prev <-> next
[2004-11-03 16:51:49] - aba: and having 'experience' and tangible actions you can point to is one of the standard advantages of being the incumbent -dave
[2004-11-03 16:50:48] - aba: *nod* I think that was another one of the election issues though. The election is sometimes more about looking forward and who can do better from this point on, rather then looking back at everything that has or hasn't happened -dave
[2004-11-03 16:50:46] - a: haha. I think the title on the message board are such a great feature. I was just reading some of the old ones. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:49:39] - xpovos: about the terrorism thing, I think it depends on what the terrorist situation is in four years. If nothing else really big happens (no terrorist attacks etc) in the next four years, maybe people won't care half so much about it -dave
[2004-11-03 16:49:30] - i always thought it was amusing that bush used kerrys inexperience against terrorism against him when bush was much less qualified for the job when he initially ran. - aba
[2004-11-03 16:48:30] - xpovos: and I think some of that can be attributed to Kerry being the challenger. Bush can point to things he's done as president, Kerry can't. On the flip side, Kerry doesn't have as many large decisions that can be held against him either -dave
[2004-11-03 16:48:24] - Dave: Well, that's certainly true for me.
[2004-11-03 16:48:06] - Dave: Alright, so if the Dems want to succeed, they have to be convincing as a deterant to terrorism, then. Hmm, frankly, I don't think that's enough. That's what Kerry was trying to do right up to the end, and while he's not a great candidate for it, it should've helped him more than it did... -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:47:02] - xpovos: I think the crux of the issue was that people weren't necessarily entirely happy about Bush, but that Kerry couldn't convince them that he had a better plan, or could do better -dave
[2004-11-03 16:46:07] - xpovos: *nod* I believe that's what most of the news outlets are saying. -dave
[2004-11-03 16:44:21] - Dave: So, the threat of terrorism, and fear of terrorists, and the belief that Bush would deal with them better enabled him to win a large enough portion of the population to win the popular vote, in addition to the E.C.? Combined with the solid Rep vote, and the evangelical morals? -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:42:44] - mig: I agree with andrew. Even if Bush's popularity is high, the Democratic base in this country is large enough that they should never assume defeat. - pierce
[2004-11-03 16:42:10] - xpovos: *nod* understandable. Even so, it's decent grounds for thought on what caused the election to go the way it did. Makes sense to me at least that the terrorism issue drastically changed the whole thing -dave
[2004-11-03 16:41:27] - mig: How could they have felt they had no chance of winning? The economy was down then (further than it is now), we'd just finished the initial moves of a very unpopular war, and Bush had lost all his 9-11 steam. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:40:28] - a: what wildcard characters are you referring to? - pierce
[2004-11-03 16:40:12] - Dave: Yup, but when the news media uses them exclusively as they have done so often, and they're very fragile, I'm never much convinced by them on anything they say. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:38:16] - xpovos: but most of that was because everyone just hadn't voted yet, yes? It's understandable how an exit poll could be way off if only 20-30% of the people have voted so far -dave
[2004-11-03 16:38:10] - Pierce: That's esp. true in 1992 since Bush Sr. had just committed political suicide by raising taxes after promising never to (in a very outlandish manner) and then when 'forced to' by the Dems, responded "Read my hips". Aka, kiss my ass. Never apologized. Bush was a lame duck, so Perot attracted a lot of Bush followers. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:37:38] - So given the numbers about the importance of the terrorism issue, who's as frustrated as I am that the bin Laden video was considered a benefit to the Bush campaign? - pierce
[2004-11-03 16:37:02] - xpovos: many times, a dem. candidate will do well in southern / republican states because the republicans become unhappy with their previous candidate etc. Hence why candidates need to "play to their base" -dave
[2004-11-03 16:36:25] - dave: I'm not sure how much we can trust those exit polls. I mean, they're the same ones that predicted Virginia would go for Kerry and all the other erroneous predictions. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:36:14] - xpovos: I think there's a lot of factors, many of them tied to just what events are going on at the time. This election there was a lot about terrorism, and that overrode / changed a lot of things -dave
[2004-11-03 16:36:12] - xpovos: true, but i don't think anyone thought whoever won the democratic nomination had a snowball's chance in hell of beating bush. so they went with the "safe" candidate instead of the supposed fringe candidate to save face if they lost. - mig
[2004-11-03 16:36:03] - It's not quite as clear what Perot supporters considered the "lesser evil", but it's generally accepted that they tilted towards Bush Sr. - pierce
[2004-11-03 16:35:25] - In terms of Clinton's popularity, I don't think you can discount the Ross Perot factor in either of his elections. We talk about Nader as a spoiler with one or two percent of the popular vote, but Perot got almost 19% in 92, and 8.4% in 96. - pierce
[2004-11-03 16:35:11] - I think it gives a lot of credence to Michael Moore's statement: "Bill Clinton was one of the best Republican presidents we've ever had." -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:35:03] - aba: actually, I believe the exit poll data pointed to terrorism. 80% of people who said terrorism was most important voted for Bush. Only around 20% of people said they voted on moral issues, and 80% of those voted for Bush. People who said economy or Iraq were most important voted for Kerry 80% of the time -dave
[2004-11-03 16:33:14] - well, i personally was surprised that kerry did so badly in ohio considering how many jobs were lost there.... i think ultimately though it boiled down to the moral issues which is sad because kerrys views werent particularly liberal while bushs views are extremely conservative. - aba
[2004-11-03 16:32:55] - According to the pundits, Ohio was -supposed- to care about their economy the most. They've been devastated by the departure of industrial jobs. Missouri's interests are not something I can talk about accurately. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:31:51] - Xpovos: thats interesting info about Missouri, btw. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:31:36] - So, my question stands, edited, perhaps. What is it about the northern democrats that causes such revulsion elsewhere, except the west coast? Supposed morality is certainly a part of it, but there's got to be more. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:30:50] - Xpovos: so what do voters in Missouri and Ohio care about the most? -mel
[2004-11-03 16:29:20] - mel: Yep. Ohio and Missouri are key. Missouri has been a good indicator of the whole country for a -long- time. Out of the past 26 elections now, including this one. 25 times they've picked the winner. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:28:04] - mig: the scuttlebutt I've heard from Democrats was all entirely "he's the one with the best chance to beat Bush, therefore we'll make him our candidate." They wanted bush at any cost, and as a result, picked a very poor candidate (IMO). -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:27:57] - aba: scratch Illinois. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:27:26] - i seriously doubt dean couldve done as well.... he was very good in revolutionizing the party, but he was way too out there for the average person to relate to him (although it doesnt seem lik ekerry was able to achieve that either) - aba
[2004-11-03 16:27:01] - aba: thanks So Clinton was able to win Iowa, Ohio, Illinois, Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, Kentucky, Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia. All states that Kerry didn't win this time around. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:26:44] - mel: "Don't ask, don't tell." His policiy for homosexuals in the military. Succinctly sums up his policy for them in the rest of life as well. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:26:39] - mig: i disagree. i think kerry was picked because he "looked presidential" and had a very seasoned experienced record. - aba
[2004-11-03 16:25:46] - although he definitely wasnt as good a public speaker as clinton was. - aba
[2004-11-03 16:25:27] - i was kinda disappointed that edwards didnt win the primary. he wouldve been an interesting though inexperienced candidate. - aba
[2004-11-03 16:25:05] - honestly i think what happened was that Kerry initially was meant to be a sacrifical lamb candidate because back then the demos had no hope of beating bush. Maybe that's why they dumped Dean, because they didn't want to waste a good candidate's effort. And the democrats realized too late they actually had a chance to unseat bush. - mig
[2004-11-03 16:25:03] - Xpovos: ok. makes sense. what did Clinton say about the gay marriage issue? I guess that wasn't as big yet. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:24:12] - Clinton avoided the abortion issue as much as possible. Being a govenor of a southern state made that easier than being a sentor. When he did confront it, it was a very equivocating way, similar to Bush's, but slightly less against it. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:23:40] - Xpovos: (assuming you wrote that) I think you're right that beign a southern Democrat would make a big difference. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:22:56] - mel: http://www.presidentelect.org/e1992.html
[2004-11-03 16:22:53] - Xpovos: what was clinton's positon on abortion? -mel
[2004-11-03 16:22:16] - hmm, who wrote that? Interesting. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:21:58] - But there's more here, I think. -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:21:54] - aba: which southern states was he able to win? -mel
[2004-11-03 16:21:40] - aba: I think you've got a part of it. Clinton was a southern Demo. Gore/Kerry aren't. Dave has a portion of it too. Kerry being a 'Catholic' and pro-abortion -really- hurt in the south. Even more than his Vietnam record and the fact that he's a Massachuttes liberal.
[2004-11-03 16:19:46] - xpovos: clinton was able to carry southern states. the democrats just need to find the right candidate. - aba
[2004-11-03 16:19:12] - xpovos: I believe the same could be conversely said about the republican party and states like california, new york, etc -dave
[2004-11-03 16:18:18] - xpovos: I'm not positive, but isn't one of the prevailing reasons southern states are generally republican is that they tend to have more conservative / religious beliefs? Hence, issues such as gay marriage, abortion, etc etc make it difficult for the dem. party to win them? -dave
[2004-11-03 16:17:25] - aba: ah. thanks. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:17:12] - Xpovos: good question. What is important to the people in the southernm states? I can't really relate to being a southern state (I don't think Northern VA counts) but I know it represnts a huge portion of the country. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:16:26] - mel: you needed a : instead of a ; - aba
[2004-11-03 16:16:08] - http://www.reuters.com/financeNewsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=6705273 Oil prices surge over $1 -mel
[2004-11-03 16:15:37] - So, here's my question. What on earth is wrong with the Democratic party? They can't win a 'southern' state if their lives depended on it. What can they change in their ideology to attract more voters? -- Xpovos
[2004-11-03 16:14:14] - a: feel free to fix the smiley in the title if you want. I don't know why it didn't come out graphical. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:14:00] - Paul: honestly, sometimes I wonder if my tack is the best, whether it might be better to be more forceful about some things. -dave
[2004-11-03 16:13:44] - dave: haha. Thats funny. I get US News and I am sorta tired of the magazine, but the subscription hasn't run out yet. The part I still enjoy though is the amusing quotes and the cartoon in the Washington Whispers page. the quotes are always funny and always made by high ranking government officials. -mel
[2004-11-03 16:11:47] - aba: haha. yes, well I read the article and it doesn't say. I alway wonder how the heck train collisions happen. We had a train derail over by where I live (in Whittier), which I sorta understand. But a head-on collision seems like it would be pretty rare (I hope)
. -mel[2004-11-03 16:11:27] - mel: hehe, yeah. Some of the early speeches, etc, that Kerry gave had some extremely amusing passages in them when he tried to be spontaneous etc. I give him huge props for turning that around and appearing very calm and collective for the mid and latter portions of the campaign -dave
[2004-11-03 16:10:37] - http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/story/249091p-213328c.html Gay marriage rejected in 11 states -mel
[2004-11-03 16:10:25] - pierce: only you would use unixshell style wildcards. ~a
[2004-11-03 16:09:44] - mel: you got me. i only copy the links, i dont write the articles.
- aba[2004-11-03 16:08:59] - aba: wow. how does a head-on metro crash happen? -mel
[2004-11-03 16:07:57] - dave: haha. I like your Kerry quote about waging a more "sensitive war" -mel
[2004-11-03 16:07:55] - Paul: have a stupendously exciting meeting ^_^ -dave
[2004-11-03 16:07:41] - http://www.wtopnews.com/index.php?nid=25&sid=319827 - aba
[2004-11-03 16:07:21] - Paul: I dunno, I guess they do get stomped on a decent bit, but if the goal is to try to get others to see your point of view, stomping back is the worst thing you can do -dave
[2004-11-03 16:06:10] - Dave: Anyway, meeting time. -Paul
[2004-11-03 16:06:09] - http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/6593240/jayz R. Kelly sues Jay-Z for "sabotaging" joint US tour -mel
[2004-11-03 16:05:38] - Dave: Well, either way, I still think you allow people to stomp over your beliefs and candidates far too much here. I'm not sure why you keep coming back.
-Paul[2004-11-03 16:04:54] - http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=businessNews&storyID=6702949 Volkswagen, Europe's largest automaker, guarantees job security for workers in Western Germany in exhcnage for 2 year wage freeze -mel
[2004-11-03 16:04:33] - Dave: I wouldn't worry about it, I just use it as fuel for my anger when other people disagree with me.
-Paul[2004-11-03 16:03:27] - Paul: so, for me, the goal is to not say them in the first place, so as to prevent the later regret -dave
[2004-11-03 16:02:52] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/election.main/index.html "Lambda Legal Defense Fund, a gay rights advocacy group, said Wednesday that it is awaiting certification of the elections but is already preparing lawsuits to nullify the results." There's a healthy respect for democracy for you. -Paul
[2004-11-03 16:02:44] - Paul: I know that I personally extremely regret many things I've said to you when I was upset at one thing or another. But there's not really any way you can take things like that back -dave
[2004-11-03 16:01:54] - Paul: I think it's human nature to want to hit back when someone hits you, but really, I don't think it does any good, and can do much harm -dave
[2004-11-03 16:01:15] -
[2004-11-03 15:59:44] - http://slate.msn.com/id/2107697/ Burger King trying to resurrect its breakfast business -dave
[2004-11-03 15:58:19] - Dave: I believe in trying to treat other people's opinions with respect too but once they start going off on my opinions the metaphorical gloves are off. -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:56:47] - Dave: I understand, but you're telling me that you don't think it would be somewhat justified if you said it to people whose minds aren't going to change and who feel no qualms about doing it themselves? -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:56:13] - heh heh "So consider a classified ad: “Wanted: Articulate, vigorous and optimistic Democrat with impeccable national security/ anti-terrorism credentials. Also must possess a demonstrated capacity to win votes in Southern and border states. Any resemblance to Franklin Roosevelt would be highly advantageous.”" -dave
[2004-11-03 15:53:08] - Paul: Maybe if I was particularly frustrated, but hopefully not. Words like that tend to convey an extreme or irrational feeling about the matter and almost never help in convincing the other party of your viewpoint (fairly sure you understand what I mean since I believe you strive for the same thing) -dave
[2004-11-03 15:49:18] - Dave: Well, what if you had tried to understand the point of view of a Kerry supporter and formed the opinion that Kerry is dumb. Would you say that? -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:48:36] - "While some voters may have felt that Bush was going too far and not heeding the protocols of international law, few, if any, could argue he wasn’t going far enough in his efforts to round up, confine, or kill al-Qaida fanatics. Guantanamo may have gained Bush votes, not cost him votes." interesting thought -dave
[2004-11-03 15:46:53] - Paul: well, I think it'd be hard for me to advocate myself as someone who truly tries to understand the opposite point of view before/while presenting my own if I said something like that -dave
[2004-11-03 15:45:46] - to back up my point about all candidates making bad quotes (I don't really hold this against Kerry) "Perhaps the rhetorical low point for Kerry came when, in one speech, he pledged — in the midst of a string of adjectives — to wage a “more sensitive” war on terrorists." -dave
[2004-11-03 15:45:40] - Dave: Live it down? -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:44:55] - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6393501/?GT1=5809 -dave
[2004-11-03 15:44:43] - "Perhaps partly due to the criticism leveled at him by the Swift Boat Veterans over his allegations of American atrocities during the Vietnam War, Kerry seemed skittish about saying anything that might be perceived as critical of Americans in uniform, even if a few of them were sadistic in the way they treated prisoners. " -dave
[2004-11-03 15:44:32] - "One factor that paradoxically may have made it more difficult for Kerry to attack Bush’s Iraq policy was the prisoner abuse scandal at Abu Ghraib. " -dave
[2004-11-03 15:42:05] - Paul: hehe, it might be funny, but I don't think I could ever live that one down -dave
[2004-11-03 15:41:29] - paul: I guess the French are as bad as the US, just lower profile ^_^ -dave
[2004-11-03 15:41:15] - paul: "A top French general told a visiting retired U.S. Army officer last spring, “Even if our policy here changed 180 degrees and the president (of France) came to us and said, ‘What can we do for Iraq?’ I have troops in Haiti, in the Ivory Coast, in the Horn of Africa, in the Balkans, in Afghanistan." Kinda funny -dave
[2004-11-03 15:40:08] - Dave: Mayhaps. Still, I think it would be great one day if, while people are discussing how much they hate Bush, you just jump in with "John Kerry is an incompetent, maggot filled piece of garbage."
-Paul[2004-11-03 15:37:31] - Paul: I guess I'm just a glutton for punishment, heh heh -dave
[2004-11-03 15:37:09] - Paul
[2004-11-03 15:36:59] - Paul: it was pretty dang funny, even it was it was anti-Bush -dave
[2004-11-03 15:36:22] - Paul: actually, my roomate played me a video that was basically a screen of an e-voting machine, and a guy trying to vote for Kerry, but the Kerry button getting smaller, or moving, or asking him if he was sure, etc etc, until he accidentally votes for Bush -dave
[2004-11-03 15:34:54] - Dave: I do wonder sometimes how you stand some of us. I think you're far too nice and considerate considering the abuse that is often heaped upon your candidates and beliefs here. -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:34:10] - paul: actually, Andrew may have voted for Bush, not sure -dave
[2004-11-03 15:33:59] - Dave: They probably figured their vote would be counted sooner (and therefore kinda count "more") with the electronic machines. I can see the rationale. -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:31:20] - Paul: yeah, it's a wonder I've survived at all after 4 years with you guys ^_^ -dave
[2004-11-03 15:29:47] - Paul: yeah, (about the e-voting machines) that's why I thought it was so amusing that a buncha people turned down paper ballots (because they was so long a line) in favor of getting to the e-voting machine. I think the article said they figured their chances of getting their vote counted were greater with the machine -dave
[2004-11-03 15:29:29] - Dave: Except I guess I would also be sad over the outcome of the election, so I guess I see what you were getting at. -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:25:10] - Dave: I wasn't for Kerry at all. Miguel and Andrew also might not have been for Kerry (but I don't want to put words in their mouth). -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:24:25] - One woman asked a bunch of questions of the person in charge and then stated that she didn't want to vote using that machine. -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:23:51] - Pierce: Where I voted they used electronic voting machines (no paper trail) and while waiting in line they announced that a machine that previously hadn't worked (was crashing) was now working. -Paul
[2004-11-03 15:22:37] - re title: I think everyone was for Kerry except me, and kinda Paul -dave
[2004-11-03 15:14:56] - And at the very least, Democrats (everybody, really) need to mobilize for serious election accountability so that there won't even be a question to ask in the future. - pierce
[2004-11-03 15:13:37] - Given the scandal regarding Walden O'Dell (CEO of Diebold)'s self-described "[commitment] to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president", and Diebold's links to the GOP, this should be a source of great concern. I'm not saying it should necessarily negate this election, but it should tarnish Diebold for future deals. - pierce
[2004-11-03 15:13:32] - Something interesting of note, Ohio had one of the largest discrepancy rates between exit polling and reported numbers. Things I've seen online (but notably absent numbers to back them up) claim that the larger discrepancies in Ohio were in precincts with Diebold machines. - pierce
[2004-11-03 14:07:47] - Though after watching the election crap yesterday i don't know whether to be amused or horrified. - mig
[2004-11-03 13:58:28] - *sigh* a repeat of the 2000 election fiasco would have been so wonderful. oh well. - mig
[2004-11-03 13:48:08] - paul: grrrreat. - aba
[2004-11-03 13:46:50] - aba: Ok, understood. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:41:34] - paul: methinks mel's opinion of you just changed...so now hitler's winning again ^_^ -dave
[2004-11-03 13:40:03] - paul: clinton connected with voters while still appearing intelligent. bush connects with voters by looking like a dumbass. that is the difference, imo. - aba
[2004-11-03 13:38:33] - Mel: You know what, fine. Whatever. I give up. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:37:39] - Paul: ok so now you can enjoy your interreupted conversation with Aparna. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:37:00] - dave: I think you're right. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:36:39] - Paul: enjoy your day. I'm going to go do some work and avoid getting further pissed off. Hoesntly, I think its annoying when you try to make it sound like I am inconsistent with myself. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:36:25] - mel: I think Paul is just trying to find a point, and finding a rubber ball instead ^_^ -dave
[2004-11-03 13:35:28] - Mel: No. Just that I think it's weird that these two conversations are going on at the same time and with completely different viewpoints. Are you saying I can't have an opinion?
-Paul[2004-11-03 13:35:03] - Paul: whatever. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:34:12] - dave: I think paul is diabolically trying to intentionally be confused. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:33:47] - Paul: I am saying what I think, <b>regardlessM/b> of what aparna is saying. what is your point?? That I need to agree with Aparna. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:33:18] - dave: haha. Not intentionally. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:33:17] - Dave: Personally, I think the two of them are secretly conspiring against me.
-Paul[2004-11-03 13:32:21] - paul: I think mel's diabolically trying to confuse you ^_^ -dave
[2004-11-03 13:31:43] - Hmmm, ok. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:31:20] - Paul: Bush does connect with people. He's comes off as dumb a lot, but people don't mind that. They still trust him to lead the country. The american people aren't impressed by book smarts anyway. I think I read some statistic about how they usually favor the lesser-educated candidate. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:30:20] - paul: I don't think aparna is making fun of, or would even agree that Bush has the ability to connect with voters -dave
[2004-11-03 13:29:53] - Paul: well I'm just saying what I think. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:29:42] - kerry was much better than gore though (in respect to connecting with voters among other presidential traits) ~a
[2004-11-03 13:28:55] - Ok, I'm a little confused here then. At the same time Aparna is making fun of Bush for his ability to connect with voters, we have Mel trying to convince me that Clinton's ability to connect with voters is what makes him great?
What am I missing? -Paul[2004-11-03 13:28:53] - Clinton was able to maintain people's trust, regardless of the whole fiasco with Lewinsky. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:27:36] - Paul: Kerrys' marriage to Teresa Heinz just adds to that percpetion. And the coverage of his Christmas in Cambodia stories hurt people's trust in him. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:26:47] - Paul: i think she's right that Kerry doesn't connect with voters in the same way. People see him as a rich New Englander. Clinton was able to connect to everday people in a way that kerry doesn't. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:25:49] - aba: unfortunately, I think a lot of that has to do with media coverage etc, because it's my belief that all candidates say or do things that make them look stupid if presented by the media -dave
[2004-11-03 13:24:57] - mel+aba: Sorry, my bad. I misunderstood. I was just wondering what makes Clinton such a better candidate than Kerry I guess. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:23:29] - Paul: read carefully. She listed three reason (combined) why Clinton was a better candidate than (kerry, bush, or gore). That doesn't mean that each individual reason must apply to each comparison. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:23:26] - the best comment came from my boss who said she found it impossible to vote for someone who went around making up words at will. - aba
[2004-11-03 13:23:15] - aba: which brings up an interesting point - that of how much, or whether being able to get the public to like you translates to being able to do a good job as president -dave
[2004-11-03 13:22:56] - dave: yes well, bush just ends up translating it into looking like he is a giant dumbass. unfortunately, the public seems to still like him.
- aba[2004-11-03 13:22:06] - paul: oh, i wasnt giving those as reasons why i like dhim better than kerry.... just why i liked him so much overall. sorry.
- aba[2004-11-03 13:21:43] - Prop 69 was passed, (Felon DNA Database), which I was really against. If you are arrested for rape or murder, you must give a DNA sample which is put in the CA database. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:21:21] - aba: honestly, I think almost all presidents, regardless of party are quite smart and have grit. Also, I think it's one matter to be smart and have grit, and another to be able to translate that into the public thinking you are smart and have grit. -dave
[2004-11-03 13:20:28] - Well, that post came out all mangled. That's what I get for changing it in the middle of writing it.
-Paul[2004-11-03 13:20:03] - mel+aba: I'm not saying Clinton or Kerry are stupid. I think both he and Kerry are intelligent. I was just surprised to hear Aparna list intelligence as a reason she liked Clinton more than Kerry (unless I misunderstood your post). -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:18:22] - paul: i dont think anyone can deny how smart clinton was. he came from poverty and ended up going through one of the best law schools in the country. he had grit, and i think a lot of people found that very appealing. - aba
[2004-11-03 13:18:02] - aba: ahh ok, I had read that too, but hadn't really read anything necessarily antagonistic or pressuring into it -dave
[2004-11-03 13:17:08] - Paul: Just because someone is intelligent doesn't mean that they have to talk like Kerry does. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:17:04] - paul: i think kerry is a lot more intelligent than bush is, but i dont think he is as good a politician as clinton is/was. clinton had a way of connecting with people from all walks of life while i feel like kerry (and gore) has a wooden feel. - aba
[2004-11-03 13:16:51] - Mel: That's ok, I think only one out of five or so of the propositions I voted on turned out how I wanted it. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:16:47] - Paul: I think Kerry is intelligent. He gets too verbose in his speeches though, its unnecessary. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:15:47] - damn it. I'm checking the CA proposition results right now and most of them didn't turn out how I had hoped either.
-mel[2004-11-03 13:14:58] - aba: You don't think Kerry was intelligent? And do you think Clinton was better at handling the economy than Kerry would be? How so? -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:13:50] - Travis: Tradition I guess. There are the arguments that we need a level between the masses and the election of the president but I doubt many people use that argument anymore. Probably just because that's how it's always been done. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:13:07] - aba: thanks. I like howstuffworks All three were before 1900. so Gore was the only case in "recent" history. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:12:35] - paul: clinton was intelligent, a good politician and had a relatively prosperous run.... i dont think kerry, bush or gore can fill his shoes. - aba
[2004-11-03 13:12:26] - Mel: I suppose so, I just don't think it was within the realm of reason to expect Kerry to win anymore. He would've had to have gotten something like 70% of the absentee votes in order to have won Ohio which I suppose is possible but seems pretty unlikely. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:11:39] - paul: i know it's been covered before, but why do we bother with the electoral college if it's so rare for someone to lose the popular vote and still become president? - travis
[2004-11-03 13:10:40] - mel: here are the other three http://people.howstuffworks.com/question472.htm - aba
[2004-11-03 13:10:15] - Paul: exactly, so that is an argument for waiting longer until all of the votes are resolved. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:09:25] - aba: I totally understand. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:09:14] - aba: A lot of people had/have hopes and dreams on Bush's campaign too. I know both sides hate it when I say this, but the two were very similar in believing that the fate of the world seemed to hang in the balance this election. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:07:53] - Travis: As popular as Clinton was, he never got a majority in the popular vote, for instance. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:07:36] - Travis: In the recent elections? Actually yes. Perot polled respectable numbers in 1992 and 1996 and Nader polled enough in 2000 to deny anybody the popular vote majority. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:06:41] - mel: i know that waiting would have divided the country more... i just felt like his campaign was about issues bigger than that. a lot of people had hopes and dreams hanging on this election, and i just felt like he gave up too easily. - aba
[2004-11-03 13:06:31] - aba: haha. yes, lets bring back clinton.
-mel[2004-11-03 13:06:26] - aba: No, I understand. I know the vast majority of Kerry supporters weren't wild about him but just saw him as better than Bush. I'm a bit surprised you liked Clinton so much though. Why did you like him better than Kerry? -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:06:02] - aba: what four candidates? -mel
[2004-11-03 13:05:53] - paul: i guess that's true, but have third party candidates actually earned enough of the popular vote to make that possible? - travis
[2004-11-03 13:05:42] - I think it was the right thing to do. From what I was reading, I think Bush was going to win Ohio anyway. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:05:40] - only four candidates ever have lost the popular vote to someone else and still become president. - aba
[2004-11-03 13:04:57] - paul: i am actually not a huge kerry fan, but i genuinely believe that he would make a much much much better president than bush. honestly though, id say fuck em all.... we should bring back clinton.
- aba[2004-11-03 13:04:36] - Ack, "principle OR just hating Bush" I mean. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:04:05] - Travis: It only means they didn't get more than 50% of the popular vote. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:04:04] - aba: I give Kerry credit for conceding. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:03:50] - Travis: Well, you might be misunderstanding that sentence. It doesn't mean that they lost in the popular vote to somebody else. -Paul
[2004-11-03 13:03:28] - aba: hey. I was in denial myself this morning. -mel
[2004-11-03 13:03:16] - aba:
Ok, I was just wondering if this was based on principle of just hating Bush. -Paul[2004-11-03 13:01:56] - "the first presidential election since 1988 in which the winner received a majority of the popular vote" see, that's a big problem with this whole electoral college business - travis
[2004-11-03 13:01:47] - paul: sure. i wont deny the fact that i find bush revolting. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:59:59] - aba: Wouldn't you have wanted Bush to concede as fast as possible if the roles were reversed and it was pretty likely that Kerry was going to win?
-Paul[2004-11-03 12:57:31] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/transcript.card.ap/index.html - aba
[2004-11-03 12:57:30] - Travis: Same here (regarding the Kerry supporters in the office). -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:57:22] - after edwards said they were going to contest votes, white house chief of staff andrew card released a statement saying that they were certain that bush had swept the three remaining states and that they were giving kerry time to "compose himself". - aba
[2004-11-03 12:55:55] - i thought it was good that he avoided creating a situation like 2000, because it would divide the country further, and most of the kerry supporters in my office were already admitting there was basically no chance anyway - travis
[2004-11-03 12:55:08] - aba: I could easily be wrong, I was just surprised cuz I hadn't read that anywhere -dave
[2004-11-03 12:54:08] - aba: really? where'd you read that? I just read that Bush was going to come out with a statement, and then delayed when Edwards announced they were going to contest votes. -dave
[2004-11-03 12:50:23] - paul: well, he also had to deal with the bush camp attacking him as dividing the country further. they put a lot of pressure on him this morning to release a statement. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:49:15] - Dave: I'm counting on Miguel's opinion of me to bring my average slightly above Hitler.
-Paul[2004-11-03 12:48:54] - aba: later figures (wed morning) from the officials in Ohio put the figure around 170k, which I think may have been a factor in Kerry's decision -dave
[2004-11-03 12:48:27] - Travis: Those were some quick stages I went through then.
-Paul[2004-11-03 12:48:11] - aba: I'm sure of all the people in the US, Kerry wanted to win the most and if he thought he had a legitimate shot at winning he would've stuck with it. -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:47:45] - paul: what? better than hitler? when did that happen? ^_^ -dave
[2004-11-03 12:45:46] - i thought for a minute that the five stages comment was about paul having to pay adrian and dave
- travis[2004-11-03 12:45:37] - however we will probably never know now.... - aba
[2004-11-03 12:45:20] - if indeed there are 250000 provisional/absentee ballots still remaining to be counted in ohio, i think it is entirely possible that he could have carried the state. it does bring it within the margin.... especially since last election, many of the people who were unable to vote on election day were minorities/traditionally democratic voters. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:42:10] - Travis: Don't worry Travis, you have my support in not voting. Of course, considering the people on this message board that's probably just a little bit better than having Hitler's support.
-Paul[2004-11-03 12:41:14] - aba: Do you think he really would've had a chance had he kept on going? -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:39:13] - paul: probably anger. partially at kerry too for giving in so easily. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:38:40] - most people take for granted things that are just handed to them. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:38:14] - enh, i dont really care who you were going to vote for. i find it pretty depressing that you didnt vote at all.... but then again i think my US citizenship/eligibility means more to me than most people since i actually had to work for it. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:37:56] - aba: Which stage are you in? -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:37:42] - Travis: Me too.
-Paul[2004-11-03 12:37:21] - five stages of dealing with catastrophic news: denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance.
- aba[2004-11-03 12:34:51] - i'm just waiting for all the anti-bush people to jump all over me for not voting - travis
[2004-11-03 12:34:12] - paul: either way i see no point in me being registered since i don't have the intention of voting - travis
[2004-11-03 12:33:35] - http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/voter.turnout.ap/index.html Fine, fine. I concede. I owe Dave and Adrian $5 each. -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:31:44] - Travis: Would you prefer not to be registered then? -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:30:34] - As it is now, you don't know if 40% of the country is too lazy, too ignorant, doesn't care, or cares but just doesn't want to vote for any of the candidates. -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:30:22] - and just to clarify, i am registered so i'm not debating to keep myself from being counted, and i chose not to vote so i'd still be contributing to the nonvoter turnout - travis
[2004-11-03 12:29:42] - Travis: I've heard similar complaints from people who want a "None of the Above" option so their hostility towards all candidates doesn't get lumped in with those who don't care or are lazy (like it is now since they don't vote). -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:26:47] - paul: yeah, they should show both instead of just putting everyone together - travis
[2004-11-03 12:23:04] - Travis: I guess it would be nice to have both statistics though. -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:22:44] - Travis: I actually don't mind it counting you as not showing up because it gives a good indicator of how many people in America aren't voting even if they can so it's kinda a double edged sword. -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:21:13] - travis: you may prefer to not be counted, but the fact still remains that you were ELIGIBLE to vote and you didnt turn up. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:18:55] - aba: But eligible doesn't necessarily mean registered? That would make sense somewhat. -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:18:11] - Dave: I don't doubt that's true, but I would've thought that they would've come out in droves the first time around too. I just can't imagine many Bush voters who would vote this election but not the last one. Republican voters tend to be more reliable and consistent. -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:17:38] - aba: i would prefer numbers that only count registered voters because if you didn't register you've chosen to not take part in the process therefore you're really not part of the equation - travis
[2004-11-03 12:16:58] - eligible probably counts voting age, citizen, never been incarcerated, etc. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:15:00] - paul: and that his base was extremely secure -dave
[2004-11-03 12:14:23] - paul: I read an article somewhere that said that the reason why it went Bush's way even though the turnout was so high, was that the evangelical base turned out in droves -dave
[2004-11-03 12:14:03] - aba: Is there a difference between eligible and registered? ie, does eligible only count voting age? -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:13:14] - Travis: Listen to Aparna here, because she probably knows more about it than I do. I just know that they don't always measure it the same way unfortunately. -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:12:08] - Travis: Often, but not always. You should always make sure it's taken out of eligible (registered) voters instead of just people who are voting age (but not necessarily eligible or registered). -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:11:22] - it matters that you CAN vote and that you didnt even bother to register. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:11:00] - travis: no, i think it is voting age population. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:09:35] - voter turnout percentages are always only counting registered voters, right? - travis
[2004-11-03 12:08:25] - paul: people fucking suck is why. - aba
[2004-11-03 12:08:07] - aba: Yeah, it's not looking good for my bet.
I'm still flabbergasted as to how the turnout was so high and Bush still managed to seemingly get a majority in the popular vote. -Paul[2004-11-03 12:05:13] - http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40485000/gif/_40485913_us_turnout_gra416.gif - aba
[2004-11-03 12:04:01] - Dave: I've seen estimates of 60% somewhere (I forget where) so far but I'm holding out that the absentee ballots will swing it in my favor.
-Paul[2004-11-03 12:03:12] - aba: I think so. -Paul
[2004-11-03 12:03:00] - paul: you seen or figured out the turnout % ? -dave
[2004-11-03 12:02:42] - aba: yes, blacksburg is montgomery county -dave
[2004-11-03 12:01:46] - blacksburg is montgomery county? - aba
[2004-11-03 12:00:42] - aba: Yeah, I think Fairfax is kinda the middle ground between liberal Arlington/Alexandria and the more conservative rest of Northern Virginia. -Paul
[2004-11-03 11:58:42] - alexandria and arlington are far more liberal than fairfax - aba
[2004-11-03 11:58:41] - a: ahh, nm, just saw the link -dave
[2004-11-03 11:58:21] - a: Well, outside of Fairfax County (and Arlington and Alexandria, which were also both blue) the rest of NOVA is still fairly ruralish. -Paul
[2004-11-03 11:58:03] - a: really? I thought northern va was fairly liberal? -dave
[2004-11-03 11:57:35] - /title relax, the worlds not going to end
prev <-> next