Re: OT: Will Democrats Ever Be Democrats Again?


poisoned rose wrote:
marcus_gen@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

Supporters of Ralph Nader decry the "tweedle-dee-tweedle-dum" platforms
of both the Republican and Democratic candidates.

So, I guess this is your way of disputing my description of your "Anyone
but Bush or Kerrey" stance?

They also espouse
and support the policy positions of Nader. Therefore, when I write
about Ralph Nader in this forum, other ngs, in emails, and in
conversations directly with others, I am in favor of Ralph's positions
and against the candidacies of the two-party duopoly...a.k.a. the
Republicans and Democrats.

"Anyone but Bush or Kerrey," yet again.

What a hilarious tapdance. And what are these Nader policy positions you
support, again? Beyond "Anyone but Bush or Kerrey"?

Stop being so disingenuous...you're not very good at it. You know
exactly what is meant when someone says they support a candidate's
position. I don't vote for a candidate simply to not vote for
another(that's the Democrats' failed strategy), I vote for the
candidate because I agree with his hope and aspirations for the USA,
and his ideas for solving the myriad of problems our country is faced
with.

If you mind is so narrow that you can't perceive the answer to who
should be president does not lie only within the one party
duopoly...there is most likely very little that I can say to convince
you otherwise.

The issue at the core of the exchange between Donz and me was whether
Al Gore actually had enough votes to win the State of Florida. As I
pointed out to Donz, the consortium of newspapers that did a recount of
all Florida votes (not just selected counties) determined that Gore had
enough votes to defeat Bush even with a deduction of all third party
candidate votes from Gore's total. In other words, the amount of total
votes by Nader, Buchanan, and other third party candidates would not
have offset the margin of victory Gore had over Bush. That is what
Tribune Media Services, Robert C. Koehler, stated (among other things)
in the article leading off this thread. As state by Koehler, Gore
dropped the ball on contesting the election. Had he done so...he would
have been president. In essence, he let down his supporters, and
democracy in general.

This data has been disputed back and forth ad nauseum, and there is no
irrefutable, satisfactory conclusion. As usual, you're simply plucking
out the articles/editorials/studies which happen to support your own
position, and deeming them the absolute truth.

The conclusion drawn by this study has overwhelming support. I wasn't
even aware of it until 2002 or 2003. My gut feeling prior to that was
that the Democrats were foolish not to demand a total recount of all
votes, and fight to have that done. I was willing to stand by whatever
conclusion that fight might have brought...but they didn't even try.
If I were a Gore voter, I would be pissed. He let his supporters down.


Oddly, however, even though he
acknowledged that Gore would have won had he contested all of the
Florida vote, he continued to state that Nader caused Gore to lose.
This was a blatant contradiction by him. When I called him on it, he
merely repeated the contradiction. Therefore, I could only conclude
that he didn't quite get what I had been saying.

The obvious answer to this is that if Gore had received those votes from
Nader supporters, the "contesting" process would have been either easier
or not necessary at all.

In other words, no one should have voted outside the one party duopoly
because only the Republicans and Democrats deserve votes. Is that what
you are saying?

And while I heartily voted for Gore, I can't
really fault him for realizing that the extended "dispute" period had
become ridiculous, was terrible for national morale and was making the
United States look very silly to the rest of the world.

If I had voted for Gore, and he didn't go all the way in making sure he
had actually lost, I would fault him for giving away my vote merely
because he felt that the "extended disputeperiod had become ridiculous,
was terrible for national morale, and was making the United State look
silly to the rest of the world." You are stating that it was much
better, for the sake of appearances, not to count all the votes. Then,
you only have Gore to blame for Bush becoming president...cause Gore
won, and he didn't have the intestinal fortitude to prove his case.

Donz is a very intelligent, cogent poster, who I always enjoy posting
and responding to. I was not implying that Donz was slow or stupid or
incapable of understanding anything, but his duality on this issue is
very perplexing.

Right. When you said "You just don't get it," you weren't implying that
he was incapable of understanding anything. Right. You're
just..."perplexed."

For once, you've got it right... I wasn't implying that Donz is
incapable of understanding, and I am confused by his contradictory
statement.

Congratulations, it's about time you got something right.

Who knows, this might bode well for the future.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: According to the latest New York Times/CBS News Poll, Bushs approval rating dropped 13% since la
    ... Yet the official 2004 tallies showed Bush with 62 million votes, ... the Democrats achieved immense success at ... Exit polls showed Kerry solidly ahead of Bush in both the popular vote ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: PLEASE IGNORE THAT ONE! All screwed up, multi-duplicated text, ...
    ... the NORC study recounted the votes as ordered by the FSC in Gore vs. ... Since the media recount proved that Bush ... That would throw the vote into the ... why did the Democrats do this (you made the case against ...
    (comp.lang.lisp)
  • Re: OT The End of An Error
    ... For insight into Bush, don't miss Oliver ... I think you left out my state (Florida) and Mississippi. ... 500+ votes, with recount after recount, the last two 'deciding' ones ... where he demonstrates convincingly that Gore ...
    (rec.music.classical.recordings)
  • Re: OT - With the stroke of a pen
    ... Especially when counting of votes STOP ... and a decision was made as to who was president. ... to why people don't like Bush. ... what he said better than they liked what the Democrats said. ...
    (rec.arts.mystery)
  • Re: OT - With the stroke of a pen
    ... Especially when counting of votes STOP ... and a decision was made as to who was president. ... to why people don't like Bush. ... what he said better than they liked what the Democrats said. ...
    (rec.arts.mystery)