Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

A companion to the Homestar Runner Wiki
It is currently Mon Sep 18, 2023 6:02 am

All times are UTC




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 119 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 1:57 am
Posts: 2981
Location: Oklahoma City
lumberjack vegetable wrote:
I totally disagree. Most of the American public will believe anything that the President and Company says.


I have hardly heard anything but Bush-bashing in the past few months.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 12:40 pm
Posts: 375
Location: Joke, PA
What most people call 'Bush-bashing', I call 'revealing facts.' This admistration just asks for it. they think they can get away with anything, it seems to me.

People need to be held responsible for their actions. That's all I am saying.

Am I getting impolite again? Forgive me.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 4:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 5:21 am
Posts: 2140
Location: My Backyard
Booo... :p

I guess I just have more faith in people. You are probably right though.

As for me, I will probably be doing what I did last elections. Umm... Go Nader.

When you live in a state that votes over 50% Republican (source) it doesn't really matter how you vote.

Personally I would like to see Lieberman and McCain run together. The both seem very level-headed (from what I watched on c-span a few weeks... err months ago). Seeing as they are different parties, I don't anticipate that happening.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 6:52 pm
Posts: 1057
Location: Ever changing...
Stu wrote:
Personally I would like to see Lieberman and McCain run together. The both seem very level-headed (from what I watched on c-span a few weeks... err months ago). Seeing as they are different parties, I don't anticipate that happening.


Now, you never know...it was a few years ago in Canada (um...I guess several years because it happened while I still lived there, and I haven't lived there in half a decade) that the former Progressive Conservative party leader (federally speaking), Jean Charest (French name, mes amis), switched to head up the provincial Liberal party in Quebec, in hopes that he could unseat the unstoppable Parti Quebecois (they and their federal counterpart, the Bloc Quebecois, mostly concentrate their efforts on the separation of Quebec from Canada...an event I hope never happens, if you want my personal opinion ;) ). I think people had a hard time buying into it - he didn't win.

So ANYTHING is possible! :p

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:05 am
Posts: 5636
Location: swirlee.org for great justice
I'd vote for a bipartisan ticket if the candidates were right. It seems like it'd be a good start to getting rid of the two-party system.

Stu, I'd be disappointed if you didn't vote. It's your right, of course, but think what would happen if every person who thinks "it seems like my vote doesn't count, so I won't bother" got up and voted. That's a lot of people. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem. :)

And I agree with you, Lumberjack. The bit about most people still believing that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 drives the point home. Though fortunately this is changing. More and more I hear news reports that say something like "Bush insists on Iraq connection despite everybody else in the universe saying there is none", and the more people hear that (instead of Bush's insistence, over and over and over again to the contrary), the more they'll begin to understand.

By the way, some of you might be interested in the Electoral Vote Predictor 2004. It's a chart of current state polls. Assuming it's accurate (and polls never are), if they held the election tomorrow, Kerry would win by 43 electorate votes. I'm in a "Barely Kerry" state, so you can bet your arses I'm voting.

_________________
StrongCanada wrote:
Jordan, you are THE SUCK at kissing! YAY! Just thought you should know! Rainbows! Sunshine!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 1:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 12:40 am
Posts: 612
Location: Trying to come back.
The 9/11 commision's report wasn't Bush-Bashing.
Thank heavens.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 5:21 pm
Posts: 15581
Location: Hey! I'm looking for some kind of trangly thing!
Like I said earlier, this sounds just like the kind of hoax you might find on the internet. I look at it the same way I look at the y2k thing a couple of years ago--healthy skepticism.

If US forces already had Osama, they would have already come out and said so, mostly to try to remove the heat from the 9-11 commission.

Don't believe everything you read on the internet. The internet is both good and bad in this. On the internet, information can be made available that the government and major corporations can't cover up. BUT it also allows people to fabricate false and misleading information with no checks or balances. A fine example would be the http://www.chick.com and http://www.godhatesfags.com web sites mentioned on another thread.

I still don't believe the war is about oil. It's about bad intelligence, false information, and poor diplomacy. I've already stated this on the War on Terror thread about a million times. Although he was wrong, I still believe the president did what he did because he was convinced Iraq was viable threat to our safety (keep in mind, Bill Clinton also conducted military operations in Iraq). I hope future presidents learn from his mistake so that it doesn't happen again.

_________________
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:05 am
Posts: 5636
Location: swirlee.org for great justice
Didymus wrote:
Don't believe everything you read on the internet.


Well, speculation like this certainly isn't limited to the Internet, I don't think anybody here actually said that they believed it in the first place. But to be honest, if it did happen, I would be shocked, but not surprised. If it were posted on Fark, it would be filed under Obvious.

Quote:
I hope future presidents learn from his mistake so that it doesn't happen again.


I wish the current one would admit that he even made a mistake. Is that too much to ask?

_________________
StrongCanada wrote:
Jordan, you are THE SUCK at kissing! YAY! Just thought you should know! Rainbows! Sunshine!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 5:21 pm
Posts: 15581
Location: Hey! I'm looking for some kind of trangly thing!
That was a major disappointment to me, too. He should know that the American people already realize he was wrong. Why not just go ahead and admit it? But he's one of those guys that always thinks he's right.

_________________
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 12:40 am
Posts: 612
Location: Trying to come back.
Usually Presidents do not admit mistakes.
Take Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:05 am
Posts: 5636
Location: swirlee.org for great justice
Um.. IIRC, Clinton did admit to his mistakes. Nixon did not; what a lousy thing to die with on your conscience.

_________________
StrongCanada wrote:
Jordan, you are THE SUCK at kissing! YAY! Just thought you should know! Rainbows! Sunshine!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 12:40 am
Posts: 612
Location: Trying to come back.
Well, before Clinton was pressured to admit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 1:57 am
Posts: 2981
Location: Oklahoma City
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." "That depends on what 'is' is..." Let's face it, Clinton had trouble admitting his own mistakes too :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 12:40 am
Posts: 612
Location: Trying to come back.
He did, exactly.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:05 am
Posts: 5636
Location: swirlee.org for great justice
furrykef wrote:
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." "That depends on what 'is' is..." Let's face it, Clinton had trouble admitting his own mistakes too :P


Yes, it took him a long time and a lot of pressure to do so, but he finally did. He should have sooner, but so should Bush, and he still hasn't. Maybe he will someday, but I'm not holding my breath.

_________________
StrongCanada wrote:
Jordan, you are THE SUCK at kissing! YAY! Just thought you should know! Rainbows! Sunshine!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 12:40 am
Posts: 612
Location: Trying to come back.
At least he did.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 1:57 am
Posts: 2981
Location: Oklahoma City
Good point. Though I laughed hard at the slide show thing which showed a picture of himself looking under furniture..."Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere..."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:05 am
Posts: 5636
Location: swirlee.org for great justice
furrykef wrote:
Good point. Though I laughed hard at the slide show thing which showed a picture of himself looking under furniture..."Those weapons of mass destruction have got to be somewhere..."


Where was this?

_________________
StrongCanada wrote:
Jordan, you are THE SUCK at kissing! YAY! Just thought you should know! Rainbows! Sunshine!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 1:57 am
Posts: 2981
Location: Oklahoma City
You didn't see that? I saw it on the news, but it was at, I believe, an annual presidential ceremony, which usually has a fair amount of light-hearted stuff like that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:23 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 5:21 am
Posts: 2140
Location: My Backyard
Sorry to jump off topic (or rather to a previous topic).

Looking at the link you provided me (much better then the source I provided you). I plan on voting, even though it really doesn't matter which candidate I pick.

67% of my neighbors are going to be voting for Bush.

Anyone know which state doesn't give all of their electoral votes to the majority? (As in if they had 10 votes, and the election turned up 60/40% in favor of Bush, Kerry would get 4 votes and Bush 6).

I like that idea. I really don't know why we still use the current rules.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 5:21 pm
Posts: 15581
Location: Hey! I'm looking for some kind of trangly thing!
It's a hold-over from when the states each had their own individual sovereignty. The Civil War and the Great Depression pretty much did away with that.

_________________
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 5:21 am
Posts: 2140
Location: My Backyard
That still doesn't really clearify (in my mind anyway) why we still give all of a states votes to the majority. That's how you end up a president with less popular votes then his oponent.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:05 am
Posts: 5636
Location: swirlee.org for great justice
Stu wrote:
Anyone know which state doesn't give all of their electoral votes to the majority? (As in if they had 10 votes, and the election turned up 60/40% in favor of Bush, Kerry would get 4 votes and Bush 6).


Maine and Nebraska allow their electoral votes to be split. According to this page:

Quote:
In Maine and Nebraska the 2 at-large electoral votes go to the winner of the statewide popular vote. In addition, the presidential candidate with the highest popular vote in each of the state's Congressional Districts wins 1 electoral vote from that particular district. Maine has been doing this since the 1972 presidential election. Nebraska is a newcomer to this "districting" system of allocating electoral votes to the presidential candidates in the November General Election- having had this in place only beginning with the 1996 election.


IIRC, there's no national law that says how electoral votes are determined. This is decided by the states (which is why Maine and Nebraska are funky). When the electoral college was first created, there were actual people with the title of elector (there still are, but it's an almost entirely symbolic role) who decided, based on their constituency's popular votes, how to cast their electoral vote.

_________________
StrongCanada wrote:
Jordan, you are THE SUCK at kissing! YAY! Just thought you should know! Rainbows! Sunshine!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 3:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:05 am
Posts: 5636
Location: swirlee.org for great justice
And, as usual, Wikipedia to the rescue.

_________________
StrongCanada wrote:
Jordan, you are THE SUCK at kissing! YAY! Just thought you should know! Rainbows! Sunshine!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 7:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 12:40 pm
Posts: 375
Location: Joke, PA
Stu wrote:
Sorry to jump off topic (or rather to a previous topic).

Looking at the link you provided me (much better then the source I provided you). I plan on voting, even though it really doesn't matter which candidate I pick.

67% of my neighbors are going to be voting for Bush.
Well, you better go out there then, and tell the people the truth. Protest in the streets, naked if you need to.

My state is a super swing state, so I'll be voting. Twice if I have to. I'm going to drag all my lazy friends out of bed and out of their bags of 'Potate' so that they vote too.

Utah, huh? I hear their cold ones are barely even ones at all, like maximum 3% ABV, if you catch my drift. That's gotta vacuum, if you catch my drift.

Did you catch my drift? Cause I can reveal more if I'm being too secretive.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 23, 2004 9:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 5:21 am
Posts: 2140
Location: My Backyard
If I was a drinkin man I would agree with you. Since the strongest stuff I drink is this I don't get too upset. Mmmmm caffeine

btw, I hate vacuums. Housework sucks. err... stinks


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 24, 2004 3:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 5:21 pm
Posts: 15581
Location: Hey! I'm looking for some kind of trangly thing!
I don't mind a Cold One every now and then. A good, frosty Liquid Bread (even though it's supposed to be served as a Warm One) isn't bad, either. Of course, a good refreshing Coldson Light goes well, too.

_________________
ImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jul 28, 2004 2:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 2:03 am
Posts: 1967
Location: Yonkers,NY
Keep the discussion up!
GJ everybody

_________________
RIP Nathan "Buz" Buzdor


Last edited by Prof. Tor Coolguy on Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 2:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:05 am
Posts: 5636
Location: swirlee.org for great justice
Well, this is interesting. Before when we were talking about electoral votes, I wondered if any elector had ever voted against his or her constituency. Well today at the Electoral Vote Predictor, the "Votemaster" linked to The Faithless Eight, which lists eight electors in history that haven't voted with their constituency. But then there's this page which says the number isn't eight, it's 156 (71 of whom changed their vote because the candidate died before the College convened), and others switched their votes for President and Vice President in protest of something-or-other. And so far no "faithless elector" has changed the outcome of an election.

This is pretty wild stuff. Do you think there will be any College hijinks this year? The "Votemaster" wonders how much it costs to buy an Elector. I think it's probably less than you'd guess.

_________________
StrongCanada wrote:
Jordan, you are THE SUCK at kissing! YAY! Just thought you should know! Rainbows! Sunshine!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 17, 2004 2:03 am
Posts: 1967
Location: Yonkers,NY
I hope you are talking the electoral collage IJ......

That is prety wild,there are some fickle people out there, what do you think everybody?

_________________
RIP Nathan "Buz" Buzdor


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 119 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group