thank you
Published on November 6, 2004 By LeapingLizard In Politics
Thank you wisefawn. Sadly, I haven't had the time to put together the blog that suggests, if not proves, in my book, that elections hardly mean a thing anymore. A deal between the Bush Dynasty and the makers of so many of the electronic voting machines has been created. The same company that makes the voting machines will be installing a wave of ATM machines in Iraq. Big surprise. It figures. Like everything else the Bush Dynasty does, it's all about the power and money. Yuck.

If anyone is interested, here is the link to the article.
Link


Comments (Page 4)
4 PagesFirst 2 3 4 
on Nov 09, 2004
You "lefties" are the ones who are *totally* pathetic. You never seem to be able to quite grasp the basic fundamentals. But I will say this. Ya'll are persistant!


I hate those sweeping statements that include EVERYONE in certain group of people. I AM "lefty" I CAN AND DID grasp the basic fundamentals. Proof: Lack of articles from me trying to prove that 2004 ( and even 2000! ) voting was a fraud.

you pathetic conservatives


Another sweeping statement.
on Nov 09, 2004
XX:
Right on. I'm sick of the generalizations. Sick to death.
on Nov 10, 2004
I hate those sweeping statements


The ironing is delicious.



Hmm...sounds like we've got a lot of housework to do. Sweeping, ironing...will someone please take out the trash, because it's overflowing all over JU. Do the math: you righties + you lefties = you whiners.

I think the American Idol vote was rigged, didn't Jeb Bush say something about delivering Ruben Stoddart?
on Nov 10, 2004
And you don't see what you've said in this thread as whining?
on Nov 10, 2004
1) Honestly, I do not think there is any question that George Bush honestly won the election. I would be stunned if any contrary evidence showed up.

2) It is time to end the tradition of challenging election results. If something like this happens once, it is a fluke. Twice, and it is a tradition -- one that would amount to a fatal cancer on our type of government. Dependable succession is one of the necessities of government, and the fact that America has long assumed that we have it does not mean that we can affort to take it for granted.

3) All this aside, serious work is needed on our method of counting votes. As it stands, electronic voting machines are a calamity waiting to happen, and people on both sides of the aisle knew this before the election. Rather than challenging the 2004 election, our country needs to take the 2000 election as spur enough to give some serious thought to vote counting -- how to make manipulation by hackers, manufacturers, vote counters, etc as impractical as possible.
on Nov 10, 2004
It is time to end the tradition of challenging election results

I disagree.

serious work is needed on our method of counting votes

Yes

that would amount to a fatal cancer on our type of government

How so?
on Nov 10, 2004
And you don't see what you've said in this thread as whining?


Hmm....not really, moreso just a simple effort to try and get y'all to calm down and worry about more important things like what Jessica Simpson was wearing in the latest issue of People or how many grapes your best friend can fit into their mouth. Onward with the distractions!

Suspeckted

PS - Lizard, sorry I've picked your blog as a playground for my ADD and secondly I would like to inform you that the CEO of the Lovesac company is on that Rebel Billionaire show....thought you'd appreciate possessing such information.
on Nov 11, 2004
Lovesac! YeeHaw! I don't know what show that is, but thanks for the information.
I had one first. I had one first. La la la la la la. *stick out tongue*

ll
on Nov 13, 2004
that would amount to a fatal cancer on our type of government

How so?

A popular election places the public in the position of making the final determination. If, when the polls close, the real action is just beginning, then the power shifts away from the public.

You might wish that there is someone wise and benevolent and impartial who will walk in and make everything fair and just and accurate -- but that is not real life. In fact, the more we rely on judges and other officials to make important decisions in our elections, the more furious the infighting will be to place the "most reliable" individuals (to the party, not to impartiality) in those positions.

If you read up on the death of the Roman republic, you see exactly that process. Long before Augustus ended the republic, the elections had become shams where the winners had little credibility and civil war became the norm.

We have so long mouthed empty words about our perfect system of government, that we have lost the ability to discuss the attributes of a governmental system that works. One of the foremost attributes is that of succession. No country can long prosper if succession of power is not reliable and smooth.
on Nov 13, 2004
The extreme right negates the extreme left.
Only when the size of the two groups is equal.

Actually, I think that one of the effects of the media is that we analyze the "horse race" aspect of elections to death, and in doing so, we come up with abstractions that hide more than they illuminate. We come to see the most left leaning X million votes as canceling the most right leaning X million votes, thus obscuring the particular beliefs, changes in beliefs, and reasons for changing beliefs. We miss that what the middle voters believe today may be quite similar to what the "extreme" voters believed yesterday.

on Nov 13, 2004
The extreme right negates the extreme left

Really though, the spectrum is cyclical. The extremes have a lot in common.

Long before Augustus ended the republic, the elections had become shams where the winners had little credibility and civil war became the norm

Since we know this, what can we do from here?

ll
on Nov 13, 2004
Given the recent events on JU, should I be considering changing the title of this article?
on Nov 15, 2004
I've decided, no. Sorry WiseFawn. You'll be missed.
4 PagesFirst 2 3 4