Political Funny Pictures Thread

[Slapstick]

You drive me nuts!

So it's not enough to tell me I'm wasting my vote, you now need to try and trick me with this ruse? I'll tell you what, when you voted for Trump in the primary you voted for Hillary in the general election.

Wow, clam down. Nobody voted for Hillary yet. I guess you've missed the fact that it's now coming out that the major pollsters are rigging their data to show Hillary ahead when in fact they are within the margin of error or Trump leads when looking at the raw data. Monmouth University got caught rigging the results, Quinninpiac has since refuse to release the demographics of their poll, so nobody knows what the ratio of democrats to republicans sampled nor how the weighted the poll to show Hillary ahead and they refuse to release that information. Without it it's a worthless poll, for all we know they sampled 100 % democrats to put Hillary ahead.

So nobody's wasted a vote yet, well except those that voted for Sanders since the DNC rigged the primary. Nobody has voted for Hillary for President yet. If you want to keep her out the White House then consider how you vote in November instead of being upset about how voted in the primary.

Remember this thread is title is Political Funny Picture Thread. Fun should be the operative word .

Edited to fix a few typos. I really need to get the cat his own keyboard to lay on instead of mine.

 

[Bill of Rights]

And is the company that makes the voting machines (formerly Diebold) above such rigging? It's not like they'll give us a paper trail to verify that the vote I cast for candidate 1 is not in fact recorded as a vote for candidate 2.

And of course, since the software is proprietary, we can't see it to find out what it does.

Even as meager and rusty as my programming skills are, *I* could write a program that acknowledges a vote as cast, but if for one candidate, records it as entered, but for the other, a 50/50 (or whatever) chance that it would record it for the other party. Fair to note that my programming experience is in a language called MUF (Multi-User Forth, which I've not used in probably 10 years), and minimally in coding for MS-Excel.

Until we can guarantee that the voting machines record and report all of the votes as cast, the fact that the pollsters rig their data is only an indication that they are human and not above corruption, which is the same thing that can be said of those who wrote the code for those machines.

The comment that voting Trump in the primary is equivalent to voting for (actually, not voting against) Hillary in the general is merely recognizing the fact that one of the two of them will be declared the winner in November. No one else will win, especially not the American people.

Blessings,
Bill

Wow, clam down. Nobody voted for Hillary yet. I guess you've missed the fact that it's now coming out that the major pollsters are rigging their data to show Hillary ahead when in fact they are within the margin of error or Trump leads when looking at the raw data. Monmouth University got caught rigging the results, Quinninpiac has since refuse to release the demographics of their poll, so nobody knows what the ratio of democrats to republicans sampled nor how the weighted the poll to show Hillary ahead and they refuse to release that information. Without it it's a worthless poll, for all we know they sampled 100 % democrats to put hilly ahead.

So nobody's wasted a vote yet, well except those that voted for Sanders since the DNC rigged the primary. Nobody has voted for Hillary for President yet. If you want to keep her out the White House then consider how you vote in November instead of being upset about how voted in the primary.

Remember this thread is titles Political Funny Picture Thread. Fun should be the operative word .

 

[eldirector]

This is a picture:

These are words:

Neither of which are very funny, nor political.

This is a picture of a political cat, which is funny (for reference):

 

[mrjarrell]

 

[OakRiver]

And is the company that makes the voting machines (formerly Diebold) above such rigging? It's not like they'll give us a paper trail to verify that the vote I cast for candidate 1 is not in fact recorded as a vote for candidate 2.

And of course, since the software is proprietary, we can't see it to find out what it does.

Even as meager and rusty as my programming skills are, *I* could write a program that acknowledges a vote as cast, but if for one candidate, records it as entered, but for the other, a 50/50 (or whatever) chance that it would record it for the other party. Fair to note that my programming experience is in a language called MUF (Multi-User Forth, which I've not used in probably 10 years), and minimally in coding for MS-Excel.

Until we can guarantee that the voting machines record and report all of the votes as cast, the fact that the pollsters rig their data is only an indication that they are human and not above corruption, which is the same thing that can be said of those who wrote the code for those machines.

The comment that voting Trump in the primary is equivalent to voting for (actually, not voting against) Hillary in the general is merely recognizing the fact that one of the two of them will be declared the winner in November. No one else will win, especially not the American people.

Blessings,
Bill

And that sort of report should be easy to automate and produce for each machine without disclosing any identifying information of the voter.

 

[jamil]

And is the company that makes the voting machines (formerly Diebold) above such rigging? It's not like they'll give us a paper trail to verify that the vote I cast for candidate 1 is not in fact recorded as a vote for candidate 2.

And of course, since the software is proprietary, we can't see it to find out what it does.

Even as meager and rusty as my programming skills are, *I* could write a program that acknowledges a vote as cast, but if for one candidate, records it as entered, but for the other, a 50/50 (or whatever) chance that it would record it for the other party. Fair to note that my programming experience is in a language called MUF (Multi-User Forth, which I've not used in probably 10 years), and minimally in coding for MS-Excel.

Until we can guarantee that the voting machines record and report all of the votes as cast, the fact that the pollsters rig their data is only an indication that they are human and not above corruption, which is the same thing that can be said of those who wrote the code for those machines.

The comment that voting Trump in the primary is equivalent to voting for (actually, not voting against) Hillary in the general is merely recognizing the fact that one of the two of them will be declared the winner in November. No one else will win, especially not the American people.

Blessings,
Bill

OMG! Forth? I used to code in that back in the day. Now if I could only track down the other 9 people who've ever heard of it.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

OMG! Forth? I used to code in that back in the day. Now if I could only track down the other 9 people who've ever heard of it.

It's definitely still around with a light following.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Forth/

 

[2A_Tom]

And that sort of report should be easy to automate and produce for each machine without disclosing any identifying information of the voter.

So the machine reports

• 2500 Total votes cast
• 1250 Total votes cast for Republican
• 1250 Total votes cast for Democrat
• 550 Total votes recorded for Republican
• 1950 Total votes recorded for Democrat

Something like that.

 

[jamil]

In the future I can see online voting being a reality. Whoever hosts it? If you don't trust them you're a racist, sexist, anti-islamic homophobe.

 

[Alpo]

So....Trump rhetoric spills into the picture thread. You couldn't find enough room in the other threads dedicated to him?

 

[mrjarrell]

 

[mrjarrell]

 

[Bill of Rights]

MUF (Multi-User Forth) is quite different from Forth, I'm told. The former was only used only on TinyMUCKs, a type of chat network that allowed for building rooms, objects, etc, all done with descriptive text. It was good practice for painting a picture with proper word choices. Learning how to use MUF was a fun challenge, too.

One thing I built was a space station in the asteroid belt. It was circular, so I called it, predictably, the Belt Loop. It also had a torus-shaped hangar below it. What do you call a ring below a belt loop? Of course. The Key Ring.

That's for those insisting on funny pics... Word pictures. :-p

Blessings,
Bill

OMG! Forth? I used to code in that back in the day. Now if I could only track down the other 9 people who've ever heard of it.

 

[OakRiver]

So the machine reports

• 2500 Total votes cast
• 1250 Total votes cast for Republican
• 1250 Total votes cast for Democrat
• 550 Total votes recorded for Republican
• 1950 Total votes recorded for Democrat

Something like that.

Pretty close to that yes, so that way it should be easy to check whether votes were incorrectly counted.

There are additional safe guards that could be built in place too. For example each voter is given a random numbered ticket that is not recorded or tied to any identifying information. Once voted they can request a receipt confirming their vote for their records. Online they may then enter their random ticket number and receipt number and may confirm that their vote was recorded correctly.

You could also have the buttons to select your candidates randomly assigned (so for one voter the Democrat pick might be on the right, for another it might be on the left) and the machine can record which button was pressed and match it to the recorded vote.

 

[Slapstick]

 

[Mikey1911]

There you go. I fixed it for you...









You're welcome.

Single Phase AC, Three-Phase AC, or DC?

 

[pudly]

 

[pudly]

 

[pudly]

 

[ArcadiaGP]