons. Teflon may be teh ghey.
brian dennehy hee was a linebacker for notre dame
i just made that up!
perry mason had a lincoln with suicide doors
and the hot della street
plus he always faced off against that ugly bastard
hamilton burgher
thats 60’s not 70’s/ sorry
Reuters propaganda faggots hype vague long term health fears
meanwhile Chicagoland has a …
cupcake truck!!!!
cupcakes on wheels!!! Cupcake find you!
It’s the future.
is toma beretta
or is beretta toma?
i want to know who’s arresting me
one has a parrot
obamacare
Chicago was much less gay when I lived there.
They sold eye gouges and throat punches from the truck. Well, that and tacos.
Today’s injunction of the Arizona immigration law makes me want to barf.
a truck drove my daddy away
i still remember his two fisted wave good-bye
The NRDC was concocted after the Alar scare went aground, it’s another Fenton agitprop organization, oh and the president of the thing, is on the humble. . . . oil commission, but will not let it influence his deliberations
Quote of the day:
The argument for the welfare state belongs in the same family as “the arguments that kings have made for enslaving the people in all ages of the world. You will find that all the arguments in favor of king-craft were of this class; they always bestrode the necks of the people, not that they wanted to do it, but because the people were better off for being ridden.” That’s Lincoln again.
Lincoln. Isn’t he, like, WAY dead?
J’all see the RGA ad over at HotAir? And the facetime of the various sitting and former governors? Anybody see Mitch? I didn’t.
Could be Mitch at 2:18.
Lindsay Graham and John McCain got soundbites though. Yeah!
And 2:23.
Without going back to look bh, is that the guy whose face is turned away from the camera in the first case, and buried under his cap in the second?
And 2:29.
He’s sorta subliminal.
1. Away from camera, showing his back and left side, wearing a hat, shaking hands with a woman.
2. Showing his left side, wearing a hat, hugging a woman.
3. Frontal shot, no hat, wearing a suit.
The third one is the Va gov.
The second one doesn’t look like Mitch to me, but I don’t know who it would be otherwise (though it’s the same guy as the first one at 2:18).
We might be thinking of different flashes then. Pretty sure that was him. It’s the very brief shot with the people wearing white (lab?) coats.
Ah, I can’t get a fix on that image, though it is certainly different than the Va gov one I was thinking of which comes just before.
Finally a pause that permits: definitely is Mitch with the labcoat peoples.
I could be entirely wrong. Can’t get it to pause at the right moments.
Beyond the “where’s Waldo”, thought it was somewhat strange as it has both Graham and McCain speaking. A) no one likes them and B) they’re not governors.
If you claim to have the most improved customer satisfaction, does that not almost admit that your customer satisfaction was the suck previously?
The labcoats people are likely Eli Lilly, where he used to be CEO.
It’s a good question it is. The McCain one is a useful lead-in to Obama making an ass of himself. The Princess one isn’t in any way necessary, as the same sentiment has been expressed by any number of more popular speakers.
JD, what about the guy in the ball cap? Mitch or not Mitch? Looks like Tom Lehman to me.
Hey george, tell me something: How come you can never trust guys with ties to fossil fuel to give unbiased opinions about energy but you can always trust guys with ties to green energy to give unbiased opinions?
Why is that?
Doesn’t this go against Article 2 sections 1.2 to 1.4? Sorry if this was brought up before.
According to a recent volume by Bill Bryson, recently in my possession, Billy Shakespeare attempted to spell his name on numerous occasions: Willm Shaksp, William Shakespe, Wm Shakspe, William Shakspere, Willm Shakspere, and William Shakspeare. Never once was he able to accomplish this meager task.
By all accounts, Christopher Marlowe was able to spell his own fucking name.
Because, that’s what ‘our betters’ always say, never mins we left wind and solar, back 300 hundred years ago or so, during the industrial revolution, oh and we can’t go back to whale oil either
Little known fact: the well-received notion that a burning roof should be allowed to continue without intervention so the partygoers underneath could continue their merriment can be traced back to The Massacre at Paris.
Fact!
So true, Bill was something of a retard. But didn’t Chris managed to git hisself kilt in a bar?
It was the heroic act of a true patriot, sdferr. Don’t believe the lies.
(Btw, I used recent and recently with a half dozen words of each other. It’s progressing.)
We don’t need no water let the motherfucker burn?!
It was the heroic death of a true patriot, sdferr. Don’t believe the lies.
(Btw, I used recent and recently with a half dozen words of each other. It’s progressing.)
Yes, I believe that’s how the kids put it nowadays, JD.
puddles. lesions plus whishkies. they say downhill but damned if it isn’t feeling up
Indeed.
Also… indeed.
The statistical thing:
Massachusetts had a plurality of votes for the candidate that lost the popular vote in 2004, 1972, 1968, 1928, 1916, 1892, 1888, 1884, 1876, 1872, 1856, 1852, 1844, 1832, 1828, 1824, 1816, 1812, 1808, and 1800. That’s all but one of the 4 times that the winner in the EC was not the winner of the popular vote. 20 of 55 times, actually 17 as the three mentioned would not have changed MA’s electoral direction. It’s interesting that if this had been law back then, Massachusetts would have gone for GW Bush once and Nixon twice.
So I’m looking forward to a result of Massachusets going for the Palin-Gingrich or Gingrich-Palin ticket in the College even when the plurality of the state voted for Obama’s second term. Especially if it changes the ultimate outcome. I guarantee that they’ll change their law, but it’ll be too late.
Real reform is a Nebraska/Vermont style apportionment scheme.
Illinois, New Jersey, Hawaii, Maryland, and Washington have approved similar measures.
Gotta say I like the trend. All reliably blue states. What they gonna do when the red candidate wins the popular vote? 71 electoral votes and counting.
Forgive the interruption but there is an Outlaw in trouble:
Send some CAS Cowboy’s way pronto!
Shit.