IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 Forum Rules 
3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> So, Who's Going To Win?, The ELECTION, dumbass!
Who you think will swing it?
You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Total Votes: 46
Guests cannot vote 
Polocrunch
post Sep 3 2004, 07:43 PM
Post #1


Has gone untreated for blurriness since 1986
************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 1,921
Joined: 3-August 03
Member No.: 505
Gender: Secret



I looked through the archives and was surprised to find that this topic didn't exist! So here it is - and don't say you didn't know it was inevitable.

I think that in order to figure out who's mostly to win we need to do three things:

1) Forget that you're a liberal. I know how hard that is, especially when you're surrounded by bleeding-heart hippies constantly, but if we're to figure out who's really going to get into the White House, we need to pretend that we aren't flag-burning, pot-smoking sissies. We need to put ourselves in the shoes of middle America, which is, after all, the main battleground for the candidates. Everyone knows which way the Massacheussets students and the downtrodden blacks are going to swing, and, equally, everyone knows which way the God-fearin' Bible-belters are going to go. What matters is where the swing vote goes, and that's what we need to pretend that we are, which leads me on to the next point...

2) Look at the big issues. We need to run through all the major issues, figure out who's going to appeal to whom, and then evaluate the importance of those issues and the size of the population that's going to be affected by them. For example - to pluck an issue out of the air - who is going to be affected by the war in Iraq? And how many of them are there? And are they already sure-fire (omg pun!) voters one way or the other, or are they swing-voters? And are they even going to go to the polls? And which candidate is strongest on the issue?

Well, I think you get the idea. Let battle commence! Or something...

EDIT:
3) Think of a third option to validate my initial statement "we need to do three things"
[/EDIT]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
craziness
post Sep 3 2004, 07:52 PM
Post #2


crazi
************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 4,010
Joined: 25-February 03
From: New Orleans
Member No.: 20
Gender: Female



Kerry because most people who are in between dislike bush more than him, and a lot of people have registered to vote this year. also, most of the intellegent members of the green party will vote for Kerry, because they know that its more important for Bush NOT to be president this time than for Nader to be president this time. (which he wouldnt anyways. the green party is kind of just a protest.) HOPEFULLY all of the college students wont be dumb and vote for Nader this time around. i could be wrong, but i sure as hell hope that Kerry wins!


--------------------
Love is real.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CommieBastard
post Sep 3 2004, 07:54 PM
Post #3


Remorseless posting machine
*************

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,749
Joined: 19-July 03
From: Bloody London
Member No.: 466
Gender: Male



I stopped caring a long time ago, to be honest. I realised the answer will be the same: a bad guy will win. I'm not really convinced that Kerry is significantly better than Bush - he certainly isn't "liberal" or "progressive" or any of those nice shiny words. Somebody bad - or at best somebody ineffectual - will win, like every time, and he will continue to do bad things, like everybody else.


--------------------
Every sort of expert knowledge and every inquiry, and similarly every action and undertaking, seems to seek some good. Because of that, people are right to affirm that the good is 'that which all things seek'...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Polocrunch
post Sep 3 2004, 07:56 PM
Post #4


Has gone untreated for blurriness since 1986
************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 1,921
Joined: 3-August 03
Member No.: 505
Gender: Secret



I think that you may not have listened to the first point, cray-zee-ness.

QUOTE
Kerry because most people who are in between dislike bush more than him


Really? The polls seem to disagree. The country is currently divided nice and evenly, and even the bookies aren't being very forthright at the moment.

I think you're probably right about the Green vote, though. Students and young people on the left are vehemently against Bush this time, and I'd be willing to bet that they'll abandon Nader to try and oust Bush.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Polocrunch
post Sep 3 2004, 07:59 PM
Post #5


Has gone untreated for blurriness since 1986
************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 1,921
Joined: 3-August 03
Member No.: 505
Gender: Secret



Goodness, Commie, I see someone's been taking their Cynicism pills nice and regularly. I also see that someone has come to political maturity in an era with a supremely uninspiring set of international political leaders. I wonder if you'd have said the same things had this been the election of 1992, or the British election of 1997.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CommieBastard
post Sep 3 2004, 08:09 PM
Post #6


Remorseless posting machine
*************

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,749
Joined: 19-July 03
From: Bloody London
Member No.: 466
Gender: Male



QUOTE (Polocrunch @ Sep 3 2004, 08:59 PM)
Goodness, Commie, I see someone's been taking their Cynicism pills nice and regularly. I also see that someone has come to political maturity in an era with a supremely uninspiring set of international political leaders. I wonder if you'd have said the same things had this been the election of 1992, or the British election of 1997.
*


Call me nationalistic, but the British political system is not the US political system. There are still ideological differences in our mainstream parties (of which there are three, not two). I don't think the Labour Party much of an improvement over the Conservative Party, they're both bad but in different ways.

As regards the 1992 election, Clinton would come under "ineffectual", a President who - while he did slightly less damage than most - talked the liberal talk but never walked the liberal walk.


--------------------
Every sort of expert knowledge and every inquiry, and similarly every action and undertaking, seems to seek some good. Because of that, people are right to affirm that the good is 'that which all things seek'...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
artist.unknown
post Sep 3 2004, 08:29 PM
Post #7


sesquipedalian
*********

Group: Established Members
Posts: 717
Joined: 3-February 04
From: der Mond
Member No.: 915
Gender: Secret



QUOTE
I stopped caring a long time ago, to be honest. I realised the answer will be the same: a bad guy will win. I'm not really convinced that Kerry is significantly better than Bush - he certainly isn't "liberal" or "progressive" or any of those nice shiny words. Somebody bad - or at best somebody ineffectual - will win, like every time, and he will continue to do bad things, like everybody else.

Yes, much agreed. Call me a pessimist (and I'll agree), but that does seem to be the general way of things. The only things I can see significantly going for Kerry are that 1) he has not had a double lobatamy, unlike some, 2) he is not under the influence of the devil's advocate, also known as Cheney, and 3) he is not Bush. Of course, because there are at least 3 positive things about Kerry, the election will go to Bush. Such is life.

Along unrelated lines, who else has had the impulse to kidnap Nader and stuff him away in a closet until December?


--------------------
-Grammar Nazi-quotes of the yesterday
It is only in his work that an artist can find reality and satisfaction, for the actual world is less intense than the world of his invention and consequently his life, without recourse to violent disorder, does not seem very substantial. -Tennessee Williams
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Polocrunch
post Sep 3 2004, 08:31 PM
Post #8


Has gone untreated for blurriness since 1986
************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 1,921
Joined: 3-August 03
Member No.: 505
Gender: Secret



Commie:

I'm not sure you fully understood what I was implying. I meant to say that perhaps if we lived in times where there was a greater sense of optimism about the political process - in 1992 after the rightist years of the Republicans and Conservatives and the end of the Cold War, for example, or in the 1997 dismemberment of the Tory party - your response to such a poll might have been less pessimistic. Instead you have matured politically (and here I assume that you weren't aware of much before the 1997 elections in the UK, or even the 2000 election in the US) after all these progressive-seeming leaders had been proven to be as inneffectual as their predecessors, and so are more likely to be influenced by the cynicism and disaffection of your age.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CommieBastard
post Sep 3 2004, 08:31 PM
Post #9


Remorseless posting machine
*************

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,749
Joined: 19-July 03
From: Bloody London
Member No.: 466
Gender: Male



QUOTE (artist.unknown @ Sep 3 2004, 09:29 PM)
Along unrelated lines, who else has had the impulse to kidnap Nader and stuff him away in a closet until December?
*


"Every night before I go to sleep, I pray that Ralph Nader will catch Osama bin Laden, all by himself, right before the election, just because it would make every single politician extremely angry."

Toothpaste For Dinner

/spam


--------------------
Every sort of expert knowledge and every inquiry, and similarly every action and undertaking, seems to seek some good. Because of that, people are right to affirm that the good is 'that which all things seek'...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gothictheysay
post Sep 3 2004, 11:10 PM
Post #10


living in your basement, eating your candy hearts
************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 3,426
Joined: 23-February 04
From: cloud cuckoo land
Member No.: 959
Gender: Female



First of all, I love the "Who you think will swing it" gangsta question up top. Secondly, I don't know! But I do know Kerry, imo, would be a huge improvement over Bush. I'm enthusiastic about this because this is one of the first elections I actually have knowledge of, and second of all...I just really don't like Bush, prefer Kerry's views although they aren't what I'd wish them to be, but I'd be really happy if Kerry did win, because I just really don't like Bush. Okay, that's repetitive. But...you see. All I know is that election night will be a lot of "too close to call" and if Bush wins I am hitchhiking to England. ...well, I wish I could.


--------------------
Being corrupted by candice since 2004
teal and orange is the way forward
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tptcow
post Sep 3 2004, 11:20 PM
Post #11


Savior on the Blood Church St. Petersburg, Russia
*******

Group: Established Members
Posts: 343
Joined: 1-March 04
From: Elizabethtown/Bowling Green, Ky
Member No.: 978
Gender: Male



The last time I looked Nader wasn't the candidate for the Green Party, it was David Cobb. smile.gif

Green Party


--------------------
Western Kentucky University
Facebook
Xanga
Formerly: Trumpetperson
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tigersong
post Sep 4 2004, 08:49 AM
Post #12


Rabid Saskatchewanian
***********

Group: Established Members
Posts: 1,026
Joined: 2-December 03
Member No.: 752
Gender: Male



I'm a pessimist. Bush is a moron, Kerry is a douchebag. I'm guessing we'll unfortunately have 4 years of moronism instead of 4 years of douchebaggery.

My prediction is that a middle aged white guy will win.


--------------------
At the Left Hand of God

OMFG STEAM R0X0RZ TEH BIG ONE111!
Thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination. Thou shalt do it standing up.
Dominating Aries, e-hubby, since 2004.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jaq
post Sep 4 2004, 08:57 AM
Post #13


Took this grammar!
************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 3,246
Joined: 23-March 03
From: Saskatoon
Member No.: 165
Gender: Female



Tigersong

Yeah. Unfortunately I agree with you. America is leaning more and more to the right. I read somewhere that in times of war people are more likely to vote for a strong leader than a compassionate leader. Seeing as how most Americans would not call Bush 'compassionate' and with this ongoing self inflicted War on Terrorism looks like Bush is going to swing the vote.


--------------------
Everytime the blue screen went out, Stan the weatherman suffered an existential crisis.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Righteous
post Sep 4 2004, 03:27 PM
Post #14


Shut up, noob!
*************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 5,760
Joined: 7-June 03
From: The Dina, No Flo
Member No.: 367
Gender: Male



I don't care, really. Either way, the masses will elect someone who will steal our money and destroy our God-given rights.

And of course folks from other countries should care about who the masses of the United States are going to elect. They need to know whom they'll be saluting when whoever it is decides to do "pre-emptive" strikes to "free" the rest of the world from "evil."


--------------------
With every breath...and all that I am...I will make a stand...until the end.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dreams On Hiatus
post Sep 4 2004, 09:07 PM
Post #15


<3
***********

Group: Established Members
Posts: 1,021
Joined: 20-December 03
From: Upstate New York
Member No.: 806
Gender: Female



Bush has more supporters, last time I checked. And good thing too, because Kerry is a flip-flopper; he says he supports one thing and then changes his mind, and can never stay on one decision. If I was 18 this November I would vote for Bush. Kerry is unfit to be president.


--------------------
IPB Image Dance, kitteh, dance!
IPB ImageIPB ImageIPB Image
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Polocrunch
post Sep 5 2004, 09:31 AM
Post #16


Has gone untreated for blurriness since 1986
************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 1,921
Joined: 3-August 03
Member No.: 505
Gender: Secret



I always get a bit worried when I hear the words "flip-flop" being thrown around. First I start to think "Buh? What've sandals got to do with the election?" and then I remember what it means and start thinking more sensibly.

The thing that I really don't like about the phrase "flip-flop" is that it's far too vague. No-one who says it ever seems to back it up with any hard evidence; they just state it baldly and expect their audience to agree. Now, it may be entirely correct and Kerry may switch his position on issues more often than he has hot dinners, but no-one has ever backed up what they say.

I'm also concerned that when people accuse one of the candidates of switching position they are not really listening to what the candidate is saying. Perhaps the candidate is trying to take the middle ground and understand both sides of the argument - is that a bad thing? Frankly, I'd rather have a flexible, understanding, moderate President than a stubborn and more extreme one. Is flip-flopping even a bad thing?

However, let us assume for the moment that "flip-flopping" is some kind of failing. The problem then is that no-one ever turns round and examines their own favoured candidate for similar failings. How ridiculous!

This whole "Kerry flip-flops" thing sounds an awful lot like bad debating to me, and I'm not going to be convinced by it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guaraldi
post Sep 5 2004, 05:31 PM
Post #17


It's him
******

Group: New Members
Posts: 249
Joined: 25-January 04
From: The great states.
Member No.: 891
Gender: Male



Arguing "flip flop" is a bad point to center your debate around, there's so much more you can do to attack Kerry. When I debate I always end up having to just defend Bush though.

Oh yeah, woo, I'm posting for the first time in forever it seems.

Bush will win, he doesn't have it in the bag though. He had a better convention than Kerry no doubt. On the second day of the DNC there was Al Sharpton, on the second day of the RNC there was Arnie. The DNC was full of left winger after left winger pretty much. The RNC showcased more moderates and I think Zell should be appealing to people.

The thing that Bush needs to put it in the bag is the equivalent a William T. Sherman to the Lincoln re-election. I don't mean the tactics, those wouldn't work in today's world, I mean the effect. I don't think it is Osama though because too many are going to suspect conspiracy, blah blah. Bush wins if the election was held today. Kerry can gain if he unveils a real plan for his term.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
artist.unknown
post Sep 5 2004, 09:30 PM
Post #18


sesquipedalian
*********

Group: Established Members
Posts: 717
Joined: 3-February 04
From: der Mond
Member No.: 915
Gender: Secret



QUOTE
Bush has more supporters, last time I checked. And good thing too, because Kerry is a flip-flopper; he says he supports one thing and then changes his mind, and can never stay on one decision. If I was 18 this November I would vote for Bush. Kerry is unfit to be president

Okay. I'd just like to clear this up. The problem with voting for bills is that they tend to be omnibus; in other words, they slap a bunch of them to-gether so that they all pass at once. I suppose the excuse is that is means they can pass more bills, more quickly, but what it really adds up to is forcing politicians to vote for bills they wouldn't otherwise, or withdraw their support for them.

An example: A bill is created to, I don't know, put aside land for preservation, or save endangered little spotty turtles. Worthy cause, right? However, attached to that bill is another one which states that, say, the government can seize anyone they like with a last name started with 'M' on alternating Tuesdays. You get the idea. So reasonable people say, That's too bad for the spotty turtles, this is really not acceptable, and the bill fails. Then the Republicans can say, Look, Kerry hates little spotty turtles, and in the speech he made just last week he said that we should protect the environment. FLIP-FLOPPER!


--------------------
-Grammar Nazi-quotes of the yesterday
It is only in his work that an artist can find reality and satisfaction, for the actual world is less intense than the world of his invention and consequently his life, without recourse to violent disorder, does not seem very substantial. -Tennessee Williams
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CommieBastard
post Sep 5 2004, 09:39 PM
Post #19


Remorseless posting machine
*************

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,749
Joined: 19-July 03
From: Bloody London
Member No.: 466
Gender: Male



QUOTE (artist.unknown @ Sep 5 2004, 10:30 PM)
An example: A bill is created to, I don't know, put aside land for preservation, or save endangered little spotty turtles. Worthy cause, right? However, attached to that bill is another one which states that, say, the government can seize anyone they like with a last name started with 'M' on alternating Tuesdays. You get the idea. So reasonable people say, That's too bad for the spotty turtles, this is really not acceptable, and the bill fails. Then the Republicans can say, Look, Kerry hates little spotty turtles, and in the speech he made just last week he said that we should protect the environment. FLIP-FLOPPER!
*


While it's an understandable scenario, can you provide some examples of when things like this have actually happened?


--------------------
Every sort of expert knowledge and every inquiry, and similarly every action and undertaking, seems to seek some good. Because of that, people are right to affirm that the good is 'that which all things seek'...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Righteous
post Sep 6 2004, 06:34 AM
Post #20


Shut up, noob!
*************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 5,760
Joined: 7-June 03
From: The Dina, No Flo
Member No.: 367
Gender: Male



If you're found with possessing drugs, the property you were hiding your drugs in, regardless of whether you own it or not, can be siezed. Theoredically, if I hide weed in a locker at a gym or something, the business could be siezed. Or if some dumb kid didn't hide his stash well enough, his parents' property could be taken from under their feet.

These are things you learn about when you're a pot smoker.

The same goes for vehicles and if you're in your car with someone who's holding and that person is found out, you go to jail along with him and they take your car.

Does that count, Commie?


--------------------
With every breath...and all that I am...I will make a stand...until the end.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
CommieBastard
post Sep 6 2004, 09:22 AM
Post #21


Remorseless posting machine
*************

Group: Moderators
Posts: 5,749
Joined: 19-July 03
From: Bloody London
Member No.: 466
Gender: Male



QUOTE (Righteous @ Sep 6 2004, 07:34 AM)
Does that count, Commie?
*


Uh...dude, are you stoned? I was asking artist.unknown for examples of when Kerry has rejected a good bill because of the not-so-good bills bundled with it, and then been blamed by the opposition for doing so.


--------------------
Every sort of expert knowledge and every inquiry, and similarly every action and undertaking, seems to seek some good. Because of that, people are right to affirm that the good is 'that which all things seek'...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jonman
post Sep 6 2004, 12:46 PM
Post #22


Duck Hunter S Thompson
************

Group: Admin
Posts: 3,417
Joined: 28-February 03
From: Lovely, rainy, Seattle
Member No.: 71
Gender: Male



According to this article in the New Yorker, it doesn't really matter what the candidates opinions on issues are - the outcome of the US elections is mostly arbitrary.

That article I linked to is long, wordy, but very very enlightening. Here's a couple of choice quotes...

QUOTE
"The most widely known fact about George H. W. Bush in the 1992 election was that he hated broccoli. Eighty-six per cent of likely voters in that election knew that the Bushes’ dog’s name was Millie; only fifteen per cent knew that Bush and Clinton both favored the death penalty. It’s not that people know nothing. It’s just that politics is not what they know."


QUOTE
"And voters apparently do punish politicians for acts of God. In a paper written in 2004, the Princeton political scientists Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels estimate that “2.8 million people voted against Al Gore in 2000 because their states were too dry or too wet” as a consequence of that year’s weather patterns. Achen and Bartels think that these voters cost Gore seven states, any one of which would have given him the election."


--------------------
Nearly two years in - about time for a new AV
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
artist.unknown
post Sep 6 2004, 03:13 PM
Post #23


sesquipedalian
*********

Group: Established Members
Posts: 717
Joined: 3-February 04
From: der Mond
Member No.: 915
Gender: Secret



Commie, here is some information on recent omnibus bills, from this site.

QUOTE
Taxpayers have reason to fret over a large omnibus: larger bills have less oversight and transparency. Omnibus bills are the ideal vessel for lawmakers to bring home the bacon. The most recent omnibus weighed in at $328 billion and contained a record-breaking 7,931 earmarks that cost taxpayers more than $10 billion. And that bill counted for only 7 of the13 annual appropriations bills....

This month's transportation bill is the most recent example of how lawmakers hide pork. Transportation Chairman Don Young (R-AK) withheld his own goodies until a day before the final vote, adding more than $300 million for Alaska at the last minute. These covert earmarks made Alaska one of the bill's biggest winners, and no one in the media picked up on his largesse until the bill was safely passed.

That, at least, is what I meant by lawmakers passing omnibus bills that look innocent but aren't--although the one above did, unfortunately, pass. When I have more time this afternoon, I'll find one that specifically relates to Kerry.

Jonman, that's the saddest (although most morbidly amusing) thing I've read in a long time. I think I have lost my remaining faith in the human race.

EDIT: Sorry, I found this shortly after posting. It's from the Boston Globe and it's a good example, especially as it pertains to the issue of his war record.

QUOTE
First, the ads focus only on the three annual Pentagon appropriation bills Kerry voted against, not the 16 he voted for. Next, they isolate small items in the massive omnibus bills as if Kerry's votes applied only to them. For example, the ads say Kerry voted against "body armor for our troops" when that represented less than half of 1 percent of the $87 billion Iraq appropriation Kerry opposed.


This post has been edited by artist.unknown: Sep 6 2004, 03:23 PM


--------------------
-Grammar Nazi-quotes of the yesterday
It is only in his work that an artist can find reality and satisfaction, for the actual world is less intense than the world of his invention and consequently his life, without recourse to violent disorder, does not seem very substantial. -Tennessee Williams
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Righteous
post Sep 6 2004, 04:33 PM
Post #24


Shut up, noob!
*************

Group: Established Members
Posts: 5,760
Joined: 7-June 03
From: The Dina, No Flo
Member No.: 367
Gender: Male



My bad, mate. I thought you guys were talking about laws with goofy little clauses that allow our government to destroy the lives of others, of which there are plenty.


--------------------
With every breath...and all that I am...I will make a stand...until the end.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Tigersong
post Sep 7 2004, 04:41 AM
Post #25


Rabid Saskatchewanian
***********

Group: Established Members
Posts: 1,026
Joined: 2-December 03
Member No.: 752
Gender: Male



QUOTE
"And voters apparently do punish politicians for acts of God. In a paper written in 2004, the Princeton political scientists Christopher Achen and Larry Bartels estimate that “2.8 million people voted against Al Gore in 2000 because their states were too dry or too wet” as a consequence of that year’s weather patterns. Achen and Bartels think that these voters cost Gore seven states, any one of which would have given him the election."

I've seen a lot of examples of this, sadly, happening right here in our little province of Saskatchewan. If the farmers are doing badly because of the drought, they tend to be angry. They are suffering, and they see the government as causing some of that suffering by not acting efficiently enough to solve the problem or help out or what not. So they lash out.

Doesn't matter that governments don't control the weather... if people are losing money, they get mad at whoever's most convenient.


--------------------
At the Left Hand of God

OMFG STEAM R0X0RZ TEH BIG ONE111!
Thou shalt not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination. Thou shalt do it standing up.
Dominating Aries, e-hubby, since 2004.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th October 2017 - 08:00 AM
Use these links if you're going to shop at Amazon and a percentage of what you spend goes towards helping this site!