LastPommerFan

Red and thin(ly populated)

Florida is looking closer for the president than the polls had indicated. If he wins there, it's ALL over.

Either you are woefully misinformed about the requirements for minimum coverage or you believe birth control drugs and/or morning after pills to be abortificants, which would be contrary to reproductive science, and the reason Bio backed me up. If it is the former, I apologize for accusing you of the latter. Abortions are not covered by the minimum coverage mandate.

Whatever his motives were, they were not to gain votes.

Totally just got a robo-call (my cell is still a cincinnati number) letting me know that due to the damage from hurricane Sandy, Ohio voting will be extended through tomorrow! Yes, but that wasn't a change in position. Edit: I also reject your rejection of the science of birth control.

Obama's change in stance on Gay Marriage garnered him exactly zero votes. Probably cost him some Catholics.

I'd say Obama does it often, but no one can really compete with Romney on position changes. It really isn't saying much to say, "so and so changes his mind on issues less frequently than Gov. Romney."

I do. I just don't think we'll be seeing the fiery demise the Romans met with the Vandals.

We can't ask those people, none of those places exist anymore. There is no Rome, no Ottoman Empire, and I'm not even sure who these Brits you speak of are. Were they from Asia?

No, I have can't vote at my current address because I have not lived here long enough to register. I'm not sure if moving within 30 days disqualifies you from voting at all, or if your supposed to vote at the place you lived before. That's what I was thinking

VERY IMPORTANT VOTING QUESTION: I just received word from my father that NYS never scrubbed my name from the voter rolls when I moved out (11 years ago!) So, I am still registered to vote from my parent's address in Fairport. This is important because that is the address I have lived at for the majority of this year. So the question is: Legally and/or ethically should I vote today?

the autocorrect to ® is priceless

Did you just admit to voter fraud? :ph34r:

Agreed, and why is the Ranking Member of the Senate Armed Services committee just bringing this up the day before the election!?!? If it had been brought to life just a week ago I'm sure something could have been done. It's not like this problem popped up over the weekend. The letter calls particular attention to the service members who have come home over the past year having difficulty getting the ballots forwarded. Further evidence that we have a major breakdown in how our nation serves our soldiers after they have finished serving our nation.

Could a huge breakthrough give us an edge? http://wheels.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/envia-claims-breakthrough-in-lithium-ion-battery-cost-and-energy-density/

The problem, for me, was that the grammar made me lose track of the content.

Absolutely stronger families is the answer. But as long as the penalties for the same crime are different based on your socio-economic position, we are letting the injustice built into the judicial system affect the elections. This is a bad outcome. This disenfranchisement certainly won't help alleviate the underlying problem.

We fought a bloody bloody war to cut the ties between who your father was and whether you get a voice in government. This is a watered down version of the same thing. "I'm sorry, your daddy was a criminal and your mamma was a crack ######, unfortunately, you didn't magically spring free from this cesspool of poverty into a bloomingly productive citizen, so you don't get to vote" (this is a dramatization, but it helps get to the complexity of the situation) Again if the punishments for the same crimes were more equal I would have less of a problem with the whole issue.

I get what you're saying. I think certain criminals forfeit the right to vote at the time they commit their crime. The problem is that the term "felon" is a legal construct that is separated from "dangerous criminal" by a variety of means including access to expensive defense counsel and the way certain laws that affect urban issues are written differently than suburban ones. See Crack vs. Cocaine for an example.

No more so than any mention of Voter Fraud. I'm not really concerned with the numbers of convicts, but barring felons from voting will disproportionately disenfranchise blacks due to income biases in the criminal justice system. It's a problem, the likely solution to which is improving the criminal justice system.

Convicted Felons are disproportionately black. Now, that might not be a huge issue if you subscribe to the thinking that committing a felony disqualifies you from voting. But a disproportionate number of black people who commit the SAME CRIMES as white people are convicted as felons. This ties largely back to the income bias of the criminal court system, but regardless, it is a serious cause for concern. Especially when the people pushing for their disenfranchisement will benefit greatly as a result.

I completely agree with this. At landfall, there are things that matter a whole lot more than core windspeed. And that is all the 1-5 ratings are based on, core wind speed.

If the thing hadn't double in speed in the last 2 hours, the surge wouldn't have risen so fast. That mother wouldn't have lost her 2 sons, and others probably would have been able to get to safety as the water rose more slowly. That failure of the models was lucky for no one. And the casualties per dollar of damage will be an order of magnitude at least lower than Katrina. That is a sign that human loss was mitigated compared to the storm's potential.

The mother who watched her 4-year-old get swept away only to have her 2-year-old yanked from her arms by the surge hit me hard. I can't imagine, because even imagining that kind of despair would probably kill me.

About half of the deaths in NYC appear to have been on Staten Island, and nearly all of those in areas designated as Mandatory Evacuation Zones at noon on Sunday. Everyone had more than 24 hours to leave the area. The dead range from age 2 to age 79. Sadly, this tragic loss of life did not need to occur.