Who gives a big ole greasy shit?

[HirotoR34]

Clinton may have been a horndog, but at least he didn't push us into an unjustified war. And besides, I've always wondered if the ol Clinton/Lewinsky scandal was manufactured to take away attention from another Clinton scandal. Y'all know the one I'm speaking of......

[mikirgra]

Time to be the Elder Statesman around here.

Don't patronize. Besides, if you registered in 82, you're not the Elder Statesman.

For all you who believe that your vote doesn’t count, you should have lived in the USSR before the fall of communism there. There was only one choice on the ballot and voting was mandatory.

Boy, it's been a long time since I heard that kind of cold war propaganda. Far be it from me to defend the former Soviet leadership, but you are mistaken. Voting was NOT mandatory. Nor was joining the communist party. Premiers were elected by the Politburo, so you're comparison isn't even relevant. In any case, I was merely pointing out that my vote had no impact on the presidnetial election because I don't live in a swing state. Of course it was tallied, I think, but that wasn't the point.

The Electoral College was set up as a compromise between our founding fathers that were split between allowing the representatives picking the president and allowing the popular vote to decide. The reason for it is so that the larger states won’t have an even bigger role in deciding the president than they would by popular vote alone. It was really a smart idea.

Key word being "was." And you mean more populous than larger, otherwise the candidates would spend all their campaign dollars in Alaska. There's no good argument for the EC now. None. The problem is changing the constitution isn't so simple.

Libertarian or Constitutional Parties.

Remember Clinton claimed a mandate from the people in 1992 when only getting 40 percent of the total vote. Bush got like 52 percent? But count in the non-voters and he only got 26 percent of total people of voting age. That means Clinton only got 20 percent of the eligible voters in 92 when the turnout was like 51 percent instead of the 60 percent this election.

WTF? You can't have it both ways dude. Do you think the ec is a good idea or not? Clinton won in a landslide (won more states). In our system, that's considered a mandate. And it's fairly obvious to even the low brain cell count folks you speak of that the country is more divided now than in 92 or 96.

Read, Think, Vote.
Don’t vote for someone because you are told to, vote for someone who stands for what you do and you believe will do a better job.

Yawn. Boy, I'm glad you cleared that up for us. I thought I had to vote for whom I was told to.

[sessiz]

Hmmm, I wonder if there's any weight behind these stats.

http://attenuation.net/files/iq.htm

It would sure explain alot.

[BilboBaggins]

Don't patronize. Besides, if you registered in 82, you're not the Elder Statesman.

Been voting in every electon since 1982, do you mean you're older?

Boy, it's been a long time since I heard that kind of cold war propaganda. Far be it from me to defend the former Soviet leadership, but you are mistaken. Voting was NOT mandatory. Nor was joining the communist party. Premiers were elected by the Politburo, so you're comparison isn't even relevant. In any case, I was merely pointing out that my vote had no impact on the presidnetial election because I don't live in a swing state. Of course it was tallied, I think, but that wasn't the point.

Boy, did you even read or watch the news in the 70's? Yes on the news they were talking of 95 percent turnout and only one choice on the ballot. Hmmm. Doesn't that make you think it was mandatory in fact if not in law?

If everyone who felt that way actually voted maybe yours would have been a swing state too.

Key word being "was." And you mean more populous than larger, otherwise the candidates would spend all their campaign dollars in Alaska. There's no good argument for the EC now. None. The problem is changing the constitution isn't so simple.

The Electorial College is still a good idea. It has worked well and continues to work well. Scraping it is just a little short-sighted.

WTF? You can't have it both ways dude. Do you think the ec is a good idea or not? Clinton won in a landslide (won more states). In our system, that's considered a mandate. And it's fairly obvious to even the low brain cell count folks you speak of that the country is more divided now than in 92 or 96.

59 percent of the actual votes were against you doesn't make it a mandate. That wasn't a Landside. Reagan was a landslide in 80 and 84. We were so divided in 92 and 96 that Perot was considered a viable option. Heck if Perot didn't drop out then reenter the race and blaming the Republicans for possibly ruining his families life the possibility would have been one of the Major Partys could have imploded (like the Whigs in 1856). There was a point in the polls in 92 that Clinton was running third behind Bush, Sr and Perot.

Yawn. Boy, I'm glad you cleared that up for us. I thought I had to vote for whom I was told to.

You should see the lemmings in this town.

[BilboBaggins]

Hmmm, I wonder if there's any weight behind these stats.

http://attenuation.net/files/iq.htm

It would sure explain alot.

I didn't think PA was that smart, but I'm in Philly where Kerry won by 390,000 votes.

[sg219]

Just because the dipshit won the election don't mean yall have to stop postin...

silla

This has to be the slowest posting week I've ever seen.

What's the deal? Everyone can't be out shopping!! Oh, wait, I think everyone was in line in front of me today everywhere I went!!! I didn't see any "FREE SHIT HERE", or "TAKE ALL YOU WANT FOR A QUARTER" signs up anywhere.

I was out and about all over the place today and everything was packed like it was X-mas Eve or the day after Thanksgiving. Even the mall "Toy Helicopor Guy" had customers.

[CaboWabo]

I hear ya, that might of been the slowest few days since the start of this mutha...
I'm here, waitin to get my ZZ MT

[stagg]

Key word being "was." And you mean more populous than larger, otherwise the candidates would spend all their campaign dollars in Alaska. There's no good argument for the EC now. None. The problem is changing the constitution isn't so simple.

The Electorial College is still a good idea. It has worked well and continues to work well. Scraping it is just a little short-sighted.

the electorial college is good, but it needs to be changed a little. It should not be one state votes 51% bush and 49% kerry and bush wins it. They should take the votes and divide like 51% to like 29(what ever the electorial number of teh state us) and then the same thing with 49%

Thats why people dont feel like voteing.. Its because in teh electroal college they get screwed out of there vote. Like the Bush vs Gore insident.

[BilboBaggins]

the electorial college is good, but it needs to be changed a little. It should not be one state votes 51% bush and 49% kerry and bush wins it. They should take the votes and divide like 51% to like 29(what ever the electorial number of teh state us) and then the same thing with 49%

Thats why people dont feel like voteing.. Its because in teh electroal college they get screwed out of there vote. Like the Bush vs Gore insident.

Some states voted to make a simular change in the EC. EC votes are from each district. If they are planning that then the two EC senator votes go to the overall winner of the state and the the rest by Congressional Districts.

I know people are complaining about how the controlling party in their state redraws the lines for the districts but that has been done from the start, I don't like it because I've seen some wierd districts in cities and states over the years. The trouble is each district must have the same number of voters and even the best laid plans will PO somebody.

Changes I'd like to see to election laws are simple.

1. No Political Advertisements until 30 days before a Primary and 45 Days before a General Election.
2. Fine the campaigns $10,000.00 for each road signs (you know the ones on the side of the road and peoples yards) that are place on Expressways that would be considered dangerous to get out of the car and walk along. I seen too many on I95 in Philly. Use that money to fund schools in the district they are found.
3. No more than one ad on TV/Radio per 1/2 hour from each campain and 1 an hour by the National Committes. We can't stop independent groups from putting on ads legally.
4. Open up the primarys so anyone could vote for whomever they wish no matter the party. Have the top vote getters from each party (including independents) make the general election if they get at least 1 percent of the primary vote.
5. Change the Voting Booths to get rid of the BIG LEVER(Button). I'd put the Incumbants in either the first row (so you know who the bums to vote out are). If there is no incumbant than the highest vote getter in the primary gets that spot.
6. ALL ELECTRONIC VOTING MACHINEs MUST PRODUCE A PAPER BACKUP (The Governor of California just signed this in his state starting in 2005.)

This was just a few minutes of think, I'm sure everybody here can think of some other things to add on.

[KaNye]

Even the mall "Toy Helicopor Guy" had customers.

LOL. I dont think Ive ever seen anyone buying those.

[HirotoR34]

Even the mall "Toy Helicopor Guy" had customers.

LOL. I dont think Ive ever seen anyone buying those.

Yeah, we had a couple of those stands in our mall. They used to sell clones for about $15, and now all they sell are those queer little "stunt vehicles" and cheesy larger scale rc. I just keep on walkin

Not a lot of posting goin on lately. All week I've signed in there have been only one or two pimps including myself online. Friggen scary

[mikirgra]

Been voting in every electon since 1982, do you mean you're older?.

If you think my comments were about age, then you missed my point entirely. A large number of members here were unhappy about the election. I made a comment about being "blue in a red state," and you come on as all "elder statesman" pushing this you should be happy to have a choice, and you should get involved if you want change, blah blah blah. I'll soften a bit: perhaps you didn't intend to sound like you think you know better than the rest of us b/c of your voting record or some bs, but that's how it sounded to me. Not that it matters a rats ass, but I too have voted since 1982 as well (I'm 40). There are more "elder" one's on here than us too. But age doesn't count for squat. There are twenty-somethings that are more clued in than you or I will ever be, and there are old farts on here like you that spew baseless crap as fact. Read on...

Boy, did you even read or watch the news in the 70's? Yes on the news they were talking of 95 percent turnout and only one choice on the ballot. Hmmm. Doesn't that make you think it was mandatory in fact if not in law?.

Oh gee, you're right. Since it was on the news here in the country that was the sworn enemy of the Soviets, it must all have been true. But there's people like you on both sides who fall for all that crap. If you'd grown up in Moscow, you'd still be preaching about the evil capitalists.

Again, I was not defending the Soviets, but you stated something as fact that was false, and any 7th grader can look it up in a history book. If you want to protend to be a knowledgeable "elder statesman" or whatever, at least get your facts straight.

It's like my favorite sport, and you're used to playing in some little private school or church league or something. This is the blacktop. You came in here and floated up some little softy, and you better believe we're going to slap that weak stuff back at ya.

[sessiz]

[lovedoctor]

Bilbo wrote:

Nixon Quit before the articles of impeachment were drafted.

Clinton's actions were detrimental to the country not because is was bopping Monica (FDR, Kennedy did it too) it was he LIED about it to congress. If he admitted it from the start public opinion would have stopped the Articles of Impeachment from being drafted. NOTE: Just because they were drafted doesn't mean he'll get impeached, it just means they will vote to impeach him.

My opinion of you is dropping (and I didn't even refer to your agreement with The Arnold, politically).

To mention that Nixon quit before he was impeached is the worst example of quibbling I've seen in a long time. He just beat congress to the punch.

As for Clinton lying to Congress. That's hilarious. Are you telling me every president who WASN'T impeached told the exact truth to Congress everytime? What about Reagan? When DID he tell the truth to congress? And don't give me that alzheimer's bull--it's weak and tired.

I'd rather have a president lie about his personal life than lie about things that get young americans killed (like weapons of mass destruction in Iraq--I'd be ROTFL if it didn't get so many innocents killed).

Sorry, Bilbo, but you're coming off as a partisan Republican to me.

Paul

[BilboBaggins]

Sorry, Bilbo, but you're coming off as a partisan Republican to me.

Paul

There are multiple reasons for it.

First was in the Late 70's early 80's in high school the only way to rebel from the slightly liberal ways in my school was to become slightly conservative. (Think Michael J Fox in Family Ties).
Second my Father is slightly to the right of Rush.

I usually followed Churchill's addage, "Those who are young and not Liberal have no heart, Those who are older and not Conservative have no Brain."

Plus I loved Thomas Jefferson's statement of "A revolution once in a while is a good thing."

My trouble now is I don't trust one party because of their record of voting to spend money on things that the constitution stated wasn't the national governments domain. And I I trust most in the other party because they seem to have forgotten that a free society means people are free to do as they wish as long as they do no harm to others.

I'd vote for somebody who would cut taxes for all and let people choose how to live their own lives.

I'd vote against Consitutional Admendments Stating people cannot burn the flag or against people of the same gender getting married. Of course I believe that gay marriage will boost divorce laywers profits most of all.

Hmmm. Shakespear may have had something when in one of his plays he mentioned the first thing we should do is get rid of the laywers.