RR98ITR

Alright!

Listening to Air America on my way to get lunch:

"We've been robbed again! The Diebold machines in eastern Florida were rigged to victimize minority voters. Diebold gave much dollars to Bush and told him that they guaranteed his victory".

"What about the early exit polling? It was going for Kerry! This doesn't add up - somebody is pulling something again."

And then on NPR:

Daniel Shorr sifts thru some exit poll data where wide variation in percentage accrues amongst the demographic breakouts and declares "If there's a mandate here I can't find it!" Funny that - he couldn't find one if it walked right up to him and introduced itself.

Funny too that the Venezuelan election had a pronounced variance between exit polls and count, but the left, liking the results, brushed aside suggestions of fraud, while here, it's obvious.

I know that I personally lied to every pollster, surveyor, and canvasser that I came into contact with - and that I'm in pretty good company in that.

Scott, who says "See - it's not over if you don't want it to be"....Maybe you kick up the civil disobedience another notch. Quit your job so that unemployment goes up, and start robbing, and burglarizing so the crime statistics get worse, drive rudely so that everybody becomes more defensive and withdrawn, sabotage local utilities to undermine confidence in our governments ability to maintain basic living conditions...After all - You know you're on the side of right and good. There you go Freedom Fighter! And, Beauty, it's all Bush's fault.

bad-monkey

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by fsp31 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

Some of us happen to think that "f***ing swing issues" (especially abortion) are among the most important considerations in selecting a president. Now you have 2 reasons to be "appalled" with me.

I can sum up campaign success against Bush in 2 words: "CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRAT". Helllooooo!!!! What were they thinking??? Bush would have gotten beat like a drum if the democratic party had not nominated so far to the left. Democrat or Republican labels don't mean crap to me. Heck, the parties have "swapped" platforms at least a couple of times in the past, but many americans (including me) simply will not vote for such a liberal candidate.</TD></TR></TABLE>

i'm sorry, but if you think Kerry was a democrat left of center, i'd hate to see what your "conservative democrat" looked like. Must be something like Pat Buchanan mistakenly registering as a democrat.

On the flip side, i'm almost curious to see what is so liberal about john kerry? sure he wears some left-ish stripes (choice, civil unions (which is more centrist than anything), and whatever else you'd point to as reeking of Trotsky), but the rest of his platform was hardly "Liberal."

protectionist trade policies? continued occupation of iraq? fiscal responsibility?

it's funny to me how the neo-cons have blurred the lines of what is left, what is right, and who stands where.

and so, I'm alive, and i don't know for how much longer, but let's just say that some of my cynicism with regards to people in general has been confirmed. if and when selective service comes a knockin and you put an M4 carbine in my hand, i'll issue a new state of my union speech.

anyway, carry on, for the good of your local walmart.

RR98ITR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by bad-monkey &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...anyway, carry on, for the good of your local walmart. </TD></TR></TABLE>

&lt;Charleton Heston voice on&gt; "Walmart is people....People!" &lt;off&gt;

Scott, who see's the world not in Right and Left....but in Good and Evil....Front Wheel Drive for example is Evil....VTEC is Good....Understeer is Evil....Mugen is Good.....Clearly I've had to compromise with Evil.

Gesundheit

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by bad-monkey &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
On the flip side, i'm almost curious to see what is so liberal about john kerry? </TD></TR></TABLE>

How about his voting record?

phat-S

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RR98ITR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Daniel Shorr sifts thru some exit poll data where wide variation in percentage accrues amongst the demographic breakouts and declares "If there's a mandate here I can't find it!" Funny that - he couldn't find one if it walked right up to him and introduced itself.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

It would have to. I don't think anyone except Webster's definition considers this a mandate given by the American voting public. But if the current administration says it is enough ... guess it becomes fact.

Ironic ain't it ... the second most votes ever received by a presidential candidate went to Sen. Kerry. That's a hell of a lot of people voting against the incumbent president. Too bad this ain't 1803 or that'd be one very iiiiinteresting White House. Hell, I might actually enjoy watching that administration.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by crankdrive &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
How about his voting record?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
I would like to learn of this voting record so please clarify which votes and what the reasons were.

RR98ITR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by phat-S &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It would have to. I don't think anyone except Webster's definition considers this a mandate given by the American voting public. But if the current administration says it is enough ... guess it becomes fact.

Ironic ain't it ... the second most votes ever received by a presidential candidate went to Sen. Kerry. That's a hell of a lot of people voting against the incumbent president. Too bad this ain't 1803 or that'd be one very iiiiinteresting White House. Hell, I might actually enjoy watching that administration.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

My comment had more to do with the predictability of Daniel Shorr, than with what's a mandate and what's not.

I don't necessarily feel that 51% is what you'd call much of a mandate, but it's a (slim) majority, and it's a damn sight better than what you'd typically see in a more diverse multiparty or parliamentary system. And the very word "mandate" is something of a wonder anyway. It's meaning in practical terms based on accomodation with a free and/or possibly hostile Congress on the basis of margin of victory and the threat that represents for the Congress at the next midterm. Not very relevant a concept at this juncture.

Is it more of a mandate than Bill Clinton ever got from the voters? By many measures Yes.

There were many tens of millions for whom Bill Clinton was not THEIR president, and for the next four years there are tens of millions for whom George Bush is not THEIR president. Wah.

But he won the office, he'll likely get significant accomodation from a Republican Congress, and some things are going to happen. Everything his partisans would like? Probably not. Everything his opponents fear? Probably not.

Scott, who is loving tonite on cable tv...Franken, Stein, O'Donnell on Miller's show, the hand wringing on Mathew's show..."Do you think there was media bias against Bush?...If so it was very subtle...."....I was dying!!! Can't wait to see Dobb's.

bad-monkey

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Crankdriven &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">How about his voting record?</TD></TR></TABLE>

his voting record is probably in line with most of the democratic party.

he isn't a leftwing reactionary, by any means. Even the official reactionary Dean, wasn't all that convincing in that role.

the people in the democratic party that remember which way left is are hardly in a position of power to run for president...remember that the clinton and his clintonian wing of the DNC, the one that wields the most power, is often called the "best republican president the democrats ever had."

Personally i think the only mandate possibly afforded to bush is the one that is caused by the subsequent apathy on the part of the weary left giving republicans free reign, from this point forward...

MechE00

I would think Bush wouldn't want anything to do with a mandate-- I mean, aren't men with mandates the exact sort of thing that leads to a large percentage of gay marriages?

Thank you, I will be here all week.. Try the veal!

phat-S

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RR98ITR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

My comment had more to do with the predictability of Daniel Shorr, than with what's a mandate and what's not.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

I think you ask 10 people to read that, 10 people are going to think you are poking a stick saying Shorr lacks the basic understanding of what mandate means in politics. He does and IMO we should want teams of folks like him in the media, not the jackassed pundits of whom if they knew ANYTHING would be in some backroom working not on a panel show drooling like the cast of Monday Night Football telling me the crap I can clearly see.

I think most members of our society (and I have now heard it more from Republicans than Democrats) do NOT feel this administration has a mandate and needs to garner support from the other side as much their own (siting that more people voted against this president than any other in history - too bad data and stats swing both ways huh?). You don't buy it, that's fine, give it a few months and I am sure that will be rescinded and replaced w/ our V.P.'s immediate comments of a mandate - nothing like a little double speak 8 hours after an election.


And Crankdriven, while you are out there looking up voting records, do me a favor and bring up John Ashcroft and Dick Cheney's voting records in the Senate and House respectively.

RR98ITR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by phat-S &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">...I think most members of our society (and I have now heard it more from Republicans than Democrats) do NOT feel this administration has a mandate and needs to garner support from the other side as much their own (siting that more people voted against this president than any other in history - too bad data and stats swing both ways huh?). You don't buy it, that's fine.... </TD></TR></TABLE>

How you would have any idea as to what I buy or don't buy is beyond me. Yep, data can be read many ways. Glass half full / glass half empty.

At what precise percentage would you acknowledge that a mandate would exist?

Is that even a practical number in the context of history or probability?

The word Mandate as used by you and those heads in a box you say you dislike means in practical terms a percentage sufficient to induce the opposition to agree that the result "speaks for the collectivity of the people" and acknowledge that their expressed will compels you to accomodate the efforts of the victor. Which isn't going to happen at 55%, 60%, or 65%. It's a matter of human nature. And even if ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Fox, and your local (cough, cough) paper were to call a mandate, Harpers, The Nation, Mother Jones, and Political Affairs would not.

Mandate Shmandate. It's about Executive Orders, Passing Legislation and Signatures, and what happens in the real world - as opposed to what happens in paranoid fantasies. Phil A. Buster is in the house.

Scott, who still hasn't heard about any Death Squads ....but I guess I wouldn't advise any "hot man-on-man action or reading of library books"* if you're really worried...

*Daily Show - Paraphrased - also enjoyed John Stewart talking to Chuck Schumer - Stewart held his feet to the fire a little. Not a bad thing.

phat-S

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by RR98ITR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

How you would have any idea as to what I buy or don't buy is beyond me. Yep, data can be read many ways. Glass half full / glass half empty.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

And how you turn a simple colloquialism into an argument or accusation is beyond me. "You don't buy it, that's fine .." you honestly think means "I am devining what you buy and don't?" Good Lord dude, continue that and you can have this conversation all to yourself.

I look at a mandate by the American people the way a good number of folks do. Not with a set number so I won't say 60.1% or 50.1% but I can say that there is a great deal of unrest w/ a voting population that votes 48% against the incumbent. (I'd like to use an expression like "whether you like it or not" but since I cannot remotely assume what you like ... whatthefuckever!). That unrest doesn't require nor does it ask for the President to pass Democratic legislation but is sure does say for him to look at future bills with a mindful eye on one half of his constituency (the American people). Does Thune have a mandate? No! And I'd expect that he'd be real sensitive to the "other side" that didn't vote his way. Does Barak Obama? Well, yeah, I think 75% is pretty strong and suggests he's got a lot of support behind him. There's a big difference.

You are right, it is about the real world, a real world where I highly doubt Sen. Spectre (with his understanding of mandate) will allow a Justice nominee past the gate w/ the intent of reversing Roe vs. Wade. I have no clue what your reference to Death Squads and haven't caught the Daily Show in a while. Don't read the local paper but you may be surprised at what I read.

GSpeedR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Catch 22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I wasn't quoting south park. I was quoting me.
Fine, you were being humorous. Great to hear. I'd love to hear how we were supposed to KNOW you were being humorous. By the smirk on your face while you were typing???</TD></TR></TABLE>

Maybe by the first bolded sentence in my second post. People pissed about the sig is fine, my point is regardless of whether I do think 51% of the American people are appalling (which I don't), I still think you're argument that everyone who dissagrees with Bush should move to France, is rediculous.

I'll be back when I have more time...

RR98ITR

I wish you guys would stop nit picking the little stuff.

Don't you realize that Bush is a religious zealot, committed to bringing about the end of time prophesied in Revelations?

Don't your realize that Bush will never voluntarily surrender the Presidency?

Don't you realize that you've only got a limited amount of time to liquidate your assets, hoard food and water, and study the martial arts?

Don't you realize that that low frequency rumble you're hearing is a black helicopter comming to get YOU?

Scott, who's still amazed that someone as pathetically stupid as George Bush is capable of all this....but then it's not my delusion.

Mark sans

No, your delusion was different. But I guess we're all entitled to them... or at least entitled to create them for others in lieu of facing any objective reality.

RR98ITR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mark sans &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">No, your delusion was different. But I guess we're all entitled to them... or at least entitled to create them for others in lieu of facing any objective reality.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Object Reality?

Hmmm....I'm curious....Could you describe it to me?


Scott, who's fascinated...."What's This?"...."You don't say?"...."Well I Never!"..."Don't bite does it?"

ShaunRR

Wow, I thought all of these threads were dead by now.

I'm guessing terrorist recruiting went up at least 10% after the election results.

RR98ITR

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by rochesterricer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Wow, I thought all of these threads were dead by now.

I'm guessing terrorist recruiting went up at least 10% after the election results.</TD></TR></TABLE>

No doubt you're right. I expect to see many Americans who are dismayed by the "re-election" of Bush to begin forming underground cells and planning and coordinating a campaign of domestic terror. But what choice do they have. If the Democrats had any backbone at all they would have at least pleaded for UN intervention to thwart the Republican Conspiracy. And our feckless allies are too weak willed to take matters into their own hands and deliver us, and the world, from this headlong sprint toward the abyss.

Scott, who doesn't get it...why would the matrix be programmed to render this much misery...shouldn't we all be happy as we produce our millivolts?

Ross

FYI, the same people that believe in Bush conspiracies also believe in Kerry conspiracies.

The whole "Black Helicopter" crowd won't be satisfied until we exhume Thomas Jefferson's body and elect it president. They are onto something, however - the anti-democratic (small "d") direction this country is heading in does not depend on the President as much as it depends on the influence exerted on our gov't by special interests.

phat-S

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Phat-S as of 10/30/2004 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
FWIW: Casualties in Iraq
American Deaths Since war began (3/19/03): 1107
Since "Mission Accomplished" or end of Combat Operations (5/1/03): 966
Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03): 656 * other source
Since Handover (6/29/04): 257 * other source
source - http://www.defenselink.mil/
</TD></TR></TABLE>

An interesting read still .... and near another year and a half later ....

Casualties in Iraq (as of March 28, 2006)
Iraqi Police/Military fatalities (3/6/06): 4376 * other source
American Fatalities Since war began (3/19/03): 2326
Since "Mission Accomplished" or end of Combat Operations (5/1/03): 2180
Since Capture of Saddam (12/13/03): 1985 * other source
Since Bush's "Bring Them On!" (7/2/03): 2118 * other source

Wounded in Action (returned to duty w/in 72 hours): 9394
Wounded in Action (did not return to duty w/in 72 hours): 7987
source - http://www.defenselink.mil/


and the quote that still scares me
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by slammed_93_hatch &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
The American people would rather have a decisive president then a correct president. Basically the people will vote for some one who "sticks to there guns" even though it might not be the best choice, over some one who is right.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

I guess if an indicted House Rep can generate 62% vote in a freaking Republican primary shows this is true - as unbelievable as that remains.


So I ask again:
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Phat-S &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Are the opinions you held then those you hold today? Are the truths you believed then still truths today?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes and Yes. What say you Mr. Speaker?

bad-monkey

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by SJR &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
So my opinion is - if you care about the opinion of a cowardly french person - that Bush is very quick to push for a war that will (and does) distract the public opinion from the current recession. I also think that Chirac needs to get over it and support the americans to go to war IF (big if there) the alleged proof that the US supplied to show "without a doubt" that Saddam has terrorist connections and has weapons of mass destructions is indeed persuasive.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

this touched a nerve w/ me upon reading 3 years later.

and may be a bit slanted, but this http://video.google.com/videop...28848 video asks some pretty ******* interesting questions...

bad-monkey

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by phat-S &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
So I ask again:
</TD></TR></TABLE>

my answer: election years are all smoke and mirrors.

WWDTrackRacer

Okay so RR dropped the Matrix reference. Thank you for that!
So anybody care to discuss V for Vendetta?

I've been meaning to read Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed .

History has a habit of repeating itself? Are we doomed to repeat it?

CRX Lee

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by WWDTrackRacer &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
I've been meaning to read Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed .

History has a habit of repeating itself? Are we doomed to repeat it?
</TD></TR></TABLE>
Interesting that you mentioned this, when I was in Europe for a meeting of international Koni distributors about two years ago (well into the war though), the dinner conversation was quite interesting and as the sole American I often fealt pinned to the wall by some of them wondering what the heck Bush and the Americans were doing. Several people seriously mentioned that they thought that this war and current leadership could very much be "the beginning of the end" of the American period of world leadership. Compared to the Roman Empire and many other long gone world leading countries, our piddling 230 year timeframe is a drop in the bucket. Having travelled internationally several times in the last few years, it is amazing how bad the US's reputation is worldwide.

Also at that same dinner meeting, I said "Just you watch, California is even probably going to elect Arnold Schwarzenegger as governor!". They laughed and laughed because it seemed so preposterous and impossible.

I have never been so concerned about the leadership of our country as now. If taken seriously, it is extremely painful and forboding. Thankfully Jon Stewart and "the Daily Show" are around to put a humourous spin to it. If you can't bear it, at least we can laug h at it. To borrow a term from my literary hero Hunter S. Thomspon, the place is run by "fixers and greedheads" and I honestly think we have a clueless semi-puppet driving the bus.

Catch 22

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by phat-S &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I guess if an indicted House Rep can generate 62% vote in a freaking Republican primary shows this is true - as unbelievable as that remains.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

This is new?
Anyone remember Mayor Marion Barry of DC?

And as for the statement that still scares you...
Just last night on the NBC Nightly News Brian told me that the latest polls show the majority of Americans believe the majority of politicians are corrupt regardless of party.
The majority of americans also still don't know what the democratic party stands for.
This is not a surprise. Even Jon Stewart makes fun of this point almost nightly.

McCain is still out there and still wants to be president. He is a republican, but moderately so, and you know what he stands for.
But he's already lost to a jagoff like Frist in a mock convention. Thats what scares me.

The democratic party isn't going to win an election until they ditch the cheesy used car salesman approach of "tell them what they want to hear" and start building platforms and sticking to them. This is what killed Kerry in the last election (and having the personality of a tree stump).

Crack Monkey

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Catch 22 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This is new?
Anyone remember Mayor Marion Barry of DC?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Remember? He's still here. Since being arrested on drug charges in 1990, he served on the City Council for Ward 8, got re-elected as mayor, and now sits on the Council again. He recently plead guilty to tax evasion, but he's still here.