The legacy of 'W'?

[FRPLG]

Here's a link to WaPo's reporting on Fla's statewide "recount".

Florida Recounts Would Have Favored Bush (washingtonpost.com)

Couple of things:

It shows Gore may have won had ALL of the disputed votes, 175,010 to be exact, in the entire state been counted. By 171 votes at most.

The "recount" was not actually a recount but a study sponsored and conducted by various news media.

My problems with they way Crazyhorse is using this are several fold.

It seems CH that you are asserting that this study shows that Gore actually won the state when in fact it shows nothing of the sort. It shows when only the disputed votes are recounted by hand that Gore wins. It says nothing about all the other non-disputed votes which surely have mistakes numbering in the hundreds at least. Statistically that is certian. Who knows, these votes could fall for Gore or maybe not but in the end the 171 margin produced by counting only a small portion of the votes, disputed or not, is competely insignificant. Heck the article points out that basically we'll never know. So don't use this supposed "recount" in your arguments without properly understanding it please.

As for the disenfranchised non-felons. The info I found while Googling showed the number to be 8,000. Not 80,000. Not insiginificant by any means but someone so in the know, educated, and stuck on facts I thought you should know that your number is wrong. Also my researching, short as it was, didn't really lead me to believe that some type of conspiracy was perpetrated. It seems likes a regular old screw up.

Now I did find some info that had actual felons been allowed to vote Gore would have won by 80,000 votes. Maybe CH is confusing his number with this one. Imagine that, convicted felons voting for Gore. Who'd have thought?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by RobH4413

I've always loved John McCain.

Poor guy has zero chance now.

I think he could make a great President, but he seems to be a terrible politician

[SmootSmack]

What was this thread about again?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Crazyhorse1

You are unintentionally showing that you don't know how the ballot was designed. Also, your remark seems to be that of a racist, since ballot confusion was pretty much limited to minority districts.

I know you probably aren't exactly a racist, but you do seem to be suffering from the delusion that dems are stupid. You should acquaint yourself with the ballot's design before making pronouncements.

By the way, studies show dems more likely to achieve advanced degrees than republicans.

The ballot was perfectly clear in relation to where to vote for Bush. How to vote for Gore and not Buchanan was unclear. The poor design was probably accidental.

The ballot's design probably did cost Gore the election but it was only one of many things. Others things were probably not accidental. The case for Fraud is not affected one way or another by the ballot controversy. Nor does the fact that Gore received more votes in Florida rely in any way in counting those lost votes for Gore.

Gore had more votes in Florida than Bush anyway. The materials I've cited are pretty clear about that. Try reading them again.

I think many of you guys must be very young. You seem not to be aware of the basics of the election controversy. I was fifty six at the time. People usually don't start following the news in any detail until their forties.

I don't think he was making a statement about the intelligence of the voters. I think he was trying to show how your argument seems to basically prove that only Democrats were dumb enough screw the ballot up. I am not saying that but your argument could lead someone to think that. I know the ballot was screwy and probably moreso towards Gore but I seriously think you read way too much into his post. He was simply pointing out how the mechanics of your argument make the argument seem indicting of democratic intelligence.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by jsarno

I find it interesting that the Democrats are throwing every kind of minority they can into the ring. (not that they are doing it on purpose, just how it fell this year)
1- Clinton - female
2- Obama - African American
3- Richardson - Mexican
So if they are going to win the white house back, they are going to have to do it in a HUGE an unprecidented way.

FYI- I could get on board with Obama, but not those other two. You guys have no idea how bad Richardson is. It's like SS knowing Stewart, I have met Richardson on several occasions, and he is one horrible person. He has hurt this state a lot.

They don't have to do jack because Republicans have molested the nation for the past 12 years. You would like to see people get on board with the democrats but the sad truth people are going to vote against Republicans more so than vote for Democrats.

As for Richardson, he's a recycled old timer I don't like recycling head coaches and I certainly don't like recycled politicians.

I actually did some volunteer work for Obama last weekend and was quite surprised how white people in general felt about him. They really liked him and I was taken aback quite a bit. It was an amazing experience really to hear what they thought about him. This is in the Northwest which is a little bit different from the rest of the country...we'll see how he does against Hilary.

I'm curious, in what way has Richardson hurt Arizona?

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by saden1

This is in the Northwest which is a little bit different from the rest of the country

I am pretty dubious of the rest of this country in this regard. I tend to wonder if even Hillary has a chance in a general election. I know a lot of people I would be suprised if they voted for either simply because I don't see them voting for a woman or a black. Sad but true. I hope I am wrong, even though I wouldn't voted for either, but I strongly suspect that their race and gender are going to be bigger factors than everyone wants to believe.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Good points. I don't think Gore should run, I just have this feeling he and Newt will enter the fray this fall. Could be wrong though.

I think I should accept that McCain is done now so I must look elsewhere. Who would be the VP on your Obama ticket?

I think I would make a great VP therefore I should be on his ticket. No seriously, I don't know but I would get excited about Harold Ford Jr. Anyone ethical and with great character would do though.

[Crazyhorse1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

You didn't show you were right about it. You posted a link from one side, just like I (in fairness) posted a link from the other.

I don't blame him for blocking, or wanting to block, you. If I am to be perfectly candid. I think you offer nothing of value to this site. Clearly, all you want to do is constantly push your anti-Bush agenda (so much so that I think you even embarrass those who are philosophically on your side), and berate and belittle those who have the audacity to disagree with Mr. College Professor with a Master's Degree. Hopefully, as the season rolls around you will remember why this site primarily exists; to discuss the Washington Redskins. But I find it curious that you've started nearly 40 threads on multiple Redskins message boards and only two had anything to do with the Redskins.

Admittedly, I am a Republican (Moderate Republican I suppose) but I can respect healthy debate with the Mattyk's, SGG's, Dmek's, and 12thMan's of the world. Sure it can get heated and I get annoyed by what they say sometimes. A lot of times in Dmek's case (no offense D) but at least I know they want to discuss, not preach. I can't say the same for you. But this has nothing to do with your views. It's the arrogance behind the views. You're like a liberal Ann Coulter

I don't know you personally obviously, nor do I care to quite frankly. Of course, many others here feel the same I'm sure. Just as I'm sure there are those who feel that way about me. I'd like to think though that if I stopped posting on this site, something of value would be lost. I understand that I do post a lot of nonsensical stuff (and especially in the off-season) but I think that's balanced by compelling posts and threads (not to toot my own horn too loudly). Again, I can't say the same for you.

What's worse is that, as a professor you're seemingly influencing the minds of tomorrow. I can only hope that those students are smart enough to challenge you (whether to confirm you're right or prove that you're wrong), and that you're enough of a professor to allow them to challenge you.

I have higher degrees than Master's Degrees and teach graduate students. Most of them already have Master's Degrees and are too smart for me to challenge most of the time. I'm 63 and have written a number of books and have over a thousand other publications, all of which I have had to research. I basically guide others in researching and writing their own books and take matters of the mind very seriously.
I'm not writing about football now because there's nothing new going on in football, Right now, we have the untimely deaths of my ex-students and could-be students and others in Iraq, for all the wrong reasons. My method of trying to combat this is to challenge ignorance, propaganda, assumptions, phony data, and expose the lies and myths that currently infect our culture and cause death, as well as endanger our Bill of Rights and Constitution.
This particular thead has been littered by data that is not only utterly garbage but dangerous. It's my duty to challenge it.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by FRPLG

I am pretty dubious of the rest of this country in this regard. I tend to wonder if even Hillary has a chance in a general election. I know a lot of people I would be suprised if they voted for either simply because I don't see them voting for a woman or a black. Sad but true. I hope I am wrong, even though I wouldn't voted for either, but I strongly suspect that their race and gender are going to be bigger factors than everyone wants to believe.

If Hilary or Obama is nominated I would think the blue states would be behind the ticket but that's generally give. The states that really matter are Midwest states like Ohio and Michigan. That's really the rest of the country. The election comes down to those state's level or racism/sexism i guess.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Crazyhorse1

I have higher degrees than Master's Degrees and teach graduate students. Most of them already have Master's Degrees and are too smart for me to challenge most of the time. I'm 63 and have written a number of books and have over a thousand other publications, all of which I have had to research. I basically guide others in researching and writing their own books and take matters of the mind very seriously.
I'm not writing about football now because there's nothing new going on in football, Right now, we have the untimely deaths of my ex-students and could-be students and others in Iraq, for all the wrong reasons. My method of trying to combat this is to challenge ignorance, propaganda, assumptions, phony data, and expose the lies and myths that currently infect our culture and cause death, as well as endanger our Bill of Rights and Constitution.
This particular thead has been littered by data that is not only utterly garbage but dangerous. It's my duty to challenge it.

Wow, you're even more arrogant than I thought. "I have higher degrees than Master's Degrees" Goodness...thank you for blessing us with your presence here.

Graduate students at community colleges?

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by saden1

I think I would make a great VP therefore I should be on his ticket. No seriously, I don't know but I would get excited about Harold Ford Jr. Anyone ethical and with great character would do though.

Practically speaking though, could a Obama-Ford ticket realistically win though? Don't you think a relative novice like Obama would need someone like maybe a Joe Biden to balance out his ticket and cover a wider base?

[saden1]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Practically speaking though, could a Obama-Ford ticket realistically win though? Don't you think a relative novice like Obama would need someone like maybe a Joe Biden to balance out his ticket and cover a wider base?

That way of thinking did us a lot of good with Chaney as the VP. Then you have Kerry coming out now saying he should have listened to his gut feeling and shouldn't have picked Edwards.

My ideal ticket is not a realistic ticket for reasons quite obvious...lol. It would be a mistake for Biden to leave the senate for a VP position, that would be a demotion for him. I don't like the idea of picking a senator as a VP. He should probably pick a governor. Who? I don't know yet.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by saden1

That way of thinking did us a lot of good with Chaney as the VP. Then you have Kerry coming out now saying he should have listened to his gut feeling and shouldn't have picked Edwards.

My ideal ticket is not a realistic ticket for reasons quite obvious...lol. It would be a mistake for Biden to leave the senate for a VP position, that would be a demotion for him. I don't like the idea of picking a senator as a VP. He should probably pick a governor. Who? I don't know yet.

Yeah I hear what you're saying. What about Mark Warner?

[Redskins8588]

I think that we need to put Crazyhorse and SBF in a cage match...

[jsarno]

Originally Posted by saden1

They don't have to do jack because Republicans have molested the nation for the past 12 years. You would like to see people get on board with the democrats but the sad truth people are going to vote against Republicans more so than vote for Democrats.

Unfortunately, you're likely right. However, Bush was not very well liked going into 2004 and he won cause the dems threw up one HORRIBLE candidate in Kerry. If they do it again, I think the republicans will stay in power. (ps- I am a registered independant in case you missed it, I am only concerned for the well being of our country, and I am huge advocate for alternative fuels and animal rights.)
By the way...12 years? How so? It's been 7 under Bush, and the previous 8 years before that was Clinton.

I actually did some volunteer work for Obama last weekend and was quite surprised how white people in general felt about him. They really liked him and I was taken aback quite a bit. It was an amazing experience really to hear what they thought about him. This is in the Northwest which is a little bit different from the rest of the country...we'll see how he does against Hilary.

That's because Obama is about as black as Brunell. What percentage african american is he anyway?
Sad thing is he won't get the proper recognition cause you know that KKK type people that live in the deep south could care less what he has to say.

I'm curious, in what way has Richardson hurt Arizona?

That really is a loaded question, and trust me when I say I am exhausted with dealing with him. But I will say these two things, 1- he bankrupted the state within the first 4 months he was in office, and 2- he ceased funding to the senior citizens who depended on it to give more funding to single mothers having more babies. I'm getting annoyed just talking about him.