In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 665
Online now 677 Record: 11761 (2/27/2012)
The Web's No. 1 forum for coverage and discussion of Terps sports
Visitor discussion of University of Maryland and college sports
A place for lively discussion for all other sports unrelated to Maryland athletics
Feedback for IMS and 247Sports
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
"Cantaloupe makes all the other fruit in the fruit salad taste a little bit like cantaloupe. Kind of a dick move."
and other deep thoughts from Obama, as he gazes pensively through windows...
A mind-reading retrospective.
LOL, it's like the American version of "Kim Jong Il looks at things."
This post was edited by PaulUMD 2 years ago
Looks like he's waiting for some old news to catch up to him, and when it does ...... game over
Dog Lovers' Day at Fenway??
As Virginia legislators hotly debated a voter ID bill that narrowly passed the General Assembly, many were unaware of a state police investigation that, so far, has resulted in charges against 38 people statewide for voter fraud. Warrants have been obtained for a 39th person who can't be located.
Many opponents of the voter ID law maintained that there was no evidence of widespread election fraud in Virginia, and the law would suppress the vote of minorities and others who don't have adequate identification. About 3.7 million Virginians voted in the 2008 election.
A total of 194 cases statewide where police determined a violation likely occurred have been closed because the commonwealth's attorneys in those localities declined to prosecute those individuals, police said.
The results of the state police investigation appears to contradict, to some degree, claims made by some opponents of the voter ID bill that no evidence existed of widespread voter fraud in Virginia.
Most were charged under a state statute that prohibits making false statements on an election form, but some were charged with illegally casting a ballot.
First of all, 194 cases out of 3.7 million voters is not exactly what I'd call widespread voter fraud. One allegation per 19,072 voters.
Second, these cases seem to deal with felons who registered and voted. Taking the voter away from felons is already a horrible law, and the horrible voter ID law would do nothing to stop this from happening. The problem was that they registered in the first place. Plus, as the caption says, "None of the cases appeared to involve someone who misrepresented his or her identity at the polls to vote."
If anything, this article shows how useless and unnecessary the voter ID law would be in practice.
For what it's worth, I think you're employing some spectacularly circular reasoning to try proving your point. Your underlying point is that voter ID laws are useless and unnecessary because this is not a widespread problem...except that we don't know the extent to which this is a problem because people aren't asked for their IDs when voting!
One of the only things we can tell is instances where people wrongly register to vote (e.g., felons...or people who register using an address that doesn't exist). But the reason we know of those cases is that no ID is needed to identify those cases of fraud; the registrations themselves are fraudulent.
But what you are talking about is lack of evidence of people misrepresenting their identity at the polling place. How, exactly, do you expect states to catch people misrepresenting their identity at the polling place if states aren't allowed to ask for ID at the polling place? The whole point of a voter ID law is to catch people misrepresenting their identity at the polling place.
You're basically stopping states from seeking of evidence of wrongdoing and then arguing that there is no evidence of widespread wrongdoing.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by terps99 2 years ago
For such a time as this.
It seems as if the relationship has soured to the point that according to the source, “He does not want her in the DNC anymore.”
Apparently, President Obama had discussions with the DNC Chairwoman regarding her approach, even telling her, “Don’t forget you work for me.”
It’s not about you, its about me. – attributed to President Barack Obama to Debbie Wasserman Schultz, as per our source
The problem that the President has is this- he can’t fire her, at least at this juncture. If President Obama were to remove Wasserman Schultz from her post he would be weakening his own position, as it would be very hard to find someone that is both in lock-step with his agenda and willing to run cover for him as she has done.
Second, this would be a clear indication to the public that there are real problems within the hierarchy of the Democratic Party.
Either this website doesn't exist or is not currently available.
Romney seems to be putting some of the VP favorites through "tryouts." He's going across Pennsylvania today with Rubio. Larry Sabato had an astute observation I think that this represents his leadership style, that he is a very hands-on decisionmaker. I definitely got that impression from reading about his days at Bain. He's not going to have his advisors make the pick for him, he's going to personally observe them on the trail, see how comfortable they are, how comfortable he is with them, etc.
Kaine was an Obama guy during the primaries and a top loyalist, WS was a big Hillary supporter until the very end. No secret that they're not the best of friends.
Wasserman Schultz is horrendous. Actually gained some respect for Obama for putting her in her place.
Go away, KA!
My wife had to show her driver's license to obtain an over the counter antihistamine. Let's not continue to insult the world's intelligence by claiming IDing voters is less important then buying allergy pills!
This post was edited by tagterp 2 years ago
She shouldn't have to show her ID for that either.
Well when those pills have been used to manufacture methamphetamine, you know, an actual problem, it becomes a little more understandable.
A vote against voter ID is obviously a vote for voter fraud.
This report is of Va state police investigations in one of seven Va State Police districts Considering ODonnell won by 300 votes the 198 figure becomes significant.
This post was edited by bigturtle 2 years ago
Just voted in the PA primary mostly out of spite. Also wrote my name in for 3 races that didn't have anyone running, so if anyone in the 43rd District wants to write me in for State Senator, General Assemblyman, or Alternate RNC Delegate, I'll be sure to send some sweet earmarks and kickbacks your way.
Well, I mean, that’s what it is. I doodoo and then listen to Katy Perry.
Cast my vote today. The PA ballot is odd because you vote for a candidate, and then you also have to vote for delegates. And they don't tell you if the delegates are affiliated with any candidate or not. Ron Paul mailed out a list of his delegates so that you would know who to vote for, other than his delegates the other delegates on the ballot were current or former state and local politicians so I assume they'll just go for Romney.
Interesting timing...and last paragraph below:
Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida will deliver what his staff bills a “major speech on the future of U.S. foreign policy” this week, the senator’s office announced Monday.
Rubio, considered to be a top vice presidential pick for likely GOP nominee Mitt Romney, is set to speak Wednesday at The Brookings Institution, a left-leaning think tank in Washington, D.C.
His remarks will focus on “whether U.S. global leadership is sustainable and even necessary in the 21st Century,” his staff said in a statement, without releasing further details.
(CNN) -- Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida will deliver what his staff bills a this week, the senator's office announced Monday.
Considering Mitt's whole "No Apologies"/American exceptionalism message, my guess is the answer will probably be yes, it is sustainable and necessary.
I personally don't think it's going to be Rubio, and honestly if I were him I wouldn't take it. I'd like to see him rack up some good accomplishments in the Senate and then possibly run for Governor in FL, before making a run at the White House. I think this is a dead end for him.
I agree and think that Romney will go with a safe guy like Portman. If he does go with a risky pick, it'd be someone with legit foreign policy experience like Petraeus or Condi rather than Rubio or Martinez or whoever the flavor of the month is.
Regardless, Rubio should stay in line with Mitt, since it would look pretty awful if a guy considered to be one of the future leaders of the party is giving a big speech in direct conflict with what your nominee is saying.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports