If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#321
|
|||
|
|||
Don't forget Dubya has yet to turn down a spending bill in his 3 years in
office. That sure doesn't jibe with your contention. Well, now you're one a different subject entirely -- and one in which I TOTALLY agree with you. Bush is no fiscal conservative, and, as a result, will probably lose my vote. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#322
|
|||
|
|||
Well, now you're one a different subject entirely -- and one in which I TOTALLY agree with you. Bush is no fiscal conservative, and, as a result, will probably lose my vote. To whom? I am also disappointed that Bush has not held the line on domestic spending, but is there any reason to believe that Dean will spend any less? I will be speaking to Gary Nolan next weekend, the most likely Libertarian candidate, but he is so far out on the War on Terror that I cannot support him unless he moderates on that issue. Don -- Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS PP-ASEL Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG |
#323
|
|||
|
|||
"Jay Honeck" wrote:
Bush is no fiscal conservative, and, as a result, will probably lose my vote. Mine, too, for several reasons. But who ya gonna vote for next time? Dean? Ick! -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
#324
|
|||
|
|||
The map shows many things. First, the vast majority of citizens with
old-fashioned American values voted for Bush. Jay, once again. Other than there being more red than blue, how does this map support that? You have taken an opinion and projected it onto data which shows something else entirely. A true statement about that map would be, a majority (not necessarily vast) of voters in a majority of counties voted for Bush, no more, no less. Having worked and lived in big cities for the majority of my life, I can vouch for the fact that very little of traditional America survives in the mindless, soulless wasteland of the inner cities. The fact that these areas recurrently (and dim-wittedly) vote for any Democrat that runs means little to me. Or to the Electoral College. Or to the Supreme Court. The vast majority of productive Americans voted for Bush. Also, a conclusion that could be drawn from your observation is that you believe that there are no Democrats in "middle America". I have asked for facts, you have offered opinion. I expected more. - Carl - --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.550 / Virus Database: 342 - Release Date: 12/9/2003 |
#325
|
|||
|
|||
Wdtabor wrote: What the market does is to manipulate the demand. The market says "You don't *really* want *that*. Here's what you *really* want." Actually, what it says is that if you *really* want that, it will cost you $$$$$. But if that is too much, we can provide this instead at $$$. Try to locate 1/2" plywood at any price in the U.S. Then take a look at how much money the lumber industry spent lobbying Congress for the rules that prevent Canadian companies from selling it to us. And if you don't think there's a demand for it, bring the subject up in home repair and woodworking groups. George Patterson Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is "Hummmmm... That's interesting...." |
#326
|
|||
|
|||
Jay Honeck wrote: Bush is no fiscal conservative, and, as a result, will probably lose my vote. Same here. If there's any decent alternative. So far, I don't see one. George Patterson Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is "Hummmmm... That's interesting...." |
#327
|
|||
|
|||
"Carl Ellis" wrote in message ... "Tom" wrote in message news "Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:ja2Cb.310866$Dw6.1046389@attbi_s02... If you do a web search you'll see reports of between 200,000 to 500,000 popular votes favoring Gore and of course an argument of what that really means. Considering that an estimate 800K to 1.2M illegal aliens voted in the 2000 election, those numbers are dubious. And that's not to mention the several states that had very quesionable vote totals...that all got lost in the Florida flare-up. Do you have a reference for those numbers? I would believe some, but that is awfully large. It was derived from the numbers of illegals that apply for services divided by high/low estimates from INS. I don't remember the exact source, but it came out in May, 2001. AAMOF, my M-I-L, who is 88, has voted in every election since 1936, after coming over from Scotland when she was nine yers old, and has NEVER become a US citizen (as she's now finding out the hard way as she applies for assisted living for seniors). Well, then let's talk about the flawed voter roll purges that occured in both Texas and Florida. http://dir.salon.com/politics/featur...ile/index.html Really credible source, Salon is. Or the shenanigans in Tennessee http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=10589 UH HUH! Sounds like what Jessie Jackson was screeching about in Florida. Plenty of dirt to go around. Better find something better than anecdote for sources. But .... the original assertion was that an overwhelming number of Americans voted for Bush. Simply visit http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm and look at the tabular data, you'll see the results. The argument is AMERICANS...and that implies ONCE, LIVING, NOT A FELON... Consider the Nader votes anti-Bush and Buchanan anti-Gore, add up the other candidates if you like in a similar fashion. Nowhere near overwhelming and the results seem to slightly favor Gore. I remember that in the first hours of the election returns Bush had a 54-46% lead over Gore (at about the 35-45% of votes cast). Considering that rural areas, Bush's strong points, are LATER in getting their numbers in, something funky happened. Recall the election messes that occurred in Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisconsin, Oregon, New Mexico, New York. They never did look into the counties that had HUGH turnouts by dead people, including several counties that Gore won that were very typical Bush territory...even more votes cast than people living there (New York and Penn.). |
#328
|
|||
|
|||
|
#329
|
|||
|
|||
It was derived from the numbers of illegals that apply for services divided by high/low estimates from INS. I don't remember the exact source, but it came out in May, 2001. AAMOF, my M-I-L, who is 88, has voted in every election since 1936, after coming over from Scotland when she was nine yers old, and has NEVER become a US citizen (as she's now finding out the hard way as she applies for assisted living for seniors). Until you have a reference and data it's supposition and unproven. It's a pretty far stretch from applying for services to voting. Well, then let's talk about the flawed voter roll purges that occured in both Texas and Florida. http://dir.salon.com/politics/featur...ile/index.html Really credible source, Salon is. Ok here are more references. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/3594763.htm http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer http://www.examiner.com/opinion/defa...editorial0522w The argument is AMERICANS...and that implies ONCE, LIVING, NOT A FELON... A felony conviction does not permenantly remove your right to vote. If it were I'm sure Admiral Poindexter would be very disappointed. If you read the article you would see that it's not just an issue with felons, it's also just the plain sloppy job the company did, capturing people who had no conviction. Their selection algorithm was just plain flawed. I remember that in the first hours of the election returns Bush had a 54-46% lead over Gore (at about the 35-45% of votes cast). Considering that rural areas, Bush's strong points, are LATER in getting their numbers in, something funky happened. Again, just conjecture. They never did look into the counties that had HUGH turnouts by dead people, Data please. including several counties that Gore won that were very typical Bush territory Not inconceivable. even more votes cast than people living there (New York and Penn.). Live in one county, work and vote in another. References? --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.550 / Virus Database: 342 - Release Date: 12/9/2003 |
#330
|
|||
|
|||
Carl Ellis wrote: Live in one county, work and vote in another. Everywhere I've lived, that was illegal. George Patterson Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is "Hummmmm... That's interesting...." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|