Why Bush won

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j2k4

Really?

I hope such evidence as you might offer to backstop your claim was not lost in the great back-up scandal a while back, Rat.

That would be regrettable.

---

Im sure you kept pointing out the popular vote meant nothing...

Now your saying:

Quote:

---

First lesson:

Majority rules, and anything above 50% constitutes a majority-no fuzzy math allowed

---

In that case, by your own words here... Gore should have been President for the last 4 years with this argument.

This is what i meant by "Im sure you werent saying this a few short months ago"...

Im sure you wont deny it, coz i cant be arsed to look up posts... however, even if you did, everyone here knows you said that the Majority doesnt matter, the Electoral College is what matters....

WE did not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthie

WE did not.

---

You did not... your country did however :(

Im sure this is the context that was being used ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scroff

Oh yea, the US media is so liberal they grilled Bush about the WMD prior to the invasion,

I attribute their failing in this regard to the fact that, no matter how anti-Bush the media is, they couldn't argue that particular point before the war because their liberal heroes were on the same side as Bush; no doubt they were flummoxed as to how they might keel-haul Bush about WMD while not doing the same to the like of Kerry.

Please try harder, scroff.

reported extensively on the Florida 2000 fiasco with intense investigative reporting, have doggedly pursued the Valerie Plame leak, intensified their investigation into the Halliburton scandels, and have been constantly attacking the Bush administration policies concerning the environment...

These things surely happened; how is it that you have determined they support your point?

People who say the US media is liberal are just parroting Rush Limbaugh and his buddies or are so far to the right they wouldn't know left from middle...

I don't blame you for being ignorant of the fact that it is Mr. Limbaugh who is parroting me, scroff.

---

I really regret that I'm so strapped for time lately; this is fun. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

You did not... your country did however :(

Im sure this is the context that was being used ;)

---

I know, I know..I just do not want to be associated with the OTHERS :blink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ruthie

I know, I know..I just do not want to be associated with the OTHERS :blink:

---

You voted, that gives you the right to complain.

About 40% of your electorate cant really say they have that right..

If they couldnt be arsed to vote, they cant really complain about the result of that vote ;)

One man, one vote would mean Gore would have been the president. the electoral college is a bullshit system and should have been gotten rid of eons ago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

Im sure you kept pointing out the popular vote meant nothing...

Now your saying:



In that case, by your own words here... Gore should have been President for the last 4 years with this argument.

This is what i meant by "Im sure you werent saying this a few short months ago"...

Im sure you wont deny it, coz i cant be arsed to look up posts... however, even if you did, everyone here knows you said that the Majority doesnt matter, the Electoral College is what matters....

---

Rat, my point in that instance was that the Electoral College carried the day because it is the law of the land, and as I recall, the gist of the thread was that the Electoral College was a passe or flawed process, which it most certainly is not.

I did not address the popular vote per se.

For those who question the Electoral College, I have no answer sufficiently brief to avoid inducing sleep; suffice it to say that the best indicator of it's efficacy would be a lingering look at one of those red/blue maps of the U.S. that are so popular during the election season-that, and a reasonable knowledge of where the population centers lie will render at least a modicum of understanding.

Those who still don't understand the underlying theory would be immune to any presentation of it's merit.

In any case, there is no such argument to be made this time around, is there?

You mean the States around the edges, and hence having more experiance with "Foreigners", are mostly Democrat, whereas the Inner States that dont see many and are only exposed to your own Media, are mostly Republican? :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rat Faced

You mean the States around the edges, and hence having more experiance with "Foreigners", are mostly Democrat, whereas the Inner States that dont see many and are only exposed to your own Media, are mostly Republican? :rolleyes:

---

Another sad misperception, Rat.

Atlanta (for example) is awash in it's foreign contingent, and I'm not talking Canadians.