I was going to write today about a couple of articles related to gasoline and gas stations, but I’m going to put those aside because of some interesting political articles I saw today:
- The Trump Card. An Australian paper is leaking what is claims to be Donald Trump’s “October Surprise”: Michelle Obama once drew up divorce papers against Barak during a rough patch, but then reconciled. Oh, the horror. A traditional marriage preserved! Heaven forfend! ETA: Australia was wrong. The October surprise? Trump would give $5 million to Obama’s favorite charity if the president would release his college applications and records and his “passport information.”
- Another One for The Binder. And (at least according to the Daily Beast), we have another Republican putting his foot in his mouth concerning rape. This time it is Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock, who said Tuesday that pregnancy resulting from rape can be “something that God intended to happen.” Sigh. Someone should coach these candidates to think about what they are saying before they say it. ETA: I should note that the Republicans aren’t the only people with crazy candidates. The Democrats have them too.
- Dead People Voting. No, I’m not talking about Chicago. Rather, it is legal in many states for dead people to vote. How, you may ask. Simple. Whenever early voting is involved, there is the possibility that the voter can die between when they cast their vote and when the vote is counted, and as there is no way to tie the vote to the voter (especially for in-person early voting), there is no way to invalidate it. It can also occur when there is mail-in voting, and the person dies after putting the vote in the mailbox. Again, there is no way to invalidate the vote. This is very different than dead people registering to vote. ETA: Here’s an actual case of a dead man who voted: a WWII veteran who voted absentee from his hospice bed, and then died a few days later.
- Expressing an Opinion. Lastly, the LA Times has an interesting article about people who complain about the paper endorsing a Presidential candidate. It seems that many people can no longer distinguish the opinion pages from the news pages. I partially blame the internet for this, as it does not make the distinction in news scavenging sites or automatic headline generates between objective news and opinion.