Why Perry Can't Win

[Unkotare]

[

It isn't about hotdogs, guy. It's about who got the most votes.

NO numbskull, no. I told you before to educate yourself on our electoral system. Not the one you wish we had, not the one your handlers at the DNC want you to promote, but the one we DO have. Is this too fucking hard for you to understand, kid?

Oh, I understand that we have a profoundly stupid system created by slaveholders who didn't like or want real democracy.

No, you don't understand. You are prevented from understanding by your ignorance of history and your avoidance of reality. You democrats lost the 2000 election. It's long since over and done with. Your bitterness and revisionism won't change that.

 

[Unkotare]

[

Or maybe if the maker of the voting machines in Ohio hadn't come out and said they could guarantee Ohio for Bush...

Funny how the voting machines always have problems when the democrat loses but work perfectly when the democrat wins. Huh...

 

[Seawytch]

[

Or maybe if the maker of the voting machines in Ohio hadn't come out and said they could guarantee Ohio for Bush...

Funny how the voting machines always have problems when the democrat loses but work perfectly when the democrat wins. Huh...

Walden "Wally" O'Dell was chief executive officer and chairman of the board of Diebold, a US-based security and financial products company.

He was an active fundraiser for George W. Bush's re-election campaign and wrote in a fund-raising letter dated August 13, 2003, that he was committed "to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President."​

Trust but verify...

 

[The Rabbi]

No, Bush didn't win the election. ...

You just admitted that he did. Come on kid, you finally stopped being stupid for a moment, even if just by accident, don't ruin it now.

Guy, if we counted votes instead of the ridiculous Electoral College, Al Gore would be President.

If the SCOTUS had actually followed the law instead of being Partisan, Al Gore would have been president.

Had Jeb Bush not purged black people from the voters rolls in Florida, Al Gore would be President.

Had their been an honest recount of the votes in Florida, Al Gore would be president.

Bush became president. He didn't "win". More Americans wanted Al Gore. Now, I voted for Bush in 2000, but the simple fact remains, Al Gore got more votes.

We should be ashamed to have won the presidency in such an underhanded, dishonest manner. If a Democrat won in such a manner, you'd be screaming bloody hell, and rightfully so.

George W. Bush lost the election. He was selected, not elected.

Republicans need to reconnect with middle America, not foist another silver spoon trust fund baby on the country and then be surprised when he loses.

Sorry, sonny. There was no recount that showed Al Gore winning. The Electoral College is how the president is chosen, as per the Constitution. You don't like that? Amend it.
But as it stands, Bush was duly elected President in 2000.

 

[The Rabbi]

[

Or maybe if the maker of the voting machines in Ohio hadn't come out and said they could guarantee Ohio for Bush...

Funny how the voting machines always have problems when the democrat loses but work perfectly when the democrat wins. Huh...

Walden "Wally" O'Dell was chief executive officer and chairman of the board of Diebold, a US-based security and financial products company.

He was an active fundraiser for George W. Bush's re-election campaign and wrote in a fund-raising letter dated August 13, 2003, that he was committed "to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President."​

Trust but verify...

Oh, that'\s the smoking gun all right. One employee of an enormous company supported Bush so the entire company was just a conspiracy to elect Bush.

Wow are you dumb.

 

[Seawytch]

The Electoral College is how the president is chosen, as per the Constitution. You don't like that? Amend it.

Just about halfway there...


California joins move to revamp Electoral College

 

[Full-Auto]

You just admitted that he did. Come on kid, you finally stopped being stupid for a moment, even if just by accident, don't ruin it now.

Guy, if we counted votes instead of the ridiculous Electoral College, Al Gore would be President.

If the SCOTUS had actually followed the law instead of being Partisan, Al Gore would have been president.

Had Jeb Bush not purged black people from the voters rolls in Florida, Al Gore would be President.

Had their been an honest recount of the votes in Florida, Al Gore would be president.

Bush became president. He didn't "win". More Americans wanted Al Gore. Now, I voted for Bush in 2000, but the simple fact remains, Al Gore got more votes.

We should be ashamed to have won the presidency in such an underhanded, dishonest manner. If a Democrat won in such a manner, you'd be screaming bloody hell, and rightfully so.

George W. Bush lost the election. He was selected, not elected.

Republicans need to reconnect with middle America, not foist another silver spoon trust fund baby on the country and then be surprised when he loses.

Sorry, sonny. There was no recount that showed Al Gore winning. The Electoral College is how the president is chosen, as per the Constitution. You don't like that? Amend it.
But as it stands, Bush was duly elected President in 2000.

chads all over


The Bob Rivers Show with Bob Spike and Joe

 

[Seawytch]

Funny how the voting machines always have problems when the democrat loses but work perfectly when the democrat wins. Huh...

Walden "Wally" O'Dell was chief executive officer and chairman of the board of Diebold, a US-based security and financial products company.

He was an active fundraiser for George W. Bush's re-election campaign and wrote in a fund-raising letter dated August 13, 2003, that he was committed "to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the President."​

Trust but verify...

Oh, that'\s the smoking gun all right. One employee of an enormous company supported Bush so the entire company was just a conspiracy to elect Bush.

Wow are you dumb.

I'm not, but Walden O'Dell certainly was. The CEO of the company making the voting machines in Ohio going on record saying he was committed to giving the state's electoral votes to a candidate? That doesn't bother you AT ALL? What if that candidate was Obama? Still okay with the CEO of a voting machine company saying it? Really?

Trust but verify...

 

[mudwhistle]

You have a very biased and jaded opinion of the GOP.

The Tea Party is an outsider when it comes to the GOP.

Not really:

Beginning in 2006 we interviewed a representative sample of 3,000 Americans as part of our continuing research into national political attitudes, and we returned to interview many of the same people again this summer. As a result, we can look at what people told us, long before there was a Tea Party, to predict who would become a Tea Party supporter five years later. We can also account for multiple influences simultaneously — isolating the impact of one factor while holding others constant.

Our analysis casts doubt on the Tea Party’s “origin story.” Early on, Tea Partiers were often described as nonpartisan political neophytes. Actually, the Tea Party’s supporters today were highly partisan Republicans long before the Tea Party was born, and were more likely than others to have contacted government officials. In fact, past Republican affiliation is the single strongest predictor of Tea Party support today.​

Which was pretty obvious from the start.

Besides....Republicans aren't like Democrats, Liberals, or Progressives. They don't have to change their stripes to become palatable to the public. They don't have to appear to be moderates to get their foot in the door.

Nonsense. There are dozens of examples one can point to, large and small. For example, Paul Ryan scrubbing use of the word "vouchers" from his Medicare issues page last year and re-branding it as "premium support" this year. Branding is at the heart of politics--there isn't a party or a person who doesn't do it.

Oh, so it's wrong to rename issues....like calling it revenue instead of tax-increases. Calling it Shared Sacrifice instead of wealth redistribution. Calling it investment instead of spending. Calling it affordable health care instead of Universal Health Care. Calling it climate-change instead of Global Warming.

People in glass houses should refrain from throwing stones.

Of course people in the Tea Party are biased. They would rather have smaller government that is less of a burden on the taxpayer rather then a bloated abusive centralized government that continues to spend us deeper and deeper into debt. If you want to call that being biased...so be it. That is what Tea Party members wanted to, in all respects, protest about, do something about. Republicans that turn out to be tax and spenders get the axe just like the Democrats. They want a system that works for the people not against the people.

They have a problem with all of the fat-cats in Washington living high on the hog, rolling around in limos and eating Chilean Sea-Bass while the rest of us lose our jobs and lose our homes and eventually lose our futures.

They don't like the direction we're going. They don't like a President that sits on his ass and waits for others to come up with ideas, then turns around and insults them.

They don't like corruption and crony-capitalism, picking winners and losers. They don't like government regulations designed to scare businesses and even force them out of business. They don't like restrictive policy that rewards slackers and punishes success.

They see the American Dream fading. They see the hope for the future dying. They see for the first time in their lives an America that won't be better for their children. They see a President that lies about his policies, saying nobody wants to take over GM and Chrysler....then takes them over and replaces their leadership. They see a President that says "there comes a time when you've made enough money" then tries to place ceilings on income of CEOs. This is as UnAmerican as you can get.

They see a President that finds fault in this country and our allies yet bows to the will of our enemies and accepts gifts from them while returning gifts from our allies.

They see a President that is encouraging an entitlement mentality in our kids and places more importance on Green programs when we need to be more competitive in the world market, chases away jobs and industry in favor of his anti-Climate Change restrictions. GE's CFBs are just one example. Restrictions on deep-sea drilling is another. Instead of becoming energy independent he's allowing our enemies to have the upper hand in the most important aspect of our planet by making us more and more dependent. Ending the Shuttle program without a replacement putting us at the mercy of the Russians.....which proved to be folly when they announced they would allow the International Space Station to fall into the sea.

The Tea Party wants to return to a more common-sense approach instead of this counter-productive pie-in-the-sky kumbiyah approach. The Tea Party wants the massive spending to stop. They want an America that is strong, not weak.

And what do they get for their concern for this country?

They're called Tea Baggers by the President himself and terrorists and racists by his representatives. Personally I think they've shown great restraint under withering attacks from his media and what are supposed to be our public servants.

 

[JoeB131]

Sorry, sonny. There was no recount that showed Al Gore winning. The Electoral College is how the president is chosen, as per the Constitution. You don't like that? Amend it.
But as it stands, Bush was duly elected President in 2000.

If you are one of these people who say a win is a win, that's fine and all.

I remember last year, the opening Bears-Lions game, where the Lions guy made this great play, and then the ref invalidated it for a really stupid reason. So essentially, the Lions were robbed. Now, as a Bears fan, got to say, I didn't feel good about that. That's not the way you WANT to win.

You want to win in a way that, "Yes, I made my case to the American people, and more of them voted for me."

Bush didn't do that. He lost the popular vote, and then engaged in months of legal shenanigans to turn a loss into a win, made all that more suspicious by the fact his brother was knee deep in the place where the shenaningans took place.

Our system is based in part on all agreeing on the results of elections, but you need that kind of certitude. We didn't have that in 2000, and Democrats and a lot of independents never considered Bush legit as a result.

And yes, we should either modify the constitution, or all the states should pass laws that their electoral votes automatically go to the winner of the popular vote nationally.

 

[Seawytch]

Like I said, almost halfway there...

California joins move to revamp Electoral College

 

[JoeB131]

No, you don't understand. You are prevented from understanding by your ignorance of history and your avoidance of reality. You democrats lost the 2000 election. It's long since over and done with. Your bitterness and revisionism won't change that.

Guy, it ain't about 'bitterness'.

Bush was a failed president. That's why Obama can get away with blaming him for eating his homework, even three years later. There will always be an asterisk after Bush's name the way there is one after John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes and Benjamin Harrison. (None of whom are considered even good presidents, much less legit ones. Two of them were related to guys who previous held the job, just like Bush.) Come on, you won't see many republicans even making half-hearted defenses of the guy these days, and some will even try to rewrite history and call him a liberal.

His illegitimacy was a large part of his failure. The media couldn't wait to turn on him, and after Katrina, they did just that.

And as the movement to abolish the Electoral College catches on at the state level, as SeaWytch has pointed out, that shit will never happen again.


I, however, look at the future. In the last four presidential elections, the GOP has gotten the following percentages of the vote

43 - 48 - 51 - 47. - Average - 47.25

The Democrat, on the other hand has gotten the following averages.

49- 49- 49 - 53 - Average - 50.

The electorate is trending more Democratic, and it will take an EXCEPTIONAL individual to take down an incumbant president. (Which I think we agree is the goal here, correct?)

But if you have your way, we'll nominate Romney, another Trust Fund baby who can't tell you how many mansions he owns, and doesn't seem to know if there are illegals working on the lawn there.

Oh, yeah, and belongs to a weirdo religion that believes Satan and Jesus were sharing bunk beds as kids on some place called Kolob.

 

[JoeB131]

Like I said, almost halfway there...

California joins move to revamp Electoral College

That's all good, but what are the other nine states? If they are all reliably blue states, I don't see that making a difference in preventing a repeat of the 2000 fiasco.

I would rather have a clearly written amendment to the constitution, which establishes what the new procedure would be.

What I'd really like to see is having something like France has. You have a general election with multiple parties participating, and if no one party gets 50%+1, you have a runoff between the top two vote getters.

I think that would rid us of the two-party system and the stranglehold extremists and special interests have on both parties.

 

[bitterlyclingin]

Perry greeted a fact finding delegation from California, seeking what Texas was doing to perhaps import it back to their state, by reciting Texas' list of economic accomplishments in the face of the nationwide depression. He closed his remarks with the phrase "This is Texas, not some state where a man can marry a man."
That alone, plus his opinions on same sex marriage, will have all Liberals salivating at the prospect of taking his scalp. The NYT, ground zero for same sex marriage, is going to be buying a lot of ink in its endeavor to achieve that scalp.

 

[The Rabbi]

Sorry, sonny. There was no recount that showed Al Gore winning. The Electoral College is how the president is chosen, as per the Constitution. You don't like that? Amend it.
But as it stands, Bush was duly elected President in 2000.

If you are one of these people who say a win is a win, that's fine and all.

I remember last year, the opening Bears-Lions game, where the Lions guy made this great play, and then the ref invalidated it for a really stupid reason. So essentially, the Lions were robbed. Now, as a Bears fan, got to say, I didn't feel good about that. That's not the way you WANT to win.

You want to win in a way that, "Yes, I made my case to the American people, and more of them voted for me."

Bush didn't do that. He lost the popular vote, and then engaged in months of legal shenanigans to turn a loss into a win, made all that more suspicious by the fact his brother was knee deep in the place where the shenaningans took place.

Our system is based in part on all agreeing on the results of elections, but you need that kind of certitude. We didn't have that in 2000, and Democrats and a lot of independents never considered Bush legit as a result.

And yes, we should either modify the constitution, or all the states should pass laws that their electoral votes automatically go to the winner of the popular vote nationally.

We arent talking about a football game.
There was no recount that ever showed Al Gore winning Florida. It was not Bush that started the shenanigans. Gore's team sent a planeload of lawyers to Fl when all this started. Their representatives began counting every ballot that wasn't clearly for Bush as a Gore ballot.
And they still lost.
The fact that the Left never considered Bush validly elected speaks to their own self-deception more than reality.
There is a reason we have an electoral college. It works just fine.
Bush was not the first president to lose the popular vote and still be elected, btw.

 

[JoeB131]

[
We arent talking about a football game.
There was no recount that ever showed Al Gore winning Florida. It was not Bush that started the shenanigans. Gore's team sent a planeload of lawyers to Fl when all this started. Their representatives began counting every ballot that wasn't clearly for Bush as a Gore ballot.
And they still lost.
The fact that the Left never considered Bush validly elected speaks to their own self-deception more than reality.
There is a reason we have an electoral college. It works just fine.
Bush was not the first president to lose the popular vote and still be elected, btw.

I'm not arguing that Gore's side was engaged in some bullshit, before and after the election, too. There was the attempt to throw out oversease votes and such. Both sides acted badly in Florida.

But you can't say a system that left us unsure who actually won 2 months after the election is a system that 'works fine'. It doesn't.

Now this thread is supposed to be about Perry, so I don't want to make it about the EC (I'm really trying to avoid that). But it's an awful system that distorts democracy, and cheats me out of my vote.

I would love to vote for Perry and against Obama, but you know what, I live in Illinois. Perry will probably not even invest money here, because no matter how bad it gets for Obama next year, he can probably count on winning his home state.

In short, the EC has disenfranchised me as a voter.

 

[Unkotare]

Sorry, sonny. There was no recount that showed Al Gore winning. The Electoral College is how the president is chosen, as per the Constitution. You don't like that? Amend it.
But as it stands, Bush was duly elected President in 2000.

If you are one of these people who say a win is a win, that's fine and all.

I remember last year, the opening Bears-Lions game, where the Lions guy made this great play, and then the ref invalidated it for a really stupid reason. So essentially, the Lions were robbed. Now, as a Bears fan, got to say, I didn't feel good about that. That's not the way you WANT to win.

You want to win in a way that, "Yes, I made my case to the American people, and more of them voted for me."

Bush didn't do that. He lost the popular vote, and then engaged in months of legal shenanigans to turn a loss into a win, made all that more suspicious by the fact his brother was knee deep in the place where the shenaningans took place.

Our system is based in part on all agreeing on the results of elections, but you need that kind of certitude. We didn't have that in 2000, and Democrats and a lot of independents never considered Bush legit as a result.

And yes, we should either modify the constitution, or all the states should pass laws that their electoral votes automatically go to the winner of the popular vote nationally.

It is beyond pathetic that you democrats can't get over an election you lost over a decade ago.

 

[Unkotare]

[

What I'd really like to see is having something like France has. .

Sounds like you would be a lot more satisfied living in France. Don't let us stop you...

 

[JoeB131]

It is beyond pathetic that you democrats can't get over an election you lost over a decade ago.

I think it's pathetic that anyone is still trying to paint Bush as a good president or that his stealing the election was a positive thing for America.

And I say that as a Republican.

The man was a fucking disaster. The only reason the GOP isn't completely extinct today and gone the way of the Whigs is that Obama has been an even bigger fucking disaster.

But some people never learn.

 

[BoycottTheday]

Sounds like you would be a lot more satisfied living in France. Don't let us stop you...

They do make some killer grilled cheese sandwiches there.