Vote Today

[Gan]

Today is the day.

No matter where you stand on the issue.

No matter who you support as a government leader.

If you have questions while at the voting computer, do not be afraid to ask. The only stupid question is one not asked.

Be thankful that you live in a country/society that has the freedom for you to elect your leadership, be thoughtful for those who are not that fortunate, and be hopeful that someday they too will have the same freedom we do.

Participate and let your voice be heard.

[Back]

Or, if you think the Republicans and the President are doing a good job... don’t.

[Sean of the Thread]

c'mon idiot.


I am against telling people that have no clue to go xmas tree a ballot tho.

[TheEschaton]

Election day makes me nervous. Too many bad memories. I am in class right now and only following polls instead of the statute of frauds.

I think I'm gonna skip civil procedure to see how things are shaping up.

Saw Dean on CNN this morning. As usual, made me mildly ill, but still.

-TheE-

[Gan]

Or, if you think the Republicans and the President are doing a good job... don’t.

All humor aside, no matter how idiotic it is ^^^, not voting is not the way to let your voice be heard.

Vote today.

If you can not vote today because you did not register. Then stop by your local post office today and fill out a registration form so you can vote in the next elections.

[Gan]

Just got back from the polls 15 minutes ago. Now I have an hour to kill before I leave for work.

Did you vote? How was the experience?

No ID or registration card required. They did get my signature twice though. We had the paper ballots that you fill in with a pencil. Very easy to comprehend. I was in and out of there in less time than my first premature ejaculation. Wham bam thank you ma’am. Of course, I was second in line this morning.

How did they really know it was you voting and not someone else?

[Augie]

I'm going to vote on the way home from work.

I just hope that Florida gets it right this year. It just seems that no matter what, Florida fucks something up every year.

[Wezas]

Finally got a good look @ the "gay marrige" amendment. It also denies unmarried couples from common law benefits. Str8 or gay.

nothx

[Sean of the Thread]

I think most states pwnt the common law marriage bullshit back in the 70s.

[Back]

How did they really know it was you voting and not someone else?

Because I am the only person with my name living at my address which they had on record and asked me to verify.

Voting has always worked like this. Its only this year, I think, that some states or counties have had laws passed to require IDs. While I am not against the idea of requiring IDs to vote I’d only fully support it if there was some provision to make IDs free to all citizens.

[Atlanteax]

How did they really know it was you voting and not someone else?Because I am the only person with my name living at my address which they had on record and asked me to verify.

Voting has always worked like this. Its only this year, I think, that some states or counties have had laws passed to require IDs. While I am not against the idea of requiring IDs to vote I’d only fully support it if there was some provision to make IDs free to all citizens.

Actually... they recognized him by the tin-foil hat.

It's really one-of-a-kind!

[Sean of the Thread]

Because I am the only person with my name living at my address which they had on record and asked me to verify.

Voting has always worked like this. Its only this year, I think, that some states or counties have had laws passed to require IDs. While I am not against the idea of requiring IDs to vote I’d only fully support it if there was some provision to make IDs free to all citizens.

Been required to have ID if even a credit card in Florida since the first time I voted in 96.

[Augie]

Because I am the only person with my name living at my address which they had on record and asked me to verify.

Voting has always worked like this. Its only this year, I think, that some states or counties have had laws passed to require IDs. While I am not against the idea of requiring IDs to vote I’d only fully support it if there was some provision to make IDs free to all citizens.


Been required to have ID if even a credit card in Florida since the first time I voted in 96.

Yup...I've always had to present my ID every time I go to vote here in FL. I am surprised that some places DON'T require that.

[ElanthianSiren]

My parents never have to show ID, but they know all of the poll workers because voting is just across the street and has always been, and they've lived in the same place for near 20 years.


-M
edit: I can also see people not asking for ID in the town where I was born and lived a good bit of my childhood. It was a tiny town in W PA of a few thousand people, and everyone knew everyone else (and their business).

[TheEschaton]

Bob Novak (douche bag supreme) just predicted 19 seats for the Dems in the House, and TWO in the Senate. He feels Chafee, Santorum, and Allen are pretty comfortably ahead.

I disagree with his senate number, but I'd probably only say 4, maybe 5.

-TheE-

[ElanthianSiren]

I have doubts about Santorum.

-M

[Back]

Here is some information (http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legman/elect/taskfc/voteridreq.htm) on which states require IDs and what kinds of IDs they require.

Georgia requires photo ID but will also issue a voting ID for free to people who don’t have drivers licenses or state IDs.

[Artha]

I just learned I have to drive back home to vote. Fuckin' A but I love democracy enough to make the 45 minute drive to stand in line.

[Latrinsorm]

Haha, Artha's a voting :noob:. You should start .5xing in Absentee Ballot, dude.

[Skirmisher]

Voted at 7am baybee.

No id required and it's kind of funny, they know my whole family and have the book open to the right page to sign by the time i walk up and ask about everyone, how they are doing.

I like voting. :)

[DeV]

Voted at 7am baybee.

I like voting. :)You are so hardcore, woman.

[zhelas]

I'm going to vote on the way home from work.

I just hope that Florida gets it right this year. It just seems that no matter what, Florida fucks something up every year.

Hundreds Get Wrong Ballots In Central Florida

Hundreds of voters in two Central Florida counties were apparently given the wrong ballots Tuesday, according to a Local 6 News report.

"We have just learned that voters at Precinct 218 ( in Volusia County) were given the wrong ballots," Local 6's Tarik Minor said. "This may be a serious problem but election officials here in Deland do not know the full extent of the problem."

The problem came to light when a woman wanted to vote for state Rep. Joyce Cusack and state Rep. Ronald Cahen but noticed they were not on the ballot. Officials then noticed that she had the wrong ballots for her district.

Minor said Volusia County's supervisor of elections Ann McFall rushed out of the office to Precinct 218 to try to determine how widespread the problem was.

"(McFall) is at Precinct 218 and she is reviewing the voter registration logs to try to verify which ballots go to which voters," said Dave Beck of the canvassing board said.

The report said 200 voters at the Christ Community Church may have received the wrong ballots, Minor said.

Also, Osceola County experienced similar problems Tuesday, according to the Local 6 News report.

People who voted between 7 a.m. and 7:45 a.m. were given Precinct 30 ballots instead of the correct Precinct 29 ballot.

Osceola County officials have set up an hot line for voters who received the wrong ballots. Voters are urged to call 407-343-3900.

Watch Local 6 News for more on this story.

http://www.local6.com/politics/10264165/detail.html

[zhelas]

Voting Machines Woes Cause Early Delays...
Poll Workers Struggle With Touchscreen Tech...
*PA Problems...
**Trouble In Indiana; May Extend Hours...
***Denver: Problems...
****Fixing charges fly in Utah town...
*****Ky. Poll Worker Charged With 'Choking Voter'...
******Hundreds Get Wrong Ballots In Central Florida...
*******Dem lawyers in TN going to court to keep polls open late...
********FEDS SEND 850 OBSERVERS TO 22 STATES...
GOP Control of Congress Hangs in Balance...
NYT: For Dems, Even a Gain May Feel Like a Failure...
Eastern States Seen As Election Key...
GOP: BEWARE OF EXIT POLLS...
PAPER: Election Outcome Expected To Be Known Early...

http://www.drudgereport.com

I am sure things like this happened all the time in the past.

[Parkbandit]

Voting has always worked like this. Its only this year, I think, that some states or counties have had laws passed to require IDs. While I am not against the idea of requiring IDs to vote I’d only fully support it if there was some provision to make IDs free to all citizens.


Incorrect as usual. I have never voted EVER in any election where I didn't have to provide some sort of proof as to whom I am.

I'm pretty sure I've been voting longer than you... I guess I just live in towns with more than 4 people.

[Parkbandit]

Here is some information (http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legman/elect/taskfc/voteridreq.htm) on which states require IDs and what kinds of IDs they require.

Georgia requires photo ID but will also issue a voting ID for free to people who don’t have drivers licenses or state IDs.

Just another reason why we need a national ID program and every state needs to have the same rules that govern voting. If you don't have to show an ID to vote.. then your vote has the ability to be tainted by fraud.

[Gan]

I wish I would have found this sooner.

Here is a demo on using one of the automatic voting machines..

http://www.hartic.com/innerpage.php?pageid=98#

[Landrion]

No id requested in NJ. I showed them my VR card, they had me sign in a ledger in one column with my signature from when I signed up in a comparison column and thats it.

[Back]

I wish I would have found this sooner.

Here is a demo on using one of the automatic voting machines..

http://www.hartic.com/innerpage.php?pageid=98#

WTF is up with the radio dial selection? They couldn’t put a QWERTY keyboard on that thing for write-ins or even make it touch screen? My iPod has more features than that thing. In fact, it would be easier to vote with my phone.

[Gan]

My guess is that with the dial, the intention of the voter is pretty clear by which one the dial rests upon and then selected using 2 seperate actions.

Its a pain, especially when attempting to write in Shelly Sekula-Gibbs as the replacement for Delay here in this district (22).

We have been using this type of machine in my preceinct since 2002.

[ElanthianSiren]

I wish I would have found this sooner.

Here is a demo on using one of the automatic voting machines..

http://www.hartic.com/innerpage.php?pageid=98#

I took the voting tutorial for PA also. The machine I voted on this morning was nothing like it. It wasn't a big deal though, completely intuitive, but I was expecting a touch screen setup. We had the light up board setup instead.

-M

[TheEschaton]

I love how it took 200 voters in Central FL before one of them realized it was the wrong ballot.

-TheE-

[Back]

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2006/11/07/exit_polls.html



November 07, 2006
Exit Polls
CNN reports corruption was the number most important issue to voters who responded to exit surveys. Early Senate numbers (uncomfirmed and with caveats):

Democrats are leading in Rhode Island (+7), Virginia (+7), Pennsylvania (+15), Ohio (+14), New Jersey (+8), Montana (+9), Missouri (+2).

Republicans are leading in Tennessee (+4) and Arizona (+4).

[Artha]

I voted for Allen. There was only one candidate for House of Reps and he's dumb, so I didn't vote for anyone :(

[Sean]

No id requested in NJ. I showed them my VR card, they had me sign in a ledger in one column with my signature from when I signed up in a comparison column and thats it.

Yea I didn't even have to show them anything to vote. I showed up the lady didn't hear my last name right (she thought I said sullivan) I saw it when she was flipping through the ledger I say my names on the next page. Signed next to my old signature with my new signature, signed the little paper i needed to hand in to get into the booth and that was it. Thats also the only question they asked, "Whats your Name?" other than that I didn't have to prove anything.

[Latrinsorm]

Heh, exit polls. :)

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Just another reason why we need a national ID program and every state needs to have the same rules that govern voting. If you don't have to show an ID to vote.. then your vote has the ability to be tainted by fraud.


Totally agree with this.

And I agree with Backlash saying it needs to be free-- everyone, rich or without a dime to their name, should be able to vote.

I think some states allow birth certificates as proof of identification, not sure about that though.

[TheEschaton]

I hate exit polls. Especially now that they're saying we're doing well.

-TheE-

[Back]

Tonight’s Daily Show/Colbert Report live 1 hour Midwest Midterm Midtacular should be good. 11pm EST.

[Jorddyn]

I voted this morning, was 9th in line. Wore my button all day.

I also did my civic duty for the day - I convinced two of my friends to register to vote in the next election.

Alright, I didn't convince them, I withheld vital reports until they agreed :)

Edited to add: I've never had to show ID to vote either, just had to provide my name. And yes, there are more than 4 people in my city.

~T

[Hulkein]

I was number 53, heh. The only young person there that early amongst a lot of senior citizens.

[Keller]

Finally got a good look @ the "gay marrige" amendment. It also denies unmarried couples from common law benefits. Str8 or gay.

nothx

At least that's a true protection of marriage.

If your policy is promoting marriage and family, you have to be consistent.

[TheEschaton]

Well, it's past midnight. Let's tally it up:

Dems have gained 20 in the house, last I can tell, and will comfortably take the house.

Dems have gained 6 gov'rships, which gives them the majority (not that it means anything), retaking Republican governships in Ohio, NY, and MA which've been there for a decade or more.

The contentious thing is the Senate. CNN (and FoxNews) have called 3 Senate gains for the Dems: PA (Santorum goes down), RI (Chafee goes down), and Ohio, where DeWine goes down.

AZ was just called for the Republicans, so there are four "open" races left, in Montana, Missouri, Tennessee, and Virginia, which the Dems would need to pick up 3 of.

So far, Webb is ahead of Allen in VA by a mere percentage point (less than 3k votes), but with 99% precincts reporting, and the ones not reporting already trending heavily towards Webb by almost a 3 to 1 margin. I feel the Dems can pick this one up.

So, two in TN, MO, and MT. Montana's early returns look good for the Dem if you go by the relatively vague trend of rural returns coming in first, urban returns coming in later. The Dem is already up in early returns, the thing is, there's no real urban blue swing in Montana to count on. Maybe we can pick that one up.

So it comes down to Tennessee and Missouri. Personally, I think Tennessee is lost for Harold Ford. It must of been the "This handsome black man is gonna steal all our white women" ad.

Missouri. Last I checked, McCaskill is down about 65k votes, with 88% of the precincts reporting (is this the percentage of precincts, or the percentage of population? Because some pretty significant precincts haven't reported yet). Still waiting on KC and St. Louis precincts to report, and if the urban trend continues to go blue (might be a bit more purple, out in the midwest), then there's a chance...but I think it's a slim one.

I'd be so pissed if there's a 50-50 tie in the Senate, and Dick Cheney got to be the deciding vote. What a crock of shit.

-TheE-

[Wezas]

Virginia looks like it might be the deciding vote. And right now it's a matter of 2500 votes. With provisional and absentee needed to be counted. This won't be solved tonight.

[Back]

A 20 seat House victory is a major victory, and a 5 seat tie in the Senate is icing on the cake. If the Democrats actually take the Senate, well thats pretty damn close to a tsunami.

Its a good day today. Can’t wait for those first 100 hours.

[ElanthianSiren]

McCaskill defied the odds. I had a feeling that she may when they mentioned that the majority of precincts left to report were dem friendly.

Wezas, i love you for voting today.

I'm waiting for vast stem cell programs, so we can really get research churned out as a model for students, professors, and other researchers.

-M
edit: looks like I underestimated the dems too in my earlier assessment.
editedit: I was #247 rather early; even the election helpers were amazed how many turned out to vote.

[Artha]

Webb's ahead by less than 8k votes with 6 precincts left to report.

I'm glad I voted.

[Tisket]

I went to vote after work. While inside doing my civic duty some ASSHOLE hit my car and left. Minor damage but jesus...

Democracy: 1
Me: 0

[Back]

Am I still asleep and dreaming or are Dems poised to take the Senate too?

[TheEschaton]

It's fucking close. We need to take VA AND MO, and we're ahead in both races. I'm positive Allen will demand a recount in VA. And Montana isn't even finished reporting?

28 seats in the house, holy shit.

Edited to add: Fucking A, it seems I was overly pessimistic in MO. Good work, urban voters!

-TheE-

[Artha]

Depending on who you talk to, a less than 1% voting difference in Va means:

1) Automatic recount
2) Loser has the right to demand a recount

There's also a few precincts left and absentee/provisional ballets, with Webb ahead by less than 8k. It ain't over yet.

[Tromp]

I woke up this morning feeling unsafe and overtaxed already. Terrorists rejoice all over the world. I think I saw some climbing over my gated community walls. Oh wait, that was the landscaping crew. <joke on all accounts above>

Without quoting alll the media sentiments, what do each you think the nation is trying to say with such a decisive swing?

[HarmNone]

We're damned mad and we're not going to take it anymore? :D

[Gan]

I woke up this morning feeling unsafe and overtaxed already. Terrorists rejoice all over the world. I think I saw some climbing over my gated community walls. Oh wait, that was the landscaping crew. <joke on all accounts above>

Without quoting alll the media sentiments, what do each you think the nation is trying to say with such a decisive swing?

Bottom line: Responsibility and Accountability

Republicans were not responsible enough with the public mandate and now they are being held accountable.

Looking forward, the next 2 years will probably be stocked full of gridlock and preparation for the 2008 election season. I dont see the first 100 days amounting to anything earth-shattering, despite what Pelosi says.

My biggest concern is that in the forseeable future, government spending will be muted, which will affect the future direction of inflation, and combined with the low GDP numbers just in, could mean a tighter economy. This could also pressure the Fed to consider lowering interest rates in the near future rather than leaving them flat as previously intended.

All in all, I'm anxiously curious to see how the markets react today through the remainder of the week with regards to the new leadership. Historically we expect a slide for the remainder of the year, but long term prospects generally yield in favor of split leadership between Legislative and Executive branches.

[Rainy Day]

Voting has always worked like this. Its only this year, I think, that some states or counties have had laws passed to require IDs. While I am not against the idea of requiring IDs to vote I’d only fully support it if there was some provision to make IDs free to all citizens.

Supposedly they were requiring ID here this year. (Possible ID included things like a utility bill.) But I wasn't asked for any when I got my ballot. Maybe since I'd mentioned having it with me she didn't need to look? I just thought it was a bit odd that it was now required but they didn't check.

RD

[Hulkein]

It's definitely a victory for the Democratic party, but not liberalism that some of the members here espouse.

A lot of the Democrats who won seats are pro-life, pro-gun, etc. The Democratic leadership finally realized that most people don't agree with your fucked up views, run some moderate Democrat's and you'll win in an anti-Republican time (who couldn't win with the war?)

[TheEschaton]

Without quoting alll the media sentiments, what do each you think the nation is trying to say with such a decisive swing?


Never FUCKING AGAIN!

-TheE-

[Daniel]

Well, now we get to hear the republicans bitch for a while.

[Back]

Well, now we get to hear the republicans bitch for a while.

Uhhh, they have haven't shut up since they won in 94 and 2000. Now maybe they will.

[TheEschaton]

Depending on who you talk to, a less than 1% voting difference in Va means:

1) Automatic recount
2) Loser has the right to demand a recount

There's also a few precincts left and absentee/provisional ballets, with Webb ahead by less than 8k. It ain't over yet.

Do you know where these precincts are? Arlington and Charlottesville Counties, which are currently trending towards Webb 3 to 1.

You can't just analyze on a superficial basis, Artha. Welcome to politics, I hope you enjoyed your first election, even if it didn't go the way you voted.

-TheE-

[Hulkein]

Without quoting alll the media sentiments, what do each you think the nation is trying to say with such a decisive swing?

Apparently this happens every mid-term election during a war. They showed the losses by the incumbent party during WWII, Vietnam, Korea, Persian Gulf, etc. Doesn't seem out of the ordinary.

[zhelas]

http://www.drudgereport.com/hh.jpg

[Back]

From CNN, the list of likely new House committee chairs…

The House Committees

Based on a review of current committee assignments, seniority and guidance from senior House Democrats, this is a list of likely House committee chairmanships in the new Congress:

Committee on Agriculture -- Chairman: Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minnesota

Committee on Appropriations -- Chairman: Rep. David Obey, D-Wisconsin

Subcommittee on Defense -- Chairman: Rep. John Murtha, D-Pennsylvania

Committee on Armed Services -- Chairman: Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Missouri

Committee on Budget -- Chairman: Rep. John Spratt, D-South Carolina

Committee on Education and the Workforce -- Chairman: Rep. George Miller, D-California

Committee on Energy and Commerce -- Chairman: Rep. John Dingell, D-Michigan

Committee on Financial Services -- Chairman: Rep. Barney Frank, D-Massachusetts

Committee on Government Reform -- Chairman: Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California

Committee on Homeland Security -- Chairman: Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Mississippi

Committee on House Administration -- Chairman: Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, D-California

Committee on International Relations -- Chairman: Rep. Tom Lantos, D-California

Committee on the Judiciary -- Chairman: Rep. John Conyers, D-Michigan

Committee on Resources -- Chairman: Rep. Nick Rahall II, D-West Virginia

Committee on Rules -- Chairman: Rep. Louise McIntosh Slaughter, D-New York

Committee on Science -- Chairman: Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tennessee

Committee on Small Business -- Chairman: Rep. Nydia Velazquez, D-New York

Committee on Standards of Official Conduct -- Chairman: Rep. Howard Berman, D-California

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure -- Chairman: Rep. James Oberstar, D-Minnesota

Committee on Veterans' Affairs -- Chairman: Rep. Michael Michaud, D-Maine

Committee on Ways and Means -- Chairman: Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York

Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence -- Chairman: Unknown, but possibly Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Florida or Rep. Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas

[Parkbandit]

It's definitely a victory for the Democratic party, but not liberalism that some of the members here espouse.

A lot of the Democrats who won seats are pro-life, pro-gun, etc. The Democratic leadership finally realized that most people don't agree with your fucked up views, run some moderate Democrat's and you'll win in an anti-Republican time (who couldn't win with the war?)


I think you are giving the liberal leadership of the Democratic party FAR FAR FAR too much credit to realize this. They won, not on their plan.. but on the discontent of the other party. That's like coming in first place in a race with a guy running on crutches. These are people that are still convinced that the American people voted for them.. and not just against the Republicans... and they will push their agenda with even the conservative Democrats following them.

[CrystalTears]

Uhhh, they have haven't shut up since they won in 94 and 2000. Now maybe they will.
They haven't shut up cause you keep bitching. :tongue:

[Parkbandit]

Uhhh, they have haven't shut up since they won in 94 and 2000. Now maybe they will.

Actually.. we're trying to balance the bullshit you post here. I would say there is three times as much liberal bitching as there has been conservative.

Now that you have nothing to cry, bitch, call foul, moan, etc about.. perhaps the Political thread will grow quiet.

Congrats on the victory though.

[Back]

They haven't shut up cause you keep bitching. :tongue:

Which came first? The bitching or the deception, horrible management, inadequate response, over-spending, deficit ballooning and divisive rhetoric?

[Wezas]

Wezas, i love you for voting today.
Boobie pics can be sent to legendwezas@cox.net

thx

[Parkbandit]

Which came first? The bitching or the deception, horrible management, inadequate response, over-spending, deficit ballooning and divisive rhetoric?


Well now you nightmare is almost over. Now you can relax as the Democrats lead with the deception, horrible management, inadequate response, over-spending, deficit ballooning and divisive rhetoric.

[Back]

Actually.. we're trying to balance the bullshit you post here. I would say there is three times as much liberal bitching as there has been conservative.

Now that you have nothing to cry, bitch, call foul, moan, etc about.. perhaps the Political thread will grow quiet.

Congrats on the victory though.

Only thing to bitch about now is when the unitary executive theory president exercises his veto power putting his personal views over the will of the people or ignores the Constitution and signs bills that have not passed Congress.

[TheEschaton]

I hope George Allen goes down, just cause I think he's an asshole. Even if the Republicans had won 99 seats in the Senate, and this was the only contested race, I'd still care.

-TheE-

[Daniel]

It's already started.

[Tromp]

I think you are giving the liberal leadership of the Democratic party FAR FAR FAR too much credit to realize this. They won, not on their plan.. but on the discontent of the other party. That's like coming in first place in a race with a guy running on crutches. These are people that are still convinced that the American people voted for them.. and not just against the Republicans... and they will push their agenda with even the conservative Democrats following them.


Dude now that is straight from Rush's show verbatum! :socool: Similar brainwashed people always seem to polarize themselves with the party of their choosing no matter what that candidate does. Heck if Folley was not shamed out of office, I bet he'd still get votes from people.


Isn't the above true with every election since swing voters are the main reason why anyone wins?

[Daniel]

I expect PB to pick up the slack of political bitching, and I'm sure there are a few lurkers who will come to prominence in the upcoming years.

[Some Rogue]

president exercises his veto power putting his personal views over the will of the people

Dammit, I swore I wasn't gonna post in this thread but isn't that what we elect a president to do? I'd rather have a man who stands on what he believes than one who changes his mind with the however the wind blows.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Hulkein
It's definitely a victory for the Democratic party, but not liberalism that some of the members here espouse.

A lot of the Democrats who won seats are pro-life, pro-gun, etc. The Democratic leadership finally realized that most people don't agree with your fucked up views, run some moderate Democrat's and you'll win in an anti-Republican time (who couldn't win with the war?)

Of course, I mean gun rights, abortion, and the gays are the core tenets of Liberalism.

Personally I care a lot more about things like education, the lower and middle class, etc. Thats not to say that there aren't some extreme Liberals out there who only care about Abortion, Gun Control, and Gay Marriage.


But your jab about most people not agreeing with the "fucked up" views of the Democratic party is, for the lack of a better word, dumb. The Democrats already had an established base of voters who did and do agree with their views so unless the republican/independents/disenfranchised voters/etc. who decided to vote Democrat somehow equals most people I'm going to assume your post should have read:

The Democratic leadership realized that some Republicans/Independents/Disenfranchised/etc. voters don't agree with your views and if they run some moderate Democrat's and you'll have a better chance to win in an anti-Republican time.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by TheE

I hope George Allen goes down, just cause I think he's an asshole. Even if the Republicans had won 99 seats in the Senate, and this was the only contested race, I'd still care.

-TheE-

STFU Macaca

[Gan]

Uhhh, they have haven't shut up since they won in 94 and 2000. Now maybe they will.

The hypocracy of this statement is blinding.

[Tromp]

The hypocracy of this statement is blinding.


Yeah he's got you there Backlash. I'd stick to just rubbing their faces in it :tumble: .

[ElanthianSiren]

It's definitely a victory for the Democratic party, but not liberalism that some of the members here espouse.

A lot of the Democrats who won seats are pro-life, pro-gun, etc. The Democratic leadership finally realized that most people don't agree with your fucked up views, run some moderate Democrat's and you'll win in an anti-Republican time (who couldn't win with the war?)

Actually, Casey getting my vote (I'm pro choice, but I hate gun control) is a sign I wasn't willing to throw it away on a third party candidate or just sit at home and not vote. I agree it's another thing I think dems have realized in this race. Unless you're from Connecticut or coming in with very strong credentials (were from a major party), the fact is that independents have an uphill battle getting elected. With this election, you saw quite a few less votes being thrown away (with the exception of the guy in VI who got what? 25k jeesh).



Without quoting alll the media sentiments, what do each you think the nation is trying to say with such a decisive swing?

They were talking about this on the news this morning, and I think it's a good question. When the party that runs on morality gets kicked out, it stands to reason that the public feels they're: 1. insincere about their morality (stay home) or 2. too extreme in their morality.

In all, I feel it's a blow to the far right christian coalition type folks, especially when you consider SD citizens striking down the abortion ban.

-M
edit: It's also about what I listed earlier about balance. :shrug: I feel perhaps we've gone beyond balance here, but on election day you can't just tell people, "Okay! There are enough dems in office now to balance the shrubbery. Stand down." Congressional leaders have to be very careful though not to come across as partisan snipers. We need to be tough, inquisitive, but also very fair because like Hulk said and I mentioned before -- the breakdown of total power isn't about me (far left dem) or some here that are far right. It's about the amount of independents either party can grab.

[Gan]

Uhhh, they have haven't shut up since they won in 94 and 2000. Now maybe they will.


I think you are giving the liberal leadership of the Democratic party FAR FAR FAR too much credit to realize this. They won, not on their plan.. but on the discontent of the other party. That's like coming in first place in a race with a guy running on crutches. These are people that are still convinced that the American people voted for them.. and not just against the Republicans... and they will push their agenda with even the conservative Democrats following them.

QFT

My advice to the Dems. Now that you have the ball, dont fumble.

[ElanthianSiren]

I think you are giving the liberal leadership of the Democratic party FAR FAR FAR too much credit to realize this. They won, not on their plan.. but on the discontent of the other party.

So much talk about dems not having a plan. Can we hear a clear Bush plan on anything (since stay the course isn't their mantra anymore, self-admittedly and please exclude all things that have already been shot down previously by an all republican congress).

I guess you missed the Madam Speaker's first 100 hours initiative. I assume you're also on the mailing list for the DNC and have read Dean's plans. In fact, have you done any reading on what the democratic plan is, minus your Limbaugh/White House spin?

-M

[Gan]

So much talk about dems not having a plan. Can we hear a clear Bush plan on anything (since stay the course isn't their mantra anymore, self-admittedly and please exclude all things that have already been shot down previously by an all republican congress).

I guess you missed the Madam Speaker's first 100 hours initiative. I assume you're also on the mailing list for the DNC and have read Dean's plans. In fact, have you done any reading on what the democratic plan is, minus your Limbaugh/White House spin?

-M

The fact alone that the focus of the Democratic campaign (republican corruption) and results of the exit polls suggest that the reason why (republican corruption) give a clear indication as to what why the voters voted the way they did. Perhaps you didnt vote for those reasons, but others did. Thats discounting my bias against polls though.

[Tromp]

Reasons why I didn't vote for Republicans (not in order of priority but just in general):

1. The War
2. The fact that anyone even had an opinion on abortion in their campaign disturbs me especially if it is a guy
3. Gay Marriage... see above
4. Stem Cell Research - why not? the whole world is
5. Global Politics - how we are viewed across the globe seems to me rather important.
6. Corruption - if is sounds like a duck and walks like a duck it is a flippin duck.
7. The fact that they had the helm for so many years and govt has increased not decreased.
8. Parkbandit <joke>

I'm thinking of a bunch more but this is what has popped in my mind so far....

[ElanthianSiren]

The fact alone that the focus of the Democratic campaign (republican corruption) and results of the exit polls suggest that the reason why (republican corruption) give a clear indication as to what why the voters voted the way they did. Perhaps you didnt vote for those reasons, but others did. Thats discounting my bias against polls though.

Voter discontent doesn't equate to democrats having no plan; that equates to people angry with current leadership. When asked what his plans were for Iraq in the 2004 debates, I clearly remember Bush skirting the question and refusing to answer. That wasn't taken as indicitive that he had no plan among roughly 50% of the populace, so why should people voting against an agenda be taken as proof that an opposing agenda doesn't exist?

Maybe dems got smart and simply let the republicans hang themselves this time around. Why open your mouth if you don't have to?

-M

[Skirmisher]

QFT

My advice to the Dems. Now that you have the ball, dont fumble.

I think judging by the record of Bush and Co we are allowed at least several fumbles before coming anywhere near their record.

[Gan]

I think judging by the record of Bush and Co we are allowed at least several fumbles before coming anywhere near their record.

Clinton fumbled which caused the Democrats to lose 40 years consecutive leadership in Congress. All it takes is 1. Especially in a short 2 year timespan between now and 08.

[Gan]

Voter discontent doesn't equate to democrats having no plan; that equates to people angry with current leadership. When asked what his plans were for Iraq in the 2004 debates, I clearly remember Bush skirting the question and refusing to answer. That wasn't taken as indicitive that he had no plan among roughly 50% of the populace, so why should people voting against an agenda be taken as proof that an opposing agenda doesn't exist?

Maybe dems got smart and simply let the republicans hang themselves this time around. Why open your mouth if you don't have to?

-M

Exactly. Kerry almost messed that up a few weeks ago.

[TheEschaton]

All it takes 1 and a rabid political party willing to sell their souls for power.

So we'll be damn careful, keep all our blowjobs under the desk. ;)

-TheE-

[Back]

UPDATES ON MONTANA AND VIRGINIA SENATE RACES...

Both Jon Tester and Jim Webb have won their races in Montana and Virginia but want to make sure that every vote is counted. We expect to have official results soon but can happily declare today that Democrats have taken the majority in the U.S. Senate.

Montana Vote Situation: Jon Tester leads Conrad Burns by approximately 1,700 votes (as of 11am EDT) and counting. In Silver Bow County (Butte), a Democratic stronghold, votes are still being counted but Tester is winning there with 66% of the vote. We expect to gain the majority of these uncounted votes and to add to Tester’s margin.

Montana Process: When the counting phase is completed, a canvass will verify the vote tallies. That process could take as long as 48 hours, and must begin within three days and end within seven. Unless the canvass shows the margin to be within ¼ of 1%, there is no recount. As the loser, Burns would have to request the recount. When the votes are all counted, we expect to be outside that recount margin.

Virginia Vote Situation: Jim Webb is up by approximately 8,000 votes and once the provisional ballots are counted, we expect Webb’s margin to increase. (Please note that VA absentees were included in the tallies from last night.)

Virginia Process: A canvass is underway to verify the results and we expect that process to finish within a day or so. To be in recount, the margin needs to be less than 1% and Allen (as the loser) would have to request it. Because of Virginia voting laws, the margin would have to be much tighter than it currently is to see any change in the outcome. Given the current margins, that is highly, highly unlikely.

Source (http://www.fudgereport.net/update_100806.htm)

[Back]

QFT

My advice to the Dems. Now that you have the ball, dont fumble.

Speaking from experience.

[Gan]

Source (http://www.fudgereport.net/update_100806.htm)

The source: http://www.fudgereport.net/update_100806.htm

Hillarious.

:lol:

[Gan]

Speaking from experience.

Historically speaking. Both sides have experience in this. The sad part is they keep ignoring history or hoping it wont apply 'this time'.

[Artha]

Paid for by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, http://www.dscc.org, and not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

HMMMM.

Less than 8k with 4 districts to go, Allen was ahead by more, and lost the lead with fewer districts last night.

[Atlanteax]

The single biggest issue that the Republicans had the past 6 years was condoning corruption in Congress.

If Hastert and the other Congressional leaders (nevermind Bush making his voice known) had done something about internal corruption... instead of doing cover-ups, and "looking the other way" ... the Republican leadership would probably had been viewed with a lot more respect by the Voters.

Instead, there was great detachment towards them (less Republicans and Democrats were willing to vote for them) and the other candidates were more strongly considered. Why would you vote for someone you feel apathetic for? (made the rare Democrat voting Rep even rarer, and failed to motivate Republican to go vote to ensure that the Rep wins).

I think that is why the Democrats won more seats in the House than anticipated, and are making the Senate race "close".

[Ravenstorm]

Has anyone seen any numbers on voter turn out? I'm curious how many people voted total and how it compares to previous mid term elections.

[HarmNone]

I haven't seen any numbers yet, Raven; however, I have seen some articles that maintain that the turnout was unusually high in some areas. We'll probably have to wait a bit to see what the turnout actually was in the various states. It will be interesting.

[Latrinsorm]

what do each you think the nation is trying to say with such a decisive swing?"the nation" isn't saying anything. A slight majority of Americans is saying that they prefer the Democratic candidates, and that's really all we can conclude. It's fun to say things like "America hates Bush" or "America doesn't want the war", but there's no real rational basis for doing so: We are self-determined individuals, not slaves to the majority of the nation.

Is anyone else surprised that Lieberman is listed as a Democrat in CNN's tally?

[Gan]

Is anyone else surprised that Lieberman is listed as a Democrat in CNN's tally?

Considering its from CNN? No.

[xtc]

"the nation" isn't saying anything. A slight majority of Americans is saying that they prefer the Democratic candidates, and that's really all we can conclude. It's fun to say things like "America hates Bush" or "America doesn't want the war", but there's no real rational basis for doing so: We are self-determined individuals, not slaves to the majority of the nation.

I think Bush's popularity rating and the fact that many Repubs tried to distance themselves from Bush during the campaign says something. I think polls have concluded the majority of Americans now think the Iraq war was a mistake. Now the House has fallen. I think they things say something.


Is anyone else surprised that Lieberman is listed as a Democrat in CNN's tally?

I didn't notice. Last night pundits were saying that Lieberman was voted in by Republicans, if that is true perhaps Lieberman should be counted as a Republican. With the Senate race so close Lieberman's vote could be key.

[Back]

Is anyone else surprised that Lieberman is listed as a Democrat in CNN's tally?

Lieberman is far more liberal than most republicans think. He will definately caucus with the Democrats, as will Socialist Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

For all intents and purposes they may as well be Democrats.

[HarmNone]

According to Forbes, Lieberman has said he will side with the Democrats in organizing the new Senate. That may be why CNN counted him as a Democrat if, indeed, they did. Just glancing at CNN's webpage, I noted they classified him as "other".

[HarmNone]

Has anyone seen any numbers on voter turn out? I'm curious how many people voted total and how it compares to previous mid term elections.

According to the nonpartisan Center for the Study of the American Electorate at American University, the turnout was over 40% this year; slightly higher than the last midterm election.

Here's a link to the AP article:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15621554/

[Parkbandit]

It was nice to see Reid and Pelosi and Dean crawl out from under their rocks and get in front of the camera finally. It was a very good strategy by them though.. with only Kerry fucking it up.

And historically speaking.. this was not only expected from the 6th year of a President.. it pretty much ran right down the average loss of power from the sitting party.

[Parkbandit]

I didn't notice. Last night pundits were saying that Lieberman was voted in by Republicans, if that is true perhaps Lieberman should be counted as a Republican. With the Senate race so close Lieberman's vote could be key.


No he can't. He voted for the war and maintains his support for it. That's pretty much all he sides with the Republicans on.

And if this was the "OMG, PEOPLE HAVE VOTED AGAINST THE WAR!!!!" result the libs are trying to make it.. how again did Lieberman get re-elected? He's one of the more outspoken supporters of the war.. in one of the more liberal states in the country.

[Back]

No he can't. He voted for the war and maintains his support for it. That's pretty much all he sides with the Republicans on.

And if this was the "OMG, PEOPLE HAVE VOTED AGAINST THE WAR!!!!" result the libs are trying to make it.. how again did Lieberman get re-elected? He's one of the more outspoken supporters of the war.. in one of the more liberal states in the country.

By support from the Republicans. He lost the Democratic primary to an outspoken war critic (at least during the primary he was). When he decided to go indy the republicans jumped ship on their candidate to vote for him. Pretty simple really.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by PB
And if this was the "OMG, PEOPLE HAVE VOTED AGAINST THE WAR!!!!" result the libs are trying to make it.. how again did Lieberman get re-elected? He's one of the more outspoken supporters of the war.. in one of the more liberal states in the country.

I'd say that was a comparable platform to the "OMG IF THE LIBERALS WIN PELOSI WILL BE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE NOOOO!" platform from the conservatives.

[Back]

[quote]Originally Posted by PB
And if this was the "OMG, PEOPLE HAVE VOTED AGAINST THE WAR!!!!" result the libs are trying to make it.. how again did Lieberman get re-elected? He's one of the more outspoken supporters of the war.. in one of the more liberal states in the country.[/qoute]

I'd say that was a comparable platform to the "OMG IF THE LIBERALS WIN PELOSI WILL BE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE NOOOO!" platform from the conservatives.

Thats tame compared to OMG IF TEH LIBS WIN TEH TERRORISTS WIN!!!

[Parkbandit]

I'd say that was a comparable platform to the "OMG IF THE LIBERALS WIN PELOSI WILL BE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE NOOOO!" platform from the conservatives.

Yea, I personally thought that would scare the shit out of alot more people to vote against the Democrats. It's a viable strategy given her extreme liberal views.

Her counter of not being out in front of the camera the final two weeks of the campaign was brilliant though.

[Parkbandit]

[QUOTE=Sean;530867]

Thats tame compared to OMG IF TEH LIBS WIN TEH TERRORISTS WIN!!!

And thats tame compare to OMG BUSH LIED AND PEOPLE DIED!!!

[CrystalTears]

I just think it's funny that people here are claiming to be so anti-war, yet we're the home to the national guard, naval submarine base and Winchester arms. May not like the war but we sure contribute a lot to it, and I'm sure all those people with jobs there would feel pretty bad if they lost it suddenly. :D

[Parkbandit]

I just think it's funny that people here are claiming to be so anti-war, yet we're the home to the national guard, naval submarine base and Winchester arms. May not like the war but we sure contribute a lot to it, and I'm sure all those people with jobs there would feel pretty bad if they lost it suddenly. :D

Clearly not as anti-war as some people would lead us to believe.... Lemont was as anti-war as they come.. and he lost.

[Tromp]

[QUOTE=Backlash;530868]

And thats tame compare to OMG BUSH LIED AND PEOPLE DIED!!!

Well that part is true.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by CT
I just think it's funny that people here are claiming to be so anti-war, yet we're the home to the national guard, naval submarine base and Winchester arms. May not like the war but we sure contribute a lot to it, and I'm sure all those people with jobs there would feel pretty bad if they lost it suddenly.

Maybe they are pro personal and national security while being anti war...

[Parkbandit]

[QUOTE=Parkbandit;530873]

Well that part is true.

Yes.. we know it is simpleton. We know Bush lied about the whole thing.. even before he got into office. He lied to Clinton, Kerry.. hell he even lied to poor Kennedy.

[Parkbandit]

Maybe they are pro personal and national security while being anti war...

LOL

That's too funny to even respond to.

[Ravenstorm]

Maybe they are pro personal and national security while being anti war...

Surely you can't possibly believe someone can be against the war in Iraq but believe we should maintain a strong military presence? That's just crazy talk!

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I just think it's funny that people here are claiming to be so anti-war, yet we're the home to the national guard, naval submarine base and Winchester arms. May not like the war but we sure contribute a lot to it, and I'm sure all those people with jobs there would feel pretty bad if they lost it suddenly. :D

Eh, I'm not anti-war but then I am anti-needless war. I still don't think Iraq was a top priority. I come froma military family so obviously I see the good in the military and in weapons (hence my strict anti-gun control views). I think it's possible to be against a single war and still subscribe to the view that war IS sometimes neccesary.

ANYWAY. In response to PB, I think it's pretty obvious that Lieberman won because he got a landslide of Republican votes. My boyfriend's parents who are die-hard republican realized that voting for Schlesinger (or however you spell his name >.<) was a moot point and didn't want to throw their votes away. So instead of Republicans voting for someone instead of Lamont, they voted anti-Lamont. Lieberman was the only realistic alternative that COULD win, besides Lamont.

[Ilvane]

PB, why you have to be nasty to anyone who doesn't agree with you, I don't understand.

I think the message is pretty much sent about the war, and how people feel about it.

What I think is that people can be anti war, and pro troops(thus supporting those in the national guard, marines, whatever is there..) It's not that hard to understand.

I DO support my troops, but wish the war would end so they could come home and be safe. Is THAT so hard to understand?

Angela

[CrystalTears]

That's almost an oxymoron. Let's have a military presence but don't use it. WTF.

What really insulted me was when someone spray-painted the submarine sign that you see from the highway. It's a symbol of something greater than your personal feelings about one particular war, but yet there they go, destroying public property because they feel they have that right. But I digress, that's a rant for another day.

[xtc]

PB, why you have to be nasty to anyone who doesn't agree with you, I don't understand.

Angela

He is having a tough day, the Repubs lost the House and it looks like the Senate is going to be split.

[Parkbandit]

PB, why you have to be nasty to anyone who doesn't agree with you, I don't understand.

I think the message is pretty much sent about the war, and how people feel about it.

What I think is that people can be anti war, and pro troops(thus supporting those in the national guard, marines, whatever is there..) It's not that hard to understand.

I DO support my troops, but wish the war would end so they could come home and be safe. Is THAT so hard to understand?

Angela

Why you have to?

Yes.. it must be all about the war Angela. It couldn't possibly be about the 6th year of every single president losing house and senate seats. No way. It must be about the war!!!

And please.. support the troops how? How exactly do you support the troops .. by telling them they are dying needlessly over in Iraq and belittling the Commander in Chief? Or do you classify 'support' as when the going gets tough to get them out of there, no matter what the future consequences?

Man.. that is some stead fast support there Angela. I don't know how they could do their jobs without it.

[Sean of the Thread]

Eh, I'm not anti-war but then I am anti-needless war


Thank God you're not the one that gets to decide that.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

That's almost an oxymoron. Let's have a military presence but don't use it. WTF.

What really insulted me was when someone spray-painted the submarine sign that you see from the highway. It's a symbol of something greater than your personal feelings about one particular war, but yet there they go, destroying public property because they feel they have that right. But I digress, that's a rant for another day.

Well, it may seem like an oxymoron but not when you really think about. It's like, we all agree that Nuclear weapons are terrible and we don't ever want to use them. But having them has meant a LOT less pointless wars than ever before, because the stakes were too high to recklessly invade most countries. That's a prime example of where we can agree it's neccesary to HAVE a force, even if you don't use it.

Same thing with people who carried concealed weapons, or even people who carry them in the open. Cops carry guns for protection, not because they as a whole WANT to pop the bad guys in the face.

I was against going into Iraq and I still strongly feel it was wrong and Bush should be held accountable, but at the same time I don't feel like we should withdraw right now and basically fuck over all of Iraq leaving it in a civil war that we pretty much started. Even though I was against going into Iraq and I wish it would be over soon, I am still of the mind that it needs to be done as good as possible and we need to not fuck over the Iraqi people more than they may have already been (and withdrawing suddenly would screw them over). Maybe that seems like an oxymoron to some people but to me you don't have to ascribe to one line of thought in total black and white to have a legitimate opinion.

Anywho, concerning Groton.. I am heading there tomorrow to renew my Military ID card.. I hope that the graffiti has been cleaned before then. I totally agree with you that it's disrespectful but I think the people who think FUCK THE MILITARY and would do something like that are a small minority, not a huge majority. Even people who don't like us using a lot of force could probably agree that such vandalism is wrong and disrespectful.

[Back]

Why you have to?

Yes.. it must be all about the war Angela. It couldn't possibly be about the 6th year of every single president losing house and senate seats. No way. It must be about the war!!!

And please.. support the troops how? How exactly do you support the troops .. by telling them they are dying needlessly over in Iraq and belittling the Commander in Chief? Or do you classify 'support' as when the going gets tough to get them out of there, no matter what the future consequences?

Man.. that is some stead fast support there Angela. I don't know how they could do their jobs without it.

Heh, settle down, cowboy. Things aren’t nearly as bad as you paint them. In fact, today starts us down a better road. You’ll see, things are going to be better now.

[CrystalTears]

They actually repainted and restored the sign, so no worries there. More people were pissed off for the trashing than the ones who were for it.

I guess the whole "for troops, against war" thing has been something I've never understood. If you have a weapon for protection, you have to also realize that one day you may have to actually use it in order to protect yourself. Granted, you may not like the idea, but you do it because that's what it's designed for. Same with the military. It's designed to serve and protect our country. Why are people so against using the military for its main purpose?

I'm gonna have to agree with PB here where I'm not understanding how you can be pro troops on one hand and then be so vehemently against the war on the other. Wouldn't that kind of negativity affect the troops?

[Ravenstorm]

PB, why you have to be nasty to anyone who doesn't agree with you, I don't understand.

Just wait till he starts calling people gay and threatening to kill their cat. He's one step away from that now.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Why you have to?

Yes.. it must be all about the war Angela. It couldn't possibly be about the 6th year of every single president losing house and senate seats. No way. It must be about the war!!!

And please.. support the troops how? How exactly do you support the troops .. by telling them they are dying needlessly over in Iraq and belittling the Commander in Chief? Or do you classify 'support' as when the going gets tough to get them out of there, no matter what the future consequences?

Man.. that is some stead fast support there Angela. I don't know how they could do their jobs without it.

This is the kind of bullshit that I can't wait to fade out after Bush leaves office. This "Support Bush or you're anti-Troops" attitude, that's totally skewed.

Our troops did not choose to go to Iraq. They did not choose for this war to happen, they did not choose any of it. They chose however to join the Military and to live with those choices, and all of them are living with that choice and fighting selflessly over there. You can support that kind of bravery and still think the War was pointless and still think Bush is an asshole.

[Jorddyn]

Why you have to?

It couldn't possibly be about the 6th year of every single president losing house and senate seats. No way. It must be about the war!!!



Except for 1998.

Jorddyn, just threw out a "but Clinton"

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

They actually repainted and restored the sign, so no worries there. More people were pissed off for the trashing than the ones who were for it.

I guess the whole "for troops, against war" thing has been something I've never understood. If you have a weapon for protection, you have to also realize that one day you may have to actually use it in order to protect yourself. Granted, you may not like the idea, but you do it because that's what it's designed for. Same with the military. It's designed to serve and protect our country. Why are people so against using the military for its main purpose?

I'm gonna have to agree with PB here where I'm not understanding how you can be pro troops on one hand and then be so vehemently against the war on the other. Wouldn't that kind of negativity affect the troops?

Seriously, just because you are against a War doesn't mean you're against the Troops or War, Period.

If we invaded Canada and many died because George Bush decided he wanted to own all of the Authentic Canadian Maple syrup, I'm sure shit-loads of people would be against that war. But that doesn't mean that in general they are against ALL war, and that they are against the troops for doing their job (to obey orders).

[CrystalTears]

I meant more war in general, not THIS war. Not liking this war is one thing. I figured that someone opposed to war on general principle, who didn't think war was EVER necessary, wouldn't be pro troops as they join in support of something you don't believe in.

Eh, didn't want to get into this troop/war discussion here, but it did always make me wonder. :shrug:

[Sean]

Originally Posted by PB
Yea, I personally thought that would scare the shit out of alot more people to vote against the Democrats. It's a viable strategy given her extreme liberal views.

Her counter of not being out in front of the camera the final two weeks of the campaign was brilliant though.

Maybe, but I'd put money that a majority of the people voting have no idea who Pelosi is or why they should be "afraid" of her being speaker of the house.

[Jorddyn]

I guess the whole "for troops, against war" thing has been something I've never understood.

I have a lot of respect for the people who say they're going to stand up and defend this country in which I live, no matter what.

That said, I can still be against a specific war. Namely this one.

I don't see it as counterintuitive at all.

It's like I'm all for guns, but I'm against shooting people without a damn good reason.

~T

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I meant more war in general, not THIS war. Not liking this war is one thing. I figured that someone opposed to war on general principle, who didn't think war was EVER necessary, wouldn't be pro troops as they join in support of something you don't believe in.

Eh, didn't want to get into this troop/war discussion here, but it did always make me wonder. :shrug:

Ahh. Yeah ok.. that one does sort of confuse me (since I'm not against ALL war).

I think it's more along the lines of what Jorddyn said.. they respect them for standing up to serve a country in a way they think they should. Even if they don't personally agree with the war-part of that. I dunno.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by CT
I meant more war in general, not THIS war. Not liking this war is one thing. I figured that someone opposed to war on general principle, who didn't think war was EVER necessary, wouldn't be pro troops as they join in support of something you don't believe in.

Eh, didn't want to get into this troop/war discussion here, but it did always make me wonder.

Speaking only for myself when I say Anti-War in this thread I'm referring to Anti-Iraqi-War since it's a topical thread.

[Sean of the Thread]

They signed up to fight this war you're so against by choice. You guys can tip toe around it all you want but you're still full of shit.

[Ilvane]

How do I support the troops?

By sending care packages to them overseas. By helping out here with my company to do that. I'd also readily volunteer to use my counseling training to help them when they got back too. PTSD is a horrid thing, and would always need to be dealt with, with many war vets.

On that note, I ran into a guy I went to high school with on the train the other night, and he was fresh back from Iraq. He had served in the first Gulf war right out of high school.

He said it was bad over there, much worse than what you saw on the news. He said he came close to dying a couple of times, and guys he had worked with had died. He said he hadn't because he was walking a few paces back, and they hit the vehicle ahead of him. He said, "You just don't get in Humvees, that's all."

He also said they have no idea who the enemy is over there. He said you could be walking down the street and you couldn't tell the difference between who was the enemy and who was the friend. He said people looked like the people we were on the train with, and sometimes they would attack.

He said it was dangerous to the point of there are much more terrorists than there used to be, that people(citizens) didn't know who were the good and bad guys, and it was very traumatic, from what he had seen.

We were discussing it, while we rode the train back. He was actually home for two weeks then going back.

Why do I think we should get out of Iraq as soon as possible? Because we need to get our men and women home.

Because as Michael said, it's worse there now than it was before we went in there.

[Daniel]

And please.. support the troops how? How exactly do you support the troops .. by telling them they are dying needlessly over in Iraq and belittling the Commander in Chief? Or do you classify 'support' as when the going gets tough to get them out of there, no matter what the future consequences?

Man.. that is some stead fast support there Angela. I don't know how they could do their jobs without it.

You know,

The last time I checked I wasn't a little baby that needed to be coddled.

It's my opinion, as a servicemember who has served in Iraq, that the government does a better service to the troops by being honest and open about what is going on, instead of sugar coating and fluffing the reality of the situation.

If things are going wrong, and things are not as they should be then the government should be the first one to step in and say so. Period.

But what the fuck do I know? I'd rather die then have someone treat me like a little kid incapable of handling reality.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

They signed up to fight this war you're so against by choice. You guys can tip toe around it all you want but you're still full of shit.

That's not true. My brother signed up way before the Iraqi war, and so did other people.

Just because they signed up to be the military does not mean they are immediately for a war, even if they are fighting in it. If that was the case, then they wouldn't even give military personnel a chance to vote. They'd just cast them all for everyone who was for the military action. There's nothing wrong with signing up because you want to be there to help if there IS a war you want to help fight and believe in or because you just want the college money so you can pay for school.

No matter the reasons people are in the military, it is NOT only because they love George Bush and want to fight in Iraq. And therefore it is NOT rude/insulting to the Troops to have an attitude against George Bush and Iraq.

[Latrinsorm]

PB, why you have to be nasty to anyone who doesn't agree with you, I don't understand.You referred to everyone who voted for Bush as a "moron" after the '04 election. Given that, the best source for your answer is probably within yourself.

[Daniel]

Furthermore,


Supporting the war in no way entails rubber stamping every single policy or decision that has came out of it.

I believed in the Iraq war, I felt it was neccessary and ultimately a good thing.

I disagree(d) with how it has been executed and handled.

The two things are no where near being mutually exclusive.

[Sean of the Thread]

That's not true. My brother signed up way before the Iraqi war, and so did other people.

Just because they signed up to be the military does not mean they are immediately for a war, even if they are fighting in it. If that was the case, then they wouldn't even give military personnel a chance to vote. They'd just cast them all for everyone who was for the military action. There's nothing wrong with signing up because you want to be there to help if there IS a war you want to help fight and believe in or because you just want the college money so you can pay for school.

No matter the reasons people are in the military, it is NOT only because they love George Bush and want to fight in Iraq. And therefore it is NOT rude/insulting to the Troops to have an attitude against George Bush and Iraq.

MOST everyone that has signed up since knew full well what they were doing unless they're as dumb as John Kerry said they were. I would NEVER re-enlist now with the current war.

[Sean]

On another note, as much as I am a Democrat and like their platform/position more I'm really hoping the Impeachment talk doesn't surface. Mainly because as much as I disapprove of Bush's politic I think it would be a bad move.

[Jorddyn]

Furthermore,


Supporting the war in no way entails rubber stamping every single policy or decision that has came out of it.

I believed in the Iraq war, I felt it was neccessary and ultimately a good thing.

I disagree(d) with how it has been executed and handled.

The two things are no where near being mutually exclusive.

Are you suggesting that a trillion dollar military operation in an overseas country where we overthrew the government with thousands of our troops and had thousands of casualties on both our side and theirs could result in a more complex opinion than "if-you-like-me-check-this-box"?

[Gan]

Except for 1998.

Jorddyn, just threw out a "but Clinton"

You're right. Clinton lost his Congress majority in 1994, in his first term.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

MOST everyone that has signed up since knew full well what they were doing unless they're as dumb as John Kerry said they were. I would NEVER re-enlist now with the current war.

The benefits for my brother were greater if he stayed in longer than if he left. So he risked another deployment to Iraq to re-enlist.

Even though he knew it could mean he was going to Iraq, it doesn't mean he supports the war there or that he REALLY WANTED to go fight it. What it means is he wanted something and the risk of fighting at Iraq was one he took.

So to sit there and spell out everyone in the military as being there because they want to help Bush and like him is bullshit, and that's the only way that being against Bush and the War would equate to being against the troops.

[ElanthianSiren]

And please.. support the troops how? How exactly do you support the troops ..

By voting yes on pennsylvania's proposal to fund Gulf vets with an additional 250.00 each.

By sending care packages to guys I know serving.

By attending and showing support to a marine I was close to that died because his vehicle lacked enough armor.

By writing Weldon and demanding the armor issue be addressed for my friend Dan and for all the other guys that don't need to die in the way John did for lack of planning.

By writing Weldon and co and demanding VA benefits not be cut.

By demanding extra funding and compensation for the armed services.

By voting against Weldon's inefficiency and for Admiral Sestak.

By researching the best way to regenerate the human body.

Your turn, PB. What have you done? Spare us the commander and chief bs. The day I see Bush on the active lines with the men and women in Iraq/Afghanistan is the day I might take that train of thought seriously.

-M

[Jorddyn]

You're right. Clinton lost his Congress majority in 1994, in his first term.

I don't disagree, but if you're going to claim that "the 6th year of every single president losing house and senate seats", I'm going to respond to the 6th year of the previous president not falling within that statement.

~T

[Back]

http://sbe.vipnet.org

The link above is to real-time Virginia voting results.

Actually, I thought they were doing the recount but I was looking at one locality.

Sorry for the initial confusion.

[Artha]

Good link.

[Parkbandit]

Just wait till he starts calling people gay and threatening to kill their cat. He's one step away from that now.


Wow.. great input on your part.

Thanks. This thread wouldn't be the same without it. Your insight into the topic of this thread is impressive with these comments.

[Back]

The DOW and NASDAQ both gained over the past two days. Guess it isn’t the end of times.

[Parkbandit]

You referred to everyone who voted for Bush as a "moron" after the '04 election. Given that, the best source for your answer is probably within yourself.

She's always been the "do as I say.. not as I do" crowd.

She must be a doctor.. since she clearly took the Hypocrite oath.

[Gan]

The DOW and NASDAQ both gained over the past two days. Guess it isn’t the end of times.

Funny, the dow has been steadily climbing for a while now and thats never stopped you from saying our economy is in the shitter because of the Republicans as you have done so on many occasions in the past.

Stick with things you know about. Like beer, wine, cheese, Chavez, socialist ideals, and funny french films with subtitles, and please dont try to play economist.

Just do us a favor and stop posting, your hypocracy is hurting my eyes.

[Parkbandit]

The DOW and NASDAQ both gained over the past two days. Guess it isn’t the end of times.

OMG! Clearly this is because the Democrats have initiated their 100 day platform 2 months early.

Seriously though.. let's have this conversation in two years.. after they do not renew the tax cuts, increase spending on their social agendas, stiffle business by raising the minimum wage, etc...

Can't wait.

[Sean]

^
I totally agree, life is all about maximizing your earning potential.

[Parkbandit]

Funny, the dow has been steadily climbing for a while now and thats never stopped you from saying our economy is in the shitter because of the Republicans as you have done so on many occasions in the past.

Stick with things you know about. Like beer, wine, cheese, Chavez, socialist ideals, and funny french films with subtitles, and please dont try to play economist.

Just do us a favor and stop posting, your hypocracy is hurting my eyes.

LOL.. by December 2006, he'll be saying the Democrats are responsible for it.

By December 2007, he'll be saying Bush is responsible for the inflation.

[Parkbandit]

^
I totally agree, life is all about maximizing your earning potential.


Life isn't about maximizing your earning potential.. but life isn't about working until mid June every year to pay for Government either.

Makes no difference to me.. in about 6 months, I'll move money from stocks and put it into much more secure areas and ride the storm out. My business will not be affected too much by the minimum wage increase. I already pay my employees far above minimum wage, but the cost of my supplies will no doubt go up since most of them are made in the USA. I will pass this cost onto my local energy company.. who in turn will pass it along to the customers. My small business taxes will most likely go up.. which I will again pass onto my energy company.. who in turn will pass it along to the consumers.

[Sean of the Thread]

The DOW and NASDAQ both gained over the past two days. Guess it isn’t the end of times.

It's been gaining almost daily since July..

[Back]

Funny, the dow has been steadily climbing for a while now and thats never stopped you from saying our economy is in the shitter because of the Republicans as you have done so on many occasions in the past.

Stick with things you know about. Like beer, wine, cheese, Chavez, socialist ideals, and funny french films with subtitles, and please dont try to play economist.

Just do us a favor and stop posting, your hypocracy is hurting my eyes.

Yes, my one little quickie humorous jab comment encapsulates my ENTIRE WORDLVIEW!!!

Get a life. Today is too good a day for any of you clowns to get under my skin.

[Gan]

Yes, my one little quickie humorous jab comment encapsulates my ENTIRE WORDLVIEW!!!

Get a life. Today is too good a day for any of you clowns to get under my skin.

Define humorous...

[Skirmisher]

OMG! Clearly this is because the Democrats have initiated their 100 day platform 2 months early.

Seriously though.. let's have this conversation in two years.. after they do not renew the tax cuts, increase spending on their social agendas, stiffle business by raising the minimum wage, etc...

Can't wait.

My thanks to Bush et all for having set the bar for what is considered as success so low then.
:thanx:

[ElanthianSiren]

Funny, the dow has been steadily climbing for a while now and thats never stopped you from saying our economy is in the shitter because of the Republicans as you have done so on many occasions in the past.


Naughty Naughty Gan. Which sectors are primarily in the dow?

-M

[TheEschaton]

I guess the whole "for troops, against war" thing has been something I've never understood. If you have a weapon for protection, you have to also realize that one day you may have to actually use it in order to protect yourself. Granted, you may not like the idea, but you do it because that's what it's designed for. Same with the military. It's designed to serve and protect our country. Why are people so against using the military for its main purpose?

I'm gonna have to agree with PB here where I'm not understanding how you can be pro troops on one hand and then be so vehemently against the war on the other. Wouldn't that kind of negativity affect the troops?

You're Christian, you should know the phrase: "Love the sinner, hate the sin." ;)

And people, for the most part, are only against the military being used in certain situations. Like the situation in Iraq. I don't think you can argue that being against the Iraq war translates into being against all war.

That being said, I'm against all war, but we've all had that argument before. ;)

-TheE-

[Apathy]

Most honest article on the elections I've read today: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/54918

[Gan]

Naughty Naughty Gan. Which sectors are primarily in the dow?

-M

I could copy/paste quicker than I could type: (courtesy of Wikipedia)
The Dow Jones Industrial Average consists of the following 30 companies:
(Banking, auto, industrial/farming, service, food, retail, entertainment, technology, and petrolium)

3M Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3M) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): MMM (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=MMM)) (conglomerates, "manufacturing")
ALCOA Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoa) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): AA (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=AA)) (aluminum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminum))
Altria Group Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altria_Group) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): MO (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=MO)) (tobacco (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco), foods)
American Express Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Express) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): AXP (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=AXP)) (credit services)
American International Group Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_International_Group) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): AIG (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=AIG)) (property & casualty insurance)
AT&T Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AT%26T) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): T (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=T)) (telecoms (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecoms))
Boeing Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): BA (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=BA)) (aerospace/defense)
Caterpillar Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caterpillar_Inc.) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): CAT (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=CAT)) (farm & construction equipment)
Citigroup Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citigroup) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): C (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=C)) (money center banks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank))
Coca-Cola Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Coca-Cola_Company) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): KO (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=KO)) (beverages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beverage))
E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DuPont) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): DD (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=DD)) (chemicals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_industry))
Exxon Mobil Corp. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): XOM (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=XOM)) (major integrated oil & gas)
General Electric Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): GE (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=GE)) (conglomerates, media)
General Motors Corp. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_Corporation) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): GM (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=GM)) (auto manufacturers)
Hewlett-Packard Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewlett-Packard) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): HPQ (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=HPQ)) (diversified computer systems)
Home Depot Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Home_Depot) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): HD (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=HD)) (home improvement stores)
Honeywell International Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeywell) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): HON (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=HON)) (conglomerates)
Intel Corp. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel) (NASDAQ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASDAQ): INTC (http://quotes.nasdaq.com/asp/SummaryQuote.asp?symbol=INTC&selected=INTC)) (semiconductors)
International Business Machines Corp. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): IBM (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=IBM)) (diversified computer systems)
Johnson & Johnson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_%26_Johnson) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): JNJ (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=JNJ)) (consumer and health care products conglomerate)
JPMorgan Chase & Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPMorgan_Chase_%26_Co.) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): JPM (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=JPM)) (money center banks)
McDonald's Corp. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald%27s) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): MCD (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=MCD)) (restaurant franchise)
Merck & Co. Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merck_%26_Co.) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): MRK (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=MRK)) (drug manufacturers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pharmaceutical_companies))
Microsoft Corp. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft) (NASDAQ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASDAQ): MSFT (http://quotes.nasdaq.com/asp/SummaryQuote.asp?symbol=MSFT&selected=MSFT)) (software (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software))
Pfizer Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfizer_Inc.) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): PFE (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=PFE)) (drug manufacturers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pharmaceutical_companies))
Procter & Gamble Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procter_%26_Gamble) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): PG (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=PG)) (consumer goods)
United Technologies Corp. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Technologies_Corporation) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): UTX (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=UTX)) (conglomerates)
Verizon Communications Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verizon_Communications) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): VZ (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=VZ)) (telecoms)
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wal-Mart) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): WMT (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=WMT)) (discount, variety stores)
Walt Disney Co. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Walt_Disney_Company) (NYSE (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Stock_Exchange): DIS (http://www.nyse.com/about/listed/lcddata.html?ticker=DIS)) (entertainment)

[Daniel]

It would have been alot quicker to type Big business.

[Gan]

It would have been alot quicker to type Big business.

Quicker, but not accurate to my point. If I were looking to throw out a political label, sure.

[Daniel]

You made a point?

[AestheticDeath]

I have to admit I did not vote. I had no idea who was up for election etc..

I dont buy the paper, and I havent been watching TV much. Is there a website or something somewhere which keeps up with all the political stuff?

I am lazy, and would love to find a site which has all the local information so I can easily read up on the pertinent info, and make as much of an informed decision as I can next year.

I just dont see the point in voting when I have no idea what the people stand for.

[Gan]

You made a point?

Lets recap.


The DOW and NASDAQ both gained over the past two days. Guess it isn’t the end of times.


Funny, the dow has been steadily climbing for a while now and thats never stopped you from saying our economy is in the shitter because of the Republicans as you have done so on many occasions in the past.

Imagine that, Backlash, who's been infamous for decrying economic and social doom because the Republicans control both executive and legislative branches of the government. To BK's defense, he did say he was making a funny. Which sounded kind of like Kerry's excuse last week.

Then (pay attention now Daniel)...


Naughty Naughty Gan. Which sectors are primarily in the dow? -M

To which I gave a complete listing of the DJIA, so to head off the ennuendo that its only big business thats prospered. Yet you missed it.


It would have been alot quicker to type Big business.

Captain obvious strikes again...

So lets look a little further since there are no nickel stock indecies by which the markets use as daily meters.

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i3/3strangedays/NASDAQ.gif

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i3/3strangedays/SP500.gif

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i3/3strangedays/DJIA.gif

^^^ 5 year histories, denoting the recession in 2003, and the recovery since. Now keep in mind, as you should know, that the markets only represent one of many economic indicators used to guage how the economy is doing. BUT since we're only discussing the markets in this scenario, these three indicies should be representative enough. See my point now?

Yea, lets all give the Democrats taking back the house/senate these midterm elections credit for fixing the markets!!! /sarcasm.

[Daniel]

To which I gave a complete listing of the DJIA, so to head off the ennuendo that its only big business thats prospered. Yet you missed it.

Here is where you failed.

You emphasized the Dow, which has *always* been about big business, and omitted the Nasdaq which is not. Hence, ES's comment.

Your Wiki listing did nothing to head off the "Innuendo"

Thanks for the pretty graphs though.

[Parkbandit]

My thanks to Bush et all for having set the bar for what is considered as success so low then.
:thanx:


Yea.. that almost makes sense if it weren't for the lowest unemployement and highest Dow in history.

[TheEschaton]

I think the point you're all missing was that Backlash was MAKING A JOKE, playing on how GOPers said that the economy would suffer under Dems, by pointing out the market had in fact risen since the Dems took power.

-TheE-

[Parkbandit]

Here is where you failed.

You emphasized the Dow, which has *always* been about big business, and omitted the Nasdaq which is not. Hence, ES's comment.

Your Wiki listing did nothing to head off the "Innuendo"

Thanks for the pretty graphs though.

LOL.. you are really.. REALLY trying to say the economy isn't good.. because the Dow is full of big business and the Nasdaq isn't?

Please tell me that's not your point. Please tell me you have more to provide than just that. Please tell me your entire argument isn't hinging on that.

[Parkbandit]

I think the point you're all missing was that Backlash was MAKING A JOKE, playing on how GOPers said that the economy would suffer under Dems, by pointing out the market had in fact risen since the Dems took power.

-TheE-


Most of Backlash's posts are a joke.

[TheEschaton]

Oh, by the way.....AP and Reuters have called VA for Webb. Allen has scheduled a conference tomorrow and reportedly "doesn't want to drag this out". Reported on CNN.

Game. Set. FUCKING MATCH.

-TheE-

[Daniel]

LOL.. you are really.. REALLY trying to say the economy isn't good.. because the Dow is full of big business and the Nasdaq isn't?

Please tell me that's not your point. Please tell me you have more to provide than just that. Please tell me your entire argument isn't hinging on that.

I don't think I made any statements about the Economy.

Nice try though.

Why don't you go back to telling people they aren't supporting the troops unless they treat them like petulent 12 year children. At least that was funny.

[Parkbandit]

Oh, by the way.....AP and Reuters have called VA for Webb. Allen has scheduled a conference tomorrow and reportedly "doesn't want to drag this out". Reported on CNN.

Game. Set. FUCKING MATCH.

-TheE-


I'm actually happy they got both houses. Reid in one house.. Pelosi in the other. How long do you think it will be until they show their true colors and fuck the Democrats out of true party reform and wind up fucking up the 2008 Presidential election?

It frightens the daylights out of me that she is 2nd in line to the Presidency after the President.

[Parkbandit]

I don't think I made any statements about the Economy.

Nice try though.

Why don't you go back to telling people they aren't supporting the troops unless they treat them like petulent 12 year children. At least that was funny.

Shouldn't you be in bed child?

(how's that?)

[TheEschaton]

It frightens the daylights out of me that she is 2nd in line to the Presidency after the President.

Now you know how nervous we feel, having Dick 1st in line. ;)

-TheE-

[Daniel]

:)

[Ilvane]

VA goes to the Dems..Wahoooo!

Now, we have some fun.:)

Angela

[Sean of the Thread]

Dems are so fucked now.. it's gonna sling shot a GOP 2008.

[Back]

Now we see Rove’s master plan. Purposely screw up the republican reelection campaign to ensure dems win to set the stage for a GOP presidency in 08.

[Hulkein]

I honestly have no problem with the changes seeing as most of the Dems who took over contested spots are moderate. I just don't like the extreme liberals, I have no problem with moderate Democrats.

[Parkbandit]

I honestly have no problem with the changes seeing as most of the Dems who took over contested spots are moderate. I just don't like the extreme liberals, I have no problem with moderate Democrats.


Me either. In fact, I probably allign more closely with a conservative Democrat than with a typical Republican.

[Gan]

Here is where you failed.

You emphasized the Dow, which has *always* been about big business, and omitted the Nasdaq which is not. Hence, ES's comment.

Your Wiki listing did nothing to head off the "Innuendo"

Thanks for the pretty graphs though.

Actualy... the DJIA is an index of major stocks. The Nasdaq is the actual market. There is the Nasdaq 100 which is made up of the largest 100 stocks on the Nasdaq. IF you really wanted to be accurate.

Make sure you get it right when you try to correct someone.

[Gan]

Now we see Rove’s master plan. Purposely screw up the republican reelection campaign to ensure dems win to set the stage for a GOP presidency in 08.

Now you're sounding like Michael Savage.

[Daniel]

Actualy... the DJIA is an index of major stocks. The Nasdaq is the actual market. There is the Nasdaq 100 which is made up of the largest 100 stocks on the Nasdaq. IF you really wanted to be accurate.

Make sure you get it right when you try to correct someone.

Your distinction changes absolutely nothing.

[Gan]

Your distinction changes absolutely nothing.

Much the same as your posts.

[Daniel]

jUked

[Skirmisher]

Yea.. that almost makes sense if it weren't for the lowest unemployement and highest Dow in history.

Well we would also have to find some country that hasn't actually attacked us, take it over, lose thousands of US servicemen in the process and spend over 300 billion with projections of nearly double that amount before we get all the way out AND somehow make the international image of the US worse than it is right now.

I'm thinking that you're right, we wont quite match up to that.

[Sean of the Thread]

Skirm it's too early for you to be hugging terrorists and genocidal dictators this morning. I havn't had my bloody mary yet.

[Skirmisher]

Sorry.

[Parkbandit]

I'm thinking that you're right


Apology accepted.

[Back]

The Democrats reversed GOP dominance that reached back to 1994, seizing a 28-22 edge in governor's mansions. When they take office next year, Democrats will control states with 295 electoral votes, up from the 126 electoral votes in states now held by Democrats. It takes 270 electoral votes to win the presidency.

Nationwide, Democrats added about 275 state legislators. Before the election, Republicans and Democrats had split the nation's 7,393 state seats almost evenly. Democrats now control more chambers than at any time since 1994.

Democrats in Minnesota elected their first black Representative, Keith Ellison. Also the first Muslim elected to Congress.

Democrats elected Deval Patrick, first black Governor of Massachusetts.

Voter turnout was more than 40 percent this year, slightly higher than in the last midterm election.

[Latrinsorm]

But... the Nasdaq was following the same trend the Dow was. ???

[Parkbandit]

Average gain of seats in mid-term elections since World War II: 25.47


Seems about average.

[HarmNone]

What I can't figure out is why only 40% (give or take a few percentage points) of the American people bother to vote. It's mind-boggling.

[Jorddyn]

What I can't figure out is why only 40% (give or take a few percentage points) of the American people bother to vote. It's mind-boggling.

Apathy. Frustration. Anger. Lack of good candidates. Fear of voting "wrong".

I'm not excusing it, just explaining. I vote every election, and I felt all of the above during this past election.

~T

[Tromp]

What I can't figure out is why only 40% (give or take a few percentage points) of the American people bother to vote. It's mind-boggling.


Fear of rage filled Parkbandit'esk clock tower snipers picking people off as they walk into the polling place is my guess.

[HarmNone]

I can understand the frustration and anger, as well as the feeling that there is nobody to vote "for", only candidates to vote against. The first two, to me, are reasons TO vote, not reasons to abstain from voting. The last one is sticky. I can really empathize with that feeling. I think it's one with which we're often confronted, unfortunately. I guess you have to look at it as choosing a grey area over one that is obviously not satisfactory to you.

I don't understand apathy. That will get one nowhere. I also don't understand fear of voting "wrong". You've got to educate yourself and vote using the gained knowledge as a guideline. If the candidate for whom you voted doesn't live up to his/her hype once in office, that doesn't mean you voted "wrong". It means the candidate freakin' lied!

[ElanthianSiren]

Actually, in response to Ganalon and Daniel, I wasn't pointing out that the dow is big business; to get your name on any of the three major boards, you almost have to be big business; it costs big capital. The process is huge and involves vouchers from banks to back you and so on. If anyone's curious, I can type out the whole thing in a U2U, but that's not relative to this.

My point was that much of the dow is comprised of "old man stocks" (the blue chips), which often factor heavily into defense (that's why I wanted to show a breakdown by sector of the total stocks vs. what sector they belong to). Surprise, surprise we're fighting a war here. While Eric is correct, the Nas is growing with the dow, it's not growing with the same ferocity, for obvious reasons (consumer expectation, government contracting etc).

What's disturbing about that?

-The nas is primarily up-and-coming technology sectors, 4 letter stocks, (your internets, biotechnology firms, technology) and has classically led in not-so-recent years. While some are used in the war (for example gps made by the firm GRMN, I believe), the majority of those sectors aren't leading. They're lagging.

You can make a few arguments here: 1. the stock market isn't localized to the US (for instance, BIDU is the chinese GOOG; they are both Nas (4 letter) stocks). You can make the counter argument to this that if the entire world is investing in their versions of blue chips (to make the spurts we're seeing), how much capital is actually left to invest in other versions of nas? You can back up this argument by looking at normalized price movement between the two stocks you're comparing to try to analyze their rate of growth/depreciation (PE ratios etc).

2. You can make the argument that neither the blue chips or the nas accurately reflect the market as a whole, and this is a silly debate entirely. This is where you'd fall back on the debate in the other thread about pips and market sentiment indicators (like consumer confidence, beige book remarks, CPI etc). Many of these kinds of reports come out weekly or monthly and are a pretty interesting read from report to report to see how things have changed. Here is where you argue that those reports are more valuable to show the market pulse than a collection of stocks that may or may not have had news or earnings (both of which impact substantially price movement).

3. You can make the argument that wezas is now asleep at his desk.

-M

[Parkbandit]

What I can't figure out is why only 40% (give or take a few percentage points) of the American people bother to vote. It's mind-boggling.


People believe that their one single vote will be lost and not heard among the millions of votes. My Dad is that way. He is a steadfast Democrat ( not a liberal though.. thank god) and I think he's voted in maybe 3 elections in his life.

[ElanthianSiren]

European people don't seem to have that kind of nagging sentiment; I'd say it's mainly an american problem.

-M

[Jorddyn]

My Dad is that way. He is a steadfast Democrat ( not a liberal though.. thank god)

Would you mind explaining how you see the difference between the two?

I know that one does not equal the other, I'm just curious as to how one is ok, and one is OMG TERRIBLE.

Jorddyn

[Back]

A look at the Senate's new leadership
By The Associated Press 47 minutes ago

A look at the new Democratic leaders and committee chairmen in the U.S. Senate when a new Congress convenes in January. Senate Democrats, including new members elected this week, will caucus next Tuesday to formally pick their leaders.
___
Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Reid's no-nonsense, plainspoken style reflects his origins, growing up in a cabin in the tiny community of Searchlight, Nev. Once an amateur boxer and an official fighting organized crime in his home state, he won a House seat in 1982 and four years later moved to the Senate. Reid, 66, served as former Democratic leader Tom Daschle's deputy for six years until Daschle lost his re-election bid in 2004. Since becoming Democratic leader in 2005, Reid has continued to fight for Democratic causes such as an increase in the minimum wage and opposition to President Bush's tax cuts. But, as a practicing Mormon, he has also at times sided with Republicans on legislation opposing abortion.
___
Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, D-Ill. Durbin, 62, joined the staff of former Illinois Democratic Sen. Paul Simon after graduating from law school, and in 1982 entered the House as a representative from the Springfield area. He served seven terms in the House before succeeding Simon, who retired from the Senate in 1996. A lawmaker with strong liberal credentials and a smooth speaking style, he frequently represents his party on TV talk shows. A skilled parliamentarian, he also was a natural successor to then-party whip Harry Reid when Reid became Democratic leader in 2005. Durbin has been an advocate of gun control and was an early critic of how the war in Iraq was being carried out.
___
Agriculture: Tom Harkin, D-Iowa. Harkin, 66, remains an idealistic but pragmatic liberal after more than two decades in the Senate. He was a principal author of the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. His previous brief chairmanship of the committee and championing of farm subsidies helped him four years ago overpower a conservative challenger in a swing state.
___
Appropriations: Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. Byrd, the longest-serving member of the U.S. Senate, has held more Senate party leadership positions_ including two terms as majority leader — than anyone. Now 88, he has grown increasingly liberal since his first statewide race in 1946. Byrd joined the Appropriations committee in 1959 and chaired it from 1989 to 1994 and again in 2001. His control of the panel and its role in federal spending prompted critics to label him "the king of pork-barrel politics."
___
Armed Services: Carl Levin, D-Mich. Levin, 72, is the longest-serving U.S. senator from Michigan. A Harvard-trained lawyer with a strong work ethic, he has been a persistent critic of the Bush administration's handling of the war in Iraq, leading an unsuccessful June 2006 effort to pass a nonbinding proposal urging Bush to begin withdrawal of troops from Iraq by the end of the year. He has a liberal voting record on many social issues.
___
Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs: Christopher Dodd, D-Conn. Ranking Democrat Paul Sarbanes, 73, is retiring after his current term, leaving his chairmanship open if Democrats win the Senate. Dodd is next in line, and would most likely sacrifice the Rules and Administration chairmanship to take the gavel here. Dodd, 62, is a liberal pragmatist who has sought Democratic leadership posts in the past.
___
Budget: Kent Conrad, D-N.D. Known for his love of charts and a passion for the budget process, Conrad, 58, is a moderate Democrat who has been a vocal critic of many of the Bush administration's fiscal policies. He worked to reduce the federal budget deficit and is particularly critical of U.S. debt to other countries. He briefly became chairman of the Senate Budget Committee when Democrats gained control of the Senate in 2001, but resumed his role as vocal opposition leader when the Republicans regained their majority status in 2003.
___
Commerce, Science, and Transportation: Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii. Inouye, 82, the first Japanese-American to serve in Congress, broke racial barriers on Capitol Hill. Known as a private man, Inouye lost an arm in World War II and was awarded the Medal of Honor for bravery in 2000. He lost a bid to become Senate majority leader in 1989, but remained a Senate power broker — he holds a seat on the Appropriations Committee and once chaired the Indian Affairs Committee.
___
Energy and Natural Resources: Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M. Bingaman, 63, has carved out a reputation on Capitol Hill as a no-frills legislator who eschews the limelight. Bingaman supported the 2005 energy bill, but accused chairman and fellow New Mexico Sen. Pete Domenici (news, bio, voting record), a Republican, of shutting him and other Democrats out of discussions on the final version of the legislation.
___
Environment and Public Works: Barbara Boxer, D-Calif. Republican-turned-independent James Jeffords is the ranking minority member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, but he's retiring this year. It's unclear who will take the gavel, but the 65-year-old Boxer — one of the Senate's most liberal members — could be next in line. Committee Democrats with seniority over Boxer would likely opt for chairmanships elsewhere, such as in the case of Max Baucus, who would wield the gavel for the Finance Committee.
___
Finance: Max Baucus, D-Mont. Baucus, 64, has played increasingly visible roles in Congress, sometimes willing to buck his Democratic Party on certain issues. He supported the president's $1.35 trillion tax cut in 2001, when he briefly held the Finance Committee chairmanship after Sen. Jim Jeffords' defection from the GOP gave Democrats control of the Senate. He works well with the current Republican chairman. But in early 2005, Baucus loudly criticized the Bush's plan to add private accounts to Social Security.
___
Foreign Relations: Joseph Biden, D-Del. Biden, 63, a six-term senator and consistent Democratic voice, has chaired the Foreign Relations Committee before and is one of the most influential foreign policy voices in Congress. An internationalist and strong supporter of the United Nations, Biden's views on the war in Iraq frequently place him at odds with the administration and in front of the cameras on Sunday morning talk shows. He has called for the firing of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and opposed Bush's selection of John Bolton as U.N. ambassador.
___
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions: Edward Kennedy, D-Mass. Kennedy, 74, the "liberal lion" of the Senate, continues to march into contentious rhetorical battles with his ideological opposition. He is a leading critic of Bush and his decision to go to war in Iraq and has criticized Bush's health care proposals. He stood beside Bush when he signed the No Child Left Behind education reform legislation, but Kennedy has since disparaged the bill's implementation.
___
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs: Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn. Lieberman, 64, lost the 2006 Democratic primary to millionaire businessman Ned Lamont, who criticized Lieberman's support for the war in Iraq and linked him to the unpopular Bush. But Lieberman won the election as an independent and has pledged to align himself with Democrats.
___
Indian Affairs: Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. As a member of his party's leadership, Dorgan, 64, often appears torn between national Democrats in Washington and more conservative voters in North Dakota. As chairman of the Democratic Policy Committee, Dorgan has led hearings on government accountability issues related to the Iraq war and hurricanes on the Gulf Coast. But he was in the minority of Democrats who voted in 2002 to authorize force in Iraq and was one of only eight Democrats who voted to approve John Ashcroft as attorney general. A persistent populist critic of the rich and powerful, Dorgan made headlines in 2005 when he called for a windfall profits tax on major oil companies.
___
Judiciary: Patrick Leahy, D-Vt. Leahy, 66, has emerged as one of the leading critics of Bush administration policies ranging from judicial appointments to combating terrorism. When he was chairman in 2001, Republicans accused him of holding up judicial nominations — and then said Leahy worked to slow them after Republicans took over. Leahy helped draft the Patriot Act after Sept. 11, but has criticized the Bush administration's implementation of it.
___
Rules and Administration: Connecticut's Dodd is most senior, but he would most likely sacrifice this chairmanship to take the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs gavel. California Sen. Dianne Feinstein (news, bio, voting record), 73, a tough-talking, consensus-forging moderate, could become chairwoman.
___
Special Committee on Aging: Herb Kohl, D-Wis. Kohl, 71, a soft-spoken multimillionaire, has refused to accept money from special-interest groups and instead used his own personal wealth to fund his campaigns. He voted against Bush's plan to overhaul Medicare and create a prescription drug benefit and opposed Bush's proposed changes to Social Security.
___
Select Committee on Ethics: Tim Johnson, D-S.D. Johnson, 59, was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2004, only a year after beginning his second Senate term. An unassuming and quiet lawmaker, he has amassed a generally liberal voting record on Capitol Hill. But he calls himself a middle-of-the-road Democrat and supports conservative positions on social issues such as abortion.
___
Select Committee on Intelligence: John Rockefeller, D-W. Va. Rockefeller, 69, is a Democratic partisan with national influence because of his role on the Intelligence Committee. He was one of 17 senators to vote against the nomination of former Rep. Porter Goss (news, bio, voting record), R-Fla., as director of the Central Intelligence Agency, saying Goss was too partisan. But he partnered with the Republican Intelligence chairman Pat Roberts of Kansas to issue a damning report on the CIA's intelligence gathering in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.
___
Small Business and Entrepreneurship: John Kerry, D-Mass. Kerry, 63, the Democratic presidential nominee in 2004, will be able to add Small Business Committee chairman to his resume — again — if he runs for president — again — in 2008. Criticized for his fuzzy stand on Iraq, Kerry in October 2005 made headlines with his call for a phased withdraw of U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of 2006. And he touted the health care proposals he formulated as a presidential candidate from his post in the Senate.
___
Veterans Affairs: Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii. Akaka, the first Native Hawaiian ever elected to Congress, has spent his low-key career protecting the interests of his state and Native Hawaiians. In 1995, Akaka, 82, sponsored legislation directing the Army and Navy to review service records of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders who received the Distinguished Service Cross to determine whether their awards should be upgraded. As a result of the review, in June 2000, 22 Asian-American veterans of World War II, most of them from Hawaii, were awarded the Medal of Honor — 15 of them posthumously.

[xtc]

And if this was the "OMG, PEOPLE HAVE VOTED AGAINST THE WAR!!!!" result the libs are trying to make it.. how again did Lieberman get re-elected? He's one of the more outspoken supporters of the war.. in one of the more liberal states in the country.

CNN reported, that exit polls showed the war was key in the majority of voters minds this year.

With Lieberman getting 50% of the vote and Lamont getting 38% and the Republican only picking up 8%, I am guessing a lot of Repubs voted for Lieberman.

[Parkbandit]

Fear of rage filled Parkbandit'esk clock tower snipers picking people off as they walk into the polling place is my guess.


And here I thought it was the Republicans stopping black people and preventing them to vote.

Son of a...

[Sean]

Na they actually tried to encourage black people to vote by running a few black candidates for various posts... they didn't win though.

[CrystalTears]

We also voted in a Republican governor. Heavily.

[Parkbandit]

Na they actually tried to encourage black people to vote by running a few black candidates for various posts... they didn't win though.


That's only because the Democrats won.

Had the Republicans somehow held onto power.. I am most certain the same types of unsubstantiated claims of voters being denied their rights (only Blacks though) would surface as they did in 2000 and again in 2004.

[Sean]

I suppose that depends on if you think they ran the best candidates or if you think they ran black candidates to try and encourage black votes. I didn't pay attention enough to be able to tell either way, but I hope it was an issued based campaign and not a he's black and he'll sleep with all your white women campaign.

[Parkbandit]

I suppose that depends on if you think they ran the best candidates or if you think they ran black candidates to try and encourage black votes. I didn't pay attention enough to be able to tell either way, but I hope it was an issued based campaign and not a he's black and he'll sleep with all your white women campaign.


You "didn't pay any attention enough to be able to tell either way".. so you thought you would just offer it up as a theory based upon absolutely nothing.

That's fantastic.

[crazymage]

Patrick won in Mass, hes blac sort of.

[ElanthianSiren]

That's only because the Democrats won.

Had the Republicans somehow held onto power.. I am most certain the same types of unsubstantiated claims of voters being denied their rights (only Blacks though) would surface as they did in 2000 and again in 2004.

Yet isn't it funny that the woman responsible for compiling the inaccurate felon voter list in FL (Katherine Harris) just got her ass trounced.

Isn't it funny that the governor responsible for sending in poll watchers in Ohio (Ken Blackwell) also just got his ass trounced.

Also, please explain how a felon list including non-felons that were barred from voting is unsubstantiated. I disagree with your "only blacks" comment.

-M

[crazymage]

BOING

[Sean]

Originally Posted by PB

You "didn't pay any attention enough to be able to tell either way".. so you thought you would just offer it up as a theory based upon absolutely nothing.

That's fantastic.

I didn't offer up any specific theory on anything. I said I would hope that those republican candidates who did happen to be black were run on issues and not because black candidate=black voters.

No I didn't pay enough attention to all of the "black republican vs" races because they weren't in my district to determine whether or not I thought they were actually worthy candidates and I never made any implication as to whether they were or weren't. The only campaign I made an allusion to was the Anti-Ford ad run by Corker in Tennessee.

Maybe next time you reply to something you'll actually bother to reply to what was in the post instead of trying to extract something that wasn't there.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I thought this was a cool breakdown of the Lieberman/Lamont race here in CT.

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/us/politics/20061108_ELECTION_PORTRAIT_CT.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1163103467-ruGOIDxtojN7TTtDv1+K6Q

It shows quite clearly how/why Lieberman won.

[Back]

Allen Concedes Election, Democrats Win Control of Congress ( http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/09/AR2006110900775.html?referrer=email)

[Latrinsorm]

It shows quite clearly how/why Lieberman won.If you buy into exit polls as representative or accurate, sure. Blind percentages ftl.

Isn't it terrifying how nobody identifies eirself as a liberal republican or a conservative democract?

[Latrinsorm]

p.s.:

OMG THE NASDAQ HAS DROPT OVER THE PAST TWO HOURS RAPTURE ALRET

[Artha]

"With deep respect for the people of Virginia and to bind factions together for a positive purpose, I do not wish to cause more rancor by protracted litigation which would in my judgment not alter the results,"

Allen > Gore

[TheEschaton]

There was no fraud or illegal/unethical behavior in the VA race. Except for the voter intimidation accusations - but those were against the Republicans, doubt Allen would sue on that.

-TheE-

[Parkbandit]

I didn't offer up any specific theory on anything. I said I would hope that those republican candidates who did happen to be black were run on issues and not because black candidate=black voters.

No I didn't pay enough attention to all of the "black republican vs" races because they weren't in my district to determine whether or not I thought they were actually worthy candidates and I never made any implication as to whether they were or weren't. The only campaign I made an allusion to was the Anti-Ford ad run by Corker in Tennessee.

Maybe next time you reply to something you'll actually bother to reply to what was in the post instead of trying to extract something that wasn't there.

Whatever Sean.

Typical fucking liberal. Throw something out there.. no matter if you have proof or not.. and maybe something will stick.

Now we know why Republicans hate black people... because you say they throw up token black candidates who have no chance.. but are only doing it to take advantage of the stupid, ill informed black voter.

[Parkbandit]

Allen > Gore


Exactly. It's good to know there are politicians that know what is best for the country. He could have demanded a recount.. dragged this on and on for a long time.. but he knew that was not what was in the best interest of the country.

[Parkbandit]

There was no fraud or illegal/unethical behavior in the VA race. Except for the voter intimidation accusations - but those were against the Republicans, doubt Allen would sue on that.

-TheE-

Yea.. what an amazing coincidence. Only the big bad Republicans intimidate voters... in close races or races they win.

LOL

[Parkbandit]

p.s.:

OMG THE NASDAQ HAS DROPT OVER THE PAST TWO HOURS RAPTURE ALRET

Bush's fault.

[Back]

Yea.. what an amazing coincidence. Only the big bad Republicans intimidate voters... in close races or races they win.

LOL

The cemetery GOTV campaign sure worked this year.

[Keller]

That's only because the Democrats won.

Had the Republicans somehow held onto power.. I am most certain the same types of unsubstantiated claims of voters being denied their rights (only Blacks though) would surface as they did in 2000 and again in 2004.


No, it's only because white men aren't excluded by other white men. You'd have to be loony to proffer that possibility with a straight-face.

[Keller]

Yea.. what an amazing coincidence. Only the big bad Republicans intimidate voters... in close races or races they win.

LOL

First, there are limited resources with which to challenge elections. Which elections would you choose?

Second, voter intimidation and systematic exclusion, either de facto or de jure, of black voters has been occurring for 150 years. It's naive to believe it's a non-issue today.

[Artha]

It's also silly to believe that the only racists are republicans.

[Back]

It's also silly to believe that the only racists are republicans.

Its silly to think the percentages would be the same.

[Keller]

It's also silly to believe that the only racists are republicans.

I don't believe that. I believe that blacks overwhelmingly vote democrat. So their exclusion hurts one party.

[Jorddyn]

Exactly. It's good to know there are politicians that know what is best for the country. He could have demanded a recount.. dragged this on and on for a long time.. but he knew that was not what was in the best interest of the country.

He knew that it was a lot harder to overcome a 7500+ vote margin than a 200 vote margin.

Jorddyn

[Keller]

He knew that it was a lot harder to overcome a 7500+ vote margin than a 200 vote margin.

Jorddyn

Not to mention the population of Florida is more than double the population of Virginia, leaving more than twice the room for error.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by PB

Now we know why Republicans hate black people... because you say they throw up token black candidates who have no chance.. but are only doing it to take advantage of the stupid, ill informed black voter.

If you really believe that this is what I was getting at then you've officially reached Backlash level of paranoia.. Congrats.

[Back]

If you really believe that this is what I was getting at then you've officially reached Backlash level of paranoia.. Congrats.

If you really believe that then you’ve officially reached Ganalon level of dumb.

[Sean]

So what your saying is that I'm "Ganalon level of dumb" for saying PB might be as paranoid as you are...

[Gan]

Isn't it terrifying how nobody identifies eirself as a liberal republican or a conservative democract?

My uber-conservative catholic neighbor (Republican) called me a liberal Republican the other day. Considering I support stemcell research (even though I dont think federal dollars will amount to great strides in research already underway), also considering I am pro-choice, and do not support bans on gay marriage or any other gay activity.

Yea, as compared to some. I'm liberal. :lol:

[Keller]

I think all of you have reached a Keller-level of troll.

[Artha]

Its silly to think the percentages would be the same.
I think you'd be surprised how a lot of the rural racist types vote.

[Keller]

My uber-conservative catholic neighbor (Republican) called me a liberal Republican the other day. Considering I support stemcell research (even though I dont think federal dollars will amount to great strides in research already underway), also considering I am pro-choice, and do not support bans on gay marriage or any other gay activity.

Yea, as compared to some. I'm liberal. :lol:

So you're a republican because you support fiscal responsibility?

Or you support taking over the world one "axis of evil" at a time?

[Back]

So what your saying is that I'm "Ganalon level of dumb" for saying PB might be as paranoid as you are...

...for suggesting that you inferred that Republicans propped up black candidates just to get black votes.

[Keller]

I think you'd be surprised how a lot of the rural racist types vote.

What do you mean?

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Keller
I think all of you have reached a Keller-level of troll.

I never thought that would be possible but you might be right. I blame it on Hope College connections.

[Artha]

Most of them are not terribly wealthy, and the poor generally lean towards the democrats. They're certainly not voting straight ticket republican.

[Gan]

So you're a republican because you support fiscal responsibility?

Or you support taking over the world one "axis of evil" at a time?

I'm for lazziez faire business regulation.
I'm for small government (something the R forgot in 2001).
Fiscal responsibility (something the R forgot in 2003)
I'm for less taxes.
I'm for family values but without the affiliation of the Church.
I'm for a strong national defense.
I"m also for taking the fight to the aggressor, and winning decisively without becomming embattled in a political war. (something the R didnt pay attention to with LBJ and Vietnam)

Where I differ with the conservative R party:
Gay rights (live and let live)
Stem Cell research
Driving organized religion down your throat
Pro-choice until the fetus is medically viable to live outside the womb (25 and sometimes less weeks currently with today's technology) not to mention its a woman's body.

[Gan]

If you really believe that then you’ve officially reached Ganalon level of dumb.

:lol:
You calling me dumb is a compliment I'll take any day.

[Parkbandit]

If you really believe that this is what I was getting at then you've officially reached Backlash level of paranoia.. Congrats.

No, I was showing how stupid your original statement was. I think we can both agree that I have achieved that goal.