2012-11-03, 23:26 | Link #2061 | |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
In possible relation to that:
Police blow up 'suspicious' items at Fla. early-voting site http://news.msn.com/us/police-blow-u...y-voting-site/ Quote:
This would seem to be in Florida Congressional District 7 (Republican seat since 1993)
__________________
Last edited by Ithekro; 2012-11-03 at 23:42. |
|
2012-11-03, 23:37 | Link #2062 |
Juanita/Kiteless
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New England
Age: 40
|
So some people are very concerned about Obama turning America into a "socialist" nation (although it might only be as socialist as Austria or Switzerland).
If Romney is elected, do we have to worry about him/the GOP turning America into a plutocracy and an aristocracy? Would those be unfounded concerns? Would that be a more valid set of concerns than the people who think Obama will turn the country into a 'socialist' nation? Are we really seeing America turn into a plutocracy and aristocracy? Are the democrats going against that, or not really because of status quo and all of that?
__________________
|
2012-11-03, 23:51 | Link #2063 | ||
cho~ kakkoii
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
|
Quote:
GOP sure can use another Eisenhower right about now.... Quote:
So the choice comes down to who is stretching the truth less or lying less. I know it's a sad affair, but that's pretty much the choice we've got right at this moment.
__________________
|
||
2012-11-04, 00:22 | Link #2064 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Age: 40
|
Quote:
I agree with you about what would come if Romney is elected. Since Nixon and onwards, the Republicans have always been doing everything for some form of aristocracy to remain on top while the rest of the population would suffer at the hands of a few. If you asked me, I think the GOP deserve a 20-year drought out of the Presidency, the same length in time when the Roosevelt-Truman administration kept a sustained success. |
|
2012-11-04, 00:29 | Link #2066 | |
cho~ kakkoii
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
|
Quote:
I concur!
__________________
|
|
2012-11-04, 00:37 | Link #2067 | |
Meh
Join Date: Feb 2008
|
Quote:
blasphemy! Eu all the way! especially delusion Eu! |
|
2012-11-04, 00:48 | Link #2069 | |
Juanita/Kiteless
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New England
Age: 40
|
Quote:
I don't like the democrats telling outright lies in their campaign ads and campaign efforts, and they are the ones I'm rooting for. I hate that the GOP does it, and I don't like seeing the democrats resort to that. I think the democratic party aligns with the truth more, is what I've gathered. That is one reason why I'm for them and not the GOP. Don't get me wrong, go to a fact checking site and you'll see plenty of instances where the democrats do so-so, poorly, or fail on a truth-o-meter. People keep voting the same people into power based on political affiliation because that matters. It is part of the broken system we have here. People want the house and senate to have a majority that is of their political party of choice. I'd be so worried if Romney become president and then we had GOP dominance with the two houses of congress. They'd steamroll forward, making a lot of changes I don't want to see.
__________________
|
|
2012-11-04, 00:50 | Link #2070 | |
Nyaaan~~
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 40
|
I just watched the movie "Recount" with Kevin Spacey and Dennis Leary .. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1000771/
I thought one of the ending quotes was poignant: Quote:
|
|
2012-11-04, 00:55 | Link #2071 | |
Juanita/Kiteless
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New England
Age: 40
|
Quote:
What is the deal with the recount? With all the misinformation there is these days, well, with the 2000 election, who really won? Was it Gore? Was the recount a cheat? Or did Bush Jr. actually win? I've heard a lot that Gore actually won, but I'd like to verify whether that is true or not. Like I said, lots of misinformation out there. Just because you hear something a lot about American politics, doesn't make it true.
__________________
|
|
2012-11-04, 01:09 | Link #2072 |
Nyaaan~~
Join Date: Feb 2006
Age: 40
|
Urzu 7 -- The short answer is no one knows.
The longer answer, my personal interpretation is: If you have any experience with reams of information and data .. databases of any kinds or thousands/millions/billions of transactions .. then you also know that there will always be errors. Software errors, machine errors, human errors. There will be votes for each side that will get excluded, depending on the methodology you employ. Now, as a person who is aware of statistics .. I will say this .. the results of the election were so close, any victory declared for either individual would be within the "standard error" Ultimately, the fact pattern is this: 1) Bush was declared the winner by the news stations 2) After the initial count, Bush remained the winner 3) After every "recount" Bush was always ahead, albeit at small or very small margins 4) There were problems with the voting process and the recount process 5) The dispute itself was deemed to be harmful to the electoral process |
2012-11-04, 01:10 | Link #2073 |
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
Author
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 66
|
Several states had documented miscounts in key counties, enough to have flipped the results. The Supreme Court jumped in to rule before Florida had gone through due process with the bogus reasoning of the "people needed a result fast". However, Gore conceded (mostly out of an over-rated idea of not tearing the country apart).
Ever get the feeling you've been "dog and ponied" on a product that doesn't really work? That's the feeling I got from the 2000 election. And the more I dig, the less pristine it looks. edit: willx's bullet points are correct, though the recounts focused on Florida though later analysis found that Ohio had even more problems.
__________________
|
2012-11-04, 01:19 | Link #2074 |
Juanita/Kiteless
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New England
Age: 40
|
Who knows what things could be like if Al Gore became president in 2000...maybe things could be worse now, but I'm inclined to think that things would be better now. Eight years of Bush Jr., we should have never had that.
__________________
|
2012-11-04, 01:22 | Link #2075 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Tennessee
Age: 36
|
Yeah, I agree. On a personal level, I liked Bush Jr. and he made for some pretty hilarious debates with Al Gore in 2000... but he was a bad president. My sorest point with him is the restrictions he put on stem cell research.
|
2012-11-04, 01:23 | Link #2076 | |
cho~ kakkoii
Moderator
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 3rd Planet
|
Quote:
As for the 2000 election, Gore is (I think) the first candidate who won the popular vote, but lost the election because Bush won the electoral vote count. What took place in Florida and Ohio are still anyone's guess, but there were enough evidence to get a few conspiracy theories going. That election will always have an asterisk beside it when it is put against the previous presidential elections in the history of USA.
__________________
|
|
2012-11-04, 01:47 | Link #2077 | ||
Me at work
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
2012-11-04, 02:07 | Link #2078 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 46
|
The last theory that I heard was that if Gore had not conceded and they followed his Parties plan to recount only the districts in question, Bush would have won.
However, if the Bush plan to recount the entire state had gone through instead, they say Gore would have won. Weird, eh? Simply put, the time the electoral college is counted is in December, and that was the deadline to get stuff done. Oh and for historical purposes, there have been four elections where the one with the popular vote has not won. The Election of 1824 was decided by the House of Representitive because there was no majority in the Electoral College. However I would point out that in 1824, the United States had only one remaining fuctional political party. The aftermath of the election saw the birth of the National Republican Party (later the Whig Party) and the Democratic Party from what had been the Democratic-Republican Party. There would four men up for the office and the split was too great. Andrew Jackson won the most votes in population and electoral votes, but not a clear majority. The House picked John Q. Adams in 1825. The Election of 1876 was even worse as the Democratic challenger, Samuel J. Tilden, won the popular vote by 51% to Republican Rutherford B. Hayes' 47.9% The Electoral Votes ended up in Hayes' favor by one vote after a huge legal battle over the last 20 contested votes. The results of this election brought the Federal occupation of the South to an end, ending Reconstruction. Compromise of 1877. The Election of 1888 had the winning win via the Electoral College (Benjamin Harrison won 20 states and 233 electoral votes with 5,443,892 votes to his name) while the loser won the popular vote (Grover Cleveland won 18 states and 168 electoral votes with 5,534,488 votes to his name). The Election of 2000 of course it the most recent and know of them. (Interesting trivia note: From after the election of 1880 - the election of 2000, no Republican presidential candidate had been able to get elected to office without winning in California. Garfield and Bush were the two to do that in 1880 and 2000, 2004 respectively) Aside from them, since 1856, no other Republican that lost in Califoria won the election. That does not mean that if Republican win in Califoria, he wins the election...as shown by the fate of James G. Blaine in 1884. California, from 1860 to 1992 was mostly a Republican state, with periods of Democratic Party in there, Under FDR-Truman was the longest of these periods until the present day when it has been solid Democract since 1992. California was also full on the Progressive Wagon with Teddy Roosevelt.
__________________
Last edited by Ithekro; 2012-11-04 at 02:53. |
2012-11-04, 08:48 | Link #2079 | |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Factbox: Close races in the battle for U.S. Senate
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8A206N20121103 Quote:
__________________
|
|
2012-11-04, 13:51 | Link #2080 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Virginia
Age: 46
|
Quote:
Last edited by Lost Cause; 2012-11-04 at 22:31. |
|
|
|