BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates

Subject: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 08:58 AM

Did anyone see Bill Moyers' NOW program on PBS last night? It was a very interesting discussion on how the US might be at the pinnacle of it's power and might as an empire, but that the downhill slide caused by arrogant imperialist over-reaching is well advanced.

Both panelists agreed that anti-American international attitudes isn't yet universal (ie there are still places that have every reason to despise the US, but don't), nor does the anti-American hatred seem so hardened that our imperial overreach couldn't yet be corrected. In other words, the panelists were guardedly optimistic about the possibility of the US pulling back from the brink, and avoiding repeating the history of the Roman and British empires.

However, both pointed out that the foreign policy of the past 50 years, regardless of who was enthroned as the imperial president, would have to do a 180 turn around to prevent us from repeating the historic mistakes of previous empires. The panelists were quite pessimistic about current trends though, especially with the so-called "war on terrorism" generally, and the Bush National Security Strategy (released about a month ago, but being conveniently ignored by the media, of course) in particular.

Somehow the "Democrats always pick on America first" apologists rings a bit hollow when you begin to find out about the "new" foreign policy strategy laid out by the Bush administration.

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: Troll
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 09:25 AM

You've been a busy little Troll, haven't you GUEST?

troll

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 02:51 PM

Just presenting a topic to be discussed hardly constitutes a troll, troll...

I didn't see the PBS special but I admire and respect Bill Moyers' desire and ability to get people to think. I would like to have seen the show. Maybe it'll come back.

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 03:50 PM

I wish people wouldn't use the shorthand "anti-American" when in most cases what they are talking about is people in other countries feeling the same disdain for certain aspects of American government that a lot of Americans do.

In fact, given that seven out of ten Americans couldn't bring themselves to vote for either side in your recent elections, it sounds as if disdain for the current American political establishment must be overwhelmingly prevalent across the United States.

In neither case is it the same as "hating America".

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: The Pooka
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 07:46 PM

McG of H: "In neither case is it the same as 'hating America'."

Agreed.

But you're wrong that "...seven out of ten Americans couldn't bring themselves to vote for either side in your recent elections..."

(a) The turnout of **persons over age 18** -- the "Voting Age Population" (VAP)--- is estimated at 39.3% Washington Post,
and will go up when official figures are compiled (because news-media estimates are based on votes cast for particular offices, which are always lower than true total turnout since not every voter votes for every office).

(b) "VAP"-based turnout estimates are skewed very low anyway, because a very substantial percentage of the VAP *isn't registered* and thus CANNOT vote.

(c) No, that non-registration rate is not chiefly a reflection of abstentionist policy-disenchantment with the political parties. Just as in the UK I'd imagine, it is more a function of economics, demography, and legal ineligibility (the VAP figures include a lot of non-US-citizens, temporarily disfranchised felons, etc.)

(d) Turnout of *registered voters* in this *off-year* election was probably 55-60%. In a Presidential election it is more like 75% - 80%.

(e) Example: In my not-hotly-contested state of Connecticut (no US Senate race here this year)last Tuesday's turnout of those registered, unofficially but very-close-to-officially --- this is my government office's website and I do the numbers so I know --- was 56.4%. CT 2002 Turnout. And when I get all the finalized corrected data it will be a wee bit higher. Trust me on this. :)

Granted, 50-60% turnouts are nothing to brag about. Still, let us be accurate. It ain't no 30% either. / BTW, what was it in the UK last May? ;)

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 02 - 11:57 AM

I live in Minnesota, where we had the highest voter turnout in the nation, as we often do. One reason for high voter turnout here is attributed to same day voter registration laws. One can register to vote on Election Day, at the polls. North Dakota has no voter registration. However, turnout isn't just about same day voter registration--Wisconsin also has same day laws, but doesn't enjoy as high a rate of voter participation as Minnesota does.

Until there is a federal election law passed that allows for this, we will never see a mid-term election national voter turnout that exceeds 40%, IMO.

The confusion about the voter turnout statistics is that two figures are often bandied about. One is, as you point out, the % of the Voting Age Population who voted, and the other is the % of registered voters who voted.

Voting Age Population is determined by statistics provided by the Federal Bureau of Census, so right now the figures are recent. By the 2008 election, the figures may well be outdated, because the census figures will be nearly a decade old.

The Percent of Registered Voters statistics, along with the turnout statistics, are provided by the individual states. Because there is a regular 2% of voters who regularly don't vote for the highest offices (ie president and vice president) when they vote, and so can seem inconsistent with other published voter turnout statistics.

In 2000, the national % of registered voters who voted was 76%. The 2000 national % of the Voting Age Population who voted was 51.3%. In the 1998 election, the % of registered voters who voted was 70.6%, and the % of Voting Age Population who voted was 36.4%.

The source of the above is the Federal Elections Commission website here:

http://www.fec.gov/elections.html

The 30% figure being used by me were the published projected estimates being used prior to the election. Even the figure you quote, 39.3%, is still an estimate given by a so-called "independent election expert", and NOT the Federal Election Commission, who will be the source of the actual results when they become available. We won't have the final tallies until the elections are all certified by the states. With Alabama still being out, that will take some time.

It does appear that this election was not in keeping with the long running trend of declining national turnout. It was also the first 9/11 election, so many election experts aren't willing to say that it is a change in the trend, or a patriotic blip on the radar.

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 02 - 12:08 PM

I would also like to add that their is a substantial amount of genuine anti-American hatred in many places in the world, which is based upon American foreign policy.

I also believe that a majority of Americans may well support US imperial military adventurism, as a way of flexing our imperial strength in the world. For some bizarre reason, they just ignore the results that the British got, and think people will like us for "liberating" them from their own cultural traditions, and forcing McBurger capitalist "traditions" down their throats under the guise of "democracy and freedom".

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: The Pooka
Date: 10 Nov 02 - 12:16 PM

Correct on virtually all points & good work, Minnesota Guest. Terrific turnout, too. You guys really know how to vote. (Well. At least WHERE to vote...)("The voters of Nebraska will continue to vote Dry as long as they can stagger to the polls." - some wit)

The FEC is indeed God in the elections biz. I wish people could get it straight about the VAP; but alas. / I'm a 25-year (old-fart) elections officer for the State of CT. Our results will be officially certified in late November, probably around Thanksgiving; so you'll have to wait for more than Alabamy. We (and other states too) will have official corrections coming in for another week or so. Speed is the Enemy of Accuracy. If it weren't for good old American instant-gratification impatience, most of the incorrectly-perceived "problems" with election results would disappear. // "Flor-i-DA! Flor-i-DA!"

"Fraud!" cried the maddened thousands, and the echo answered, "Fraud!"
But one scornful look from Casey and the audience was awed.
-- Casey at the Bat

Ducking & Running from the teetotaling Nebraska 'Catters,
--Mighty Casey

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: The Pooka
Date: 10 Nov 02 - 12:20 PM

Yes & a not-unreasonable analogy to the British Empire, too, Guest. Upon which the sun DID set, after all. "Get ye the sons your fathers got, and God will save the Queen."

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 02 - 12:27 PM

Well, I wouldn't say the sun set on the British empire yet. There have been plenty of harrier jets flying missions in far flung places like the Falklands and Iraq too, don't forget. I don't see the sun having set on the British empire, as much as I see it extending its reach to now include the Anglo American US empire. When is the last time you can recall a Franco-American military alliance, for instance? Or a German-American military alliance.

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: DougR
Date: 10 Nov 02 - 01:44 PM

I don't see where you feel justified in making such a statement, McGrath. The are many reasons why one does not vote. Lack of interest in the issues, lack of transportation, illness, no interest in politics, and on, and on.

"Disdain for the current political establishment," I believe would be far down the list. If you were to ask the average American citizen if he/she would prefer a political system different from the existing one, I believe the answer would be no.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: US Imperialism & Fake Election Mandates
From: The Pooka
Date: 10 Nov 02 - 03:26 PM

"When is the last time you can recall a Franco-American military alliance, for instance? Or a German-American military alliance."

>Um...lessee...1991? Er...NATO??