Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 36 of 36
  1. #21  
    How does Bush expect to govern when he barely won Florida by about 125 votes?(give or take 200 votes by the U.S/Florida Supreme Courts and the Florida Legislature)
    he well be just as effective as his daddy, which isn't saying much.
    we will have four years of boredom and gridlock!

    Gore in '04
    handspring is going to "bounce" the pocketPC off the handheld scene.
  2. #22  
    Hello All,
    Speaking of making speeches; have anybody use or seen someone use a PDA or Handheld device to make a public speech?
    Do you think this can increase someone image / appear?

    Byron
    <A HREF=http://www.xecu.net/bcollins/index.htm><IMG SRC=http://www.xecu.net/bcollins/BEBOOKEM.GIF>
  3. #23  
    I think that there should have been a Florida state-wide re-vote not a re-count. It should be only for the people that had voted. It would have only taken one day instead of dragging this thing over a month. Therefore, every vote would be counted fairly without all this bickering and accusations.

    In my opinion, I think that Gore is the more qualified candidate. I always thought that The President of the USA should be more intelligent than I am. Judging from W's performance in the debates, new conferences, speeches, and interviews, I'm having doubts....
    KAY
  4. #24  
    But regardless of who we voted for and how disappointed some of us may be, what a wonderful lesson this has been. What a powerful nation. Even in the midst of great political party turmoil... and a shifting of power... and a race so close... and people everywhere being politically charged and outraged... we still manage to have a peaceful conclusion to this election, no widespread violence like in other countries, etc.

    What do you expect?.. GM Chrysler! It took 3 hours for Elections Canada to determine the winner of our federal election. Why did this take five weeks? What violence would there be considering what appears to be a general indifference, fatigue, and ennuis? What on earth would cause this election outcome to result in a break out in violence considering a 50-50 split? Walk down the street and consider every other person you meet as voting for the other party. It'd be a humorous battle royale!

    The two-party 'platform' (exposure) is ridiculous. It's too bad. Heh heh. Quite frankly George W Bush frightens me when he bluntly speaks of "putting people to death."

    What a debacle!
    Scanner modules in '04!
    "The Greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance -- it is the illusion of knowledge." -- Daniel Borstin
  5. #25  
    Originally posted by lennonhead
    Or the "press" to count absentee ballots from the Republican majority military?
    There's a big difference between people who's ballots arrive late or with an unimportant piece of information missing because they are overseas serving their countries, and people who are too stupid to correctly punch the hole next to their candidate of choice.

    Originally posted by nfeaglewr
    How does Bush expect to govern when he barely won Florida by about 125 votes?(give or take 200 votes by the U.S/Florida Supreme Courts and the Florida Legislature)
    All I want to know is whether you'd be saying the same thing if Gore had won.

    Originally posted by KennethAaron425
    I think that there should have been a Florida state-wide re-vote not a re-count. It should be only for the people that had voted. It would have only taken one day instead of dragging this thing over a month. Therefore, every vote would be counted fairly without all this bickering and accusations.
    Nice idea, but completely unconstitutional.
    Life's just a blast, just it's moving really fast, and you'd <BR>better stay on top or life'll kick you in the *** -Limp Bizkit
  6. #26  
    Both speeches were A+. Bush, would have been nice if he looked into the camera more however, Gore had all day to memorize his shorter speech and Bush was using teleprompters because he only had about 45 minutes prep time after the speech by Gore to make certain that he used some of Gore's comments.

    Now regarding the election: Gore's legal team screwed up by getting the Florida supreme court to move the "certification" to Nov. 26th. If the certification would have been held to the 14th as laid down by the Florida legistlature then the "contest" of the election and hence the Miami-Dade ballots probably would have been counted. We don't know what the outcome of those hand counts would have amounted to but we do have a President Elect that we need to get behind.

    Now most of the members of this board probably aren't old enough to remember but the 1960 election that got JFK elected was riddled with fraud in the greater Chicago area. This was a proven fact however, Richard Nixon did not "challenge" the election even though he had proof of the corruption.

    We need an overhaul of the ballot method's in this country in order that all voters are "franchised". What we don't need is to continue to argue who really is the President.
    Moose Man
    Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.
    iPhone 3G, Treo 750, 680, 650, 600 and T5, T3, T, M515, M505, Vx, V, Prizm, Visor, IIIc, IIIe, Palm Pilot Professional, Palm Pilot (ok boys and girls a whopping 128k of memory - those were the days) and former Palm Beta tester.
  7. #27  
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by parb33
    There's a big difference between people who's ballots arrive late or with an unimportant piece of information missing because they are overseas serving their countries, and people who are too stupid to correctly punch the hole next to their candidate of choice.
    ______________________________________________
    I have to disagree with that comment, voting is a right for all people reguardless of how "stupid" you think they are.

    Couldn't I make the same argument that people were also "stupid" because they forgot to put that "unimportant piece of infomation" on their envelopes or they were "stupid" for sending in their ballots in late?

    [Edited by KennethAaron425 on 12-17-2000 at 09:33 PM]
    KAY
  8. #28  
    Originally posted by KennethAaron425
    Originally posted by parb33
    There's a big difference between people who's ballots arrive late or with an unimportant piece of information missing because they are overseas serving their countries, and people who are too stupid to correctly punch the hole next to their candidate of choice.
    I have to disagree with that comment, voting is a right for all people reguardless of how "stupid" you think they are.

    Couldn't I make the same argument that people were also "stupid" because they forgot to put that "unimportant piece of infomation" on their envelopes or they were "stupid" for sending in their ballots in late?
    I don't understand your train of thought. Where did I say that voting is not a right for people that I believe to be stupid?

    What I did say is that when someone clearly votes for a candidate, and fills out their voting papers properly except omitting one minor detail, that person's vote should be counted, especially if their ommission was because they were overseas serving their country, and had no way of finding out their Voter ID #. If that person puts their ballot into a military mail pouch, and as a result it is delivered a day late or not postmarked, I do not believe that he/she should be penalized.

    If, however, a person cannot even make it clear which candidate (if any) they wish to vote for, then that person's vote should not be counted.
    Life's just a blast, just it's moving really fast, and you'd <BR>better stay on top or life'll kick you in the *** -Limp Bizkit
  9. #29  
    response by parb33
    [B]All I want to know is whether you'd be saying the same thing if Gore had won.
    Yes I would say the same thing, but I think Al Gore is the stronger leader. He is able to operate more effectively in the area of foreign affiars through Gore's connections with foreign leaders. Bush has never visited Europe in his adult life. Also Gore would be more effective in Washington D.C, Bush has only worked in state politics in his brief political carrer.

    Either way I belive that America has been screwed by the political process, Gore won the popular vote. Bush needs to remember one thing over half of America DID NOT vote for him!

    Gore in '04
    handspring is going to "bounce" the pocketPC off the handheld scene.
  10. #30  
    Originally posted by nfeaglewr
    Either way I belive that America has been screwed by the political process, Gore won the popular vote. Bush needs to remember one thing over half of America DID NOT vote for him!

    Gore in '04
    FYI, Gore didn't get more than half the American vote either.
    James Hromadka, TreoCentral Editor
    Houston - EST. 1836
  11.    #31  
    Originally posted by parb33

    There's a big difference between people who's ballots arrive late or with an unimportant piece of information missing because they are overseas serving their countries, and people who are too stupid to correctly punch the hole next to their candidate of choice.
    Since there was confusion when voting for some people makes them stupid and their vote void? What if you had done the same thing? Just because mistakes happen doesn't make people stupid.

    Originally posted by parb33
    Nice idea, but completely unconstitutional.
    Ah yes, that holy document which people manipulate in order to get what they want. Need a gun? Just look in the Constitution, it says you can own one because when the nation was founded it needed to raise an army so it provided for the ownership of weapons. It doesn't apply to today except when it satisfies the interests of a particular person or group.

    Don't get me wrong, I find the Constitution very important, but just because something is or is not written in the Constitution does not make it right or wrong.

    [Edited by lennonhead on 12-18-2000 at 03:01 PM]
    <A HREF="http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/stats/team/team_69783.html"TARGET=_BLANK><IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/lenn0nhead/hvcslogo181x75.jpg"BORDER=1></A>
  12. #32  
    Originally posted by parb33
    Nice idea, but completely unconstitutional.
    Ah yes, that holy document which people manipulate in order to get what they want. Need a gun? Just look in the Constitution, it says you can own one because when the nation was founded it needed to raise an army so it provided for the ownership of weapons. It doesn't apply to today except when it satisfies the interests of a particular person or group.

    Don't get me wrong, I find the Constitution very important, but just because something is or is not written in the Constitution does not make it right or wrong.

    [Edited by lennonhead on 12-18-2000 at 03:01 PM] [/B][/QUOTE]

    Good thing the constitution stands on it's own merit for the last 200+ years. It is when people choose to intrepret it to match their ideals that we run into problems.

    The gun clause guarantees the right for the INDIVIDUAL to own a gun...it is not necessary to be in the malitia. That is a favorite mis-quote. With just a little thought, you might even understand how important personal gun ownership was to the founders of this country and to the personal liberties you enjoy. It is because the populous is armed that the government cannot run roughshod over the American public. As far as gun registration etc. We can easily see how successful that approach has been in Australia and England. Capitol crimes have increased. When concealed carry is approved in states like Florida and Texas, Capitol Crimes have dropped. Common sense might even suggest to you that if a criminal was under the impression you MIGHT be armed, he would probably move to another target.

    If you are so darn anti gun, then I challenge you to post your property with the same babble. Let's see how long the sanctity of your home is maintained.
    "Stupid Handspring."
  13. #33  
    Originally posted by MIKE STH

    It is because the populous is armed that the government cannot run roughshod over the American public. As far as gun registration etc. We can easily see how successful that approach has been in Australia and England. Capitol crimes have increased. When concealed carry is approved in states like Florida and Texas, Capitol Crimes have dropped. Common sense might even suggest to you that if a criminal was under the impression you MIGHT be armed, he would probably move to another target.

    If you are so darn anti gun, then I challenge you to post your property with the same babble. Let's see how long the sanctity of your home is maintained. [/B]
    Oh come on! Do you actually believe all that BS that the NRA is saying? What...that THE GUN [/B] is the only thing keeping this country from anarchy... or keeping the government from "taking over"? You have been watching X-Files or listening to the AM radio for a little too long.

    Criminals are not going to mug you because they think that you're packing?!?! What kind of childish/Rambo reasoning is that? Why don't we all carry guns and dissolve the police departments? I mean if EVERYONE is packing heat ...wow...that would solve ALL crime problems!! Let this country deteriorate back into the wild wild west.

    This assumption that bad guys aren't going to hurt you because they think that you are armed is just ignorant. How do you explain gang violence? Gang A knows that Gang B has the guns, yet they still shoot each other. Why? Because the youths today believe that they are indestructible. Did the guns deter the violence or made it worse?

    I have seen, treated, and sometimes lost victims of gun shot wounds in the ER, and I have talked with gang bangers. When they wanted to hurt or rob someone...these kids today think that they're indestructible... rather or not their victim was armed are not on the top of their list. All they are thinking about is the loot. Actually if they see that you are armed, you may not only get robbed, but possibly killed.

    I'm not going to argue about the validity of the data that capital crimes are increasing in Australia and England since they started to register guns. Sounds like NRA propaganda to me. All I know is that I have not read or seen any reports of school shootings like Columbine, church shootings, postal shootings, or office shootings coming out of those countries.

    [Edited by KennethAaron425 on 12-19-2000 at 03:51 AM]
    KAY
  14. #34  
    Originally posted by lennonhead
    Originally posted by parb33

    There's a big difference between people who's ballots arrive late or with an unimportant piece of information missing because they are overseas serving their countries, and people who are too stupid to correctly punch the hole next to their candidate of choice.
    Since there was confusion when voting for some people makes them stupid and their vote void? What if you had done the same thing? Just because mistakes happen doesn't make people stupid.
    I do believe that people who have trouble finding and punching the correct hole on their ballot or vote for two candidates are stupid, but that wasn't my point. I was just trying to point out the ludicrousness of equating the military ballots that Democrats [unsuccessfully] tried to have thrown out based on their not being postmarked (due to arriving in a military mail pouch) or being postmarked a day late (same), and the normal ballots that the Republicans [successfully] argued to have thrown out because they didn't have a vote for anyone, or they had two holes punched out, etc.

    Originally posted by lennonhead
    Originally posted by parb33
    Nice idea, but completely unconstitutional.
    Ah yes, that holy document which people manipulate in order to get what they want. Need a gun? Just look in the Constitution, it says you can own one because when the nation was founded it needed to raise an army so it provided for the ownership of weapons. It doesn't apply to today except when it satisfies the interests of a particular person or group.

    Don't get me wrong, I find the Constitution very important, but just because something is or is not written in the Constitution does not make it right or wrong.

    [Edited by lennonhead on 12-18-2000 at 03:01 PM]
    The constitution details very clear procedures for the election of the president and the vice president, without even contemplating the possibility of revotes. Our founding fathers wished to make sure that corrupt politicians are not able to pull a "Slobodan Milosevic," i.e. be voted against in election after election but refuse to concede and call for another election because of "fraud," or "ballot tampering," etc. It is rather ironic that Mr. Gore was one of the first to call for Milosevic's resignation/concession; he should have taken his own advice to heart.
    Life's just a blast, just it's moving really fast, and you'd <BR>better stay on top or life'll kick you in the *** -Limp Bizkit
  15. #35  
    To the folks who wonder how Bush can govern when half the people didn't vote for him:

    1. Bush got more votes than Clinton ever did (as did Gore);

    2. The Republicans effectively control both the House and Senate, albeit by narrow margins, so an electoral mandate is less important than under other circumstances.

    I say, give the guy a chance. He consistently campaigned on trying to bridge the partisan divide and bring the country together - long before he knew the election was going to be a squeaker. Let's see if he can do it before we all doom his presidency to failure.
  16. #36  
    This can be argued as "the glass is half full or half empty", but Bush is going to have a much harder time in Washington then Clinton. Clinton was able to pass major legislation and even stop key items of the republican agenda (the contract for(on)america),even with a republican majority at the time. this shows that the republican party does not have a unified agenda between the conservative christains and the more liberal party members, which will harm Bushs' chances at bipartainship.

    Gore in '04
    handspring is going to "bounce" the pocketPC off the handheld scene.
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions