 sj |
||
|
||
Not music-U. S. Political
|
|
|
Subject: Not music-U. S. Political From: DougR Date: 13 Nov 00 - 04:50 PM Some U. S. Mudcatters have questioned the value of the Electoral College. USA Today printed a very interesting map in color that you might like to check out. It is a map in color of the United States showing the counties in each state carried by Al Gore and George Bush. Many of you will not check this out because of the address of the website where it is reproduced. The website address is www.rushlimbaugh.com. If you do access the website, I am not urging any of you to do anything other than to look at the very interesting map. I would not want you to read information, or opinions, that is not available to you in the liberal U. S. press. Jeeze, no telling what it might do to you! For those of you who do not access the site, I will merely tell you that the map shows that Gore carried 677 counties in the United States. Bush carried 2,434. The land mass represented in those counties: Gore, 580k square miles; Bush, 2,427k square miles. Much has been made of Gore winning the popular vote. The map indicates that the majority of those who voted for him lived in America's major cities. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Bert Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:04 PM I saw that map in the paper the other day. I find it strange that no politician seems to have been able to bridge the town/country gap. The Arkansas Traveller/Hayseed conflict still exists. The first politician to figure it out is going to win by a landslide. It's also odd that folk music is associated with country folk, but most 'Catters seem to be Democrats. |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Sandy Paton Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:05 PM Those city-dwellers are people too, Doug. It's people, not square miles, that elect our government officials. Sandy (an old fogey from a rural region) |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: mousethief Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:12 PM You could at least give us a clicky. Sheesh. click here
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: mousethief Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:16 PM What the hell do square miles have to do with it? Are votes worth more where the population density is lower? Last time I looked each person's vote was worth the same, regardless of where he was from, and what counted was the number of people who vote for a candidate, not the number of counties or square miles. What a stupid map. No wonder Limbaugh is criticized. What a farking idiot! And the dittoheads that parrot him are farking idiots to the nth power. Square miles. Gawd. What will they think of next?
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Ebbie Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:21 PM I see, according to the map, that Alaska and Hawaii are not part of the United States. Sounds pretty bush league to me. Just think- if Alaska had been included- because it did go for Bush- of all the space Bush/Limbaugh could claim for themselves. Never mind that it's mostly empty space- not much difference between that and some heads, now is there? :~| Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: John Hardly Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:24 PM DougR, Though I see the "area" issue as a non-issue if one is only considering acreage, what it does represent is that a diverse people have divergent interests that need to be protected--thus the electoral college. It used to be seen as the last best hope for minorities to have representation. It seems public sentiment has turned a corner on which minority's needs, rights, and viewpoints are due consideration and represention. As we are becoming a more poll-driven, pop-cultured, sheep-like society it's hard to qualify, but I wonder if any of this anti-constitution talk would be happening if the electoral/popular vote was reversed. We are most certainly headed for a constitutional convention. There is just so much of the constitution that at least 50% of Americans no longer believes. It was written as a Gov't limitation--a la the Magna Carta, but we don't want a government that is limited in this way. For the longest time we have doubted the possibility of a new civil war--mostly on the basis of our prosperity/lack of poverty. This presupposes a material mind-set. What about our extreme POVERTY of TRUST, JUSTICE, LOGIC AND EDUCATION, and SHARED VALUES? I am the ultimate pessamist I guess but I predict civil war and/or a CC in less than 10 years. I also predict that the new CC will make what was the US into essentially a different country. In a poll taken in the 1950's the Question "Would you favor a return to a monarchy?" recieved a less than 2% positive response. The same poll done in 1997-8 recieved a 12% positive response. The good news--it should inspire some great folk music. Public uprisings always do. John |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Bert Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:26 PM I don't think that Doug was suggesting that land mass should be the criteria. Just that it was interesting. As a Democrat who often argues with Doug, I found it very interesting. It's almost as though a carry over from the English class stuggle still exists over here. I would have thought that the issues would not be split in such a way. 'Tiz curious. |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:31 PM "Would you favor a return to a monarchy?"
What is it if it isn't a monarchy already? Purchased or elective monarchies - and I'm not sure which the USA is these days - are still monarchies. |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Wesley S Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:33 PM Doug - Where do you live ?? |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: John Hardly Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:49 PM MofH, The equally cynical answer to your cynical question is; A constitutionally limited oligarchy. That's why the loss of the constitution matters. John |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Jim the Bart Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:52 PM "I'm not saying it's over, and I'm not saying it's a landslide, but you've got to be missing something to think that this race is a dead heat." - El Rushbo Thanks for the directions to such an amusing web sight. I found Rush's concern with how "divisive" Al Gore has been to be the biggest laugh. He calls himself the "Truth Detector"? What a load of crap. Bart |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: DougR Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:54 PM Bert, you are right. It is a non-issue, and was not intended to try to illustrate anything, other than that I found it interesting! Geeze! Sandy, I agree with you completely. City-dwellers are people too, and at the moment, more of them voted for Gore than they did for Bush. Alex, thanks for the blue clicky, I just haven't taken the time to conquer the technique. And don't blame Rush Limbaugh for the map. He merely reproduced the map that was in USA Today, for chrissake! Talk about an example of killing the messenger! But I love you all anyway! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: mousethief Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:55 PM You've got to be missing something to think this race is a dead heat. Blinders.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: DougR Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:58 PM Sorry Wesley, I didn't answer your question. I live in Phoenix, Arizona. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: mousethief Date: 13 Nov 00 - 05:58 PM DougR: What messages a person decides to pass on says a lot about him as a person. He didn't HAVE to reproduce a stupid map from USA Today. Nobody held a gun to his head. He could also have said, "Look at this stupid map! As if square miles matters a donkey's ass!" But he didn't. He published it as if it showed something important about the election. For that we are entitled to berate him.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Troll Date: 13 Nov 00 - 06:00 PM Instead of flaming, tell us why you think Rush is wrong when he says Gore is divisive. Saying that it is a laugh and a load of crap does not present a very convincing argument against him. troll |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Troll Date: 13 Nov 00 - 06:00 PM Instead of flaming, tell us why you think Rush is wrong when he says Gore is divisive. Saying that it is a laugh and a load of crap does not present a very convincing argument against him. troll |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Bert Date: 13 Nov 00 - 06:08 PM I must admit that I didn't follow the link. I saw the map in USA Today and thought it interesting. The map points out a division amongst Americans. If we are interested in people and/or politics then we should be concerned that such major divisions exist. After all people are just people, all pretty much the same. There's just as many good folks in the country as in the city. Why should there be SUCH a difference in their politics? I would have thought that Television and modern communications would have smoothed out such differences long ago. Are we still voting according to the prejudices of our parents? |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: DougR Date: 13 Nov 00 - 06:32 PM Alex, nothing prevents you from berating Limbaugh as much or as many times as you are so inclined. The Baker quote? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: mousethief Date: 13 Nov 00 - 06:35 PM Other thread, Doug. You're confusing both of us now.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: DougR Date: 13 Nov 00 - 06:54 PM Yep, you're right, Alex. Wrong thread! |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: John Hardly Date: 14 Nov 00 - 08:40 AM ...Shouldn't be able to view it both ways. Either both Limbaugh and the mainstream media lose credibility for calling a race "To close to call", or "Probably not as close as predicted"--in Limbaugh's case the latter error, in mainstream media's case the former (they said the '80 race was just to close to call), or neither loses credibility for making an educated guess. ...shouldn't be able to have it both ways. Either what a man did in his distant past does or doesn't matter. If Clinton's past was irrelevant to you then Bush's DUI should have been too. The party with a history of not allowing their own to have it both ways is the Republican party. THEY forced Nixon's resignation (when Goldwater et al visited the White house and informed Nixon that it was over). Gingerich and Livingston resigned because they knew the REPUBLICANS would NOT defend their immorality. The Democrats, can point to none of their own that they finally found untenable to defend from scandal. Wright and Rostenkowski (the only dems I can ever remember facing the music) were forced out by majority votes. There is no controlling legal or logical authority and, unfortunately, that is the only thing that affords us our peace. John |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: kendall Date: 14 Nov 00 - 08:51 AM Rush Limbaugh is one of the very few people whose ass I would enjoy kicking down Maine st. I was surprised that no one took Dubbya up on his often repeated statement "I have been Governor of the second largest state" Using that convoluted logic, we should draft the Governor of Alaska! Since when do cows and snakes vote? |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: GUEST,Greg F.(remote location) Date: 14 Nov 00 - 09:01 AM What forced Nixon's registration was the certain knowledge that he was guilty, had been caught red-handed, and was certain to be impeached,convicted, and possibly jailed. Not "the Republican Party". Gingrich and Livingston resigned because their bombast and hypocricy, once made plain, left them without any credibility. Had "the Republican Party" a real moral sense they would not still be claiming that Tricky Dick was a martyr who got a raw deal a quarter-century after the event. You'll have to excuse me now-I have to go take a Nixon ( as Kinky Friedman, a good Texas Boy, would say.) |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: catspaw49 Date: 14 Nov 00 - 09:34 AM How many of these threads are we gonna' run anyway? Is there anyone who has changed their mind on anything? Do we all know where we all stand? The whole map thing is non-sensical to begin with......Is this new info that cities tend to go Dem and rural tends to be Rep.? We have many states with populations less than a lot of cities. I frankly don't care as much about what happens in the next two months as I do about what happens in the next two years. Is the American electorate ready to pressure their representatives to change a lot of these aging and ancient laws and get on with living in this century and not the 20th.....or even perhaps the 19th? States rights is all well and good, but when any state's procedures and laws get in the way of the country as a whole, its time we stepped in and made a few changes. We can debate the changes, but this thing has become ridiculous. The Constitution was written over two centuries ago and is a brilliant piece of work, but discussing what the framers had in mind is just ludicrous. Did they have the computer in mind? Were they expecting space stations? A lot of them weren't expecting women to vote for gawdsakes. The concept of a Federal Republic can and perhaps should be upheld, but its long past time to view it through 18th century eyes. Let's get on with making the changes necessary to assure that the will of the majority is carried out in today's world. Whichever man attains the office this time, he will be in the position of having to act in a centrist fashion and the best thing he could do to gain credibility among the people would be to aggressively pursue both Campaign Finance Reform and Election Reform. Getting significant changes in those areas would give him a better chance at a second term than anything else. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Kim C Date: 14 Nov 00 - 09:50 AM I agree with Spaw. Now let's move on to less taxing pursuits. :) |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: GUEST,Greg F. (rem.loc.) Date: 14 Nov 00 - 10:29 AM So, 'Spaw- How 'bout them METS!? ;-) Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: mousethief Date: 14 Nov 00 - 11:35 AM Taxing pursuits! Now that's a great idea! Every time a young man makes a pass at a young woman (or vice versa, or whatever, allowing for all possible configurations), charge him a dollar. Or more even. Or who was it who said if we taxed men on the length of their penis -- but allow them to self-report -- we could make millions. Just a thought. Or two. Trying to lighten the mood and all. Never mind.
Alex |
|
Subject: RE: Not music-U. S. Political From: Little Hawk Date: 14 Nov 00 - 01:01 PM Limbaugh's map is interesting in a cultural sense, but doesn't indicate much about who should be considered to have won the election. It is not unusual for rural people to be more politically conservative. The same is true in Canada and elsewhere. A cynic might well say that this is partly because rural people are more isolated from different races, different cultures, and different possibilities, and therefore tend to be less accomodating to anything they perceive as a "threat" to their chosen status quo and their accustomed way of life. In fact, even someone who isn't cynical might say that. The "liberal" vote will always be found in the big cities, in the more cosmopolitan centers. The US Senate and House of Representatives were very sensibly set up in such a way that one of them is based on representation by population, while the other gives each state an equal voice. Very smart way to organize a government! We could use a setup like that in Canada...it would greatly ease tensions in this country, where Ontario and Quebec basically run the place between them (due to their huge population base), while the other provinces are marginalized and resentful, particulary the western provinces. Congratulations to the designers of the American Constitution. They got it right in that case. - LH |
| Share Thread: |
