2000 Election Reflection (for my bestest friend N8)

[reggiebar]

That's an assumption that the purge was done for political reasons, electorial-wise and that's something I reject.

You reject it because you refuse to actually learn about the subject. Of course, it was done for political reasons and if you knew anything about the American political process for the Presidency you might be able to get a clue.

 

[War Lord]

You reject it because you refuse to actually learn about the subject. Of course, it was done for political reasons and if you knew anything about the American political process for the Presidency you might be able to get a clue.

It's not due to ignorance on my part that I reject it. I reject it because to purge people so they can't vote to try and turn a state, as opposed to it being a control on criminals, is hardly worth the effort, especially when it involves such small numbers.

Since nobody knew that it would be as close as it was going to be, to ban less than 1/3 of 1% is not even anyway justifiable as a political tactic. It makes about as much sense as trying to sell ice cubes to Eskimos and expecting to become a millionaire doing it.

If I was a sneaky politician who totally lacked any kind of ethical centre and my political adviser came up to me and said, "We know this state is going to be close, probably less then 5% difference between the two parties. If we stop 57,000 people from voting, we might reduce the difference to 4%." My only response would be, "I'd rather spend more money and bribe the voters. It's a bigger bang for the buck."

 

[sinewave]

That's an assumption that the purge was done for political reasons, electorial-wise and that's something I reject.

but that was only one of the many underhanded things the republicans did to turn the vote in their favor. trust me, they did their homework and with karl rove's help they orchestrated a huge coup. they new which districts were predominantly democrats and tweaked everything they could think of including the voter rolls, calling people and posting the wrong dates and times the polls would be open, confusing old people, etc... you refuse to believe it because you hold them to a higher standard, while the majority of the us citizens don't. they actually realize how dirty this administration is. modern politics are extremely dirty and the republicans realise that they needed to try everything they could think of to win this election. you're naive if you think otherwise.

 

[reggiebar]

It's not due to ignorance on my part that I reject it. I reject it because to purge people so they can't vote to try and turn a state, as opposed to it being a control on criminals, is hardly worth the effort, especially when it involves such small numbers.

Since nobody knew that it would be as close as it was going to be, to ban less than 1/3 of 1% is not even anyway justifiable as a political tactic. It makes about as much sense as trying to sell ice cubes to Eskimos and expecting to become a millionaire doing it.

If I was a sneaky politician who totally lacked any kind of ethical centre and my political adviser came up to me and said, "We know this state is going to be close, probably less then 5% difference between the two parties. If we stop 57,000 people from voting, we might reduce the difference to 4%." My only response would be, "I'd rather spend more money and bribe the voters. It's a bigger bang for the buck."

Well, good thing you are not in American politics are you would get caught trying to attempt any underhanded tactics.

The voter purge and in the specific counties it was done was a very calculated move.

Seriously, just stop it now, because you are ignorant on the subject - honestly you are ignorant on tis subject.

Go to your local library and read "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" and then get back to me, because you are illinformed on this subject and the American political process in general.

 

[War Lord]

Well, good thing you are not in American politics are you would get caught trying to attempt any underhanded tactics.

The voter purge and in the specific counties it was done was a very calculated move.

Seriously, just stop it now, because you are ignorant on the subject - honestly you are ignorant on tis subject.

Go to your local library and read "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" and then get back to me, because you are illinformed on this subject and the American political process in general.

I wouldn't read anything by Greg Palest, he's not exactly educational as much as propagandizing.

 

[War Lord]

but that was only one of the many underhanded things the republicans did to turn the vote in their favor. trust me, they did their homework and with karl rove's help they orchestrated a huge coup. they new which districts were predominantly democrats and tweaked everything they could think of including the voter rolls, calling people and posting the wrong dates and times the polls would be open, confusing old people, etc... you refuse to believe it because you hold them to a higher standard, while the majority of the us citizens don't. they actually realize how dirty this administration is. modern politics are extremely dirty and the republicans realise that they needed to try everything they could think of to win this election. you're naive if you think otherwise.

It's not even that. Politics is a dirty game. However, even politics is subject to the principle of economics.

You don't spend money to turn a small number of votes in your favour if you can get larger numbers of votes otherwise. Majoring in the minors is never a winning election ploy for anybody.

 

[sinewave]

It's not even that. Politics is a dirty game. However, even politics is subject to the principle of economics.

You don't spend money to turn a small number of votes in your favour if you can get larger numbers of votes otherwise. Majoring in the minors is never a winning election ploy for anybody.

you'll spend whatever you can to win an election this bign, and that's exactly what they did. they knew they couldn't win this state with just a fair, straightforward campaign. so they took it to the next level, which happened to include extremely creative, yet underhanded, things.

 

[War Lord]

you'll spend whatever you can to win an election this bign, and that's exactly what they did. they knew they couldn't win this state with just a fair, straightforward campaign. so they took it to the next level, which happened to include extremely creative, yet underhanded, things.

Even federal elections in the states is subject to the laws of economics. You're not going to use tactics that are effective on the most miniscule of a populaton when it's far better and more effective to reach out to the maximum number of people possible.

 

[sinewave]

Even federal elections in the states is subject to the laws of economics. You're not going to use tactics that are effective on the most miniscule of a populaton when it's far better and more effective to reach out to the maximum number of people possible.

like what? what are you taking about, specifically? do you understand what i'm trying to say? they weren't sure they were going to win in florida so they pulled some strings with their connections there (jeb, katherine harris, etc...) and rove came up with a brilliant but crooked multi-tiered strategy that would assure them the win. the only reason it was so close is because more people legitimately voted for gore.

 

[War Lord]

like what? what are you taking about, specifically? do you understand what i'm trying to say? they weren't sure they were going to win in florida so they pulled some strings with their connections there (jeb, katherine harris, etc...) and rove came up with a brilliant but crooked multi-tiered strategy that would assure them the win. the only reason it was so close is because more people legitimately voted for gore.

What you're suggesting is that Jeb Bush is prepared to put his entire administration and reputation on the line for a tactic that would affect about 1/3 of 1% of the populaton. Even if it helped Bush win the presidency, that's not intelligent politics to risk your own career over such a miniscule benefit, that being one election, your reputation, and your kids reputation, not to mention the ability of Republicans to win an election for an entire generation.

I think Republicans are smarter than that. You don't take such huge risks over such comparably small benefit.

However, if you believe this, what does that say about your intelligence and possibly the intelligence of every single Democrat across the continental US?

 

[War Lord]

I'm sorry if that sounded personal, because that wasn't my intent. But think about it.

Nobody who is sane risks self destruction over small gains that normally would count as squat.

 

[Milkman95]

Had a great time in 2000 - I was actually down in Austin for work when that clown Gore conceded the election. Downtown Austin was a great party atmosphere that night........

 

[sinewave]

What you're suggesting is that Jeb Bush is prepared to put his entire administration and reputation on the line for a tactic that would affect about 1/3 of 1% of the populaton. Even if it helped Bush win the presidency, that's not intelligent politics to risk your own career over such a miniscule benefit, that being one election, your reputation, and your kids reputation, not to mention the ability of Republicans to win an election for an entire generation.

I think Republicans are smarter than that. You don't take such huge risks over such comparably small benefit.

However, if you believe this, what does that say about your intelligence and possibly the intelligence of every single Democrat across the continental US?

i'm through debating this. it's tiring. i'll leave you with this; it may have been a huge risk but it worked out exactly as planned for the republicans and the bush family. and if you're still sticking to the "it only affects about 1/3 of 1% of the populaton" line of thinking then everything that reggiebar and i have said has either not sunken in with you or you've chosen to ignore it altogether. besides, it's all in the past and trying to convince you, a loyal conservative, that others of your ilk cheated to win an election is a moot point anyway.

 

[War Lord]

i'm through debating this. it's tiring. i'll leave you with this; it may have been a huge risk but it worked out exactly as planned for the republicans and the bush family. and if you're still sticking to the "it only affects about 1/3 of 1% of the populaton" line of thinking then everything that reggiebar and i have said has either not sunken in with you or you've chosen to ignore it altogether. besides, it's all in the past and trying to convince you, a loyal conservative, that others of your ilk cheated to win an election is a moot point anyway.

One more point in this. There are also one thing that you're suggesting about this tactic. Either the Republican party is far more competent than the Democrats because they knew precisely to the millionth's percentage of how people would vote, because that was the only way such a tactic would work, in which case I'm glad that they are running the country because you want the most capable party in power.

 

[sinewave]

One more point in this. There are also one thing that you're suggesting about this tactic. Either the Republican party is far more competent than the Democrats because they knew precisely to the millionth's percentage of how people would vote, because that was the only way such a tactic would work, in which case I'm glad that they are running the country because you want the most capable party in power.

is the most i can muster now. it's like trying to break through the great wall with a toothpick.

 

[reggiebar]

I wouldn't read anything by Greg Palest, he's not exactly educational as much as propagandizing.

...and you know this how? Have you ever read anything by the man? He is actually a great "investigative" journalist. However, you wouldn't know this because you have never actually never read his stuff.

BTW, you truly are completely ignorant to the American politcal system. Have I ever posted on any Canadian politcal threads (if there are any?)? No. Why? I am not educated enough about the Canadian politcal system. You need to do the same.

For the record, from what I know about the Canadian Government and the social system, you live in a great country.

 

[War Lord]

...and you know this how? Have you ever read anything by the man? He is actually a great "investigative" journalist. However, you wouldn't know this because you have never actually never read his stuff.

BTW, you truly are completely ignorant to the American politcal system. Have I ever posted on any Canadian politcal threads (if there are any?)? No. Why? I am not educated enough about the Canadian politcal system. You need to do the same.

For the record, from what I know about the Canadian Government and the social system, you live in a great country.

I know this because he's using a nonsensical point like barring cons from voting as evidence for Republican gaming the electoral system.

I live in a country that was no better than any third world country when the Liberal party was in power. Now that the conservatives are in power and doing a great job, it gives me some hope.

Let's just say that I find the American system fascinating.

 

[hippie_hunter]

Electoral college actually is a good idea. It favors states rights. You see if we did not have it Northern Democrats and Californian Democrats would always control the executive. Look at Bush who won without carrying big states like New York and California. True both states are very important, but I don't believe South Carolina, Oklahoma or Kansas would be pleased if they were deciding what was right for them all the time.

I completely understand, I live in an area of New York that is ignored for New York City, Syracuse, and Buffalo. But in my opinion it hinders democracy. Shouldn't the majority of the people be able to decide whom they want for our leader?

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I completely understand, I live in an area of New York that is ignored for New York City, Syracuse, and Buffalo. But in my opinion it hinders democracy. Shouldn't the majority of the people be able to decide whom they want for our leader?

Then that leads to tyranny of the majority. If the majority always got what they wanted then small states would rarely if ever have a voice.

 

[Man-Thing]

That's exactly right! It's funny when you actually look at the founding father's opinions of a democracy. They hated the idea, and understood that a true democracy will always end in mob rules. Hence they put that whole Republic thing in the constitution.

 

[Man-Thing]

^ Easily the best poster on this site right now (well, second or third anyway). No one should ever laugh this hard at 3 am.

48 buks in the bocks!

 

[reggiebar]

I know this because he's using a nonsensical point like barring cons from voting as evidence for Republican gaming the electoral system.

I live in a country that was no better than any third world country when the Liberal party was in power. Now that the conservatives are in power and doing a great job, it gives me some hope.

Let's just say that I find the American system fascinating.

No, he has many points in that book, but, you can remain ignorant and assume you know what he has researched Keep commenting on something you haven't read, it makes you look real smart

 

[sinewave]

I know this because he's using a nonsensical point like barring cons from voting as evidence for Republican gaming the electoral system.

I live in a country that was no better than any third world country when the Liberal party was in power. Now that the conservatives are in power and doing a great job, it gives me some hope.

Let's just say that I find the American system fascinating.

that's ridiculously narrow-minded. you can't make judgements on something you have absolutely no knowledge about. just the fact that you made that statement proves you know nothing about the book or the author.

you're country was much better than a 3rd world country, don't be silly. the liberals may have been corrupt, but you had a great economy, peace and freedom. what's wrong with that? with all the griping you do about canada and all the praising of america, why have you never attempted to move here?

 

[War Lord]

No, he has many points in that book, but, you can remain ignorant and assume you know what he has researched Keep commenting on something you haven't read, it makes you look real smart

It doesn't take much research to create conspiracy theories.

 

[War Lord]

that's ridiculously narrow-minded. you can't make judgements on something you have absolutely no knowledge about. just the fact that you made that statement proves you know nothing about the book or the author.

you're country was much better than a 3rd world country, don't be silly. the liberals may have been corrupt, but you had a great economy, peace and freedom. what's wrong with that? with all the griping you do about canada and all the praising of america, why have you never attempted to move here?

I said like a third world country and they were. It was just announced on the radio that part of the 2 billion dollar cost of the gun registry involved a single 250 million dollar payment to some company for some computers that was made by the Liberals.

Now that we have an honest government , I'm hoping that it doesn't come to having to consider leaving my country.