Funny that going back to the '70s, when Republicans have won the Presidency, voter turn out averaged 52.9% while when the Democrats won it was 52.6%.
This is true, but I’m not sure you should be so excited about it. The Dems have made the poor their lap dogs by patting them on the head and telling them it’s not their fault to guarantee themselves a perpetual voter class.
Even funnier is that if you go back to 1960, with the Republicans it was 54.06, while with Democrats, it was 56.56.
Ain’t arbitrary statistics fun?
Sure, but nothing tops the Dems winning in 1996 with the lowest turnout ever.
Change that to “Republicans” and “rich” and the statement is still true.
And you think other people are elitists? You’re hilarious.
So, he didn’t know what ACORN stood for? Big deal. The very reason they have an acronym is so people don’t have to remember a long-ass name. And I wouldn’t be surprised that that stupid bitch Maxine Waters didn’t know what it stood for either.
Just because someone can’t recall what NASA stands for doesn’t men their opinion on the space program is without merit.
No, but odds are along the way they developed a working knowledge of what NASA does.
The fact that they don’t know what the acronym itself means isn’t really the point. It is just illustrative of the fact that they know NOTHING of ACORN or its mission, or the facts surrounding this phony controversy. Yet they regurgitate the 3 sentences they do know about it because it slanders a particular candidate.
You could replace the question of the acronym with “What does ACORN do” and you would get the same blank stare from the talking points crowd.
Folks who are crying over ACORN are just NUTS.
Anybody want to lay odds on Carol Stream coming back to this thread?
I just don’t get it; why is everyone so upset about ACORN? They were required BY LAW to submit every voter registration that they collected, whether they were fraudulent or not. So they turned them in and flagged at least some of them (and possibly all the suspicious ones) as potentially fraudulent. What were they supposed to do? How could they have been better?
Carol, can you please explain it to us what would have made you nutjobs happy?
I’m not Carol, but my WAG about it is that the only thing that ACORN can do to make right-wing nutjobs happy is to quit trying to register the poor.
Do you think the guy on Maher’s show didn’t doesn’t know what ACORN does? Please. Sure the guy’s got a goofy laugh, but he’s a journalist for one of the most respected papers in the world.
And I would just add to your comment that it RIGHTLY “slanders a particular candidate”—and party. They have a one-hand-giveth-the-other-hand-taketh relationship with many in the democratic party. And the people who take their money and then vote to give them a few hundred million more are worthy of contempt.
Add me to those who are confused about how this slanders either Obama or the Democrats. How do a bunch of obviously phony registrations affect anything? No one can vote with them.
Their news is respected. Their editorial board is the biggest gaggle of right-wing reactionaries since the John Birch Society faded into obscurity.
And Steve Moore is only a journalist on economic issues. He wasn’t talking about ACORN as an economist, he was talking about them as a member of the WSJ Editorial Board.
I smell pee.
Well, stop pissing on your face.
But look, I’ve told you before that this infatuation you have with piss and ass and shit is not my thing. But if it would make you happy I can look into hiring a nice big fat guy to piss on your face and shit in your mouth after a nice bean dinner. Just send me your info and I’ll try to arrange it.
So you’re having beans for dinner?
He’s not a journalist, he’s one of the tax-obsessed halfwits on their editorial board. And, no, I don’t think he knows anything about ACORN beyond the talking points he’d memorized.
(And, I didn’t denigrate the guy for not knowing what the acronym meant. Maher had never even heard of the organization. In the future, respond to what’s actually said here, schmuck.)
You are correct. I misread your post. I thought you were attributing his being a tool to the exchange with Waters, in which he admitted not knowing what ACORN stood for. My apologies for that misreading.
I guess I should have known that his being a writer for the WSJ automatically made him a tool.:dubious:
“ACORN” is not an acronym. It is a Swahili word for “drink the blood of the white devils and fry their livers in their own rich fat.” (Very concise language, Swahili.)