Wow...50 years...that is an old girl!
Three Ravens Consulting
Eric Roberts
Owner/Developer
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com
tel: 630-486-5255
fax: 630-310-8531
http://www.threeravensconsulting.com
-Original Message---
yup
Three Ravens Consulting
Eric Roberts
Owner/Developer
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com
tel: 630-486-5255
fax: 630-310-8531
http://www.threeravensconsulting.com
-Original Message-
From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...
So I have an FB page, twitter and WP all set up and supposedly linked, but
the things I post to WP aren't being updated to FB. Suggestions on what I
should go looking for?
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www
sorry, couldnt resist:
http://www.businessinsider.com/jobs-bushs-first-term-vs-obamas-first-term-2012-11
With the release of Friday's jobs report -- the last one before the
election -- we thought it made sense to update one of our favorite charts
comparing Obama's first term vs. George W. Bush's
Also, I disagree, we make most of our decisions based off of our education
and our environmental history.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 10:32 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
> Interesting thread:
>
>
> http://www.armyparatrooper.org/dropzone/showthread.php/33181-Another-Conspiracy-From-a-Tin-Foil-Hat-Wearer/pag
Interesting thread:
http://www.armyparatrooper.org/dropzone/showthread.php/33181-Another-Conspiracy-From-a-Tin-Foil-Hat-Wearer/page4?highlight=voter+fraud
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Anecdotal evidence is worthless.
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:06 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
Anecdotal evidence is worthless.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:06 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Yup, anecdotally I can simply point to the machines of Chicago, or
> Louisiana or NC or other and you see it obviously.
>
~|
Order the Adob
Yup, anecdotally I can simply point to the machines of Chicago, or
Louisiana or NC or other and you see it obviously.
On Nov 5, 2012 10:04 PM, "Jerry Barnes" wrote:
>
> "You made a flat statement that Democrats commit voter fraud more often
> than Republicans."
>
> That's because they do.
>
>
>
"You made a flat statement that Democrats commit voter fraud more often
than Republicans."
That's because they do.
"In order to make that statement, surely you have hard numbers to support
it."
In order to make that statement, I don't need hard numbers. I can use
inductive reasoning. Certain
"The fact that you ask for me to specifically supply you with links to
'Republican
voter fraud' could also lead one to perceive that either a) you do not
believe such fraud is perpetrated by Republicans or 2) that you won't go
seek such information on your own."
Geeze. I have some posts about Re
Agreed.
Interesting how things turned out with Maine at the republican convention.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:50 PM, Jerry Barnes wrote:
>
> "I like how this pans out... Maybe will go back to popular vote and
> squash these
> swing state campaigns and all the stupid news that goes along with it
"I like how this pans out... Maybe will go back to popular vote and
squash these
swing state campaigns and all the stupid news that goes along with it once
and for all..."
A popular vote would be against the principals of the founding fathers.
What should happen is every state should mimic Maine
Great story. Thanks for passing that along.
I find it amazing how alive a big ship like that is.
I participated (very minimally) in the scrambled cleanout of the USS Gato
(SSN 615) before it's last voyage to the breakers yard. It was very eerie,
and I felt like we were stripping an animal of its
If Obama wins I reserve the right to continue criticizing the shit job
he's going to do.
.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 5:13 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> Saw this on Facebook and thought it summed up my feelings quite nicely
>
> "Vote for who you want to and if you don't vote don't complain. If you do
You still post plenty of lefty rants though.
.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:22 PM, Jerry Milo Johnson wrote:
>
> I quit listening back in April.
>
> Even my family and friends know by now - if politics is on the tv, or is
> the conversation, i am going to go find something else to do.
>
> It's not
...um Maureen, it's a joke. The election is tomorrow.
Thanks for playing.
.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> After all these years of trashing MSNBC for being dishonest, are you
> seriously going to call the election based on test page on their website?
>
> How very special.
>
> "Vote for who you want to and if you don't vote don't complain. If you do
> vote and win, don't gloat, if you lose don't whine. Get behind the winner
> and let's move forward."
Hear hear!
-Justin
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusio
Cool story.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2227953/USS-Enterprise-Worlds-nuclear-aircraft-carrier-completes-final-voyage-50-years-sea.html
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfu
Saw this on Facebook and thought it summed up my feelings quite nicely
"Vote for who you want to and if you don't vote don't complain. If you do
vote and win, don't gloat, if you lose don't whine. Get behind the winner
and let's move forward."
--
Scott Stroz
---
You can make things
I quit listening back in April.
Even my family and friends know by now - if politics is on the tv, or is
the conversation, i am going to go find something else to do.
It's not as if, even with boycotting everything I could, I am not still
overwhelmed, sick, yet fully informed.
You sing it Maure
True that, it's the continuous whine that gets me.
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2012, at 6:50 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> There's a cure for it. Don't watch the media circuses, don't visit their
> websites,don't listen to their talk shows, don't click or share the memes
> or links. If the peop
Once in a while Politico's test pages escape into the wild. They are just used
for load testing. It's meaningless. Test data is all. Chris (the tech lead) set
it up for a special load test that ran about 1pm or so today.
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2012, at 6:52 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Aft
Not sure about that - more like typical incompetence.
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2012, at 6:41 PM, "Eric Roberts"
wrote:
>
> With all the issues going on in Florida and Ohio, I think those states are
> not going to get counted for weeks. Both of the state's Secretary of State
> have been
Silver is about the only analyst with such an in depth knowledge of statistical
polling. I do not like all of his conclusions but I cannot fault his
methodological rigour.
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2012, at 6:39 PM, "Eric Roberts"
wrote:
>
> Yes he does...Nate is a statistical genius..
After all these years of trashing MSNBC for being dishonest, are you
seriously going to call the election based on test page on their website?
How very special.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Sam wrote:
>
>
> http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/11/early-election-results-via-msnbc-148500
There's a cure for it. Don't watch the media circuses, don't visit their
websites,don't listen to their talk shows, don't click or share the memes
or links. If the people ignore the political nonsense, eventually the
media will ignore it too, because their ONLY concerns are ratings,
click-throu
Like this?
*http://*bit.ly/YN1PPf
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Eric Roberts <
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote:
>
> With all the issues going on in Florida and Ohio, I think those states are
> not going to get counted for weeks. Both of the state's Secretary of State
> have been doin
With all the issues going on in Florida and Ohio, I think those states are
not going to get counted for weeks. Both of the state's Secretary of State
have been doing some really underhanded shit.
Three Ravens Consulting
Eric Roberts
Owner/Developer
ow...@thre
Yes he does...Nate is a statistical genius...
Three Ravens Consulting
Eric Roberts
Owner/Developer
ow...@threeravensconsulting.com
tel: 630-486-5255
fax: 630-310-8531
http://www.threeravensconsulting.com
-Original Mess
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
> Wait.they actually tally...and release the numbers...of early voting?
>
> Something about that, can't pinpoint what, does not sit well with me.
>
They are suggested wins from all networks, not the actual numbers until all
absentee ballot
The last part is what I'm not looking forward to no matter who wins.
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2012, at 5:09 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Yeah, it is. Because no matter who wins heads are gonna explore and there
> are going to be challenges in any state that is close. And a huge bunch of
> so
Wait.they actually tally...and release the numbers...of early voting?
Something about that, can't pinpoint what, does not sit well with me.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Sam wrote:
>
>
> http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/11/early-election-results-via-msnbc-148500.html
>
> .
>
>
Politico is running tests. They use CF to generate the HTML pages. This is a
test page.
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 5, 2012, at 4:51 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> If you notice, the image says "16% in" albeit faintly. They are obviously
> running tests of the system that is going to get hammer
Yeah, like Al Gore and Al Frankin.
Anymore Al's running?
.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> Yeah, it is. Because no matter who wins heads are gonna explore and there
> are going to be challenges in any state that is close. And a huge bunch of
> sore losers are going whine fo
Yeah, it is. Because no matter who wins heads are gonna explore and there
are going to be challenges in any state that is close. And a huge bunch of
sore losers are going whine for the next four years.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 1:57 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
> I read somewhere today that it could be
I read somewhere today that it could be weeks until swing states,
particularly ohio, certify their counts.
This is gonna suck.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:52 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> err..tomorrow night. I'll probably also get hammered tomorrow night. If you
> know what I mean.
>
>
> On
err..tomorrow night. I'll probably also get hammered tomorrow night. If you
know what I mean.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
> If you notice, the image says "16% in" albeit faintly. They are obviously
> running tests of the system that is going to get hammered tonight. So
If you notice, the image says "16% in" albeit faintly. They are obviously
running tests of the system that is going to get hammered tonight. Somehow
those tests ended up public. Oops. Probably happened to those of us here
before, however.
As for polling and analysis, I like FiveThirtyEight. Nate
Ah OK..the numbers they using aren't even "ballpark" figures.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> They're just testing on the production server. Who doesn't do that?
>
> Where's that dos xx's guy?
>
> .
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:42 PM, GMoney wrote:
> >
> > That's pret
They're just testing on the production server. Who doesn't do that?
Where's that dos xx's guy?
.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:42 PM, GMoney wrote:
>
> That's pretty messed up. Bush had 500,000 K more popular votes, but if this
> map is to be believed, Romney will get almost 4, 000,000 more popula
And before Clinton?
Bush, Reagan Reagan, Carter
.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:28 PM, Casey Dougall - Uber Website Solutions
wrote:
>
> For the record...
>
> Democrats have won the popular vote in four out of the last five
> presidential elections
~~
Oops, that should have said Al Gore got 500,000 more popular votes in
2000.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:42 PM, GMoney wrote:
> That's pretty messed up. Bush had 500,000 K more popular votes, but if
> this map is to be believed, Romney will get almost 4, 000,000 more popular
> votes, and yet l
That's pretty messed up. Bush had 500,000 K more popular votes, but if this
map is to be believed, Romney will get almost 4, 000,000 more popular
votes, and yet lose...that seems unbelievable.
Also, this shows about 36,000,000 Americans casting a vote for
President.is that accurate??? I knew
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:20 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/11/early-election-results-via-msnbc-148500.html
>
I like how this pans out... Maybe will go back to popular vote and squash
these swing state campaigns and all the stupid news that goes along with it
once a
http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2012/11/early-election-results-via-msnbc-148500.html
.
~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive:
Numbers of convictions by political party from a trustworthy source, like
the judicial system. Not spin or speculation.
You made a flat statement that Democrats commit voter fraud more often than
Republicans. In order to make that statement, surely you have hard numbers
to support it.
On Mon,
By the look of the site it looks like he either won't go and find them or
won't accept them if presented with them. There have been several
republican officials charged with electoral and voter fraud in the past
year...none of which appear on his page. I find it hard to believe he has
not run ac
Agreed, I was just speculating, but I would not be surprised.
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 9:09 PM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 8:57 PM, Larry C. Lyons wrote:
>
>>
>> Well there have been several cases of Republican inspired voter fraud,
>> such as the Republican party operative caug
I was not laughing at voter fraud, nor was I chuckling at your project (I
did read through several, but not all, of the articles).
What stuck me as funny was the overall sentiment of 'I believe X. If you
do not agree, check out this web site (which I operate) for more
information.'
I do not thin
"I chuckled a little that one source you want people to look at to help prove
your point is a web site that you manage."
Did you even look at the site?
I said it a little project I am working on. I use it as a place to keep
notes. I include election fraud, intimidation, democrats, republicans,
There has been speculation, and likely for years, but some wonderful
obsessed nerds have found the actual rock outcropping that the inner stones
came from.
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/12/stone-henge-rocks-origins/
pretty cool.
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 10:18 AM, Jerry Barnes wrote:
>
>
> You should check out the project I linked to:
> http://voter-fraud.blogspot.com/. It is still a work in progress and I
> would be glad to add any articles you can find regardless of party.
>
>
I chuckled a little that one source you wan
"I suspect I'll be waiting a while for proof of that allegation...like
forever."
Like I said before, it depends on what you want as proof. What are your
criteria?
In terms of pure volume of election fraud, Democratic misconduct dwarfs
republican misconduct. This includes official legal charges
Here are a few
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA642.html
.
On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Maureen wrote:
>
> While interesting, it neither supports or rebuts Jerry's statement that
> more Democrats than Republicans commit voter fraud.
>
> I suspect I'll be waiting a while for proof of that a
54 matches
Mail list logo
