It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

2004 Electoral Disaster (truthout.org)

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
And cities do matter, a lot. They are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the gross national product. Why should the economic engine of this country be forced to follow a political ideology it does not agree with?


For their own good because we are right and they are wrong!




posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
... unless the coyotes suddenly get a vote.


Uh-oh ... I detect coyote disenfranchisement!


That 'open space' really isn't open ... small towns, big towns
that aren't cities ... I understand where you are coming from
on this, but I still (respectfully) disagree. For a candidate to
carry some big cities and not the rest of America, puts him
(or her) out of touch with most of America.

BTW - The cities are the economic drive in America? True, but
The bread basket feeds those cities. Without the grain from
Kansas ... NYC would be dead in a week.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phoenix
ID really needs to be required at the poll. Claims of intimidation fall flat when one realizes most are not claiming this when cashing a check, buying liquor or many of the other mundane daily occurances where ID is needed.


Absolutely. How could any any election actually be called fair if EVERYONE doesn't have to prove who they are and that they have the right to vote? Sounds like more potential there for fraud and abuse of the system than in any of these machine problems.


If electronic voting is un-reliable then we need to go back to the tried and true paper ballot (no chad) marked with an indelible pen - if you can't properly fill it out tough luck.


Again, agreed. Voting is a right that all Americans have and are born with (just don't get to excercise it until 18). All Americans are entitled to vote. Americans are not entitled to someone coming behind them and making sure they know how to vote or that they did it correctly. Perhaps having the ability to correctly cast your vote is the last darwinistic indicator of suitability to vote.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
No, it doesn't. Because the overwhelming majority of US land is open space, color maps are pointless... unless the coyotes suddenly get a vote.


And cities do matter, a lot. They are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the gross national product. Why should the economic engine of this country be forced to follow a political ideology it does not agree with?


I'm surprised SO, maybe that eye patch is distorting your depth perception. You want to set an economic standard for who's vote counts? Sounds divisive to me, and more than a wee bit condescending... I live in rural America because I can, I don't need urban blight to support my financial needs (and I would believe you are not so encumbered as well, you choose to live in New York). I travel 300+ days year, sometimes in metropolitan areas (I’m in Columbus now, sometimes in more rural areas, I was in Fort Dodge, Iowa earlier this year… It doesn’t get more rural than that) I deal with every imaginable type of person, not just my patients, but contractors, medical sales, service industry types, you name it… Then I deal with people in my ordinary life… More of the same, and I fail to see where any one lifestyle, economic strata, or moral belief trumps another. Rural America feels as if it’s under attack, don’t believe me? When’s the last time you’ve seen a national “movement” that started in B.F. Nowhere? Me neither, they are products of population centers, usually by people that have too much time on their hands (read unemployed, or unemployable). Eschew America’s heritage, and you eschew America, if you want to form a New Nation, molded in a 21st Century urban vision, strike up the revolutionary banner and have at it… It would be interesting… A little revolution every once in a while is a good thing. I for one would not rise to your call, nor do I think many would… There isn’t enough “Hatfield and McCoy” to the “Country Bumpkin vs. The City Slicker” scenario.

On a final note, don’t deride the voting rights of coyotes, unlike many registered democrats (*cough* Chicago *cough*), they have a pulse.


A viewpoint from four years ago...



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
You tell SO it shouldn't be believed because it's "from" a certain site, yet you won't believe it it's not from a certain site..... It really shouldn't matter...what should matter is that the information be confirmed and then dealt with accordingly, not just totally dismissed because it's not from a site you prefer.


It shouldn't be dismissed but it is kinda odd only Bush got "extra" votes. Sounds fishy to me.

As for the source. In my opinion it does matter. A Pro-Kerry website would want to cast a shadow on the Bush adminstration. It would benefit the Democratic Party to leave questions in the voters head like "did Bush cheat" or "did the republican party program the machines to cheat".

Like i said, it should not be dismissed but it does need to be looked into. We have to get the voting system down, it is ridiculous.

Koodos to Kerry for not dragging the election out in the courts.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by AntiPolitrix
Koodos to Kerry for not dragging the election out in the courts.


I ditto this! Everyone expected him to whine and drag America
through the year 2000 fiasco again. His 10,000 lawyers on
standby never were able to be used. I don't know if he 'did the
honorable thing' and didn't challenge ... or if he saw the writing
on the wall and knew it would be useless ... either way ....
He did the right thing, and I'm glad (and surprised).



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ambient Sound
Perhaps having the ability to correctly cast your
vote is the last darwinistic indicator of suitability to vote.


This is pure wisdom!! If I had any 'way above'
votes left, you'd get one!



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me You want to set an economic standard for who's vote counts? Sounds divisive to me, and more than a wee bit condescending...
Ah... someone nearly grasped the irony of the question at hand. Keep digging... it's there.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mynaeris

Lady V you are 100% correct they wanted neither Bush nor Kerry. So its a leap to add them to the Kerry tally. As I have said numerous times - its scary that even with the great anybody but Bush sentiment - Kerry could still not carry the day.


That is what i don't unserstand from reading these replies. It seems that the only person that could have cheated was Bush. "So its a leap to add them to the Kerry tally." Yes it is. Lets say all votes that didn't go for Bush should go to Kerry. What is that?



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:18 AM
link   
I think the reason Kerry did not want this to go to the courts is because he knows what will happen. Both sides would have their say on what went on. It would be hard for him to complain about Ohio, If he knew that Philly and Wisconsin were fraught with Democratic voter irregularities.

Kerry comes out looking like a statesman instead of a sore loser. Gore will always have that tag assigned to him. In 20 years from now, we will see Gore's phote with the caption, Vice President, a sore loser.

Kerry wants this over and the longer the Democrats keep bringing this up, the longer it takes for him to fade into the history of America.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Ah... someone nearly grasped the irony of the question at hand.

Keep digging... it's there.


No need to dig SO, I know you were paralleling the moral/religious paradigm that many have perceived as being the wedge in this election. Since I don't subscribe to it, and I am not a Christian, the argument is lost on me. When the “Jack Booted Thugs” start marching through the streets and kicking in doors, call me.. I'll be the first to take up arms against any Administration, Republican or Democrat that would try to usurp the Constitution. Until then, I will watch, keep close counsel on the machinations of both parties, and vote my conscience... As I would expect all Americans would do...



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
And honestly, I don't believe anything CNN or CBS says.
If someone posted something that they were reporting,
I'd have to see it backed up by at least two or three other
sites before I'd consider it to be remotely true.



Yeaaaaaa, this is how it is. Got to get a second and third souce. Then and only then is it possibly correct. Too many media providers out there with their own agendas. Beware what you believe.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
I will watch, keep close counsel on the machinations of both parties, and vote my conscience... As I would expect all Americans would do...

But you do know of course that is not "most" of those that voted Bush....many, many voted him because the think he is a demi god for morality. You know this is true whether you will admit it or not.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
I will watch, keep close counsel on the machinations of both parties, and vote my conscience... As I would expect all Americans would do...


Aye! And theres the rub!!

How do you know that vote will mean anything? eh?

And money has no political affiliation.

I think what is making the right uncomfortable with this situation is that "the fix" has favoured the repubs in 2004. Could it favour the dems in the future? Maybe. Perhaps then we will have more concerned republicans. For now they seem happy with the result and not bothered by voter fraud.

I don't see the "just get over it" crowd willing to give up their willful blindness anytime soon.

Sad state of affairs. If you wait for the Jack Booted Thugs it will be too late.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mirthful Me I know you were paralleling the moral/religious paradigm that many have perceived as being the wedge in this election.
Ohhh... too bad... so close... what's our consolation prize Johnny? The Overlord is about to shock you with a link: www.fed-soc.org... Amendment X is important here.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
But you do know of course that is not "most" of those that voted Bush....many, many voted him because the think he is a demi god for morality. You know this is true whether you will admit it or not.


I know that there was only one viable candidate that gave a hint of morality (morality in a politician is one of those oxymoron’s you can take to the bank), and despite John Kerry's penchant for holding campaign functions in church, no one believed that he wore the mantle of fealty to God (or anyone else, John is his own master), it was merely a "prop", necessary to hold sway over "conservative" democrats.

Gay marriage? Abortion? I could care less, I'm not going to have either one. I care about fiscal policy, foreign relations, constitutional integrity (this will bring the naysayers out in droves), the issues outlined in the Constitution, and delegated to a small Federal Government, not contrived in the media. When we all stop worrying about someone else’s soul, and pay a little more attention to our own, we will have turned the corner on morality as a political issue.



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 11:47 AM
link   
(monkies need to look one post up to see how similar they are to skeptic super heros)



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Ohhh... too bad... so close... what's our consolation prize Johnny?

The Overlord is about to shock you with a link: www.fed-soc.org...
Amendment X is important here.


For those not familiar with SO's reference to Amendment X.


The Constitution of the United States-Bill of Rights
Amendment X - Powers of the States and People. Ratified 12/15/1791.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.


Precisely SO, the "wedge" were State Referendums, there was no "National" Referendum, nor was there a "national campaign" (despite those who will voraciously post to the contrary). Yes, there was an implied issue, and there was a grass roots movement within the evangelical community, but this would imply a “Moral Majority” (see my previous post), capitulation should not be the goal right now for the opposition. Introspection and the will to devise a cohesive platform that will yield results in 2006, and 2008. I have posted many times on the dangers of the Republican Party becoming dominant within the electoral process. The value of “the best” (ask me about my ideas on candidate reform
) from both parties cannot be underestimated.

p.s. “Price is Right” is just so daytime…

Jeopardy Monkeys, not just for the “Final Question” anymore…



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
And cities do matter, a lot. They are responsible for the overwhelming majority of the gross national product. Why should the economic engine of this country be forced to follow a political ideology it does not agree with?


Well true, IF all employees in said city lived in that county occupied by that city. How many employees in NYC commute from outside of NYC each day? I work in Syracuse but I don't live in that county. There are lots of us that may work in a city but prefer to live elsewhere. If you look at it from your perspective SO then you are predominantly looking at the minority vote as they typically do not commute 20-50 miles each way to work in a city but live in a different county. The economic engine? I'd say the executives who make the decisions and solve the problems don't all live in the cities.

[EDIT]: Sorry, point got lost. Not everyone who may work in an economic engine (city) may vote in that same economic engine. That muddying of the water makes it difficult to say the economic engines voted their choice when you have to consider that many working in that economic engine don't live in that economic engine. Thus their votes are counted elsewhere.

An interesting study would be an analysis of the counties surround these economic engines. How did they vote? Maybe democrat for all I know. Would be very telling though if suburban counties (relevant to big cities) exhibited a strong republican vote...


[edit on 11/8/2004 by titian]



posted on Nov, 8 2004 @ 12:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadyV
....many, many voted him because the think he is a demi god for morality.


I voted for him (and those I know who voted for him), voted for
him because he was a better choice than John Kerry. If the dems
had put up Gephardt or Lieberman .... things would have been
very different. They had a much better chance at beating G.W.
than Kerry (for MANY reasons)

(I do not support a Constitutional Anti-Gay Marriage Amendment.
This is a states rights issue, as far as I am concerned. Everyone
I know who voted for G.W. feel the same way. It wasn't so much
a 'morality' thing, as a John Kerry is incompetant thing.)



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join