PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
US Election 2000
November 15th 2000, 13:36 CET by morn

Discuss.

C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: US Election 2000

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by "Whisp"
2000-11-15 13:42:04
whisp_@hotmail.com
It's a mess.  I love politics!  I haven't had this much fun following current events since, well, ever.

-Whisp
#2 by "Flamethrower"
2000-11-15 13:54:25
flamethrower@barryswold.com http://www.PORTALofEVIL.com
America -- the worlds greatest democracy?

Don't make me puke laughing.
#3 by "kitrack"
2000-11-15 14:05:02
jbholdridgeii@vt.edu
Awful vague instructions, morn.  Though I suppose it does go well with the election ...
I'm glad it's a tight race.  That way, nothing'll get done when it get resolved; as far as I'm concerned, a large number of problems begin with the american government and I have no wish to extend them.

--- .sig begins here ---
Iroasenai atsui amoi
Karadajuu de tsutaetaiyo tonight<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#4 by "Karl Palutke"
2000-11-15 14:24:56
palutkek@asme.org
This year's electon was the Special Olympics of presidential elections.  Unfortunately, one of the two most 'special' will end up being my next president.  *sigh*<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#5 by "brennan"
2000-11-15 14:58:56
scottsyoen@home.com
So, Flamethrower, how do you really feel about American politics? :P

My favorite thing about the whole recount controversy, as a Democrat, is that even if Bush wins (which I believe he eventually will), his administration is pretty much neutered at this point.  He won't be able to get anything even remotely controversial done.  As far as the Supreme Court, which was the biggest reason I was personally voting for Gore rather than Nader, the 50-50 split in the Senate means that Bush likely won't be able to push through any Scalia-esque candidates.  So, I'm overall not too sad.

The worst thing Gore can do right now for himself and the Democratic party is to pursue a lengthy court battle.  I say let the hand recount be fought, and then *let it go*.  Step aside.  Gore then looks (somewhat) statesmanlike, where Bush looks like he stole the election in the state his brother governs.

That said, I hope the Dems don't re-nominate Gore in four years, tho.  The thought of these two running against each other again makes me want to curl up into a ball on the floor and weep.

-brennan
#6 by "[KAG]formerly known as Seth"
2000-11-15 15:11:34
d_k_denz@hotmail.com http://www.aelk.org
since all the post until now are far too long(though shorter than morn's topic description), I'll try to change this trend...
(until McGrew turns up)
just found this on <a href="http://www.zgeek.com">www.zgeek.com</a>


<QUOTE>
NOTICE OF REVOCATION OF INDEPENDENCE

To the citizens of the United States of America,

In the light of your failure to elect a President of the USA and thus to
govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your
independence, effective today.

Her Sovereign Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will resume monarchial duties
over all states, commonwealths and other territories. Except Utah,
which she does not fancy. Your new prime minister (The rt. hon. Tony
Blair, MP for the 97.85% of you who have until now been unaware that
there is a world outside your borders) will appoint a minister for
America without the need for further elections. Congress and the Senate
will be disbanded. A questionnaire will be circulated next year to
determine whether any of you noticed.

To aid in the transition to a British Crown Dependency, the following
rules are introduced with immediate effect:

1. You should look up "revocation" in the Oxford English Dictionary.
Then look up "aluminium". Check the pronunciation guide. You will be
amazed at just how wrongly you have been pronouncing it. Generally, you
should raise your vocabulary to acceptable levels. Look up
"vocabulary". Using the same twenty seven words interspersed with
filler noises such as "like" and "you know" is an unacceptable and
inefficient form of communication. Look up "interspersed".

2. There is no such thing as "US English". We will let Microsoft know
on your behalf.

3. You should learn to distinguish the English and Australian accents.
It really isn't that hard.

4. Hollywood will be required occasionally to cast English actors as the
good guys.

5. You should relearn your original national anthem, "God Save The
Queen", but only after fully carrying out task 1. We would not want you
to get confused and give up half way through.

6. You should stop playing American "football". There is only one kind
of football. What you refer to as American "football" is not a very
good game. The 2.15% of you who are aware that there is a world outside
your borders may have noticed that no one else plays "American"
football. You will no longer be allowed to play it, and should instead
play proper football. Initially, it would be best if you played with the
girls. It is a difficult game. Those of you brave enough will, in
time, be allowed to play rugby (which is similar to American "football",
but does not involve stopping for a rest every twenty seconds or wearing
full kevlar body armour like nancies). We are hoping to get together at
least a US rugby sevens side by 2005.

7. You should declare war on Quebec and France, using nuclear weapons if
they give you any merde. The 98.85% of you who were not aware that
there is a world outside your borders should count yourselves lucky.
The Russians have never been the bad guys. "Merde" is French for
"shit".

8. July 4th is no longer a public holiday. November 8th will be a new
national holiday, but only in England. It will be called "Indecisive
Day".

9. All American cars are hereby banned. They are crap and it is for
your own good. When we show you German cars, you will understand what
we mean.

10. Please tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us crazy.

Thank you for your cooperation.
</QUOTE>
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#7 by "Dethstryk"
2000-11-15 15:19:54
dethstryk@damagegaming.com http://www.damagegaming.com/
<b>Whisp wrote in post #1:</b>
<quote>It's a mess. I love politics! I haven't had this much fun following current events since, well, ever. </quote>
Personally, I'm having a great time watching the hypocritical actions of Gore, that fool.

<b>Karl Palutke wrote in post #4:</b>
<quote>This year's electon was the Special Olympics of presidential elections. Unfortunately, one of the two most 'special' will end up being my next president. *sigh*</quote>
Just think.. whoever wins this election won't win in 2004 when these two go at it again, I'm sure. I think we're going to have both of these "special" presidents in office. (Bush first, though.)

<b>brennan wrote in post #5:</b>
<quote>Gore then looks (somewhat) statesmanlike, where Bush looks like he stole the election in the state his brother governs. </quote>
<i>Riiight</i>. If Gore's crybaby tactics are alright for you, then so be it. Stealing the election is hardly an issue considering that the recounts are still coming up in Bush's favor.

<quote>That said, I hope the Dems don't re-nominate Gore in four years, tho. The thought of these two running against each other again makes me want to curl up into a ball on the floor and weep. </quote>
Like I just said, if this happens, whoever wins this election will lose the next one. (That is, unless they manage to pull off some kind of wonder-term while they are in office.)


--
Dethstryk
#8 by "kitrack"
2000-11-15 15:26:58
jbholdridgeii@vt.edu
To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 14:19, Dethstryk had <i>something</i>(#7) to say:

<quote>Like I just said, if this happens, whoever wins this election will lose the next one. (That is, unless they manage to pull off some kind of wonder-term while they are in office.)</quote>
Nah.  Whoever gets in this term will have something going for them-it's harder to defeat an incumbant, simply because all the challenger can do is promise things-the incumbant can <i>do</i> them.

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 13:58, brennan had <i>something</i>(#5) to say:

<quote>That said, I hope the Dems don't re-nominate Gore in four years, tho. The thought of these two running against each other again makes me want to curl up into a ball on the floor and weep.</quote>
Even the idea makes me ill...

<quote>The worst thing Gore can do right now for himself and the Democratic party is to pursue a lengthy court battle. I say let the hand recount be fought, and then *let it go*. Step aside.</quote>
Either party taking this to court is a <i>bad thing</i>(tm) ...  To be honest, we should have had election supervisors from other countries over to monitor ours, just like we've insisted other countries do.


--- .sig begins here ---
Iroasenai atsui amoi
Karadajuu de tsutaetaiyo tonight<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#9 by "Blood"
2000-11-15 15:27:35
blood@gamescon.com
The election was screwed up by two things: the media and human error.  These two things won't go away for the next election either, so this may very well happen again.

The media reported Bush as the winner while the polls were still open in California, which prompted many voters there to give up and not vote.

Human error caused tens of thousands of ballots to be negated.  I've seen a picture of the ballot, and I can understand people getting confused with it.  I mean, people are being herded through the booths like cattle and they're not really given enough time to figure out how to use the ballot.  Note to Americans: make your ballots EASY enough that a 5-year old could vote.  Because a lot of old people are getting dumber and dumber, and will get confused if it is not made this simple.

Some people think that the voting was tampered with, and that's why the US has this situation.  Note to you people: THE VOTING IS ALWAYS TAMPERED WITH.  This is not a new thing.  The election was not screwed by it...if relatively few people manage to vote as someone else, this won't have a national impact on the election.

I also think it's messed up that a candidate who gets the majority vote may not win, because of the electoral college.  

Democracy is not perfect...
#10 by "Dethstryk"
2000-11-15 15:37:05
dethstryk@damagegaming.com http://www.damagegaming.com/
<b>kitrack wrote in post #8:</b>
<quote>Nah. Whoever gets in this term will have something going for them-it's harder to defeat an incumbant, simply because all the challenger can do is promise things-the incumbant can <I>do</I> them. </quote>
You also have to take into consideration that this election will be held over the next president's head for the next four years, and people are really going to question if they picked the right guy in the last, extremely close election.

<b>Blood wrote in post #9:</b>
<quote>The election was screwed up by two things: the media and human error. </quote>
The things that have "screwed up" this election happen every single time around, the only problem is that we have Gore not able to accept the fact that <i>he lost</i>.

<quote>The media reported Bush as the winner while the polls were still open in California, which prompted many voters there to give up and not vote. </quote>
Same case in Florida.

<b>Blood wrote in post #9:</b>
<quote>Note to Americans: make your ballots EASY enough that a 5-year old could vote. Because a lot of old people are getting dumber and dumber, and will get confused if it is not made this simple.</quote>
Maybe it's just me, but if you can not follow a simple, well-defined arrow, you should have your voting priviledges taken away. This is an extreme case I realize, but "an uneducated voter is no voter."

<b>Blood wrote in post #9:</b>
<quote>I also think it's messed up that a candidate who gets the majority vote may not win, because of the electoral college.</quote>
I present to you <a href="http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today/countymap.html">this map</a> which clearly shows why we need the electoral college. (Clearly meaning "mud-like substance." It's equal representation.


--
Dethstryk
#11 by "kitrack"
2000-11-15 15:37:16
jbholdridgeii@vt.edu
To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 14:27, Blood had <i>something</i>(#9) to say:

<quote>The media reported Bush as the winner while the polls were still open in California, which prompted many voters there to give up and not vote.</quote>
Commonly stated but not proven.

<quote>Human error caused tens of thousands of ballots to be negated. I've seen a picture of the ballot, and I can understand people getting confused with it. I mean, people are being herded through the booths like cattle and they're not really given enough time to figure out how to use the ballot. Note to Americans: make your ballots EASY enough that a 5-year old could vote. Because a lot of old people are getting dumber and dumber, and will get confused if it is not made this simple.</quote>
I've seen the same ballot, and I have no idea how people got confused.  Also, tens of thousands suggests more than 30k-the number is 19k, which has much less of an impact than 'tens of thousands'.
The ballot was, in my opinion, simple, albeit the actual order was slighly illogical.  However, the point has been made again and again, it was approved by both major parties and was published ahead of time in the papers.  If it was really so confusing, those who were confused should have raised hell about it beforehand.
As far as I'm concerned, if you're too dumb to understand the ballot and to get the help required (there are at the least two people there to aid), then you deserve to be disenfranchised.

--- .sig begins here ---
Iroasenai atsui amoi
Karadajuu de tsutaetaiyo tonight<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#12 by "kitrack"
2000-11-15 15:44:22
jbholdridgeii@vt.edu
Damn you, Dethstryk, and your responding while I'm responding!
To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 14:37, Dethstryk had <i>something</i>(#10) to say:

<quote>You also have to take into consideration that this election will be held over the next president's head for the next four years, and people are really going to question if they picked the right guy in the last, extremely close election.</quote>
Possibly, though I doubt that the public will have much memory for it

--- .sig begins here ---
Iroasenai atsui amoi
Karadajuu de tsutaetaiyo tonight<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#13 by "Speed"
2000-11-15 15:47:46
speed@pandora.be http://fragland.net
US elections are even worse than the ones in Belgium.
I hope you guys get a government before DNF gets released :)

Speed
Fragland.net
#14 by "Dethstryk"
2000-11-15 15:49:32
dethstryk@damagegaming.com http://www.damagegaming.com/
<b>kitrack wrote in post #12:</b>
<quote>Damn you, Dethstryk, and your responding while I'm responding! </quote>
:P

<quote>Possibly, though I doubt that the public will have much memory for it </quote>
I'm not sure.. when it comes to the president, it won't take too long for the anal-retentive types to bring something up, and a while after that the general mass will start to hear it. *shrug*

Crazy elections.


--
Dethstryk
#15 by "Frijoles"
2000-11-15 15:56:59
<Quote>Dethstryk said:
Maybe it's just me, but if you can not follow a simple, well-defined arrow, you should have your voting priviledges taken away. This is an extreme case I realize, but "an uneducated voter is no voter."</Quote>

I seem to recall there being IQ tests (equivalence to IQ tests, anyway) to try to get black people not to vote. If a larger portion of individuals get confused than can be explained by statistics, then I say something is wrong.

But I have no idea about the statistics of this ballot, so I have no opinion if it was hard to use or not. I can easily see why someone could be confused by it, however.

Not that any of it matters anyway. Both Bush and Gore have suffered and I hate to see either of them in office now. Not that my vote counted anyway (minority vote, unfortunately).
#16 by "Dethstryk"
2000-11-15 16:05:59
dethstryk@damagegaming.com http://www.damagegaming.com/
<b>Frijoles wrote in post #15:</b>
<quote>But I have no idea about the statistics of this ballot, so I have no opinion if it was hard to use or not. I can easily see why someone could be confused by it, however. </quote>
Following an arrow is difficult?

<quote>Not that my vote counted anyway (minority vote, unfortunately).</quote>
A vote is a vote, bud. ;)


--
Dethstryk
#17 by "Demonicuss"
2000-11-15 16:06:38
demonicuss@cbrmail.com http://www.geocities.com/backspaced.geo
Whoa brother, if we all voted Nader, we wouldn't have to deal with this Florida crap.  I personallly hope Bush gets it.  Gore is a lying sleeze.  Plus I don't want those moral Nazis Tipper and Lieberman anywhere near spitting distance of the White House.

[6] KAG:  Here's another revocation for everyone!

(Note: I did not write this. It was forwarded to me by a representative of the United <B><U>Native</U></B> American Council. Apologies to Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, we have the prior claim.)


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
NOTICE OF REVOCATION OF INVASION

To the citizens of the former United States of America,

In the light of your failure to elect a President of the USA and thus to govern yourselves, we hereby give notice of the revocation of your invasion, effective immediately.

Since we were here first, we're keeping it. Most of you will be forced to relocate. Only those of Native American descent, partial or whole, will be allowed to remain.

The rest of you will be forced to return to the nations of original settlement. We realize that this might be confusing because of the "Melting Pot" nature previously known in America.

To simplify matters, you will all be put in camps for relocation based on the national origin of your last name.

All individuals whose last name ends in -son, -sen or -sson will be relocated to Minnesota pending relocation to Scandinavia. Minnesota was agreed upon since most of you are there anyway.

Another example, all persons with last names beginning in Mc, Mac or O' will be relocated to Boston to await transport back to the British Isles. The Kennedy's will be tending the bar.

Other name and nationality relocations will be announced as plans are formalized.

Until relocation is completed, the following new rules shall apply, effective immediately.

1.) The use of the word "injun" is now a Federal Capital Offense. "Waumpum" is a bad idea, too.

2.) The name of the football team formerly referred to as "the Redskins" will be hereby known as the Washington Honkeys. Fair <B><U>IS</U></B> fair.

3.) Hollywood will not produce any more "crying Indian" commercials. Since you will all be leaving, the place will be cleaner, and there will be no need for such trite public service announcements.

4.) Hollywood will occassionally cast a Native American as something other than the bad guy, the drunk, the Native Scout, the sidekick or some sort of Zen MAster. It's gotten old.

5.) Gambling will no longer be allowed on Native American lands. It will, however, be instituted on <B><U>your</U></B> reservations.

6.) We will, of course, be keeping the nuclear stockpiles. Poachers Beware. We will, as a courtesy to the community of nations world-wide, nuke Quebec.

7.) Please tell us who killed JFK. It's been driving us crazy.

Thank you for your cooperation.
#18 by "Frijoles"
2000-11-15 16:13:00
<B>Dethstryk said in post #16</B>
<Quote>
Following an arrow is difficult?
</Quote>

I have to put myself in to a strange state of mind to see how it is difficult, but if you were just going from the left hand side and were not really paying attention, you would have picked hole #2 because that's where Gore is, in spot #2. Like I say, you'd have to totally miss the right hand side of the ballot to do this, which I agree, seems pretty foolish.

Another thing that bothered me was that apparently a few of these individuals tried to get help but were unable to because the person in the polling office conducting the poll was either unsure themselves or were not interested in helping.

I'm thinking this will end up with the Supreme Court by the end of next week. Unless the oversea votes come in and give Bush a few thousand votes. As my one friend said, "That's how it should be. The ones who have to protect this country are the ones who should decide on who is leading us."
#19 by "Whisp"
2000-11-15 16:37:44
whisp_@hotmail.com
<b>#7</b> "Dethstryk" wrote...
<QUOTE><B>Whisp wrote in post <A href="spy-internal:Load/179#1">#1</A>:</B>
<quote>It's a mess. I love politics! I haven't had this much fun following current events since, well, ever. </quote>
Personally, I'm having a great time watching the hypocritical actions of Gore, that fool. </QUOTE>
Personally, I'm having a great time watching the hypocritical actions of Bush, that fool.  ;)

<b>#10</b> "Dethstryk" wrote...
<QUOTE><B>Blood wrote in post <A href="spy-internal:Load/179#9">#9</A>:</B>
<quote>I also think it's messed up that a candidate who gets the majority vote may not win, because of the electoral college.</quote>
I present to you <A href="http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today/countymap.html">this map</A> which clearly shows why we need the electoral college. (Clearly meaning "mud-like substance." It's equal representation.
</QUOTE>
Brilliant idea!  Before the next election, we should enact an amendment that distributes the votes based on the amount of land a state possesses, rather than the number of people that live there.  Or maybe we should weight each person's vote based on the amount of land he or she owns?  

<b>#11</b> "kitrack" wrote...
<QUOTE>I've seen the same ballot, and I have no idea how people got confused. Also, tens of thousands suggests more than 30k-the number is 19k, which has much less of an impact than 'tens of thousands'.
The ballot was, in my opinion, simple, albeit the actual order was slighly illogical. However, the point has been made again and again, it was approved by both major parties and was published ahead of time in the papers. If it was really so confusing, those who were confused should have raised hell about it beforehand.
As far as I'm concerned, if you're too dumb to understand the ballot and to get the help required (there are at the least two people there to aid), then you deserve to be disenfranchised. </QUOTE>
I've heard it said that when actually voting, the ballot would frequently not go in correctly, causing the holes not to line up with the arrows.  

-Whisp
#20 by "Blood"
2000-11-15 16:46:39
blood@gamescon.com
<b>Dethstryk wrote in post 10:</b>
<quote>
The things that have "screwed up" this election happen every single time around, the only problem is that we have Gore not able to accept the fact that he lost.
</quote>
Yep.  Sorry for stating the obvious :)

<b>Dethstryk wrote in post 10:</b>
<quote>
Maybe it's just me, but if you can not follow a simple, well-defined arrow, you should have your voting priviledges taken away. This is an extreme case I realize, but "an uneducated voter is no voter."
</quote>
I agree.  However, the ballot could have been made much easier to use (and should have been).
The ballots in Canada are way simpler (I'll be seeing one soon).

<b>Dethstryk wrote in post 10:</b>
<quote>
I present to you this map which clearly shows why we need the electoral college. (Clearly meaning "mud-like substance." It's equal representation.
</quote>
Pardon my ignorance about American politics, but it seems simple to me: 40 million people vote for person A and 39 million people vote for person B, then person A should win.  That map didn't really clear things up for me.

<b>Kitrack wrote in post 11:</b>
<quote><i>
The media reported Bush as the winner while the polls were still open in California, which prompted many voters there to give up and not vote.</i>

Commonly stated but not proven.
</quote>
Who needs proof?  Would you still bother going to the polls if you thought there was already a winner?  Maybe <i>you</i> would but I doubt many others would.

<b>Kitrack wrote in post 11:</b>
<quote>
tens of thousands suggests more than 30k-the number is 19k, which has much less of an impact than 'tens of thousands'.
</quote>
Correct me if my information is wrong, but 19k were thrown away in Florida alone.  I was referring to the entire country.
#21 by "Remulak"
2000-11-15 17:17:32
Remulak@woodruffs.com
Has anybody here actually <b>done ANY interface design?</b>  This should be a required class in any EE/CS program.  But from the state of software today, it clearly is not the focus it should be.

Yes, the ballots look easy:

* IF you know in andvance they are tricky (this is crucial in your evaluation.  It's easy to see something you don't expect IF you are warned that somethig funky is going on; it's when you are doing something that you have done before (that changes), or when you are concentrating on something else (like the names of the candidates) that people make stupid mistakes.

* IF <b> you aren't holding a punch in your right hand! </b> Look at the damned things - anybody right handed would be covering up the right side of the ballot when holding a hole punch.  I printed out one out to check this out.  

Frankly I'm suprised that more people didn't get it wrong; this may be why there were all these discarded ballots all over the state (in Republican strongholds too, I might add).

Overall though, this will result in 4 more years of gridlock, whever wins.  I like gridlock (so I voted for Gore for pres and Republican congresscritters) becuase both parties have to keep their crazy aunts locked in the attic.

Remulak
#22 by "kitrack"
2000-11-15 17:54:31
jbholdridgeii@vt.edu
To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 15:37, Whisp had <i>something</i>(#19) to say:

<quote>Brilliant idea! Before the next election, we should enact an amendment that distributes the votes based on the amount of land a state possesses, rather than the number of people that live there. Or maybe we should weight each person's vote based on the amount of land he or she owns? </quote>
Sure, the electoral college is screwed up.  But think on this (Supposing that this election was based on popular, not electoral, votes):  We have a helluva close election, one that's decided (like this one) by 0.2%.  We'd have to do a recount.  Only, instead of the 5 million ballets in florida, it's 100 million ballets, nation-wide.  Just a point I thought I'd make...

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 15:37, Whisp had <i>something</i>(#19) to say:

<quote>I've heard it said that when actually voting, the ballot would frequently not go in correctly, causing the holes not to line up with the arrows. </quote>
I've heard that, too, but that would be a problem with the voting system, and not just the ballet, which is what everyone seems focused on.

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 15:46, Blood had <i>something</i>(#20) to say:

<quote>I agree. However, the ballot could have been made much easier to use (and should have been).
The ballots in Canada are way simpler (I'll be seeing one soon). </quote>
The irony is, that the ballets <i>were</i> designed to be easier-the butterfly ballet would allow them to make the candidate's name and affiliations easier to read, targets specifically at elderly americans with failing eyesight.

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 15:46, Blood had <i>something</i>(#20) to say:

<quote>Pardon my ignorance about American politics, but it seems simple to me: 40 million people vote for person A and 39 million people vote for person B, then person A should win. That map didn't really clear things up for me. </quote>
Not sure myself, but I think he was making the opposite point-that we don't need/shouldn't have the electoral college, and that was supposed to be the proof.  The electoral college is flawed (see my response to whisp) but still, it's easier to recount 5 million than 100 million, especially when you do it over and over and over ad nauseum

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 15:46, Blood had <i>something</i>(#20) to say:

<quote>Correct me if my information is wrong, but 19k were thrown away in Florida alone. I was referring to the entire country.</quote>
Alright, there we have confusion-I was refering to Palm Beach country, Florida alone, as it is the source of all this controversy (damned disney world!)
To the best of my knowledge, that style was only used in that area.  It's the only area that is causing trouble over it anyway.
As for 10s of thousands nationwide, that's not bad.  Perhaps 1/3 of them were for undervoting-not voting on the president at all, and the rest for overvoting-voting for two+ candidates.  Tens of thousands is less than a tenth of a percent-not that bad, in my opinion ... People are stupid at times.  Unfortunately, those tens of thousands either chose to be stupid on election day or are stupid all the time.  As it is, you can't please all the people all the time, and for something that only happens once every four years, the elections went rather well.

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 16:17, Remulak had <i>something</i>(#21) to say:

<quote>Has anybody here actually <b>done ANY interface design? </b>This should be a required class in any EE/CS program. But from the state of software today, it clearly is not the focus it should be.</quote>
I haven't (excepting the actual experience of designing the interface for a commercial product[don't want to do that again]) but (supposing they have one here) I will ASAP.  I do know we have some good HCI resource for grad students ...

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 16:17, Remulak had <i>something</i>(#21) to say:

<quote>* IF you know in andvance they are tricky (this is crucial in your evaluation. It's easy to see something you don't expect IF you are warned that somethig funky is going on; it's when you are doing something that you have done before (that changes), or when you are concentrating on something else (like the names of the candidates) that people make stupid mistakes. </quote>
Point taken.  However, I do think that it's important to be thorough when doing something as important as voting.

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 16:17, Remulak had <i>something</i>(#21) to say:

<quote>* IF you aren't holding a punch in your right hand! Look at the damned things - anybody right handed would be covering up the right side of the ballot when holding a hole punch. I printed out one out to check this out. </quote>
Again, point taken.
My main grip is that people didn't seem to notice the arrows.  Plus, the way they punched it was by putting it onto a machine and selecting from there-not with one of those 'one-hole' punches school teachers always had ...

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 16:17, Remulak had <i>something</i>(#21) to say:

<quote>Overall though, this will result in 4 more years of gridlock, whever wins. I like gridlock (so I voted for Gore for pres and Republican congresscritters) becuase both parties have to keep their crazy aunts locked in the attic. </quote>
Interesting turn of phrase, but I agree...

--- .sig begins here ---
Iroasenai atsui amoi
Karadajuu de tsutaetaiyo tonight<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#23 by "dukope"
2000-11-15 18:12:42
me@you.us
Remulak said:
<QUOTE>
* IF you aren't holding a punch in your right hand! Look at the damned things - anybody right handed would be covering up the right side of the ballot when holding a hole punch. I printed out one out to check this out.
</QUOTE>


i think the butterfly ballot fits in a specially designed machine with the hole punchers lined up down the middle.. you just press the punch of the hole you want with your finger or something logically simple..
#24 by "Woo-Fu"
2000-11-15 18:39:02
random1@speakeasy.org
Hmmm, if this were some other country, we'd probably be locked in an ugly civil war about now over this issue.

Overall, politics fills me with apathy.  After working 'inside the machine', one recognizes that it isn't for the people, by the people, of the people.  I can't even remember exactly how that phrase goes.  It is just another profession, with its own rules and goals, calling it civil service is a joke.

These people are so detached from the day to day life of the average american, how could you try to pick one over the other based upon their stated opinions?  For fuck's sake, they were drawing up competing budget plans, NEITHER of which had a chance of hell of making through congress even close to how it started.  If I actually believed in that crap, I should've voted for Bush, he'll reduce my taxes by $4k, lol.

Neither of these gentleman are leaders, nor have they ever served in the military(to my knowledge).  That is a big sticking point for me.  Just thinking about myself, having never been in a shooting war, could I really have a firm grasp of the consequences of my actions should I 'use' the military?

The best you can hope for is that these people surround themselves with competent advisors, and consider their advice.
#25 by "Morn"
2000-11-15 18:56:26
morn@planetcrap.com http://www.planetcrap.com
<a href="http://www.theonion.com/onion3641/serbia_deploys_forces.html">Hahahaha</a>.

- Mörn
<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#26 by "Llewrend"
2000-11-15 18:57:28
lordartos@yahoo.com
"Bush likely won't be able to push through any Scalia-esque candidates"

You do realize Gore voted her in, right?  Why does everyone think Gore is anti-abortion?  He ran in TN as a Democrat opposed to abortion, but true to his style, changes his opinion with the poles.

As far as the ballot thing goes, I consider it part of "weeding out the stupid".  If you can't figure out the ballot, how the hell do you manage daily life?  Those kind of people are the reasons for all the silly labels like "coffee is hot".  I say give them all the most dangerous household appliances we can give them until they weed themselves out.  Darwin would have wanted it this way.

And furthermore, Florida has a history of voting fraud, Democrat and Republican.  In fact, at one point the (then)state attorney genral arrested some one who presented her with evidence of fraud.  That attorney genral  was Janet Reno.  Go check out www.votescam.com .

If you voted major party, you threw away your vote to a corporation that doesn't care about you.  Buy stock in vasaline, because supporting Democrats or Republicans is at best delusional, and more likely, masochistic.
#27 by "None-1a"
2000-11-15 19:47:54
none1a@home.com http://www.geocities.com/none-1a/
<b>#9</b> "Blood" wrote...
<QUOTE>The media reported Bush as the winner while the polls were still open in California, which prompted many voters there to give up and not vote. </QUOTE>

Happens every time, you figure the people in california would come to reliase 54 electorial votes can have a major impact.

<b>#9</b> "Blood" wrote...
<QUOTE>Human error caused tens of thousands of ballots to be negated. I've seen a picture of the ballot, and I can understand people getting confused with it. I mean, people are being herded through the booths like cattle and they're not really given enough time to figure out how to use the ballot. Note to Americans: make your ballots EASY enough that a 5-year old could vote. Because a lot of old people are getting dumber and dumber, and will get confused if it is not made this simple.
</QUOTE>

What I don't get is how exactly the people in florida managed to get confused about the new ballots in the first place. For crying out loud it was printed in the newpapers and mailed to all registered voters before the election. Opps forgot the protesters and new media that lached on to the story aren't about to tell you that.

Anyone else find if odd that the hand counting is only being done in dem heavy areas in florida?
--
None-1a.

O forget it.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#28 by "Eldridge"
2000-11-15 19:54:33
It's rather funny. When Milosevic refused to conceed the elections in Serbia, and demanded a recount of the votes, the whole world laughed at the absurdity of his demands, and Nato threatened to bomb his ass a little bit further back into the stone age.

Nobody seems to find it absurd that Al Gore is REPEATEDLY asking for the same thing.
Maybe we should bomb Al and Palm Beach County like we did Serbia..

E.
#29 by "kitrack"
2000-11-15 20:00:35
jbholdridgeii@vt.edu
To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 18:47, None-1a had <i>something</i>(#27) to say:

<quote>Anyone else find if odd that the hand counting is only being done in dem heavy areas in florida? </quote>
No-he's the one asking for the recounts.  You can bet your ass that Bush would/will be if one of those counties gave gore a few vote edge.

--- .sig begins here ---
Iroasenai atsui amoi
Karadajuu de tsutaetaiyo tonight<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#30 by "Remulak"
2000-11-15 20:07:03
Remulak@woodruffs.com
None-1a said <quote>Anyone else find if odd that the hand counting is only being done in dem heavy areas in florida? </quote>.

No shit - the democrats are following state law in requesting a recount in areas that they thought were undercounted for them (and due to those stupid punchcards probably were, along with every other punchcard county).  The republicans stupidly missed the deadline, and they haven't been shy about trying to litigate their way out of it.
#31 by "Creole Ned"
2000-11-15 20:08:17
cned@telus.net http://www.quirkybastards.com/
If I were a U.S. citizen and Bush had promised to change PC's color scheme back to what it was before October 24, 2000, I would have voted for him.

If I were a U.S. citizen and Gore had promised to change PC's color scheme back to what it was before October 24, 2000, I would have voted for him.

If I were a U.S. citizen and Nader had promised to change PC's color scheme back to what it was before October 24, 2000, I would have voted for him.

If I were a U.S. citizen and Buchanan had promised to change PC's color scheme back to what it was before October 24, 2000...well...maybe not. :)
#32 by "Eldridge"
2000-11-15 20:47:32
The Republicans did not ask for a recount, because they had already WON THE COUNT.
After the recount was done, they had STILL WON THE COUNT.

They did not figure Al Gore was going to be such a stupid ass as to keep counting until his cronies "have read enough voters' minds" until he has apparently won the election.

It's also funny that Al Gore thinks that the republicans can win 2 or 5 or 700 recounts, and that the moment HE wins one count, he gets to be the president.


Is Lee Harvey Oswald still alive?

E.
#33 by "Dethstryk"
2000-11-15 20:49:24
dethstryk@damagegaming.com http://www.damagegaming.com/
<b>Demonicuss wrote in post #17:</b>
<quote>Plus I don't want those moral Nazis Tipper and Lieberman anywhere near spitting distance of the White House.</quote>
Hell, they have been changing their stances so much lately you can't even tell what they are anymore!

<b>Frijoles wrote in post #18:</b>
<quote>Another thing that bothered me was that apparently a few of these individuals tried to get help but were unable to because the person in the polling office conducting the poll was either unsure themselves or were not interested in helping. </quote>
It's been said, but this ballot was approved AND circulated before the election. The bitching should not come AFTER the fact.

<quote>"That's how it should be. The ones who have to protect this country are the ones who should decide on who is leading us." </quote>
You know, now that I think about it, that is absolutely right, to an extent.

<b>Whisp wrote in post #19:</b>
<quote>Brilliant idea! Before the next election, we should enact an amendment that distributes the votes based on the amount of land a state possesses, rather than the number of people that live there. Or maybe we should weight each person's vote based on the amount of land he or she owns? </quote>
Hey, I posted the link and wanted people to interpret it their own way. Now that looks like it might have been a mistake. ;)

<b>Blood wrote in post #20:</b>
<quote>Pardon my ignorance about American politics, but it seems simple to me: 40 million people vote for person A and 39 million people vote for person B, then person A should win. That map didn't really clear things up for me. </quote>
You are absolutely right, and I'm all for doing away the Electoral College. (And yes.. I am for Bush.) But the law is the law, and it has to be done this way. Gore even said that.. before he realized he was losing.

<b>Woo-Fu wrote in post #24:</b>
<quote>Hmmm, if this were some other country, we'd probably be locked in an ugly civil war about now over this issue. </quote>
You're right, and Bush would win. Guns and the military, baby.

<quote>Neither of these gentleman are leaders, nor have they ever served in the military(to my knowledge). </quote>
Gore was a photographer in Vietnam, with special orders to keep him protected because he was a senator's son. (Or something like that.)

<b>None-1a wrote in post #27:</b>
<quote>Anyone else find if odd that the hand counting is only being done in dem heavy areas in florida? </quote>
Odd? No. Fucked up? Yeah.

<b>Eldridge wrote in post #28:</b>
<quote>Maybe we should bomb Al and Palm Beach County like we did Serbia.. </quote>
I second that!


--
Dethstryk
#34 by "Whisp"
2000-11-15 20:56:26
whisp_@hotmail.com
<b>#26</b> "Llewrend" wrote...
<QUOTE>As far as the ballot thing goes, I consider it part of "weeding out the stupid". If you can't figure out the ballot, how the hell do you manage daily life? Those kind of people are the reasons for all the silly labels like "coffee is hot". I say give them all the most dangerous household appliances we can give them until they weed themselves out. Darwin would have wanted it this way. </QUOTE>
I find all this mocking of those voters who made honest mistakes in the Florida election to be distasteful.

Have you never made a decision while under pressure that you immediately realized was foolish or wrong the moment you were no longer pressured?  A good example is an exam in school.  I know there have been many times when I wrote down something completely boneheaded even though I knew the correct answer, or would have done it different when I wasn't staring at that blank sheet of paper.  

When I marked my ballot one of the things I was most concerned about was whether or not I was going to punch the correct hole - especially since I was voting absentee, and had no way to correct the mistake or get a new ballot.  The West Virginia ballot wasn't even as confusing as the Florida (just the standard format), and I had no kind of time pressure on me at all.  It was just me, the stylus, and the punch card.  Even still, all it would have taken is a moment of inattention, and my vote would have been thrown away.

<b>#27</b> "None-1a" wrote...
<QUOTE>What I don't get is how exactly the people in florida managed to get confused about the new ballots in the first place. For crying out loud it was printed in the newpapers and mailed to all registered voters before the election. Opps forgot the protesters and new media that lached on to the story aren't about to tell you that. </QUOTE>
Actually, the approval, public display, etc has been mentioned.  Every time the media talks about the ballot that I have seen (at least in print) they include statements similar to yours.  I find it inconsequential anyway.  Did you go over the copy of your local ballot in the newspaper before you went to the poles?  I'd be willing to bet hardly anyone more than glanced at them.  Even if the ballot was approved correctly and was completely legal, that doesn't magically make it not confusing.  Just for the record, I didn't think the butterfly ballots were confusing either, the first time I saw them.

And for all you people carping about the recounts in Florida, don't forget that Bush is trying to get recounts in other states that Gore narrowly won.

<b>#28</b> "Eldridge" wrote...
<QUOTE>Maybe we should bomb Al and Palm Beach County like we did Serbia.. </QUOTE>
As long as you include Texas and Bush on your target list too, I'd be all for it.  

-Whisp
#35 by "Dethstryk"
2000-11-15 21:03:48
dethstryk@damagegaming.com http://www.damagegaming.com/
<b>Whisp wrote in post #34:</b>
<quote>I find all this mocking of those voters who made honest mistakes in the Florida election to be distasteful. </quote>
I find that the only reason they are in such an uproar is because of Al Gore's telemarketer phone calls he arranged. <i>That's</i> distasteful.

<quote>Have you never made a decision while under pressure that you immediately realized was foolish or wrong the moment you were no longer pressured? A good example is an exam in school. </quote>
Can you re-take exams? Not where I come from.

<quote>Did you go over the copy of your local ballot in the newspaper before you went to the poles? I'd be willing to bet hardly anyone more than glanced at them. Even if the ballot was approved correctly and was completely legal, that doesn't magically make it not confusing. Just for the record, I didn't think the butterfly ballots were confusing either, the first time I saw them.</quote>
If I remember right, copies of the ballot were mailed to every registered voter in Florida. Someone back me up on this.


--
Dethstryk
#36 by "Whisp"
2000-11-15 21:04:07
whisp_@hotmail.com
I played around for a few minutes with a picture of a Palm Beach ballot for a few minutes today.  This is what I got.  Feel free to guess which one was the original.  Notice how much more thought it takes when the holes don't align perfectly with the arrows.  Admittedly, these are probably worse than any actually were during the election.

<a href="http://filebox.vt.edu/users/jcharonk/art/palm1.jpg">Ballot 1</a>
<a href="http://filebox.vt.edu/users/jcharonk/art/palm2.jpg">Ballot 2</a>
<a href="http://filebox.vt.edu/users/jcharonk/art/palm3.jpg">Ballot 3</a>

-Whisp
#37 by "Demonicuss"
2000-11-15 21:14:19
demonicuss@cbrmail.com http://www.geocities.com/backspaced.geo
In post 34 Myst writ...

<QUOTE>I find all this mocking of those voters who made honest mistakes in the Florida election to be distasteful</QUOTE>

Here's something that I just thought of.  If the Floridians marked their ballots and then realized that they made a mistake, wouldn't they simply ask for a new ballot?  "Hey, I got messed up and make a mistake.  Can I have a new ballot, please?"

I'm willing to wager that only a few actually did that.

BTW, shouldn't Gore quit making a jackass of himself about now?  "We're gonna keep recounting until I win, damnit!"
#38 by "Whisp"
2000-11-15 21:20:43
whisp_@hotmail.com
<b>#35</b> "Dethstryk" wrote...
<QUOTE>
I find that the only reason they are in such an uproar is because of Al Gore's telemarketer phone calls he arranged. <I>That's</I> distasteful. </quote>
Haven't heard anything about that.  But I doubt that is the <i>only </i>reason.
<quote>
Can you re-take exams? Not where I come from.

</quote>No, but if you have a problem with the grading or a question, you can usually go and discuss it with your teacher.  Examples would be the incorrect totaling of deductions, or a fundamental flaw in a test question.  On standardized tests however, marking 2 answers usually leaves you out of luck.  If the grading machine didn't pick up your mark though,  there's at least a chance for the teacher to check it by hand and mark it correct.  

My point was not to compare the election to a test anyway.  I was just giving an example of a stressful situation that most are probably familiar with, and asking them to think about whether they might sometimes make mistakes too.
<quote>
If I remember right, copies of the ballot were mailed to every registered voter in Florida. Someone back me up on this.  
</QUOTE>
I'm pretty sure you are right about that.  But I still doubt people paid much attention to it beforehand - after all they probably already knew how they planned to vote.  Why would they waste their time studying a ballot and practicing punching it?


<b>#37</b> "Demonicuss" wrote...
<QUOTE>Here's something that I just thought of. If the Floridians marked their ballots and then realized that they made a mistake, wouldn't they simply ask for a new ballot? "Hey, I got messed up and make a mistake. Can I have a new ballot, please?"

I'm willing to wager that only a few actually did that.
</QUOTE>
From what I understand, some did, and some did fix their mistake.  Other were improperly denied a new ballot.  Once the ballot has been submitted though, it's too late.  It can't be retrieved, and filling out a new ballot would be no different from voting twice.  

-Whisp
#39 by "None-1a"
2000-11-15 21:28:38
none1a@home.com http://www.geocities.com/none-1a/
<b>#37</b> "Demonicuss" wrote...
<QUOTE>BTW, shouldn't Gore quit making a jackass of himself about now? "We're gonna keep recounting until I win, damnit!" </QUOTE>

Just wait till he sees the numbers from the oversees stuff. It should come in primaraly for Bush (at lest from what I've heard), that or Gore will be recount those as well.
--
None-1a.

O forget it.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#40 by "EvilAsh"
2000-11-15 21:39:07
evilash@eviladam.com
hey Morn..  I know your a busy dude and all.. but you told me a week or 2 ago that my article I submitted would go up once things cooled down around here (what that meant I still don't know)


But its now obvious especially with 4 other "brilliant" articles having been posted since then.. that it looks like your not going to use my article.  I just think if you don't want to use it.. Please just have the decency to tell me so.   I know I am not a famous writer or some known Game designer but I did think the article was good enough for planetcrap and enough to help spark some thought around here.

If your not interested in it just tell me. And I will try and get it posted elsewhere.  whats really sad is 2 Sites I have submitted this article 2 Sites both said they would post it.. then on one site 3 months goes by and ther person never posts it.. And never gives a reason why.. Now on this site. Its been 2 weeks or so.. and nothing.   Jeeze I knew new people would be so I don't know apathetic about someone's work.

EvilAsh.. not so evil today mostly.. annoyed.
#41 by "Llewrend"
2000-11-15 21:40:32
lordartos@yahoo.com
Whisp:

If you're the kind of person who feels pressured and paniced when going to a local school, standing alone in a booth with several people behind you, ready to answer any questions, and lining up a piece of papers through which to punch holes, perhaps you should rethink your role in deciding on the next ruler of the free world.  My opinion stands that people like that are best left out of the process of deciding anything.  In fact, keep them away from toasters as well, they could lose and eye or something.
#42 by "Charm"
2000-11-15 21:47:26
wrs13@columbia.edu
Couple of points:

1) The people who say things like 'If this happened in any other country, there would be a civil war' have their heads up their behinds.  It does happen in other countries with relative frequency, they are called 'minority governments' and they are dealt with incredibly competently.  Yes there are *SOME* countries where this might result in rioting or a civil war, but not in *ANY* other country.  Please.

2)  Watching this as a foreigner all I can say is what's the GODDAMN rush?  Why wouldn't you want an accurate count?  Why isn't the whole state being recounted?  There are more than 2 bloody months before the next president takes office!  Both camps are whining and scraping and looking like buffoons.  At least Bush has an excuse, he doesn't really have any idea what's going on.  Gore just can't believe that he *MIGHT* have lost (let's wait until all the votes are counted properly hmmmmm?).

3)  Why on God's green earth don't they just recount the whole damn state of Florida?  Because then the Republicans wouldn't have anything to whine about if they lost?  Why should they only count the Democratic-majority counties... oh wait... they're not.. look it up.  Be surprised.

4)  To those who complain that Gore is trying to take this to be decided in court, only Bush had his name on a case pending in front of a Florida court, not Gore.

5)  Gore would do far better for himself to concede defeat, set up a 'shadow cabinet' similar to that seen in parliamentary systems (call it a think-tank) whatever, and ride the wave of the disaster that will be a Bush presidency.  (Oh, a disaster not because it's Bush necessarily, but because i) he will take the presidency under a cloud and ii) the US is due for an economic downturn).

Cheers
#43 by "Warren Marshall"
2000-11-15 22:03:32
warren@epicgames.com http://www.epicgames.com
<b>Flamethrower</b> (#2):
<QUOTE>America -- the worlds greatest democracy?

Don't make me puke laughing. </QUOTE>
Then don't look in the mirror.  Ba-dum-bum clash!

--

Warren Marshall - Professional Nuisance<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#44 by "asspennies"
2000-11-15 22:25:02
asspennies@coredump.org http://www.coredump.org/
<b>#2</b> "Flamethrower" wrote...
<QUOTE>America -- the worlds greatest democracy?

Don't make me puke laughing. </QUOTE>

Well, America isn't a democracy and never was, so...if it fails at being a democracy, that's not exactly a slight against it.<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#45 by "Blood"
2000-11-15 22:38:19
blood@gamescon.com
America is a democracy, but democracy isn't perfect, which is why you end up with the situation where it is now, such that people think they are no longer governed under democracy.  But every democracy has swayed from the "pure" definition, to the point where the "pure" definition is no longer applicable, and we have to admit that democracy has changed on a global scale.
#46 by "Blood"
2000-11-15 22:42:03
blood@gamescon.com
...more...
Democracy is like hockey.  You could say we don't play hockey in North America.  You could say this if your definition of hockey is "two nets, a puck and 12 players, nothing more"...which is how it started.  

However, hockey has evolved, just like democracy.  We still have democracy, it's just the "new" democracy :)
#47 by "Llewrend"
2000-11-15 22:45:12
lordartos@yahoo.com
What, didn't you play Civ II, Call to Power?  We live in a Corperate Republic.
#48 by "12xu"
2000-11-15 22:46:49
mswitzer@insync.net http://http;//www.hichouston.org
<b>#7</b> "Dethstryk" wrote...
<QUOTE>Personally, I'm having a great time watching the hypocritical actions of Gore, that fool. </QUOTE>

How do you feel abuot the hypocritical actions of W?

I find them just as entertaining...


<b>#7</b> "Dethstryk" wrote...
<QUOTE><I>Riiight</I>. If Gore's crybaby tactics are alright for you, then so be it. Stealing the election is hardly an issue considering that the recounts are still coming up in Bush's favor. </QUOTE>

ummm...Bush stole the election, or weren't you paying attention?

<b>#9</b> "Blood" wrote...
<QUOTE>Human error caused tens of thousands of ballots to be negated. I've seen a picture of the ballot, and I can understand people getting confused with it. </QUOTE>

Latest thing I have read is an affidavit from a Rabbi in palm beach...says his ballot didn't line up properly, and that seemed to be the case for about 50% of his congegration...the other half had no problems...it seems to him that there were possibly two different ballots being used...

<b>#10</b> "Dethstryk" wrote...
<QUOTE>The things that have "screwed up" this election happen every single time around, the only problem is that we have Gore not able to accept the fact that <I>he lost</I>.
</QUOTE>

just like Nixon wouldn't admit it in 60...his people asked for all sorts of recounts and fought it in the courts...Nixon was smart enough to keep plausible deniability for himself though...

<b>#24</b> "Woo-Fu" wrote...
<QUOTE>Hmmm, if this were some other country, we'd probably be locked in an ugly civil war about now over this issue. </QUOTE>

if you havent seen the onion yet...go...now....www.theonion.com

HIGHlarryus

<b>#24</b> "Woo-Fu" wrote...
<QUOTE>nor have they ever served in the military(to my knowledge). </QUOTE>

Gore served in Vietnam...only a reporter, but he served...Bush skipped out on most of his Gaurd duty...

<b>#24</b> "Woo-Fu" wrote...
<QUOTE>The best you can hope for is that these people surround themselves with competent advisors, and consider their advice. </QUOTE>

Bush is considering Giuliana for Attorney General...i didn't think he could find anyone I would fear more than Reno, but he did...

<b>#29</b> "kitrack" wrote...
<QUOTE>No-he's the one asking for the recounts. You can bet your ass that Bush would/will be if one of those counties gave gore a few vote edge. </QUOTE>

They both had 72 hours to request hand counts...Bush's folks didn't...

<b>#32</b> "Eldridge" wrote...
<QUOTE>
Is Lee Harvey Oswald still alive?
</QUOTE>

It's possible that at least one of the Lee Harvey's is still hidden away somewhere....  ; )

<b>#34</b> "Whisp" wrote...
<QUOTE>And for all you people carping about the recounts in Florida, don't forget that Bush is trying to get recounts in other states that Gore narrowly won. </QUOTE>

actually I think Bush took New Mexico on a hand recount...and Bush approved hand recounts in Tx...

<b>#35</b> "Dethstryk" wrote...
<QUOTE>Can you re-take exams? Not where I come from</QUOTE>

If enough of the students complain that the exam is unfair, or one question in particular is, I have seen educators throw out the results of the test, or at least the protested question.

12xu
out

and here I was trying to calm down...



<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#49 by "kitrack"
2000-11-15 22:51:42
jbholdridgeii@vt.edu
To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 21:46, 12xu had <i>something</i>(#48) to say:

<quote>They both had 72 hours to request hand counts...Bush's folks didn't... </quote>
hmm.  Okay, aside from my ignorance of Florida law, I was trying to say that Bush would have if Gore had had a similiarly narrow 'victory' ...  I suppose that no matter which way it goes, it's still a pyrric victory...

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 21:46, 12xu had <i>something</i>(#48) to say:

<quote>actually I think Bush took New Mexico on a hand recount...and Bush approved hand recounts in Tx... </quote>
I'm pretty sure it was a simple machine recount-there was a bug in the counting program that messed up straight party tickets

To better expose my ignorance, I present this as evidence:
On 11/15/2000 at 21:46, 12xu had <i>something</i>(#48) to say:

<quote>and here I was trying to calm down...</quote>
Ha!  You can't calm down on PC.  I swear, I'm gonna get an ulcer from this place


--- .sig begins here ---
Iroasenai atsui amoi
Karadajuu de tsutaetaiyo tonight<I><B></B></I><I></I><I></I>
#50 by "Stepto"
2000-11-15 22:55:13
Stepto@gamersangst.com http://www.gamersangst.com
Not too long ago I ate lunch with some friends of mine who spent the entire lunch purple with rage at each other cause half the table was democrat and the other half were republican.

Both sides were arguing that if *their* man didnt get in, the United States of American would cease to exist within 4 years.  Either Bush would nominate 28 supreme justices  to the supreme court that only supported a woman's right to churn butter and stay in the kitchen, or Al Gore was going to cut the military budget in half and use the money to pay women to sleep with him in the oval office cause he wasnt near as good at seduction as clinton.

I remained silent for most of it and eventually someone asked me who I planned to vote for.

"I don't know," I said, "Do either of the candidates support pedophilia?  That would get my vote."

The conversation turned to football instantly.

My question though didnt get answered.  Does anyone here know?

S.
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: US Election 2000

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]