Freethinker Posted November 5, 2004 Report Posted November 5, 2004 In other areas: students at Florida State and Florida A&M universities had their party registration switched to Republican and their addresses changed. The latter would affect their ability to vote since they would not be registered at the proper site. The media traced the source to a group hired by the Florida Republican Party. In Allegheny County, Pa., fliers on a bogus county letterhead were handed out and mailed, saying that “due to immense voter turnout expected on Tuesday,” the election had been extended. Republicans should vote Tuesday, while Democrats should vote on Wednesday – the wrong day. In some Milwaukee black neighborhoods, a flier warned people that they could not vote in that election if they had already voted in another election that year. “If you violate any of these laws, you can get ten years in prison and your children will get taken away from you,” the flier said. In Charleston County, S.C., a fake letter supposedly from the NAACP threatens voters who have outstanding parking tickets or have failed to pay child support with arrest. A similar flier was distributed in Baltimore in 2002. In Nevada and Oregon a former employee of Voters Outreach of America has come forward to say that he saw the company, which was being paid by the Republican National Committee, destroy Democrats' registration forms, while it was handing in forms filled out by Republicans.
Stargazer Posted November 5, 2004 Report Posted November 5, 2004 I'm disapointed with both the voter turnout as well as the result. Four years with Bush, and the support is still this strong? Where have people been the last four years? And then the turnout; 55%? I'm used to 85%, and even that is a bit too low. For one of the oldest democracies in the world, one could normally expect more than the youngest democracy, Afghanistan, which had a 69% voter turnout. One could also expect the elections to go smoothly, without selfappointed "challengers", or dishonest people spreading misinformation, or suspicious voting machines. For a country so eager to spread democracy around the world, it's remarkably uninterested in its own democracy. But yes I know that the voter turnout is not the single most important thing (as Switzerland has had lower numbers than that, for example, and in Soviet it could be very high), yet it might tell us something.
Freethinker Posted November 5, 2004 Report Posted November 5, 2004 Originally posted by: StargazerFor a country so eager to spread democracy around the world, it's remarkably uninterested in its own democracy.You assume that spreading Democracy was actually a goal. It might have provided an excuse, but I can assure you it was NOT high up on the list of ACTUAL reasons. We now have an oil pipeline thru Afganastan, which we could not accomplish with the Taliban there. And we have 14 PERMENENT Military bases in Iraq where we had NONE before. Along with the largest Embasy we ahve anyplace in the world. You talk about turnout for voting in Afganastan. What of the 14 of the 18 candidates that boycotted it because it was a sham?
Stargazer Posted November 6, 2004 Report Posted November 6, 2004 Originally posted by: FreethinkerYou assume that spreading Democracy was actually a goal. It might have provided an excuse, but I can assure you it was NOT high up on the list of ACTUAL reasons.I was a bit sarcastic, though it didn't show well online... We now have an oil pipeline thru Afganastan, which we could not accomplish with the Taliban there. And we have 14 PERMENENT Military bases in Iraq where we had NONE before. Along with the largest Embasy we ahve anyplace in the world.Well I've never thought that the USA invaded Iraq to liberate it or to spread freedom all over the world. I don't think it was the fear of WMD either. Terrorism? Hardly. My guess is they created a terrorist out of Saddam so they could capture him to show the American people how hard they are working to fight terrorism. Meanwhile, bin Laden is still running about plotting for new attacks, and is therefor useful to scare people with, so that they will vote for the same president who is working so hard to fight terrorism. I hope this is not true, because that would mean the US is not devoting as much troops to capture bin Laden anymore and let Pakistan do it instead. Oh, wait... You talk about turnout for voting in Afganastan. What of the 14 of the 18 candidates that boycotted it because it was a sham?Heh. If it's true it was all a sham, I'm not surprised at all.
Aki Posted November 7, 2004 Report Posted November 7, 2004 Originally posted by: Tim_Louwell, at least bush won the election..... in my school, kerry got around 1000 votes (from teachers, staffs, students...etc)bush got only 500 or so. nadar, i forgot... its probably because of the fact that the school is in NJ...hehe Well here in Canada, the ration is probably 10:1 for Kerry. Nobody in Canada really likes Bush.
Robust Posted November 8, 2004 Report Posted November 8, 2004 Bush-snush....Kerry-smary....the important outcome is that the Republican party gained seats in botb the House ans Senate
IrishEyes Posted November 8, 2004 Author Report Posted November 8, 2004 No, I live HERE under the Bush theocracy. His world cop thing works, you know. Just not in a very positive way for all of us. What type of negative impact has Bush had on you personally, and your country in general? I'm very interested in any answers from people outside the US on this one.
lindagarrette Posted November 8, 2004 Report Posted November 8, 2004 The effect of current administration policy has the direct effect on everyone of slowing, and even reversing progress in education, environmental protection, world peace, tolerance of different values, scientific research, our image and relationship with other nations, and economic issues that there isn't room to explain here. Billions of mid to llower income taxpayers money is being wasted on this ludicrous "war" and reconstruction of Iraq while half the world lives in extreme poverty and 1% or the people own and control the vast majority of the world's wealth. It is also personally offensive to be constantly reminded that the next generation is growing up under a theocratic plutocracy with decreasing access to secular rationalism. This once well respected and progressive nation will be paid back for its arrogance if not during the next four years, than over time at even greater cost in more ways than one. The trade deficit and national debt have already left us in the dust as an economically strong nation. It is my opinion that another administration would take us in a different direction on all the issues I mentioned. That is not to say that the democratic party was in a position to come up with many better solutions without alienating the majority who have already been indoctrinated.
Freethinker Posted November 8, 2004 Report Posted November 8, 2004 Voting machine fraud? Nah, couldn't happen coould it? How does one prove that a vote they cast was not what was actually reported? As long as the Black Box Voting Machine programmers write code to make sure the voter totals come out, how can be be sure the percentages are correct? The machine manufacturers can atleast accomplish this slight of hand? Nope, they can't even program the software to keep the count correct! Machine error gives Bush 3,893 extra votes in OhioBy John McCarthy, Associated Press...Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. Bush's total should have been recorded as 365. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/evoting/2004-11-06-ohio-evote-trouble_x.htm
BEAKER Posted November 9, 2004 Report Posted November 9, 2004 Thanks Tormod. Viva-la-Bush! Go Bush!; Go Bush!; Go Bush! (And all (politically correct substitute) the girls go dooo, dooo, dooo; dooo, dooo-da-dooo...) -Rolling Stones By the way Freethinker; I totally respect and admire your political involvment. - Seriously. I was lucky to find enough time to put a "W" sticker on my car and a "Bush for president" sign in my yard. It's probably because I'm spending too much time Hypographizing. Ignorance is bliss. - (at least that's what I've heard.)
Aki Posted November 9, 2004 Report Posted November 9, 2004 Anyways, that election was a tight race. I think this is the tightest election race and american history. No loser has ever gotten as many votes as Kerry.
sanctus Posted November 9, 2004 Report Posted November 9, 2004 Beaker,I wonder, what were your reasons to vote for Bush? I mean as yuo are here on this forum I suppose you like to think and so you didn't vote for bush just because the media told you to, but you had actual reasons.I can't understand what the reasons could be, so I would be very glad to know.
Freethinker Posted November 9, 2004 Report Posted November 9, 2004 Originally posted by: BEAKERViva-la-Bush! Go Bush!; Go Bush!; Go Bush! Ignorance is bliss. - (at least that's what I've heard.)And ignorance is the only way to validate supporting the war criminal, crook, vote stealling liar for a 2nd unelected term.
Freethinker Posted November 9, 2004 Report Posted November 9, 2004 Originally posted by: BEAKER(And all (politically correct substitute) the girls go dooo, dooo, dooo; dooo, dooo-da-dooo...) -Rolling StonesAnd we see why you think Bush was the right vote! This is NOT from the Stones, it is from Lou Reed - Walk On The Wild Side. The more you KNOW, the less you'd support Bush. :-)
Freethinker Posted November 9, 2004 Report Posted November 9, 2004 Originally posted by: AkiAnyways, that election was a tight race.Will we ever actually find out who WON the election? We KNOW that the vote count is bogus.
IrishEyes Posted November 9, 2004 Author Report Posted November 9, 2004 I wonder, what were your reasons to vote for Bush? I mean as yuo are here on this forum I suppose you like to think and so you didn't vote for bush just because the media told you to, but you had actual reasons.I can't understand what the reasons could be, so I would be very glad to know. I know this wasn't for me, but I'm going to answer anyhow.For me, it was much like Freethinker. It wasn't so much that I wanted Bush to win as it was not wanting the Democratic Party to be in office. I don't agree with many of the things that the Democratic Party supports. 1- I don't agree with abortion, especially government funded, or late term abortions. I think that underage children should be required to tell their parents if they want to have an abortion.2- I think welfare needs to be re-structured at least, done away with at most.3- I don't think I should be taxed to fund stem-cell research.4- I think that there should be a school choice initiative. I pay school taxes, but my children all stay home. My school district still gets my tax money, AND government funding for my children that do not attend. That's not right. 5- I don't think the US should be part of the UN. Too many reasons to list.6- I think the job of judges should be to interpret the laws, not re-write the laws. 7- I do not think that gay couples should have the same legal rights as 'traditional' married couples. This is not because they are gay. It's because,imo, if the law is changed to include gay couples, that leaves the door open for other 'alternative' situations, such as three people wanting the same legal rights, etc. Where does it end? There has to be a line. I know that the Republicans don't have all of the answers, or the best answers to all of the questions. But they best represent what I can abide. As for the "Bush didn't win, he was declared the winner"... puh-leaze. If he would have won by a 60/40, or 70/30 margin, people that oppose him would still find a way to scream foul. If Kerry had won, I wouldn't be thrilled, but I sure wouldn't be trying to say it was fraudulent. I would figure out how to get more votes next election, and start working my butt off towards that goal. The Dems all but admitted that they were out of touch with what *most* Americans want. What more needs to be said?
Freethinker Posted November 9, 2004 Report Posted November 9, 2004 Originally posted by: IrishEyes1- I don't agree with abortion, "The Supreme Court has decided (Roe v Wade). The best public policy is to encourage fewer abortions through strong adoption laws and giving children a clear pro-abstinence message." G Bush NPAT 1998 Jul 2, 1998 Bush Accepts FDA approval of RU-486 but concerned about overuse. (Oct 2000)2- I think welfare needs to be re-structured at least, done away with at most.Clinton was the FIRST President to actively eliminate Welfare as we knew it. He was a DEMOCRAT lest you forgot!3- I don't think I should be taxed to fund stem-cell research.G Bush Supports adult stem-cell research but limits on embryos. (Jun 2003)4- I think that there should be a school choice initiative. I pay school taxes, but my children all stay home. My school district still gets my tax money, AND government funding for my children that do not attend. That's not right. When was the last time you used the Fire Dept? Let's stop funding it!6- I think the job of judges should be to interpret the laws, not re-write the laws. Such as what votes should or should not be counted? 7- I do not think that gay couples should have the same legal rights as 'traditional' married couples.What other RELIGIOUS ceremonies should the Government step in and control? Should they pass prejudical laws against Gays being baptisted? Maybe Health Dept should outlaw Eucharist? IT IS a food served publicly in facilities that do not meet requirements. And the wine served? Rabbi's performing operations without being Drs? (circumcision) Who are you to decide what other religions should or should not be allowed to do? Who is the Government to decide what religious ceremonies a Church can perform? or does the 1st Ammendment mean nothing to you? As a believer, I would expect you to demand that the Gov stay out of such Religious issues! I know that the Republicans don't have all of the answers,and as we see in Bush's lies about his Abortion stance, that they are not afraid to outright lie to get a vote!But they best represent what I can abide. Lies and intentional prejudice. How nice!As for the "Bush didn't win, he was declared the winner"... puh-leaze. If he would have won by a 60/40, or 70/30 margin, people that oppose him would still find a way to scream foul.It isn't the margin, it is the FACT that Black Box Voting Machinces are PROVEN to be untrustworthy. There are over 270 specific examples of FRAUD/ voter suppression/ outright machine failure... at http://www.votersunite.org/electionproblems.asp?offset=0&catid=&showall=&sort=
Recommended Posts