The Song Fight Bulletin Board

Thanks Leaf!

I have discovered the TRUTH! Behold!!!
http://boomchicago.cyso.net/images/Voting_Machine.mov

c hack wrote: Also, I guess technically, it's not fair to say that the majority of Americans want Bush as president -- more accurately, the majority of Americans think he was the best choice from the crap we were given to choose from.

Or, even more accurately, the majority of Americans believe in certain issues that they vote for, even if a dick will be implementing them.

Which he probably won't anyway, as Henrietta mentioned.

i guess a majority is still a majority, even though it's really NOT a majority in the sense i've come to expect from that word.

when is barely more than half a majority? when it comes out of a republicans mouth today

C Hack, I don't think anyone's been bad-mouthing farmers or even rural people as being somehow "lesser" than city clickers. But the fact is that rural voters overwhelmingly supported Bush (even though he's doing abso-frickin-lutely nothing for them) and urban voters overwhelmingly chose Kerry. So it's not entirely false to say that rural voters chose the president, though of course it's a big oversimplification.

What's everybody thanking Leaf for? Did he post a link somewhere I'm missing?

Leaf wrote:Perhaps the irony of this will turn out to be four fantastic glorious years of a Bush adminstration that brings world peace, health and safety to all of humankind?


He could go down as the greatest ever, you never know... if the Redskins can be wrong, so might all the Bush critiques?


.. just trying to pump up some optimism here.... keep your chin up...

Yeah, it's not like the end of the world or anything....

Jim of Seattle wrote:C Hack, I don't think anyone's been bad-mouthing farmers or even rural people as being somehow "lesser" than city clickers. But the fact is that rural voters overwhelmingly supported Bush (even though he's doing abso-frickin-lutely nothing for them) and urban voters overwhelmingly chose Kerry. So it's not entirely false to say that rural voters chose the president, though of course it's a big oversimplification.

a big part of the republican ideology is the less government, the better. and in terms of many folks not living on either coast, this is exactly what they want. these are strong willed, church going, self reliant people where family value is not just a soundbite. no one single factor swayed this election but i'm pretty confident that "family values" played a larger than anticipated role.

i hate to say it but i honestly think edwards could have done better in the top spot. he would have at least gotten better numbers from the south and maybe young voters.

"family values" is nothing more than a buzzword. There's no such thing. I defy anyone to adequately define something called "family values" that also seems to be more a tenet of the Republican agenda than the Democratic.

As for church-goers voting Bush, that's one that REALLY confounds me. Rather than actually co-opt the beliefs of the more religious of our citizenry, they've managed to push buttons like "gay marriage" and "abortion" and such while causing people to not make the connection that what they REALLY stand for is in opposition to every church in the world.

I want to publish a bumper sticker that says "JESUS WAS A LIBERAL" because it's true. The Democratic party needs to take back common-sense (meaning non-fundamentalist) religious folks because their ideology is, in reality, much more in line with the democratic party.

Jim of Seattle wrote: I want to publish a bumper sticker that says "JESUS WAS A LIBERAL" because it's true. The Democratic party needs to take back common-sense (meaning non-fundamentalist) religious folks because their ideology is, in reality, much more in line with the democratic party.

and many ministers, pastors, priests would probably disagree with you, as they obviously did. it's easy for you to write off the word Jim, but what it stands for isn't so easy to write off.

jack shite wrote:i heard somewhere that the turnout for young people (18-25) was somewhere in the neighborhood of 17%. thats pretty sad. that easily could have been the difference. another opportunity lost.

This is a misleading statistic. I think it was 17% of the voters were in that age bracket.

It's true that was the same percentage as 2000, but the voter turnout across the entire age range was so huge, this year's 17% represents a much higher number.

-craig

jimtyrrell wrote:This morning, I really really feel like I threw my vote away. I will not do it again.

yeah well even though he may not have won the whole country, he won new hampshire by like one vote, so that should make you feel important!

Henrietta wrote:Off to the polls....

it's funny, looking at the maps of colorado. there were only two counties (according to cnn) where a majority voted "yes" on the splitting-the-electoral-vote referendum. and those were the exact same places that were the most blue on the bush/kerry map. i guess there is such a republican majority throughout most of the state, they assumed (correctly) that they would win the state, and so voted against the measure lest they risk giving up part (nearly half in this case) of their votes to the other guy.

<i>tviyh wrote: yeah well even though he may not have won the whole country, he won new hampshire by like one vote, so that should make you feel important! </i>

Yeah, I suppose that's true. It WAS a very close race here, and New Hampshire is the only state to have gone for a different party than it did in the previous election.
I guess, as President Bush says, America has spoken. And when my countrymen suggest I'd be happier in France, all I can do is admit that yes, my view of what America should be is not the opinion held by the majority of Americans.
This country belongs to George Bush. I just live here.

c hack wrote:Also, I guess technically, it's not fair to say that the majority of Americans want Bush as president -- more accurately, the majority of Americans think he was the best choice from the crap we were given to choose from.

A majority of Americans that voted want George W. Bush to be president. Apparently. That's about as clear as it could be.

Jim of Seattle wrote:But the fact is that rural voters overwhelmingly supported Bush (even though he's doing abso-frickin-lutely nothing for them)

He signed a huge farm subsidy bill that helps farmers out a lot. Plus tax cuts.

jack shite wrote:

Jim of Seattle wrote: I want to publish a bumper sticker that says "JESUS WAS A LIBERAL" because it's true. The Democratic party needs to take back common-sense (meaning non-fundamentalist) religious folks because their ideology is, in reality, much more in line with the democratic party.

and many ministers, pastors, priests would probably disagree with you, as they obviously did. it's easy for you to write off the word Jim, but what it stands for isn't so easy to write off.

What word are you talking about? Family values? (that's 2 words) OK, so what DOES it stand for? I have a family, and we don't value things the Republicans value. Don't we count?

jimtyrrell wrote:New Hampshire is the only state to have gone for a different party than it did in the previous election.

well, the only state until bush is declared the winner in new mexico and iowa.

gwb wrote:the result is now clear -- a record voter turnout and a broad, nationwide victory.

(source: cnn.com)

yeah if you want to call just-slightly-over-half a "broad victory"

Jim of Seattle wrote:

jack shite wrote:

Jim of Seattle wrote: I want to publish a bumper sticker that says "JESUS WAS A LIBERAL" because it's true. The Democratic party needs to take back common-sense (meaning non-fundamentalist) religious folks because their ideology is, in reality, much more in line with the democratic party.

and many ministers, pastors, priests would probably disagree with you, as they obviously did. it's easy for you to write off the word Jim, but what it stands for isn't so easy to write off.

What word are you talking about? Family values? (that's 2 words) OK, so what DOES it stand for? I have a family, and we don't value things the Republicans value. Don't we count?

Family Values is short for TRADITIONAL familiy values. Basically religious church going christians, 2.5 kids with House, Lot, and driveway somewhere in the suburbs or rural areas. A breakdown of simple life and know thy neighbor strength communities. NOT BAD THINGS...but different things. His administration caters to THEIR views. Most of those folk don't believe abortion can be an option in any case no matter what, homosexuality is just plain wrong, and anybody who doesn't make a sastisfying living is doing something wrong and it's all their fault. Thats just what they believe. And thats what he promises to deliver.

I'm a city boy but I believe in SOME of those 'family values' in a romantic way...but that isn't nearly enough to sway my vote. To me, there are much larger items to be concerned about. I'm saddened because those same traditional families believe in their hearts that their interests are being protected and Bush is doing the right thing for everybody, including them. Very sad. However, our opinions may be strong... the people as a whole have spoken and we have to accept that we are divided in opinion. It's hard to discern who is right or who is wrong. Now it's all a judgment call and unfortunately, in my opinion, we have no more say in it.

Phil. Redmon. wrote:

KILL! x 8

dude, the sekkrit service do0ds will be stoppin' by shortly

tviyh wrote: yeah if you want to call just-slightly-over-half a "broad victory"

yeah, if you call over 3.5 million just slightly..

new topic....

Leaf wrote:new topic....

Yes, like "when can I move in with you or one of your other Canadian chums?

I fear greatly for my safety.

The dumbest thing I ever heard in support of Bush was "We haven't been attacked again" .... uh...... That's like coming up to someone who's beating their head against a wall and telling them to stop and them replying "it hasn't killed me yet!"

I am fucking disgusted by the stupidity of 51% of Americans. If you voted for Bush, you are either A: Fucking stupid, or B: one of the few greedy bastards benefitting directly from the crooked-ass operations of this administration. There is no other reason. 99% of Bush voters fall under A.

Also, fuck C Hack.

Well I don't know about all of you, but that really sold the Democratic ticket to me.
This shit sucks. I'm done talking about it.

The Sober Irishman wrote: The dumbest thing I ever heard in support of Bush was "We haven't been attacked again" .... uh...... That's like coming up to someone who's beating their head against a wall and telling them to stop and them replying "it hasn't killed me yet!"

This is true.

The Sober Irishman wrote:I am fucking disgusted by the stupidity of 51% of Americans. If you voted for Bush, you are either A: Fucking stupid, or B: one of the few greedy bastards benefitting directly from the crooked-ass operations of this administration. There is no other reason. 99% of Bush voters fall under A.

There are valid reasons for voting for Bush. If you can't figure that out, your head is farther up your ass than I thought.

The Sober Irishman wrote:Also, fuck C Hack.

You're just saying that because you love me so much.