Election rigged? Nah ;)

Re: Election rigged? Nah ;)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"K@t 5\")</div>

[font=&quot]Is it just me, or does all of this constitute cheating? Furthermore, isn?t most of this illegal? There was no way that vote stacking (which is what you described Darkwolf) could possibly have caused the type of voting frenzy that everyone seems to think that it did. Remember, only about 20% of our nation?s population happens to be Christian fundamentalist. That leaves about 80% of the population who sits and decides on other factors. Several scholars and staticians are throwing a fit and amazingly no one seems to notice. As we say in the computer sector when it comes to troubleshooting a problem: most of the time, the simplest answer is the correct one[/font].[/b]
Click to expand...

This might make some sense if every citizen voted. As it is though, this feels like some kind of slam on Christians and an insult to average Americans.

Anyone seen the book "What's Wrong With Kansas"? It's author postulates that there must be something wrong with Kansans because they regularly vote against what the author percieves as there own best interests.

As an aside, politics and politicians have always operated in the way Darkwolf described and they always will. It's just that because of computers they now have it down to an exact science. Previously they could (and did) call their opponent a drunk or the father of a bastard child or something along those lines, the story varying from whistlestop to whistlestop.
 
Re: Election rigged? Nah ;)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Harte\")</div>
This might make some sense if every citizen voted. As it is though, this feels like some kind of slam on Christians and an insult to average Americans.

Anyone seen the book \"What's Wrong With Kansas\"? It's author postulates that there must be something wrong with Kansans because they regularly vote against what the author percieves as there own best interests.

As an aside, politics and politicians have always operated in the way Darkwolf described and they always will. It's just that because of computers they now have it down to an exact science. Previously they could (and did) call their opponent a drunk or the father of a bastard child or something along those lines, the story varying from whistlestop to whistlestop.[/b]
Click to expand...

I?m sorry that you feel that way, as no slam was intended. What I was saying is that everyone is touting that the election was won because of ?moral issues?. It is a well-known fact that bush caters to the fundamentalists as well. This does not cover all Christians. Most will never behave in the fanatical manner that these men portray. And just for the record, no one ever slammed on the average American. In fact, I specifically said that the other 80% of the population decides on other factors. Not just religious pandering. This means that the other portion of Americans out there can and do think for themselves. Just looking around this forum should prove that to any and all who might think otherwise.



As for the way that the politicians operate, just because they do that, doesn?t make it right. Don?t we teach our children that this is not proper behavior? How do we expect them to grow up into decent human beings when those they see in the forefront of the leaders they are taught about behave no better than a toddler who just had his ball taken away?
 
Re: Election rigged? Nah ;)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"K@t 5\")</div>
I?m sorry that you feel that way, as no slam was intended. What I was saying is that everyone is touting that the election was won because of ?moral issues?. It is a well-known fact that bush caters to the fundamentalists as well. This does not cover all Christians. Most will never behave in the fanatical manner that these men portray. And just for the record, no one ever slammed on the average American. In fact, I specifically said that the other 80% of the population decides on other factors. Not just religious pandering. This means that the other portion of Americans out there can and do think for themselves. Just looking around this forum should prove that to any and all who might think otherwise.
?
As for the way that the politicians operate, just because they do that, doesn?t make it right. Don?t we teach our children that this is not proper behavior? How do we expect them to grow up into decent human beings when those they see in the forefront of the leaders they are taught about behave no better than a toddler who just had his ball taken away?[/b]
Click to expand...

I do see your point, only I wish to point out that you leave yourself open to the charge of Christian bashing. For example, you imply that fundamentalists cannot think for themselves. Isn't it possible for a person to come to the fundamentalist viewpoint after a process of thinking for himself? This is similar to the outrageous implication that there is something wrong with the average citizen of Kansas as I mentioned before.

By the way, I read an editorial response to that book entitled "What's the Matter With Central Park West?" Apparently the entire (100%) CPW neighborhood voted for Kerry, notwithstanding the fact that the CPW population is primarily made up of big business movers and shakers, supposedly all solid Bush supporters.

It would be more correct to say the remainder of the voting population decides on other factors. We who don't vote based on religious issues do not constitute the remaining 80% of the population, I assure you. Anyway, it is absolutely true to assert that the Republicans pander to the fundamentalists. That's the same as saying that they wish to be re-elected. Any large voting bloc is pandered to by one side or the other.

As far as the media reporting that the election was won on "moral issues", that was really a stretch for them. If I recall correctly, the polling showed people based their vote on several things and many of these issues were lumped together with "moral issues". Even then, "moral issues" was barely leading that poll over security issues (I think). It was disingenuous of the media to overblow the effect of moral issues on the outcome of the election in my mind.

Lastly, I agree with you that politicians are mostly to be reviled. I certainly wouldn't want my kids to enter that field, at least not at the State or Federal level. In order to be successful in big time politics, you have to do things that would turn my stomach. Once my kids are a little older, I will be pointing out to them every inconsistency, every lie, every bit of posturing and all the cynicism I see in politics so they can laugh at them the way I do.
 
Re: Election rigged? Nah ;)

Politicians are what leaders become who are either unqualified at the outset, and put into leadership positions by puppeteers (e.g., both Bushes), or, lacking other internal substance, quickly degenerate into the role to gain office.

It is true that the enormous problems facing us right now are partly the result of putting people into office who are not morally qualified to be leaders because they are politicians-- although it may be that some of the best leaders are the ones who can be both.

I think that this is why they keep talking about "moral issues" in the last election-- it certainly couldn't be because either of the dolts put up for office were moral paragons or had any particular "respect for life." Americans yearn for genuine moral leadership, and get, instead, pirates and snakeoil salesmen.

Americans didn't vote because they live in blue or red States, or along the lines of who they think will inaugurate a New Jerusalem on the Potomac. They voted prompted by what always prompts them: who is going to safeguard the country, which to them includes everything from the price of gas to the value of two thousand people trapped in a skyscraper.

What is the value-- speaking of "values"-- after all, of having one person president instead of another? With the pairs they keep giving us, it doesn't matter which you choose. Everyone says this: everyone. You all say it here. I hear it every day. You pick one: its a crap shoot. You play a hunch.

Right now, the smart money is on Bush-- despite having apparently whipped the donkey fellow-- making quite an ass of himself when his whole act is exposed. There will be nothing quite as dramatic to watch as millions of Americans becoming greatly disillusioned, all at once.

It's the "moral issue," you see: one of these days, we will all altogether realize that he is a big, fat, liar. You think you know who the "conservatives" are now? Think you can spot a "liberal?" Wait til the boom is lowered before you decide who is on your side and which side you're on.
 
Re: Election rigged? Nah ;)

At this point in time, liberal and conservative are rather meaningless. Those are simply tags that the politicians have put on themselves and us to keep about 50% of the population at the throat of the other half and vice versa. It strikes me that the complaints leveled against Clinton by the right are now being leveled at Bush from the left. They are both correct, but the right wingers are not angry at bush for doing the same things as Clinton. The left won't be angry an Clinton 2 for doing the same and worse things as Bush. They've got us divided for the conquering.
 
Re: Election rigged? Nah ;)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Harte\")</div>
I do see your point, only I wish to point out that you leave yourself open to the charge of Christian bashing. For example, you imply that fundamentalists cannot think for themselves. Isn't it possible for a person to come to the fundamentalist viewpoint after a process of thinking for himself? This is similar to the outrageous implication that there is something wrong with the average citizen of Kansas as I mentioned before.[/b]
Click to expand...
It?s interesting to come across someone who can step forward and show me twists of the ways that I think when most others won?t come close to touching these issues. For that I thank you. I want to stress that I wasn?t attacking Christians. For some reason you seem to feel that I was. I have no beef with Christians or their beliefs. What I have a beef with are people using that as a smokescreen to commit atrocities that wouldn?t fly otherwise. As with other groups, this is a case of a few making a bad name and image for the many. The more prominent players in this particular drama that we are watching unfold will state over and over, louder each time, that what they are doing is in the name of God, is the will of God. This will always grab the attention of those who will not think for themselves and those are the people who will parrot anything that goes along with their narrow way of thinking. Does this happen with other issues? Of course it does. This particular round in the ring just happens to draw attention to this one area of life. It doesn?t really matter how you come to a certain point of view ? whether or not you choose or someone pushed you toward it. What matters is whether or not you allow it to cloud your good sense and sense of propriety. You apparently are not one of the latter.

This is certainly one of the areas in politics that is very touchy, but needs to remain separate. There is definitely a need to separate church and state. The last time the two were combined, we lost too much knowledge because of fear and people were burned at the stake. While no one has been bound to a pole as of yet, people are being ostracized because their feelings and beliefs are different. Tolerance is a thing of the past. This is not something we, as a society, should be striving for.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Harte\")</div>
It would be more correct to say the remainder of the voting population decides on other factors. We who don't vote based on religious issues do not constitute the remaining 80% of the population, I assure you. Anyway, it is absolutely true to assert that the Republicans pander to the fundamentalists. That's the same as saying that they wish to be re-elected. Any large voting bloc is pandered to by one side or the other. [/b]
Click to expand...
Somehow, I botched this one too. That?s essentially what I meant by what I said. I?ll try to be more clear on this in the future. I am, however, a little confused by something you said. The remaining 80% of the population doesn?t vote based on other issues?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Harte\")</div>
As far as the media reporting that the election was won on \"moral issues\", that was really a stretch for them. If I recall correctly, the polling showed people based their vote on several things and many of these issues were lumped together with \"moral issues\". Even then, \"moral issues\" was barely leading that poll over security issues (I think). It was disingenuous of the media to overblow the effect of moral issues on the outcome of the election in my mind. [/b]
Click to expand...
Just as an aside here, the media weren?t the only ones to state this. Bush himself stated this.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Harte\")</div>
Lastly, I agree with you that politicians are mostly to be reviled. I certainly wouldn't want my kids to enter that field, at least not at the State or Federal level. In order to be successful in big time politics, you have to do things that would turn my stomach. Once my kids are a little older, I will be pointing out to them every inconsistency, every lie, every bit of posturing and all the cynicism I see in politics so they can laugh at them the way I do.[/b]
Click to expand...
It?s good to know that someone is willing to teach their kids to think for themselves and not believe everything they are told. ;)
 
Re: Election rigged? Nah ;)

It?s good to know that someone is willing to teach their kids to think for themselves and not believe everything they are told.
wink.gif
Click to expand...



Which means that they are exactly the kind of people we want in politics.
__________________
 
Re: Election rigged? Nah ;)

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(\"Darkwolf\")</div>
Which means that they are exactly the kind of people we want in politics.
__________________[/b]
Click to expand...
Do I smell a nomination here? ;)
 

Top