|
Hey, imisshimbad, you have 59
messages.
Jul 24th, 2004, 6:12pm
|
Author |
Topic: URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
(Read 2038
times) | |
Mij
L.O.R.D.
Music is the
BEST!
Posts: 1991
|
 |
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #60 on: Feb
28th, 2004, 8:46pm » |
 Quote
 Modify
|
on Feb 28th, 2004,
6:14pm, Noah
wrote:
| JEB BUSH
singlehandly delivered the election, NOT NADER!
| |
Let's
be clear on this one. Jeb Bush was only
responsible for Florida's mess as far as I know.
The real question regarding Nader in
2000 is how many would have voted Democrat in the
ones who did. More than 50% ? If so, we can
assume, without reasonably being wrong, that Nader
"gave" presidency to Bush in 2000.
Let's just hope it won't happen
again.  |
|
 IP
Logged |
No doubt, we're doomed !
| | |
Noah
Senior
Member
Beware of
FOWL!
Posts: 297
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #61 on: Feb
28th, 2004, 10:26pm » |
Quote
Modify
|
Florida was (and will be again) the
swing state, due to the ridiculous voter college.
And for anyone paying close attention last
year to all that absentee garbage, THE DEMOCRATS
DID HAVE MORE VOTES IN FLORIDA! |
|
IP
Logged |
For my freak flavoured tunes click
hyah
http://zed.cbc.ca/go.ZeD?user_id=29496&user=FOWL&page=content
| | |
Ronnys
Noomies
L.O.R.D.
ATTACK!!!!!
Posts: 2627
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #62 on: Feb
28th, 2004, 10:45pm » |
Quote
Modify
|
on Feb 28th, 2004,
6:14pm, Noah
wrote:
Well, he went and
did it. Ralph Nadar is running for president
again. The man who single-handedly gave Bush the
presidency in 2000 is at it again.
Umm. While I do agree with some of
your points, now this is a sticky issue, and in
the end I don't know where to lean, or who I
would vote for if I were American, but let's be
clear, JEB BUSH singlehandly delivered the
election, NOT NADER!
| |
Ol'
Jeb wouldn't have even needed to sniff around this
at all if Nader hadn't gotten the votes he did.
Maybe things will be different this
time. The press is pretty uniformly dismissive of
him this time, and he has no accomplishments to
tout, since he's hasn't done anything but sit on
his ass since the last election. And there's no
Green Party this time. Sooooo...............
|
|
IP
Logged |
We had to use a, had to use a putty
knife, man, to get them damn things off the
winduh. You couldn't even see out the winduh with
all them boogers, man. I'm not kiddin' you
(sniff).
| | |
MentalTossFlycoon
L.O.R.D.
That's why I'm movin'
to Montana...
Posts: 3608
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #64 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 1:54am » |
Quote
Modify
|
on Feb 28th, 2004,
11:53pm, flammaster
wrote:
| Well ther is always
Pat Paulson..aww shit he's dead oh well.
| |
Yeah...
so's Frank.
Not many people know
that Ross Perot's 1992 Presidential bid was driven
primarily by his intense personal hatred of George
Bush 41. Perot stole enough votes away from Bush
to let Clinton win (Bush's most famous quote -
"Read my lips; no new taxes" - didn't help
either).
Perot got 19% of the vote (Clinton
won with 44%, Bush had 37%). This must have
surprised even Perot, so he ran again in 1996. But
this time, he didn't do nearly as well.
In 2000, George W. Bush won the
election by 5 electoral votes. Florida has 25
electoral votes (winner take all), and Bush won
Florida by 537 votes. If Gore had won Florida, he
would have woin the election by 20 electoral
votes.
But Florida wasn't even
the closest state race. In New Mexico (5 electoral
votes), Gore won by just 366 votes.
Tennessee - Gore's home state - has
11 electoral votes, and Bush won Tennessee (where
both Gore and his father had served as multi-term
Senators) by 80,000 votes. If Gore had won in
Tennessee, it wouldn't have made a damn bit of
difference what happened in Florida.
Gore won the popular vote by half a
million votes. But he didn't win the electoral
college. You can blame Jeb Bush or Ralph Nader if
you want, but I blame Al Gore.
After
all, he invented the Internet: he should know
better.... |
|
IP
Logged |
This is the Central Scrutinizer. As
you can see, music can get you pretty fucked up.
Take a tip from Joe - do like he did - hock your
imaginary guitar, and get a good
job...
| | |
imisshimbad
L.O.R.D.
Posts: 1050
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #65 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 8:14am » |
Quote
Modify
 Remove
|
on Feb 28th, 2004,
8:46pm, Mij
wrote:
The
real question regarding Nader in 2000 is how
many would have voted Democrat in the ones who
did. More than 50% ? If so, we can assume,
without reasonably being wrong, that Nader
"gave" presidency to Bush in 2000.
| |
Just
a btw... The number was 38%.
|
|
IP
Logged |
Blitzer: One of the major differences
between you on the one hand, and the Democrat and
Republican presidential tickets on the other hand,
is that you want to get out of Iraq as quickly as
possible.
| | |
imisshimbad
L.O.R.D.
Posts: 1050
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #66 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 8:30am » |
Quote
Modify
Remove
|
Hey, I just noticed...Ralph is PRO
marijuana legalization, that ought to raise a few
eyebrows. |
|
IP
Logged |
Blitzer: One of the major differences
between you on the one hand, and the Democrat and
Republican presidential tickets on the other hand,
is that you want to get out of Iraq as quickly as
possible.
| | |
imisshimbad
L.O.R.D.
Posts: 1050
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #67 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 9:20am » |
Quote
Modify
Remove
|
It's funny, if the Republican get's
in, he's chained by a quarter billion in campaign
contributions. If a Dem get's in he's chained by a
quarter billion in campaign contributions. Yet we
complain about money in politics while many push
away the one who is NOT chained to money...in
favor of someone who is chained to money!
The Dem's are selling us out now. We
see this in the results of the vote on Medicare
showing the Dem's have also sold us out, just
exactly like the the Republicans. Yes to a lesser
degree, but if we're sold out a little or a lot,
we're still sold out.
Here's the
chart again...A "Yes" vote is a vote with the
pharmaceutical industry. It's a great chart
because it so clearly hurt us all while it helped
the industry that paid so much in contributions
and lobbiests for this particular vote. We
consumers even paid (in sales), the money to the
pharmaceutical industry that they used to buy the
politicians so that they could screw us. We pay
the whole way.
Look what control
money has over BOTH the democrats and republicans.
This is not onlly not good enough anymore, but it
is also such a waste of such a strong country.
This is why Ralph is running...Exactly why.
We are out of time for
money in politics selling us out a little bit by
little bit.
Ralph is exactly against
money that buys charts like the one above. D's and
R's are about money in politics producing charts
like the one above, in fact they exactly produced
the chart above. Ralph is about taking control of
our government back to the people, and away from
money. Why fight against him to make damn sure
money stays in control.
--------------------------------------------------------
PS. BTW, IMHO. People may not like Naders
views, or be afraid of him that he'll hurt their
candidate's chances. Fine. But to say Ralph lacks
experience is ludicrous, same for saying he just
want's limelight, ludicrous. Saying such
uninformed things (IMHO), removes all credibility
from the persons putting forward those arguments.
|
|
IP
Logged |
Blitzer: One of the major differences
between you on the one hand, and the Democrat and
Republican presidential tickets on the other hand,
is that you want to get out of Iraq as quickly as
possible.
| | |
imisshimbad
L.O.R.D.
Posts: 1050
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #68 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 9:33am » |
Quote
Modify
Remove
|
IMHO:
Ralph Nader represents
everything us old hippies ever wanted, and he is
going up against everything we always hated.
Where are we now? |
|
IP
Logged |
Blitzer: One of the major differences
between you on the one hand, and the Democrat and
Republican presidential tickets on the other hand,
is that you want to get out of Iraq as quickly as
possible.
| | |
imisshimbad
L.O.R.D.
Posts: 1050
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #69 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 9:50am » |
Quote
Modify
Remove
|
IMHO:
This is a new election. It
is not templated from 2000. We live in a
substantially different situation in 2004.
We're supposed to vote for who we feel is the
candidate who best represents us...and in my case,
that is not Kerry or Bush....it is Nader by a
mile, by ten hundred miles. |
|
IP
Logged |
Blitzer: One of the major differences
between you on the one hand, and the Democrat and
Republican presidential tickets on the other hand,
is that you want to get out of Iraq as quickly as
possible.
| | |
Zardoz
L.O.R.D.
Distant cousins, there's
a limited supply
Posts: 1673
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #70 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 10:12am » |
Quote
Modify
|
on Feb 29th, 2004,
9:50am, imisshimbad
wrote:
IMHO:
This is a
new election. It is not templated from 2000. We
live in a substantially different situation in
2004.
We're supposed to vote for who we feel
is the candidate who best represents us...and in
my case, that is not Kerry or Bush....it is
Nader by a mile, by ten hundred miles.
| |
That's
nice in a fantasy world. Most Americans still only
vote for either the Repos or Dems. Being this is a
critical election, seeing that as you put it "The
Old Hippies" buy in to Naders campaign were doomed
with another 4 years of Bush. Then again, most old
hippies, became yuppies after college and are now
Republicans. That pretty much leaves it up to the
lower and middle class America to vote this moron
out of office. |
| « Last Edit: Feb
29th, 2004, 10:13am by Zardoz
» |
IP
Logged |
| | |
imisshimbad
L.O.R.D.
Posts: 1050
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #71 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 10:50am » |
Quote
Modify
Remove
|
on Feb 29th, 2004,
10:12am, Zardoz
wrote:
Most
Americans still only vote for either the Repos
or Dems.
| |
That,
my friend, is the problem. It cannot continue, our
children are in debt and we're retiring soon. It
is a critical election, we'd better get the
control away from the money in our government.
It's still my opinion that it is not
fantasy that the country is different in 2004 than
it was in 2000. Possibly some of the most election
moving influences in history have taken place
since 2000.
Maybe it's fantasy to think we can
ever get control back from money, but that doesn't
mean I'm not going to try.
I have a
new question. I believe a lot of shit will get
exposed if Nader get's into the debates. Also, I'd
love to see that just to see Dubbuah shamed on
publik TV. So my question is this, how many here
would be opposed to Nader getting in the first
debate?
|
|
IP
Logged |
Blitzer: One of the major differences
between you on the one hand, and the Democrat and
Republican presidential tickets on the other hand,
is that you want to get out of Iraq as quickly as
possible.
| | |
Zardoz
L.O.R.D.
Distant cousins, there's
a limited supply
Posts: 1673
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #72 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 11:10am » |
Quote
Modify
|
on Feb 29th, 2004,
10:50am, imisshimbad
wrote:
I have
a new question. I believe a lot of shit will get
exposed if Nader get's into the debates. Also,
I'd love to see that just to see Dubbuah shamed
on publik TV. So my question is this, how many
here would be opposed to Nader getting in the
first debate?
| |
Don't
get me wrong, I believe that we need to get away
from this two party system that has devoloped in
this country. That money is a factor, and in an
election I believe that equality should prevail
for each candidate. In reality we know that
doesn't happen..
As for your
question, every candidate running should be
involved in debates. Not just the Democrats and
Republicans. In previous election debates, where
the hell was Harry Brown? Who was running as the
Libertarian party candidate. In this country
elections aren't run democratically, money talks,
everyone else walks.
PS: I just don't think
this is the election to be playing around. It's
more important to get Dubya out of office, than it
is to create divisions on votes. |
| « Last Edit: Feb
29th, 2004, 11:14am by Zardoz
» |
IP
Logged |
| | |
imisshimbad
L.O.R.D.
Posts: 1050
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #73 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 11:23am » |
Quote
Modify
Remove
|
on Feb 29th, 2004,
11:10am, Zardoz
wrote:
PS: I
just don't think this is the election to be
playing around. It's more important to get Dubya
out of office, than it is to create divisions on
votes.
| |
We
both feel this strongly, but different way's to
our goal.
I say backing Nader all the way to
the debates poses no risk of splitting votes.
A "what if": What if Nader got in
the debates and the next weeks polls showed he
gained a large amount of support, substantially
larger than either the D or the R? Another words,
what if there really is something to the notion
that democracy works?
|
| « Last Edit: Feb
29th, 2004, 11:40am by
imisshimbad » |
IP
Logged |
Blitzer: One of the major differences
between you on the one hand, and the Democrat and
Republican presidential tickets on the other hand,
is that you want to get out of Iraq as quickly as
possible.
| | |
imisshimbad
L.O.R.D.
Posts: 1050
|
|
|
Re:
URGENT: STOP RALPH NADAR!!
« Reply #74 on: Feb
29th, 2004, 11:38am » |
Quote
Modify
Remove
|
on Feb 29th, 2004,
11:10am, Zardoz
wrote:
As for
your question, every candidate running should be
involved in debates. Not just the Democrats and
Republicans. In previous election debates, where
the hell was Harry Brown? Who was running as the
Libertarian party candidate. In this country
elections aren't run democratically, money
talks, everyone else walks.
| |
Only
the D's and R's can be in the debates. When the
D's and R's took over control of the debates from
the League of Women Voters they raised the entry
threshold from 5% to 15%. Since only the D's and
R's get the big bucks, only the D's and R's can
get over 15% and get into the debates. No more
outsiders in the debates....yet another principle
Nader is standing up in our place against.
Perot got over 5% and spiced up our
debates. Then the D's and R's took over and
changed the entry rules, ...so Nader couldn't get
in in 2000 to be heard, (he had 7.5 % which was
enough for 1996 rules, bit not the 15% for 2000
rules).
Some may remember he then went to
attend the debate as an audience member, but was
peacfully, but forcibly removed because he didn't
have a ticket. He did that for protest. He wanted
it on TV that he was physically being taken away
from our debates. My kinda guy.
|
| « Last Edit: Feb
29th, 2004, 11:44am by
imisshimbad » |
IP
Logged |
Blitzer: One of the major differences
between you on the one hand, and the Democrat and
Republican presidential tickets on the other hand,
is that you want to get out of Iraq as quickly as
possible.
| | |
|
Frank Zappa Forum » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP
1.3.1!
YaBB © 2000-2003. All Rights
Reserved.
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Profile
Notification
Logout
Reply
Send
Topic
Print
