OK, we know who won (or: Does God exist?)

Leaf · Post by **Leaf** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 1:15 pm

TERESA HEINZ KERRY ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL

At a press conference today,Teresa Heinz Kerry, wife of Democratic Presidential nominee John Kerry, announced that she's going to be on
the campaign trail with her husband! "To prepare myself," she said, "I have shaved off all my pubic hair.

From now until the election, I shall sit on the stage with John, and may occasionally flash my legs apart without wearing any panties.

This will send a strong message to America."

"Just what is that message, Mrs. Kerry?" gasped astonished reporters at the news of this rather startling announcement.

To which Teresa replied, "READ MY LIPS, NO MORE BUSH!"

Poor June · Post by **Poor June** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 5:41 pm

i dont' know... i'm paranoid of either one winning... i will not vote screw that... i'd almost prefer bush to stay... just cause i know what he's gonna do... i don't know what the hell kerry has in mind...

he seems like the biggest douche bag alive...

and yet i really dislike bush 2....

i'm too broken between the two to give a shit... i hate politics...

either way much fear of the next four years... canada looks nicer each and everyday... :::nods:::

Jim of Seattle · Post by **Jim of Seattle** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:10 pm

Just go vote for Kerry then, in honor of all your Songfight friends, who support him over Bush overwhelmingly.

MouthReliant · Post by **MouthReliant** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:16 pm

If you hate both these motherfuckers, as I do, perhaps you'll join me in voting for Badnarik?

http://www.badnarik.org

Poor June · Post by **Poor June** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:29 pm

Jim of Seattle wrote:Just go vote for Kerry then, in honor of all your Songfight friends, who support him over Bush overwhelmingly.

i'm glad y'all put up with me... and y'all deffinately are cool... but i don't wanna feel responsible when either one gets into office... cause i can only see bad shit happenin' in the next four years... either way...

Poor June · Post by **Poor June** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:41 pm

MouthReliant wrote:If you hate both these motherfuckers, as I do, perhaps you'll join me in voting for Badnarik?

http://www.badnarik.org

uhm... i'm goin' have to check into it... what i've read so far seemed cool... i do wanna know it's views on abortion though

Poor June · Post by **Poor June** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:52 pm

Poor June wrote:
MouthReliant wrote:If you hate both these motherfuckers, as I do, perhaps you'll join me in voting for Badnarik?

http://www.badnarik.org
uhm... i'm goin' have to check into it... what i've read so far seemed cool... i do wanna know it's views on abortion though

uhm... just read up on all of it... sounds pretty good actually... i don't agree with abortion... but ehhh i guess it's one of those things that you can't really fight if you are goin' for an go by your own rules sort of stand...

i am curious to know how they would make most of this stuff possible...

mkilly · Post by **mkilly** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:55 pm

Poor June wrote:i am curious to know how they would make most of this stuff possible...

you don't vote a libertarian for president because you think he'll be able to do what he says. you do it because you agree with his principles.

Poor June · Post by **Poor June** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:02 pm

mkilly wrote:
Poor June wrote:i am curious to know how they would make most of this stuff possible...
you don't vote a libertarian for president because you think he'll be able to do what he says. you do it because you agree with his principles.

tis true... which i do agree with most of his principles... but to actually take government off a lot of these issues... would be a toughy... cause there are too many middle men in the way... probably would stop a lot of what this guy wants to accomplish

MouthReliant · Post by **MouthReliant** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 12:50 am

gotta say, at least badnarik's a step in the right direction.

abortion is a weird issue. the Libertarian Party is the one party that doesn't take a hard stance on it just because it's such a wedgy thing.

Poor June · Post by **Poor June** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 1:54 am

MouthReliant wrote:gotta say, at least badnarik's a step in the right direction.

abortion is a weird issue. the Libertarian Party is the one party that doesn't take a hard stance on it just because it's such a wedgy thing.

yea which is completely understandable... it's hard enough for them to get votes... and if they did that... they'd continue weedin' votes out haha

j$ · Post by j$ » Sat Oct 23, 2004 7:35 am

You know, this poll is fasincating. Because I didn't realise that there was such a split. I assumed from my Safe European Home that while most people who considered themselves liberal hated Bush, they also believed Bush would get in regardless. That's the feeling/concern that I've been encountering over here.

It warms the cockles to see there is a real possibility he might not get in again. Not so much because I think he's insane, but just because it means a liberal, considered attitude is alive and well in the States (at least within the artist community) which again is not the way the American electroate is represented over here.

See, in the UK, with Blair's 3rd term vote not too far away, there's a similiar divided attitude, but despite all my problems with 'new labour', I want him to get in again. The Tories are too right-wing to ever consider. And the Lib Dems are a good idea whose policies are underdeveloped. My biggest fear is a hung parliament, where nothing gets done for five years.

Which makes Blair the least of three evils. And I kind of think the same of Kerry.

j$

c hack · Post by **c hack** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 8:58 am

j$ wrote: but just because it means a liberal, considered attitude is alive and well in the States (at least within the artist community) which again is not the way the American electroate is represented over here.

It's actually the overwhelming majority in large cities like Boston. I don't think I know anyone around here who'll be voting for Bush. If I had to guess, I'd say the country's got an even balance of conservatives and liberals. Of course, each side likes to whine that the other side's in control.

Jim of Seattle · Post by **Jim of Seattle** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 9:27 am

The West Coast and New England are solidly Kerry, the plains and the South are solidly Bush. The Midwest is up for grabs. The states that will decide the election are, in order of importance:

Florida
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Iowa

j$ · Post by j$ » Sat Oct 23, 2004 10:19 am

Jim of Seattle wrote:The West Coast and New England are solidly Kerry, the plains and the South are solidly Bush. The Midwest is up for grabs. The states that will decide the election are, in order of importance:

Florida

This is Bush-held at the moment, right? This was the big hanging chad place last time?

I am worried about these 'untrackable' voting machines. technology is a bitch.

J$

Henrietta · Post by **Henrietta** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 10:44 am

My guess is that Bush will win here in Colorado. We have a strong pro-military & Right-wing Christian presence. Our own Marilyn Musgrave is the representative who penned the proposed Constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Kerry needs to sway enough moderate Republicans over to his side to win the state, but Bush has done a fine job casting Kerry as a particularly liberal flimsy democrat.

Prediction: Kerry will win in the Denver-Boulder metro area based on his smarts, but Bush will win the state based on his Christian family values and general terrorism warnings/fear-mongerings.

Meanwhile, at a recent Bush rally, the Republican governor introduced John Elway who in turn introduced George Bush. Obviously, the governer of the state is not the most important guy in the Colorado Republican party.

HeuristicsInc · Post by **HeuristicsInc** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 3:26 pm

j$ wrote: I am worried about these 'untrackable' voting machines. technology is a bitch.

Don't get me started again! Really! It would be like adjuster and int... uh, nevermind.

Yes, Florida is where that ridiculous business went down last election.
-bill

mkilly · Post by **mkilly** » Sat Oct 23, 2004 9:04 pm

j$ wrote:This is Bush-held at the moment, right? This was the big hanging chad place last time?

Bush's little brother is the governor of Florida, but Florida is tied. This a projection of the final map, based on the criteria mentioned on the page, and this is how the polls have shown Florida over the past five months.

The race is a tie right now. It could go either way. But as I outlined, I'd project momentum to be on Kerry's side. A Kerry win is not out of the question, neither is a Bush win, but if it makes you feel better you can very reasonably say that it's 55/45 likely a Kerry win.

Jim of Seattle · Post by **Jim of Seattle** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 12:29 am

People. All the "swing" states are going to be so close that they will be decided not by the number of votes cast for each candidate, but by the method in which the votes were counted. The margin of error in these close states (based in projected vote-counting inaccuracies or outright manipulation) is WAY WAY larger than the projected difference in the number of actual votes. This election, like 2000, will be decided in a contentious court battle, just like last time, but it will make 2000 look like Election Result (TM) by Parker Brothers.

Sorry to be such a negative Nellie, but as Hoblit so astutely said, I can't imagine any conceivable way in which the Bush camp will simply give up the presidency merely due to the inconvenience of receiving allegedly "fewer" votes.

mkilly · Post by **mkilly** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 1:09 am

Jim of Seattle wrote:People. All the "swing" states are going to be so close that they will be decided not by the number of votes cast for each candidate

That uh, isn't provably true. Every swing state could give Kerry or Bush a 3% lead over the other. Or larger. Who knows? Polls have margins of error. It's really early for you to be saying this, anyway. Maybe Kerry (or Bush) will win with an electoral vote count as such that Florida will be rendered useless--all a candidate would have to do is grab 300 EVs. 297, in fact.

Hoblit · Post by **Hoblit** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 6:08 am

Jim of Seattle wrote: I can't imagine any conceivable way in which the Bush camp will simply give up the presidency merely due to the inconvenience of receiving allegedly "fewer" votes.

EXACTLY

or is it really

Jim of Seattle · Post by **Jim of Seattle** » Sun Oct 24, 2004 7:14 am

mkilly wrote:
Jim of Seattle wrote:People. All the "swing" states are going to be so close that they will be decided not by the number of votes cast for each candidate
That uh, isn't provably true. Every swing state could give Kerry or Bush a 3% lead over the other. Or larger. Who knows? Polls have margins of error. It's really early for you to be saying this, anyway. Maybe Kerry (or Bush) will win with an electoral vote count as such that Florida will be rendered useless--all a candidate would have to do is grab 300 EVs. 297, in fact.

You think Florida is the only state with ballot problems? Fully one-third of the votes cast across the country this election will be electronic, and will have no paper record against which they can be verified. If votes are lost (or removed) no one will be able to find or retrieve them. That scares the crap out of me.

OK, we know who won (or: Does God exist?)

Who will win the presidential election?