|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"psycholist" wrote in message ... "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Tom Kunich wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... wrote: Less than one-third of the eligible voters chose Bush II. The real winner, chosen by 40% of the eligible voters was "none of the above". Good, then you DO have a citation to back up that preposterous claim? Bush II received approximately one-half of the vote of the approximately 60% [1] of the eligible voters who voted. That is approximately 30% of the eligible voters choosing Bush II, or less than one-third. 40% did not choose either Kerry or Bush II, thereby indicating their preference for "none of the above". [1] http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/voter.turnout.ap/. -- Tom Sherman - Greater QCA Your math is sound. Your conclusion, in my opinion, is not. You give those folks who didn't vote too much credit. I don't believe they were making the statement, "none of the above" at all. I believe they were making the statement, "whatever you think is OK with me" or, "I don't care, pass the (beer, drugs)" or "I'm just too plain lazy." Bob C. Now YOU are giving them too much credit. "Election? What that this month?" "Did Hilary win? I Hope not." |
Ads |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
On 11/7/04 8:12 AM, in article , "Tom Sherman"
wrote: Tom Kunich wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... wrote: Less than one-third of the eligible voters chose Bush II. The real winner, chosen by 40% of the eligible voters was "none of the above". Good, then you DO have a citation to back up that preposterous claim? Bush II received approximately one-half of the vote of the approximately 60% [1] of the eligible voters who voted. That is approximately 30% of the eligible voters choosing Bush II, or less than one-third. 40% did not choose either Kerry or Bush II, thereby indicating their preference for "none of the above". [1] http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/voter.turnout.ap/. You made an EXPLICIT statement with no proof to back it up. This logical conclusion of yours is IMPLICIT and is based more on apathy for politics, indifference or even laziness! There was no "write-in" choice for None of the above..... |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Tom Sherman
writes: (as evidence mounts of incorrectly counted optically scanned votes in Florida and serious disagreements with exit polls in Florida, Ohio, and other states). Cool! We can dispense with this messy and expensive voting thing and rely on the polls. Why didn't I think of that? Do you really think an exit poll is accurate? Especially four years ago in FLORIDA when the all knowing and wise PRESS declared Florida had gone for Gore before the polls closed in the panhandle? We oughta pass a consititutional amendment banning polls. Tom Gibb |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Tom Sherman
writes: (as evidence mounts of incorrectly counted optically scanned votes in Florida and serious disagreements with exit polls in Florida, Ohio, and other states). Cool! We can dispense with this messy and expensive voting thing and rely on the polls. Why didn't I think of that? Do you really think an exit poll is accurate? Especially four years ago in FLORIDA when the all knowing and wise PRESS declared Florida had gone for Gore before the polls closed in the panhandle? We oughta pass a consititutional amendment banning polls. Tom Gibb |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
/. : : You made an EXPLICIT statement with no proof to back it up. : This logical conclusion of yours is IMPLICIT and is based more on apathy for : politics, indifference or even laziness! : : There was no "write-in" choice for None of the above..... In his original post, he didn't mention a "write-in" vote at all. Don't put words into his mouth. Pat in TX : |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
/. : : You made an EXPLICIT statement with no proof to back it up. : This logical conclusion of yours is IMPLICIT and is based more on apathy for : politics, indifference or even laziness! : : There was no "write-in" choice for None of the above..... In his original post, he didn't mention a "write-in" vote at all. Don't put words into his mouth. Pat in TX : |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Tom Kunich wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... wrote: Less than one-third of the eligible voters chose Bush II. The real winner, chosen by 40% of the eligible voters was "none of the above". Good, then you DO have a citation to back up that preposterous claim? Bush II received approximately one-half of the vote of the approximately 60% [1] of the eligible voters who voted. That is approximately 30% of the eligible voters choosing Bush II, or less than one-third. 40% did not choose either Kerry or Bush II, thereby indicating their preference for "none of the above". [1] http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/voter.turnout.ap/. Not voting does not mean a vote against Bush. I know that this is really hard for the extremists to understand, but Bush wasn't only voted in on one of the most important Presidential elections in half a century, but the Republicans extended their leads in the Senate, the House, many state legislatures and governorships. He will probably replace three or four Supreme Court Justices which will hopefully end the idea that the Supreme Court should be ruling this land rather than the elected officials as the founders chose. The Democratic Party has become so obviously a party of radical Liberal extremists instead of the "Party of the people" it was when Kennedy cheated his way into the Presidency that unless moderate Democrats take the party back they are doomed to become less than one third of the Congress come the next election cycle. Here's a suggestion - if you maintain that people like Kerry, Edwards and Dean should represent the whacko left this country will be getting in some pretty serious trouble with a one party system in place of the two party system envisioned by people more worthy of consideration than you. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... Tom Kunich wrote: "Tom Sherman" wrote in message ... wrote: Less than one-third of the eligible voters chose Bush II. The real winner, chosen by 40% of the eligible voters was "none of the above". Good, then you DO have a citation to back up that preposterous claim? Bush II received approximately one-half of the vote of the approximately 60% [1] of the eligible voters who voted. That is approximately 30% of the eligible voters choosing Bush II, or less than one-third. 40% did not choose either Kerry or Bush II, thereby indicating their preference for "none of the above". [1] http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/03/voter.turnout.ap/. Not voting does not mean a vote against Bush. I know that this is really hard for the extremists to understand, but Bush wasn't only voted in on one of the most important Presidential elections in half a century, but the Republicans extended their leads in the Senate, the House, many state legislatures and governorships. He will probably replace three or four Supreme Court Justices which will hopefully end the idea that the Supreme Court should be ruling this land rather than the elected officials as the founders chose. The Democratic Party has become so obviously a party of radical Liberal extremists instead of the "Party of the people" it was when Kennedy cheated his way into the Presidency that unless moderate Democrats take the party back they are doomed to become less than one third of the Congress come the next election cycle. Here's a suggestion - if you maintain that people like Kerry, Edwards and Dean should represent the whacko left this country will be getting in some pretty serious trouble with a one party system in place of the two party system envisioned by people more worthy of consideration than you. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Tom Sherman" wrote in message
... Or maybe both the candidates with a chance of winning did nothing to inspire people to vote. I guess that's why this was the biggest turnout in election history. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! ___________ ylojceq | Tom Kunich | Rides | 4 | November 10th 04 04:26 AM |