DC and Tony have another desperate gamble to buy time

I've never heard of a runoff election as a result of voting in the general election, particularly for a national office...   I have heard of recounts, flipping of coins, and clearcut victories, but never a runoff in a general.

Maybe I need to go back to civics class.

Huh...   Louisiana is definitely a strange duck when it comes to elections....  Guess it is possible to have a runoff there after the general election.  Apparently the general election is their primary with all candidates showing up on the ballot.  And if no one comes out 50% or better, a runoff is held between the top two.

The runoff would be December 6th, by the way.  Not January.

Learn something new every day

I'm pretty sure it only applies to the gubernatorial elections, and maybe other state offices, but not to any of the national offices.

Why do Louisiana and Georgia control what Iraq does with their currency?  Exactly...

Or in this case two ...

BritishBulldog wrote:Why do Louisiana and Georgia control what Iraq does with their currency?  Exactly...

I'll let Tony & Winston explain:

Tony: What we are looking at is for the elections to happen tomorrow without distractions, without donations from us to either party.  If the election goes smoothly tomorrow, then the general public should be seeing it over the weekend.  They plan to keep exchanging people since Friday, and fold us in.  If there is a runoff in January, they may try to keep this money from us until then.  In Georgia and Louisiana, if there is a runoff and it’s that close, then the political guys will push NOT to enter the RV until that is done. I don’t believe they can hold it off that long, because the international rate is showing on the screens, and the rest of the world can either force the US to release it, or get into a huge fuss.  They can make the rollout so slow that we end up in January.

DC:  They are saying, “You’re saying a runoff in North Carolina or Louisiana, that is holding up this entire process, and the entire world?!” and apparently some raw political guys think so and they seem to be in charge. The rest of the world is beside themselves, saying “You cannot wait that long and no way in hell are we going to put up with this!”


Caller: So we want to root for a clear election and no runoffs, right? When we watch the election results, we just want someone to WIN, is that the case?


DC:  That’s up for debate.  Louisiana will almost certainly have a runoff, and possibly Georgia.  If the Republicans win the Senate, expect a slower rollout; if the Democrats retain control, they will probably speed it up.  The key states are New Hampshire (if Scott Brown wins, the Dems will probably give up), North Carolina (T Hagan is slightly ahead, but it could go either way)…. NH is important because if Brown wins, the Republicans will probably win in the Senate as well.  Georgia is a sway, Arkansas has already gone to the Republicans, and Kansas is too close to call. Colorado is important, too.  What we really want is clear decisions, not to have it up in the air on who controls the Senate.  So get out there and VOTE.

 "If the Republicans win the Senate, expect a slower rollout; if the Democrats retain control, they will probably speed it up." DC really,how do you vote? UMM, I am going to guess democrat. Tony, I do not know being a convicted felon if you got that taken care of to be able to vote. DC,you are a poo stirring POS to state such an "opinion". Trying to influence votes because of the speed of the roll out. Really?

And it all makes no sense.  The Dems have had control of the Senate, so the rollout will be quicker of they remain in control?

Billyg wrote:
 "If the Republicans win the Senate, expect a slower rollout; if the Democrats retain control, they will probably speed it up." DC really,how do you vote? UMM, I am going to guess democrat. Tony, I do not know being a convicted felon if you got that taken care of to be able to vote. DC,you are a poo stirring POS to state such an "opinion". Trying to influence votes because of the speed of the roll out. Really?

Someone else at TNT picked this up too: 

Voting EITHER way	Permalink
On yesterday's call, it was clearly stated that the RV process would move faster if Dems won and a slower rollout if Rep won. On the same call, it was mentioned that an an unbiased sentiment was delivered. BS. If THAT wasn't a clear and cut statement to sway the vote to dinarians, I don't know what is. THAT statement could have served the public best having been UNSAID. For shame. Of note: the Dems have been in control of the administration for the past six years, and NO RV. Obviously, they are incapable of moving it along for US. They have no problem moving it along for the elite, friends and family, though. Keep them in power, and get much of the same. Let another group take a shot at getting this RV done, and we will stand a better chance. Logic.  In past posts I, and others have been painfully neutral in verbiage by eliminating party vs party, so when our intel team uses a swaying politically charged message on a broadcasted call, I have no option but to respond in kind. I was clearly stunned at the underlying political message put out to the masses yesterday. It makes absolutely no sense to me for anyone to vote for the status quo and expect anything different from it. Being effective at serving the constituents, we the people, is how I choose to cast my vote. And I just did!

Just when I think they can't say anything MORE STUPID