Why does everyone hate Hillary Clinton so much?

For all of you who don't actaully go out and read news (keep thinking TV news is actually news there kids) here is the Florida 2000 story.

Florida's flawed "voter-cleansing" program - Salon.com's politics story of the year BY Greg Palast
Monday, December 4, 2000

If Vice President Al Gore is wondering where his Florida votes went, rather than sift through a pile of chad, he might want to look at a "scrub list" of 173,000 names targeted to be knocked off the Florida voter registry by a division of the office of Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris. A close examination suggests thousands of voters may have lost their right to vote based on a flaw-ridden list that included purported "felons" provided by a private firm with tight Republican ties.

Early in the year, the company, ChoicePoint, gave Florida officials a list with the names of 8,000 ex-felons to "scrub" from their list of voters.

But it turns out none on the list were guilty of felonies, only misdemeanors. The company acknowledged the error, and blamed it on the original source of the list -- the state of Texas.

Florida officials moved to put those falsely accused by Texas back on voter rolls before the election. Nevertheless, the large number of errors uncovered in individual counties suggests that thousands of eligible voters may have been turned away at the polls.

Florida is the only state that pays a private company that promises to "cleanse" voter rolls.The state signed in 1998 a $4 million contract with DBT Online, since merged into ChoicePoint, of Atlanta. The creation of the scrub list, called the central voter file, was mandated by a 1998 state voter fraud law, which followed a tumultuous year that saw Miami's mayor removed after voter fraud in the election, with dead people discovered to have cast ballots. The voter fraud law required all 67 counties to purge voter registries of duplicate registrations, deceased voters and felons, many of whom, but not all, are barred from voting in Florida.

In the process, however, the list invariably targets a minority population in Florida, where 31 percent of all black men cannot vote because of a ban on felons. In compiling a list by looking at felons from other states, Florida could, in the process, single out citizens who committed felons in other states but, after serving their time or successfully petitioning the courts, had their voting rights returned to them. According to Florida law, felons can vote once their voting rights have been reinstated.

And if this unfairly singled out minorities, it unfairly handicapped Gore: In Florida, 93 percent of African-Americans voted for the vice president.

In the 10 counties contacted by Salon, use of the central voter file seemed to vary wildly. Some found the list too unreliable and didn't use it at all. But most counties appear to have used the file as a resource to purge names from their voter rolls, with some counties making little -- or no -- effort at all to alert the "purged" voters. Counties that did their best to vet the file discovered a high level of errors, with as many as 15 percent of names incorrectly identified as felons.

News coverage has focused on some maverick Florida counties that decided not to use the central voter file, essentially breaking the law and possibly letting some ineligible felons vote.

On Friday, the Miami Herald reported that after researching voter records in 12 Florida counties -- but primarily in Palm Beach and Duval counties, which didn't use the file -- it found that more than 445 felons had apparently cast ballots in the presidential election.

But Palm Beach and Duval weren't the only counties to dump the list after questioning its accuracy. Madison County's elections supervisor, Linda Howell, had a peculiarly personal reason for distrusting the central voter file: She had received a letter saying that since she had committed a felony, she would not be allowed to vote.

Howell, who said she has never committed a felony, said the letter she received in March shook her faith in the process. "It really is a mess," she said.

"I was very upset," Howell said. "I know I'm not a felon." Though the mistake did get corrected and law enforcement officials were quite apologetic, Howell decided not to use the state list anymore because its "information is so flawed." She's unsure of the number of warning letters that were sent out to county residents when she first received the list in 1999, but she recalls that there were many problems. "One day we would send a letter to have someone taken off the rolls, and the next day, we would send one to put them back on again," Howell said. "It makes you look like you must be a dummy."

Dixie and Washington counties also refused to use the scrub lists. Starlet Cannon, Dixie's deputy assistant supervisor of elections, said, "I'm scared to work with it because of lot of the information they have on there is not accurate."

Carol Griffin, supervisor of elections for Washington, said, "It hasn't been accurate in the past, so we had no reason to suspect it was accurate this year."

But if some counties refused to use the list altogether, others seemed to embrace it all too enthusiastically. Etta Rosado, spokeswoman for the Volusia County Department of Elections, said the county essentially accepted the file at face value, did nothing to confirm the accuracy of it and doesn't inform citizens ahead of time that they have been dropped from the voter rolls.

"When we get the con felon list, we automatically start going through our rolls on the computer. If there's a name that says John Smith was convicted of a felony, then we enter a notation on our computer that says convicted felon -- we mark an "f" for felon -- and the date that we received it," Rosado said. "They're still on our computer, but they're on purge status," meaning they have been marked ineligible to vote.

"I don't think that it's up to us to tell them they're a convicted felon," Rosado said. "If he's on our rolls, we make a notation on there. If they show up at a polling place, we'll say, 'Wait a minute, you're a convicted felon, you can't vote. Nine out of 10 times when we repeat that to the person, they say 'Thank you' and walk away.

They don't put up arguments." Rosado doesn't know how many people in Volusia were dropped from the list as a result of being identified as felons.

Hillsborough County's elections supervisor, Pam Iorio, tried to make sure that that the bugs in the system didn't keep anyone from voting. All 3,258 county residents who were identified as possible felons on the central voter file sent by the state in June were sent a certified letter informing them that their voting rights were in jeopardy. Of that number, 551 appealed their status, and 245 of those appeals were successful.

Some had been convicted of a misdemeanor and not a felony, others were felons who had had their rights restored and others were simply cases of mistaken identity.

An additional 279 were not close matches with names on the county's own voter rolls and were not notified. Of the 3,258 names on the original list, therefore, the county concluded that more than 15 percent were in error. If that ratio held statewide, no fewer than 7,000 voters were incorrectly targeted for removal from voting rosters.

Iorio says local officials did not get adequate preparation for purging felons from their rolls. "We're not used to dealing with issues of criminal justice or ascertaining who has a felony conviction," she said. Though the central voter file was supposed to facilitate the process, it was often more troublesome than the monthly circuit court lists that she had previously used to clear her rolls of duplicate registrations, the deceased and convicted felons. "The database from the state level is not always accurate," Iorio said. As a consequence, her county did its best to notify citizens who were on the list about their felony status. "We sent those individuals a certified letter, we put an ad in a local newspaper and we held a public hearing. For those who didn't respond to that, we sent out another letter by regular mail," Iorio said. "That process lasted several months."

"We did run some number stats and the number of blacks [on the list] was higher than expected for our population," says Chuck Smith, a statistician for the county. Iorio acknowledged that African-Americans made up 54 percent of the people on the original felons list, though they constitute only 11.6 percent of Hillsborough's voting population.

Smith added that the DBT computer program automatically transformed various forms of a single name. In one case, a voter named "Christine" was identified as a felon based on the conviction of a "Christopher" with the same last name. Smith says ChoicePoint would not respond to queries about its proprietary methods.

Nor would the company provide additional verification data to back its fingering certain individuals in the registry purge. One supposed felon on the ChoicePoint list is a local judge.

While there was much about the lists that bothered Iorio, she felt she didn't have a choice but to use them. And she's right. Section 98.0975 of the Florida Constitution states: "Upon receiving the list from the division, the supervisor must attempt to verify the information provided. If the supervisor does not determine that the information provided by the division is incorrect, the supervisor must remove from the registration books by the next subsequent election the name of any person who is deceased, convicted of a felony or adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting."

But the counties have interpreted that law in different ways. Leon County used the central voter file sent in January 2000 to clean up its voter rolls, but set aside the one it received in July. According to Thomas James, the information systems officer in the county election office, the list came too late for the information to be processed.

According to Leon election supervisor Ion Sancho, "there have been some problems" with the file. Using the information received in January, Sancho sent 200 letters to county voters, by regular mail, telling them they had been identified by the state as having committed a felony and would not be allowed to vote. They were given 30 days to respond if there was an error. "They had the burden of proof," he says.

He says 20 people proved that they did not belong on the list, and a handful of angry phone calls followed on Election Day. "Some people threatened to sue us," he said, "but we haven't had any lawyers calling yet."

In Orange County, officials also sent letters to those identified as felons by the state, but they appear to have taken little care in their handling of the list. "I have no idea," said June Condrun, Orange's deputy supervisor of elections, when asked how many letters were sent out to voters. After a bit more thought, Condrun responded that "several hundred" of the letters were sent, but said she doesn't know how many people complained. Those who did call, she said, were given the phone number of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement so that they could appeal directly to it.

Many Orange County voters never got the chance to appeal in any form. Condrun noted that about one-third of the letters, which the county sent out by regular mail, were returned to the office marked undeliverable. She attributed the high rate of incorrect addresses to the age of the information sent by DBT, some of which was close to 20 years old, she said.

Miami-Dade County officials may have had similar trouble. Milton Collins, assistant supervisor of elections, said he isn't comfortable estimating how many accused felons were identified by the central voter file in his county. He said he knows that about 6,000 were notified, by regular mail, about an early list in 1999. Exactly how many were purged from the list? "I honestly couldn't tell you," he said. According to Collins, the most recent list he received from the state was one sent in January 2000, and the county applied a "two-pass system": If the information on the state list seemed accurate enough when comparing names with those on county voter lists, people were classified as felons and were then sent warning letters. Those who seemed to have only a partial match with the state data were granted "temporary inactive status." Both groups of people were given 90 days to respond or have their names struck from the rolls.

But Collins said the county has no figures for how many voters were able to successfully appeal their designation as felons.

ChoicePoint spokesman Martin Fagan concedes his company's error in passing on the bogus list from Texas. ("I guess that's a little bit embarrassing in light of the election," he says.) He defends the company's overall performance, however, dismissing the errors in 8,000 names as "a minor glitch -- less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the electorate" (though the total equals 15 times Gov. George W. Bush's claimed lead over Gore).

But he added that ChoicePoint is responsible only for turning over its raw list, which is then up to Florida officials to test and correct.

Last year, DBT Online, with which ChoicePoint would soon merge, received the unprecedented contract from the state of Florida to "cleanse" registration lists of ineligible voters -- using information gathering and matching criteria it has refused to disclose, even to local election officials in Florida.

Atlanta's ChoicePoint, a highflying dot-com specializing in sales of personal information gleaned from its database of 4 billion public and not-so-public records, has come under fire for misuse of private data from government computers.

In January, the state of Pennsylvania terminated
a contract with ChoicePoint after discovering the firm had sold citizens' personal profiles to unauthorized individuals.

Fagan says many errors could have been eliminated by matching the Social Security numbers of ex-felons on DBT lists to the Social Security numbers on voter registries. However, Florida's counties have Social Security numbers on only a fraction of their voter records. So with those two problems -- Social Security numbers missing in both the DBT's records and the counties' records -- that fail-safe check simply did not exist.

In its defense, the company proudly points to an award it received from Voter Integrity Inc. on April 1 for "innovative excellence [in] cleansing" Florida voter rolls. The conservative, nonprofit advocacy organization has campaigned in parallel with the Republican Party against the 1993 motor voter law that resulted in a nationwide increase in voter registration of 7 million, much of it among minority voters. DBT Online partnered with Voter Integrity Inc. three days later, setting up a program to let small counties "scrub" their voting lists, too.

Florida is the only state in the nation to contract the first stage of removal of voting rights to a private company. And ChoicePoint has big plans. "Given the outcome of our work in Florida," says Fagan, "and with a new president in place, we think our services will expand across the country."

Especially if that president is named "Bush." ChoicePoint's board and executive roster are packed with Republican stars, including billionaire Ken Langone, a company director who was chairman of the fund-raising committee for New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani's aborted run against Hillary Rodham Clinton. Langone is joined at ChoicePoint by another Giuliani associate, former New York Police Commissioner Howard Safir.

And Republican power lobbyist and former congressman Vin Weber lobbies for ChoicePoint in Washington. Just before his death in 1998, Rick Rozar, president of a Choicepoint company, CDB Infotek, donated $100,000 to the Republican Party.

(Alicia Montgomery, Daryl Lindsey and Anthony York contributed to this story.)

[email protected]


Gregory Palast's other investigative reports can be found at www.GregoryPalast.Com where you can also subscribe to Palast's column.

Gregory Palast's column "Inside Corporate America" appears fortnightly in the
Observer's Business section. Nominated Business Writer of the Year (UK Press
Association - 2000), Investigative Story of the Year (Industrial. Society - 1999), Financial Times David Thomas Prize (1998).
 
Here is the second article that will further explain Florida in 2000.

A Blacklist Burning For Bush
The London Observer
Sunday, December 10, 2000

Hey, Al, take a look at this. Every time I cut open another alligator, I find the bones of more Gore voters. This week, I was hacking my way through the Florida swampland known as the Office of Secretary of State Katherine Harris and found a couple thousand more names of voters electronically 'disappeared' from the vote rolls. About half of those named are African-Americans. They had the right to vote, but they never made it to the balloting booths.

When we left off our Florida story two weeks ago, The Observer discovered that Harris's office had ordered the elimination of 8,000 Florida voters on the grounds that they had committed felonies in other states. None had. Harris bought the bum list from a company called ChoicePoint, a firm whose Atlanta executive suite and boardroom are filled with Republican funders. ChoicePoint, we have learned, picked up the list of faux felons from state officials in - ahem - Texas. In fact, it was a roster of people who, like their Governor, George W, had committed nothing more than misdemeanours.

For Harris, Florida Governor Jeb Bush and his brother, the Texas blacklist was a mistake made in Heaven. Most of those targeted to have their names 'scrubbed' from the voter roles were African-Americans, Hispanics and poor white folk, likely voters for Vice-President Gore. We don't know how many voters lost their citizenship rights before the error was discovered by a few sceptical county officials, before ChoicePoint, which has gamely 'fessed-up to the Texas-sized error, produced a new list of 58,000 felons. In May, Harris sent on the new, improved scrub sheets to the county election boards. Maybe it's my bad attitude, but I thought it worthwhile to check out the new list. Sleuthing around county offices with a team of researchers from internet newspaper Salon.com, we discovered that the 'correct' list wasn't so correct.

One elections supervisor, Linda Howell of Madison County, was so upset by the errors that she refused to use the Harris/ChoicePoint list. How could she be so sure the new list identified innocent people as felons? Because her own name was on it, 'and I assure you, I am not a felon'.

Our 10-county review suggests a minimum 15 per cent misidentification rate. That makes another 7,000 innocent people accused of crimes and stripped of their citizenship rights in the run-up to the presidential race. And not just any 7,000 people. Hillsborough (Tampa) county statisticians found that 54 per cent of the names on the scrub list belonged to African-Americans, who voted 93 per cent for Gore.

Now our team, diving deeper into the swamps, has discovered yet a third group whose voting rights were stripped. The ChoicePoint-generated list includes 1,704 names of people who, earlier in their lives, were convicted of felonies in Illinois and Ohio. Like most American states, these two restore citizenship rights to people who have served their time in prison and then remained on the good side of the law.

Florida strips those convicted in its own courts of voting rights for life. But Harris's office concedes, and county officials concur, that the state of Florida has no right to impose this penalty on people who have moved in from these other states. (Only 13 states, most in the Old Confederacy, bar reformed criminals from voting.)

Going deeper into the Harris lists, we find hundreds more convicts from the 35 other states which restored their rights at the end of sentences served. If they have the right to vote, why were these citizens barred from the polls? Harris didn't return my calls. But Alan Dershowitz did. The Harvard law professor, a renowned authority on legal process, said: 'What's emerging is a pattern of reducing the total number of voters in Florida, which they know will reduce the Democratic vote.'

How could Florida's Republican rulers know how these people would vote? I put the question to David Bositis, America's top expert on voting demographics. Once he stopped laughing, he said the way Florida used the lists from a private firm was, 'an obvious technique to discriminate against black voters'. In a darker mood, Bositis, of Washington's Center for Political and Economic Studies, said the sad truth of American justice is that 46 per cent of those convicted of felony are African-American. In Florida, a record number of black folk, over 80 per cent of those registered to vote, packed the polling booths on November 7. Behind the curtains, nine out of 10 black people voted Gore.

Mark Mauer of the Sentencing Project, Washington, pointed out that the 'white' half of the purge list would be peopled overwhelmingly by the poor, also solid Democratic voters.

Add it up. The dead-wrong Texas list, the uncorrected 'corrected' list, plus the out-of-state ex-con list. By golly, it's enough to swing a presidential election. I bet the busy Harris, simultaneously in charge of both Florida's voter rolls and George Bush's presidential campaign, never thought of that.

But enough is never enough, it seems. We have discovered a fourth group of Gore voters also barred from the polls.

It was Thursday, 2am. On the other end of the line, heavy breathing, then a torrent too fast for me to catch it all. 'Vile... lying... inaccurate... pack of nonsense... riddled with errors'... click! This was not a ChoicePoint whistleblower telling me about the company's notorious list. It was ChoicePoint's own media communications representative, Marty Fagan, communicating with me about my, 'sleazy disgusting journalism' in reporting on it.

I was curious about this company that appears - although never say never in this game - to have chosen the next President for America's voters. Its board dazzles with Republican stars, including billionaire Ken Langone and Home Depot tycoon Bernard Marcus, big Republican funders.

Florida is the only state to hire an outside firm to suggest who should lose citizenship rights. That may change. 'Given a new President, and what we accomplished in Florida, we expect to roll across the nation,' ChoicePoint told me ominously.

They have quite a pedigree for this solemn task. The company's Florida subsidiary, Database Technologies (now DBT Online), was founded by one Hank Asher. When US law enforcement agencies alleged that he may have been associated with Bahamian drug dealers - although no charges were brought - the company lost its data management contract with the FBI. Hank and his friends left last year and so, in Florida's eyes, the past is forgiven.

Thursday, 3am. (I should say both calls were at my request). A new, gentler voice giving me ChoicePoint's upbeat spin. 'You say we got over 15 per cent wrong - we like to look at that as up to 85 per cent right!' That's 7,000 votes-plus - the bulk Democrats, not to mention the thousands on the Texas list. Gore may lose by 500 votes.

I contacted San Francisco-based expert Mark Swedlund. 'It's just fundamental industry practice that you don't roll out the list statewide until you have tested it and tested it again,' he said. 'Dershowitz is right: they had to know that this jeopardised thousands of people's registrations. And they would also know the [racial] profile of those voters.'

'They' is Florida state, not ChoicePoint. Let's not get confused where the blame lies. Harris's crew lit this database fuse, then acted surprised when it blew up. Swedlund says ChoicePoint had a professional responsibility to tell the state to test the list; ChoicePoint says the state should not have used its 'raw' data.

Until Florida privatised its Big Brother powers, laws kept the process out in the open. This year, when one county asked to see ChoicePoint's formulas and back-up for blacklisting voters, they refused - these were commercial secrets. So we'll never know how America's president was chosen.

ChoicePoint complains that I said Harris signed their contract. It was a Beth Emory. I'm still more than 85 per cent accurate.

Gregory Palast writes the Award-winning column, Iside Corporate America fortnightly in Britain's Sunday newspaper, The Observer, part of the Guardian Media Group, where this first appeared. For comments or request to reprint, contact:www.gregorypalast.com
 
So, all of you who ACTUALLY KNOW NOTHING about what happened in Florida can now get a clue if you take the time to read what really happened in the 2000 election. So, save it about your electoral vs popular vote nonsense. That election was STOLEN - plain and simple.
 
wow I have read this article and now know what really happened...Sarcasm brought to you by the friends of Roach committee
 
I find it funny that Reggie acts like we dont nkow this already.
 
Darthphere said:
I find it funny that Reggie acts like we dont nkow this already.

yeah, what year is this again? this is old news, reggie. sorry.
 
sinewave said:
yeah, what year is this again? this is old news, reggie. sorry.

Well, when people state that the election in 2000 was not rigged I have to show sources that it was rigged.

So, don't state that Bush won in 2000 and I won't post these reminders.

BTW, if this is still not outragous, you are simply one of the sheep who is being led to slaughter by Bush.
 
hippie_hunter said:
You obviously don't read your Consitution, you win the Presidency by winning the electoral vote, not the popular vote, and Bush did win Florida. All the Supreme Court did was stop the recounts that would have never ended by Gore. Get over it, it's done, look foward to 2008

BTW, Darth & Co. clearly hippie_hunter doesn't know this information.

So, raffle down there kiddies.
 
reggiebar said:
Well, when people state that the election in 2000 was not rigged I have to show sources that it was rigged.

So, don't state that Bush won in 2000 and I won't post these reminders.

BTW, if this is still not outragous, you are simply one of the sheep who is being led to slaughter by Bush.

i appreciate your passion, but you don't know me or anyone else on these boards. sure, there's people here who think the '00 election was won by bush fair and square and that there was no rigging involved in it, but the majority are well aware of it. you don't have to take differing opinions personally. nobody likes a person who tries to shove their opinions down your throat, especially when they insult you at the same time. just keep your cool and stick to the facts.
 
okay I did. while he still would be a better candidate than Bush, I don't really like him that much. He's too moderate for me. I'm a far left, and for me things really need to get done, and I don't think he would acheive much. I think he would push us slightly in the right direction, but it doesn't seem like he would really tackle the problems we have and make something happen.

Now he sounds like he would have a descent chance of winning, but personally as a lifelong Liberal I feel the deomcratic party does not need to come to the center.
They simply need new faces, with new ideas and they need to bring new issues to the table. new solutions. they need a plan.

To me, he sounds just too moderate. I agree with him on many of the issues, but thre are some that I don't. However politicians evolve over time, for all we know he could run as a far lefty inspired energized and different from what he was in the past. Ya never know.

Why couldn't Howard Dean have been more likeable and electable?
 
Spider-Bite said:
Why couldn't Howard Dean have been more likeable and electable?

Because CNN and other Media networks kept running his rebel yell.
 
Dick Gephardt. Gephardt, Gephardt, Gephardt, Gephardt, Gephardt, Gephardt, Gephardt, Gephardt, Gephardt, Gephardt, Gephardt.... GEPHARDT!!!!
 
I think the media totally protrayed him falsely at that time. This was the guy to get you on your feet. Get the crowd pumped.

when he talked you could hear the passion in his voice as he would get all into it.

To me that's a good thing. but all the media showed was the same 10 second "yeaaaaahhh" over and over again so people didn't get the complete picture of who Howard Dean was. All they saw was an excited lunatic, instead of the passionate excited Liberal he was.

and as Governor this guy was amazing! He achevied a lot!
 
Dean's not in a position to run now, much as I would've liked to see him do so.
 
Sandman138 said:
Dean's not in a position to run now, much as I would've liked to see him do so.

I agree. I think he'd make an excellent president, but he just can't win the election.:(
 
reggiebar said:
Again, you clarly don't know all the fact reagrding Florida, so raffle down.

I tend not to beleive those reports, politics has the worse sore losers ever. On both sides. If Gore or Kerry won the election people like lazur or War Lord would be saying the same damn thing you are saying :o
 
Sandman138 said:
Kerry was good, he got just didn't combat the spin machine well, and he shot himself in the foot by going windsurfing. But in Massachusettes, he was known in his role as Assistant DA for hiring based on merit, something that was not done all that much in Boston politics. I'd much perfer that to the Bush Administration's nepotism, you know the kind that put Brownie in charge of FEMA and a pedophile in the Department Of Homeland Security (great way to kick off an EXPANSION OF GOVERNMENT CONTROL).

Very true, Kerry's merit based hiring is far superior to Bush's nepotism. But Kerry's ideas just seemed too idealistic and he came off as a man who just wanted a vote by going hunting, voting for the war in Iraq but then opposing it, etc.
 
hippie_hunter said:
I tend not to beleive those reports, politics has the worse sore losers ever. On both sides. If Gore or Kerry won the election people like lazur or War Lord would be saying the same damn thing you are saying :o

hey, didn't you hear the guy? raffle down! :mad:

seriously, what the hell does that mean?
 
Spider-Bite said:
okay I did. while he still would be a better candidate than Bush, I don't really like him that much. He's too moderate for me. I'm a far left, and for me things really need to get done, and I don't think he would acheive much. I think he would push us slightly in the right direction, but it doesn't seem like he would really tackle the problems we have and make something happen.

Now he sounds like he would have a descent chance of winning, but personally as a lifelong Liberal I feel the deomcratic party does not need to come to the center.
They simply need new faces, with new ideas and they need to bring new issues to the table. new solutions. they need a plan.

To me, he sounds just too moderate. I agree with him on many of the issues, but thre are some that I don't. However politicians evolve over time, for all we know he could run as a far lefty inspired energized and different from what he was in the past. Ya never know.

Why couldn't Howard Dean have been more likeable and electable?

Baby steps, man. Baby steps. You won't be able to go from the uber right wing climate we have today to a hard left President. Not gonna happen. Has to happen in small steps with a left-leaning moderate first and then more progressive folks as the political climate changes. That's one of the reasons why Warner is a viable candidate.

jag
 
Spider-Bite said:
I agree. I think he'd make an excellent president, but he just can't win the election.:(

Actually, I think he could get elected, but it's not worth losing him as the Chairman of the DNC.
 
Sandman138 said:
Actually, I think he could get elected, but it's not worth losing him as the Chairman of the DNC.

was that sarcasm? because he's not exactly doing a great job in that role right now.
 
reggiebar said:
We were speakign of full fledged war on Iraq which didn't happen there Sparky!

This is what you said:

Did we go into Iraq under Clinton?

The answer is yes, we did go into Iraq under Clinton, if my father wasn't on leave he would have gone there when Operation Desert Fox occured.

BTW, my Bush bashing is far from idiotic. Blindly supporting the single worst President in the history of the US is idiotic.
It's sterotypical. Which annoys the hell out of me. It tells me that no matter what, you'd oppose any idea that Bush supported even if it was a good idea. And everything you have said, I heard before, over and over, and over.
Me, I find Bush to be a rather mediocre President. His PATRIOT Act is unconstitutional, he's let America be more politically divided than ever before, the war in Iraq has become a disaster and Iraq is on the verge of civil war, his doesn't come off as a smart man, he's arrogant and ignorant, he's a fiscal idiot. He's appointed men into offices that they don't deserve (such as Brown in FEMA, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, etc.), his enviromental policies are not good for the enviroment, and the deficit is rediculous. But he has done a few good things, such as rallying the nation after the September 11th attacks and the destruction of the Challenger space shuttle, he's deposed an evil man out of power in Iraq (good, but the aftermath, not so good) and he's refused to join the Kyoto Protocol. But he is not the worst President. There are plenty who are much, much worse.

For the record, it is not the late 60s and there really are no hippies anymore so you might want to move on with those outdated concepts.
There are still hippies in this world. PETA and Greenpeace are downright hippies.
 
Spider-Bite said:
I agree. I think he'd make an excellent president, but he just can't win the election.:(

Dean tends to piss off Republicans. It is not a good idea to piss off swing-voting moderate Republicans.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,560
Messages
21,760,195
Members
45,597
Latest member
Netizen95
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"