Forums Index >> General >> Begged // Borrowed // Stolen
Page : 1 : <2>
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/12/28/washington.governor.ap/index.html
wherever votes are counted, one is sure to find pissed-off republicans.
Huh? You should use your time on someting else TH! Just wait for few years and the president changes.
You don't have to let go of one rope before grabbing the other. But you'll have to let go of one if you want to swing forward.
I close my eyes, and all I can hear is the sheep noises.
$40 Million for Inauguration - $35 Million for Tsunami
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2879135
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6679533/#041229a
I think I may have just been converted. (from 3rd party, I never seemed to share the views of either party until I saw most of this) Now I feel undereducated. I am almost speechless, but not quite enough to not type this.
The world is a nasty place... *shudder*
Speaking of sickening plots...y'all seen this?
http://www.freedomunderground.org/memoryhole/pentagon.php#Main[/quote]
I have seen that many times before DD, but I have not seen it enough.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/pdfs/Mitofsky4zonedata/
math heads: looks like the exit polls have been leaked.
Seems to be breaking stuff:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/12/31/16138/255
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00142.htm
Last edited: Friday, December 31, 2004 at 6:44:23 PM
""... A server at Edison/Mitofsky malfunctioned shortly before 11 p.m. The glitch prevented access to any exit poll results until technicians got a backup system operational at 1:33 a.m. Yesterday.
The crash occurred barely minutes before the consortium was to update its exit polling with the results of later interviewing that found Bush with a one-point lead. Instead, journalists were left relying on preliminary exit poll results released at 8:15 p.m., which still showed Kerry ahead by three percentage points.
It was only after the polls had closed in most states and the vote count was well underway in the East that it became clear that Bush was in a stronger position in several key battlegrounds, including Ohio, than early exit polls suggested."
Which is why the following data study by Jonathan Simon of verifiedvoting.org is so remarkable.
As it turns out this study was only possible because of the computer crash reported by the Washington Post. While the boffins fiddled with their computers Simon - with a considerable degree of foresight - downloaded as much data as he could off the publicly available sites.
Simon noticed an overall red shift (to Bush) across the spectrum of states, but the shift was significantly nonuniform.
Having divided the 47 states examined into two groups, 35 noncritical states and 12 critical or suspect states (Nebraska included because of ES&S control and prior anomalies even though not a battleground state).
I calculated that the average discrepancy in the 35 safe states was a +1.4% red shift, that is the average of the vote totals in each state was 1.4% more favorable to Bush than what the exit polls predicted (= total movement of 2.8%).
In the 12 critical states (CO,FL,MI,MN,NE,NV,NH,NM,OH,PA,WI,IA) the average discrepancy was a 2.5% red shift (= total movement of 5.0%), nearly twice that in the safe states. This in spite of the fact that the average sample size in the critical states was nearly twice that in the noncritical states and should have produced significantly more accurate results."
I have been waiting for the "other shoe to drop" ever since the PTT liberal-vs-conservative debates started way back before the election.
Never has. So, now I will drop the other shoe. I have a question...
What happened to all the old-school Democrats that hated totalitarian governments?
The word liberal used to come from the root "liberate" and was used in the context of protecting the most basic freedoms. Not freedom from the threat of the American right or the freedom for downtrodden here at home or for a near-extinct species (whales, for example), but freedom from repressive governments.
There has been a huge shift in the Democratic thinking and I don't get it. I am at the point of thinking that I could push all the "hot" buttons (Iraq, ID creation, gay rights, etc.) and the trump card of the Democratic Party will never get played!
So you explain it to me, eh?
What I think is best described in two long articles:
"An Argument for a New Liberalism" by Peter Beinart
"Holland Daze" by Christopher Caldwell
They are long articles, so I will give you the gist. (The first is a good read; the second is to skim, but has some good insights.)
In the 1940s, the Democrats were almost in the same political climate as today. Except there were two voices within the Democratic Party and the hard-line group won.
Hard-liners said: "Free society and totalitarianism today struggle for the minds and hearts of men..." The Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) said "...the interests of the United States are the interests of free men everywhere" The ADA would oppose any ideology "hostile to the principles of freedom and democracy on which the Republic has grown great."
The soft liners back then were pushed aside. Do these soft liners rule the DNC today?
They seem to. Several examples from the article:
1. "MoveOn see threats to liberalism only on the right...It urged its supporters to participate in protests co-sponsored by International Answer, a front for World Workers Party, which defended Saddam, Milosevic, and Kim Jong IL."
When challenged Eli Pariser said: "I'm personally against defending Milosevic and calling North Korea a socialist heaven, but its just not relevant right now."
2. Michael Moore in Dude, Where's My Country says "There is no terrorist threat...Why has our government gone to such absurd lengths to convince us our lives are in danger?" In other words, the totalitarian threat of radical Islam is a "phantom, a ruse employed by the only enemies that matter, those on the right. Saudi extremists may have brought down the Twin Towers, but the real menace is the Carlyle Group."
Those are just a few quotes...
The DNC totally missed the 2004 election because it could not understand totalitarian threats as the 1940s Dems did. IOW, this "issue" was not a cause.
Think this is not a point? Look at what is happening in Holland right now. It is well described in the “Holland Daze” (luv that title) article. The liberal government there tried to absorb extreme Islam and is now in a real pickle, with public opinion swinging crazy.
Now, before I hear the "slippery slope" argument, remember the anti-totalitarian thing used to be a plank for the donkey party. Hee Haw.
Too bad or too good, it isn't now: Too bad for the future of the Democratic Party. Very good for the Republican Party. Ignore the threat to your own political peril.
Last edited: Monday, January 03, 2005 at 8:00:43 AM
I don't know, dude, my limited political knowledges tells me there are more fissures occurring than there are conglomerations.
Both parties are being polar; the left, as you describe above, and the right, with its center being yanked around by the religious cats who currently run the show (see: arlen specter). Apparently much of that is going on.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/
for daily juice. The current top article is an interesting read.
hopefully, someone somewhere left of the current theocrats will sprout some courage in their nad region and put a foot or two down. Social security, iraq, the judges, aide to the east.... Bush thinks he has political capital to spend, what with his second stolen election and majorities all about. If we're lucky, our elected politicians will stop representing lobbies and their bank accounts and start getting to work.
protest the electoral vote, anyone?
Anyone?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/3/2058/70237
*unrelated stuff*
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x2892988
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/2/222859/9927
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6777696/site/newsweek/
Jan. 10 issue - It was a little after 7 p.m. On election night 2004. The network exit polls showed John Kerry leading George Bush in both Florida and Ohio by three points. Kerry's aides were confident that the Democratic candidate would carry these key swings states; Bush had not broken 48 percent in Kerry's recent tracking polls. The aides were a little hesitant to interrupt Kerry as he was fielding satellite TV interviews in a last get-out-the-vote push. Still, the 7 o'clock exit polls were considered to be reasonably reliable. Time to tell the candidate the good news.
Kerry had slept only two hours the night before. He was sitting in a small hotel room at the Westin Copley (in a small irony of history, next door to the hotel where his grandfather, a boom-and-bust businessman, shot himself some 80 years ago). Bob Shrum, Kerry's friend and close adviser, couldn't resist the moment. "May I be the first to say 'Mr. President'?" said Shrum.
And an interview with tutu;
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6769668/site/newsweek/
You said George Bush should admit that he made a mistake. Were you surprised at his re-election?
[Laughs] I still can't believe that it really could have happened. Just look at the facts on the table: He’d gone into a war having misled people—whether deliberately or not—about why he went to war. You would think that would have knocked him out [of the race.] It didn’t. Look at the number of American soldiers who have died since he claimed that the war had ended. And yet it seems this doesn't make most Americans worry too much. I was teaching in Jacksonville, Fla., [during the election campaign] and I was shocked, because I had naively believed all these many years that Americans genuinely believed in freedom of speech. [But I] discovered there that when you made an utterance that was remotely contrary to what the White House was saying, then they attacked you. For a South African the déjà vu was frightening. They behaved exactly the same way that used to happen here [during apartheid]—vilifying those who are putting forward a slightly different view.
Last edited: Monday, January 03, 2005 at 12:18:44 AM
Page : 1 : <2>
: :
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=548&ncid=703&e=7&u=/ap/20041211/ap_on_el_ge/voting_problems
I am curious what it would take for this situation to be taken seriously. As with al gore in 2000, if the situation was reversed, the republicans would be launching killer volcano rocks from capitol hill.