The Republican Thread

[lostfan]

The argument is that your boss can tell you that when you show up the next day, you better have a slip showing you voted for His Favorite Candidate.

If somebody pulled that at my job that'd be a MAJOR issue if not a fireable offense.

[The Critic]

The argument is that your boss can tell you that when you show up the next day, you better have a slip showing you voted for His Favorite Candidate.

Any company that allowed that to happen would be in for a hailstorm of lawsuits.

[Balta1701]

I am against any paper receipt that leaves with the voter. That would be the end to a private ballot.

No one wants a paper receipt left with the voter Tex. That's obviously flawed since it allows for vote buying.

 

The point of a paper receipt is that it removes the "Black box" counting method and gives the voter a chance to verify that his or her vote was recorded correctly. You don't take the paper receipt with you, you drop it in a box on the way out. Thus, in the event of a computer malfunction or a recount, there is a second record of votes other than just what is stored on the hard drive. Removing that material from a polling place ought to be a crime.

[NorthSideSox72]

If somebody pulled that at my job that'd be a MAJOR issue if not a fireable offense.

 

 

Any company that allowed that to happen would be in for a hailstorm of lawsuits.

 

Yes.

 

No one wants a paper receipt left with the voter Tex. That's obviously flawed since it allows for vote buying.

 

The point of a paper receipt is that it removes the "Black box" counting method and gives the voter a chance to verify that his or her vote was recorded correctly. You don't take the paper receipt with you, you drop it in a box on the way out. Thus, in the event of a computer malfunction or a recount, there is a second record of votes other than just what is stored on the hard drive. Removing that material from a polling place ought to be a crime.

 

As long as there is a paper receipt that the voter can see AND goes somehow into that "audit" box, then that is all I was looking for here.

 

[Chisoxfn]

If it is anywhere close to 200 million per day I have to ask, why the hell are we paying for him to go there and do that? That is freaking outrageous.

[StrangeSox]

Should Presidents just not leave the country then?

 

I'm sure daily security costs for just sitting in the White House aren't cheap, and the motorcades and plane trips around the US aren't exactly frugal, either.

[Chisoxfn]

Should Presidents just not leave the country then?

 

I'm sure daily security costs for just sitting in the White House aren't cheap, and the motorcades and plane trips around the US aren't exactly frugal, either.

Compare it to the typical presidential travel costs. This administration in general has had far more people traveling with him. A much bigger "entourage" per say and the global costs have been excessive.

 

And personally speaking, If it is going to cost that sort of money to visit various countries than no, I'd put a significant limit on presidential travel. We have this huge deficit and spending 200 million a day to travel to India isn't somewhere high on my list of priorities.

[StrangeSox]

Do we have typical presidential travel costs? Really the only comparable would be Bush in a post-2001 world.

[BigSqwert]

Compare it to the typical presidential travel costs. This administration in general has had far more people traveling with him. A much bigger "entourage" per say and the global costs have been excessive.

 

And personally speaking, If it is going to cost that sort of money to visit various countries than no, I'd put a significant limit on presidential travel. We have this huge deficit and spending 200 million a day to travel to India isn't somewhere high on my list of priorities.

Could you find anything more trivial to complain about?

[StrangeSox]

Let's not forget that the $200m figure isn't exactly well-sourced.

[Chisoxfn]

Could you find anything more trivial to complain about?

No, not really. Spending massive amounts of taxpayer money is not trivial to me.

[Chisoxfn]

Let's not forget that the $200m figure isn't exactly well-sourced.

Hell, I don't believe the 200M figure could possibly be true, but regardless, it sounds like it will be at a significant cost to our government and for what I ask?

[BigSqwert]

Hell, I don't believe the 200M figure could possibly be true, but regardless, it sounds like it will be at a significant cost to our government and for what I ask?

Great point. I particularly loved how you argued so vehemently against Bush whenever he traveled overseas.

[NorthSideSox72]

Compare it to the typical presidential travel costs. This administration in general has had far more people traveling with him. A much bigger "entourage" per say and the global costs have been excessive.

 

And personally speaking, If it is going to cost that sort of money to visit various countries than no, I'd put a significant limit on presidential travel. We have this huge deficit and spending 200 million a day to travel to India isn't somewhere high on my list of priorities.

Typical? Seriously, the main costs involved are security and supporting air force one. Even if Obama has a larger "entourage" with him, which I have seen no evidence of, the increase in cost for extra hotel rooms and meals would be tiny.

 

Come on Jason, you have to be smarter than to think somehow the cost of security and air travel for the President has somehow materially changed with this or any other new President.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

Hell, I don't believe the 200M figure could possibly be true, but regardless, it sounds like it will be at a significant cost to our government and for what I ask?

Do you really think the President shouldn't travel?

 

[Chisoxfn]

Typical? Seriously, the main costs involved are security and supporting air force one. Even if Obama has a larger "entourage" with him, which I have seen no evidence of, the increase in cost for extra hotel rooms and meals would be tiny.

 

Come on Jason, you have to be smarter than to think somehow the cost of security and air travel for the President has somehow materially changed with this or any other new President.

Well I had read article and heard pundits state otherwise. Am I saying Obama is spending an extra 200 million, no, but he is certainly spending more and I ask why?

 

And the bigger the entourage the much more significant the security force required and as a result, the security costs increase significantly, which has happened.

[BigSqwert]

Well I had read article and heard pundits state otherwise. Am I saying Obama is spending an extra 200 million, no, but he is certainly spending more and I ask why?

 

And the bigger the entourage the much more significant the security force required and as a result, the security costs increase significantly, which has happened.

This is just getting ridiculous and petty.

[Chisoxfn]

Do you really think the President shouldn't travel?

I believe when we are going through a global recession we should make sure we do our part. We should try and limit various things and ensure what is truly necessary and what isn't. Do I know for a fact that we need to go or not go to India, hell no I don't. Don't pretend do, but do I have a problem with Michelle O'Bama going on these ridiculous vacations to spain, spending a ton of money in other places, yeah I do.

[BigSqwert]

I believe when we are going through a global recession we should make sure we do our part. We should try and limit various things and ensure what is truly necessary and what isn't. Do I know for a fact that we need to go or not go to India, hell no I don't. Don't pretend do, but do I have a problem with Michelle O'Bama going on these ridiculous vacations to spain, spending a ton of money in other places, yeah I do.

It's great to see that all Republican politicians drive to D.C. in their own cars and on their own dime. Perhaps the next GOP President will work out of his own van and have his cousin be his bodyguard for free.

 

*shakes head*

[Chisoxfn]

I look at it as the Obamas travel entourage and travel schedule is similar to an executive that overlavishes himself and I think we've all seen that America isn't happy with that. Whether that is the voters or the shareholders of these major corporations, people have made it evident that those in power can't just spend other peoples money like crazy.

[BigSqwert]

I give up. I never took you for an unreasonable tea party type.

Edited November 3, 2010 by BigSqwert

[StrangeSox]

Please cite travel costs and "entourage" sizes for Bush v Obama.

[NorthSideSox72]

Well I had read article and heard pundits state otherwise. Am I saying Obama is spending an extra 200 million, no, but he is certainly spending more and I ask why?

 

And the bigger the entourage the much more significant the security force required and as a result, the security costs increase significantly, which has happened.

 

 

Please cite travel costs and "entourage" sizes for Bush v Obama.

 

[mr_genius]

Do you really think the President shouldn't travel?

 

if he can't leave the country for less than 200 million a day, no. that's just a stupid amount of money to go to India. the 200 million number could be a way high estimate.

[Chisoxfn]

Seriously, if we are spending 200 million per day, than I'd rather pay to have the other countries presidents visit us in the US. We can pick up the tab.