billvon 3,080 #101 July 23, 2004 >Why do I bother to keep posting? I don't know. Hopefully because you enjoy it; there is absolutely no other reason to post here. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #102 July 23, 2004 QuoteQuote No...that's the point. They had a list, but it wasn't of Florida felons. So how could a list of felons who are not even Florida felons have kept Florida felons or non felons from voting? How would the names on a list of Florida voters and TEXAS FELONS intersect? Nice right-wing bias there. You assume the "felon" part is accurate but not the "Florida" part. All he said is they were not Florida felons. They could just have easily have been Floridians who were not felons rather than felons who were not Floridians. In fact MORE easily, since it'd be tought to improperly exclude someone who's not registered to vote in your state (e.g. a Texan in Florida). Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #103 July 23, 2004 Quote Quote62% of improperly excluded voters reported that they are Democrats, and 20% Republicans. So 62% of convicted felons identify with the Democratic Party. I wonder why that is? Likes attract? Pull a hamstring making that leap of logic? Where did Kallend say that 62% of improperly excluded voters were convicted felons? Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peacefuljeffrey 0 #104 July 23, 2004 QuoteHow annoying is Kallends, "PAY ATTENTION", shit? Does he think this is one of his classes? Jesus get off the high horse. You have no authority here. No joke. I've come to let his condescension roll down my back. He does it to me all the time. --Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jazzjumper 0 #105 July 23, 2004 QuoteQuotemost sacred act of American democracy There is no such thing. Democracy runs on the concept of a majority rule. When the majority of the people can vote for one candidate, yet another candidate wins the election, with less votes......it is impossible to call that a democracy. Wrong...democracy is government by the people, especially rule of the majority, not majority rule. We have majority rule in electoral precents. However, to preclude a heavily populated area such as NYC or the greater LA area having an undue influence on the rest of America, the founders decided an electoral process would be a better way to elect the President. If that weren't the case, you'd have 3 states exclusively deciding every election. So, in our instance we are a Federal Republic based on democracy. No matter how good she looks, someone, somewhere is sick of her shit! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jazzjumper 0 #106 July 23, 2004 Quote>I wrote that Gore did not receive a majority. Gore received a majority of the vote. ma·jor·i·ty ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-jôr-t, -jr-) n. pl. ma·jor·i·ties 2. The amount by which the greater number of votes cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes. Nov 2 2000 totals: Total Bush votes: 50,456,002 Total Gore votes: 50,999,897 Gore majority: 543,895 Yes, too bad Gore didn't realize that the president isn't elected by a majority of personal votes, but a majority of electoral college votes. Total Bush/Cheney electoral votes: 271 Total Gore/Lieberman electoral votes: 266 Gore majority: -5....woops, that would mean (OMG) Bush really won!!! No matter how good she looks, someone, somewhere is sick of her shit! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,110 #107 July 24, 2004 QuoteHow annoying is Kallends, "PAY ATTENTION", shit? Does he think this is one of his classes? Jesus get off the high horse. You have no authority here. Not my fault if you're not paying attention to the thread.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
storm1977 0 #108 July 24, 2004 But it does seem a little strange that no one could understand what you were trying to say. Maybe YOU weren't clear enough. ----------------------------------------------------- Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crwtom 0 #109 July 24, 2004 Quote Yes, too bad Gore didn't realize that the president isn't elected by a majority of personal votes, but a majority of electoral college votes. Rest assured that Gore knew how the electoral process works. Still even on the level of electoral votes this was an extremely close election ( hanging on a few FL votes and a few court decisions). With a weak mandate for the current president such as that it would have been more reflective of the will of the people (and more honorable at that) to pursue a more bipartisan, consensus building policy. Instead the Bush admin took an unrelenting winner-takes-it-all attitude and pushed some of the most extreme agendas. Bush's selfproclamation as "the great uniter" has become no more than a cynical joke. Cheers, T ******************************************************************* Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jazzjumper 0 #110 July 24, 2004 QuoteWith a weak mandate for the current president such as that it would have been more reflective of the will of the people (and more honorable at that) to pursue a more bipartisan, consensus building policy. Instead the Bush admin took an unrelenting winner-takes-it-all attitude and pushed some of the most extreme agendas. Bush's selfproclamation as "the great uniter" has become no more than a cynical joke. Cheers, T Well, sure, the people who aren't happy with ultimate results in an election would have that view of things. However, a quick study of US politics from say 1960 on shows that attitude is a complete and utter pipe dream. The fact is the winner in a presidential election does take all...regardless of their self-proclamations. I'm sure Clinton's, "...first black President..." and Gore's, "...I invented the Internet..." comments were ever view as anything other than cynical. I'm sure it would be very reflective of the people if any president were to consider everyone's feelings before he made a decision, but then he'd never get anything done. The US Federal Republic system is about representative government, not majority One a person is elected to Congress, Senate, or President, the founders envisioned them doing what they thought was best for the country...not the rolling tides of public opinion. What the founders envisioned is unarguable, since it is so well documented. Whether what they envisioned is correct or not (or is what the US people want right now) is an entirely different discussion. No matter how good she looks, someone, somewhere is sick of her shit! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,110 #111 July 25, 2004 Quote But it does seem a little strange that no one could understand what you were trying to say. Maybe YOU weren't clear enough. Really? I didn't mention GORE, the Electoral College, the recounts, or the outcome of the 2000 election at all in my initial post to this thread, yet three of you answered as if my post was all about Gore and the recounts. How exactly was that unclear? More likely you all went off with your programmed responses without bothering to read or think about what was actually written.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
