election (6 Viewers)

[ElderLemon]

on a slightly unrelated note...I think the Guardian campaign to write to a voter in Ohio was also an extremely arrogant and foolish ploy...they called it a "Democratic Toolkit" (George Orwell would have been proud)...and this has backfired and probably will lead more people to vote FOR Bush then against him.

No one likes being told what to do..Imagine people from all over the world sending letters to Irish households in which they explained why THEY think people should not vote for Bertie and FF. Imagine the backlash against foreigners trying to interfere in OUR democratic process... I don't think it would go down to well in our own backyard.

I think you're right... 'Outsider Psychology' .... Think Michael Lowry in North Tipp ... The Dublin papers did more for his vote than a year of canvassing....

 

[Vinnie]

Bush is the defender of the values of his supporters. He's not a rogue loony. His supporters have a very distinct 'us against them' ideology. It is something they revel in. Partisan politics are their raison d'etre and nobody since McCarthy has polarised the country in the way Bush has and this polarisation has given political credence to a substantial demographic. A voice for those inclined towards the politics of dogma, division and exaggeration which is what the icons of American democracy are built on.

 

[ITalkShite]

I think you're right... 'Outsider Psychology' .... Think Michael Lowry in North Tipp ... The Dublin papers did more for his vote than a year of canvassing....

Okay, you've answered him, now are you going to answer anybody else?

 

[billygannon]

Looks like Bush has won.
99% of votes counted in Ohio and he's got a lead of over 100,000 votes.

4 more years of bullshit.

 

[jane]

I think you're right... 'Outsider Psychology' .... Think Michael Lowry in North Tipp ... The Dublin papers did more for his vote than a year of canvassing....

Actually, I imagine few Americans even heard about that campaign. They don't pay much attention to what the Guardian says or does. I figure, a few people got letters, and then someone posted a link on a right-wing internet forum, and a few wackos wrote angry letters to the 'limey pricks'. I thought it was a bit of a nutso campaign, and an open-letter-to-the-American people sort of thing would have been more appropriate, but, again, it was probably very minor news.

 

[snakybus]

Lizzie dude, I was implying that it was a bad thing that you were using youth defence style tactics, duh

Elder Lemon, I can't believe that you're talking about Bush's pro-life stance as a reason to vote for him when he is plainly and clearly responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq (anyone got the numbers?). You speak of the Iraq situation as some kind of casual mistake, when it is clearly a pre-determined brutish, immoral, cowardly act. A facile pro-life stance by Bush is, and always has been, a vote-getter. Regardless of whether you're for it or against it, it was incidental as an issue in this election - as little as, as you say, the death penalty.

 

[ElderLemon]

There was a reallt high turnout in this election, and Bush won. Does that not tell us that people were quite keen on keeping him where he is, for whatever reason?

Kerry shows the problem with getting a senator to stand for election - good legislator/good debator, but maybe someone with a governorship behind them knows how to pitch their personal appeal a bit better.

Good point... Kerry's obviously a very intelligent guy and an excellent debater, but he has learnt his trade on the floor of the senate which by its very nature tends to be further removed from the immediate concerns of voters than maybe a congress rep. or a governor might be.

 

[jane]

"Dear Eye-wack,

I vewy saaawwwwy.

I did a oopsie.

Hope you feew bettaw soon.

Wuv,
Ameriker."

 

[Latex lizzie]

Lizzie dude, I was implying that it was a bad thing that you were using youth defence style tactics, duh

Elder Lemon, I can't believe that you're talking about Bush's pro-life stance as a reason to vote for him when he is plainly and clearly responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq (anyone got the numbers?). You speak of the Iraq situation as some kind of casual mistake, when it is clearly a pre-determined brutish, immoral, cowardly act. A facile pro-life stance by Bush is, and always has been, a vote-getter. Regardless of whether you're for it or against it, it was incidental as an issue in this election - as little as, as you say, the death penalty.

I know you were.

 

[snakybus]

I know you were.

yeah sure you did

 

[Latex lizzie]

I did honest. I gave you rep points and in the comment box I wrote "i am a shit"

 

[taubstumm]

(anyone got the numbers?)

specifically for violent deaths, not including any caused by disease, poverty, malnutrition, lack of potable water or other inevitable effects of violent aggression:

a statistically probable 98,000 in iraq, according to the lancet.

at least 14,219 confirmed by iraq body count as the lowest possible.

plus over 1,000 american troops.

several thousand in israel/palestine.

no reliable estimates for afghanistan.

 

[jane]

i don't think anyone here is a kerry supporter. americans had a choice between insanity and even more insanity, and went for the latter.

i'm not trying to be abusive in saying this; it just seems that a rational human being with access to some basic facts (and who isn't paralysed with fear or drunk with patriotism) would not vote for george w bush in a million years.

Actually, Tom, I would have been a Kerry supporter. His statements in his presidential campaign were really disappointing, as was his vote -- along with the rest of the Senate -- to give Bush the power to invade Iraq. If he'd presented himself as we in Massachusetts always knew him, as someone with one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate, I'd have been a much more ardent supporter. I also held out hope that he was actually saying these things -- ill-advised or not -- to get into office, and that, once he was in, he'd go back to the way he was.

In his presidential campaign, I can't say I supported him as wholeheartedly as I would have liked to, but I've still always thought he was pretty great, as politicians go.

 

[oh shit]

so america feels safer now... right?

 

[billygannon]

Good point... Kerry's obviously a very intelligent guy and an excellent debater, but he has learnt his trade on the floor of the senate which by its very nature tends to be further removed from the immediate concerns of voters than maybe a congress rep. or a governor might be.

Bush is an stupid man informed by evil money-grabbing oil barons.

The people who voted for Bush have been stupid to support him and they will regret their decision over the next four years.

I don't care if this is vitriolic. This is a bad day.

 

[dudley]

http://www.ananova.com/entertainment/story/sm_1156148.html?menu=

Sir Elton Sorry For Madonna Mime Taunt

Superstar Elton John says he will apologise to Madonna for accusing her of miming.

The 57-year-old star said the comments came "in the heat of the moment" and after a "very drunken lunch".

He told Entertainment Weekly magazine: "I don't want to escalate it because I like Madonna.

"It was something that was said in the heat of the moment, and probably should not have been said."

"Would I apologise to her if I saw her? Yeah, because I don't want to hurt any artist's feelings," he added.

Sir Elton's outburst came when he heard Madonna had been nominated for the Best Live Act during the Q awards in London earlier this month.

At the time he said: "Since when has lip-synching been live? Anyone who lip-synchs in public on stage when you pay £75 to see them should be shot."

Sir Elton said he was not going to mellow with age and would always speak his mind.

Madonna's spokeswoman Liz Rosenberg said: "She sang every note of her Re-invention tour live and is not ashamed that she was well-paid for her hard work."

 

[nEiLo]

it was a fix anyway....

 

[veryslowey]

 

[oh shit]

Actually, Tom, I would have been a Kerry supporter. His statements in his presidential campaign were really disappointing, as was his vote -- along with the rest of the Senate -- to give Bush the power to invade Iraq. If he'd presented himself as we in Massachusetts always knew him, as someone with one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate, I'd have been a much more ardent supporter. I also held out hope that he was actually saying these things -- ill-advised or not -- to get into office, and that, once he was in, he'd go back to the way he was.

In his presidential campaign, I can't say I supported him as wholeheartedly as I would have liked to, but I've still always thought he was pretty great, as politicians go.

yeah, karl rove is pretty smart. bush focused on his conservative base, leaned to the right, then appealed to the middle at the very end.
but i think that in the current climate, an appeal to new england liberalism wouldn't have held much sway in the midwest swing states...
moot points.

 

[P. Littbarski]

Hey jane...are you still eligible to vote in america (I'm just assuming that you have american citizenship but i could be wrong)...

how does the postal vote thing work ? are they counted before the main votes (assuming that they need to be sent before a certain date) or after voting has finished ?