Talking Points Memo covers today's developments well, so I'll link there.
A quote? Sure...
So now Rossi has a new angle. He says Gregoire should join him in calling for a whole new election to be held. You know, to ensure the integrity of the process.
Newsflash: she ain't interested.
Says Gregoire: "A do-over ... is only in golf. We call it a mulligan. This is not golf, and this is not practice. This is an election. It's had three counts."
Now some of the locals are putting together an email campaign to tell Rossi it's time to hang it up.
Blue Oregon has posted essentially the same information as Talking Points Memo. The mulligan quote is attributed to "Gregoire spokesman Morton Brilliant" on this site.
Is Gregoire's campaign saying that what happened a few days back in the Ukraine was democracy gone wrong? I support her, but Brilliant needs to pull away from the news coverage of his own canidate and glance at the world headlines time to time.
A note on the attribution, AP gives the quote to Gregoire, then the AP gives the quote to Brilliant.
There is one big difference between Washington and the Ukraine. The AP offers the following from Washington Secretary of State Sam Reed:
While there were mistakes, Reed told a news conference, "at this time there is nothing that appears fraudulent."
"I saw serious mistakes being made. I saw them being corrected," Reed said. "That's part of the process. The system itself has worked well."
Still, there is Republican talk of a "Smoking Gun" that may overturn the election... Again.
New Frames tosses this one out, and I agree. It is why I have given so much attention here to my northern neighbors:
The Dem lawyers in this case were the kind of junk-yard dogs we could have used in 2000, but of course that's the past. So let's use these guys in the future. They know how to fight to get every vote counted (note to DNC.)
Awhile back, blogs all over had their eye on this issue. Is it too early in the morning today or has the attention span waned? I will say, it makes me nervous how political blogs are hovering around the Tsunami issue.
I hope someone has their eye on the White House. If they want to slide a couple of zingers through, this is an opportune time to do it.
Friday, December 31, 2004
ABC People of the Year: Bloggers
I posted the following as a comment a few minutes ago on PoliPundit... I just wanted to add, ABC didn't mention our notorious typos and lack of editing. Shame on them. We are proud of our slacker approach to publishing...
I know that all of the hoopla about blogging this year is about the growing influence of “power” blogs on the political sphere, but it always seems strange to me that something I have been doing for over three years is suddenly “New” and “Exciting.”
To me is shows just how behind and out of step the traditional media is.
I suppose it also makes me feel appologetic… After the election I split my blog in two- one for the 13 year old girl within who wants to Journal, and another for irrelevant political ranting.
So, since I have a “new” blog for politics, I feel like I am just jumping on the bandwagon, though the reality is far from the truth.
My blog on 9/11 recieved hundreds of hits that day since I was providing up to the minute updates and many people who were stuck at work could not get information from the established media websites because they kept crashing from the volume.
But blogging was irrelevant until this year, I am told.
I also wonder, are any blogs started since the election going to be taken seriously because of all of this old media hype?
I know that all of the hoopla about blogging this year is about the growing influence of “power” blogs on the political sphere, but it always seems strange to me that something I have been doing for over three years is suddenly “New” and “Exciting.”
To me is shows just how behind and out of step the traditional media is.
I suppose it also makes me feel appologetic… After the election I split my blog in two- one for the 13 year old girl within who wants to Journal, and another for irrelevant political ranting.
So, since I have a “new” blog for politics, I feel like I am just jumping on the bandwagon, though the reality is far from the truth.
My blog on 9/11 recieved hundreds of hits that day since I was providing up to the minute updates and many people who were stuck at work could not get information from the established media websites because they kept crashing from the volume.
But blogging was irrelevant until this year, I am told.
I also wonder, are any blogs started since the election going to be taken seriously because of all of this old media hype?
Wednesday, December 29, 2004
Engaging Red America
Alice at GOTV thinks that the Democrats can engage new communities in the suburbs by touching them first, before the Republicans move in.
I do not know if capturing these suburban voters is going to be as easy as slapping an “I’m first!” line on their hypothetical Commenting tool, but it is a start. Name recognition is huge, and the first name in the spotlight is always going to be harder to beat in many people minds.
I also very much agree with the idea that:
Human beings are social creatures, and the physical presence of a campaign, by itself, can sway voters our way. And physical presence must include personal contact with campaign volunteers.
Just from anecdotal evidence, I would guess that my little, recently developed valley about 40 minutes from downtown Portland, OR went about 2 to 1 for Bush over Kerry. I just moved out here last fall and it was shocking for this Urban Liberal Type to suddenly find myself back in the Republican dominated Suburbs for the first time since high school… But still, its not like we talk much with our neighbors out in these parts.
One other factor that plays where I live, I am in an “older” (built in the early 90s, I am guessing), apartment complex where there are also a high number of immigrants, many from Russia and the former Soviet states. I do not know how they went in the election, if they went at all, but as far as the established middle class goes, my guesstimate comes from the bumper sticker/yard sign counts.
Personally, I agree with Alice that discussions regarding party politics in these neighborhoods tend to stir up a lot of “clichés and stereotypes about suburban voters put forward by those who have never walked a precinct.”
Alice’s post seems to be inspired by an entry yesterday on Mercury Rising that concludes with the sentiment that, in order to engage these neighborhoods, in order to engage my neighborhood, well…
"Placating the exurbs" means placating racists who don't want their tax money going to help people whose skin tone is darker than theirs. Even if this really would get us votes, is this something we really want to do?
At least the Republicans sugar coat their insults with lies before they lay it on me.
Really, this is the sort of rhetoric that is making it difficult to engage with Red voters. In rural areas, it is my belief that there is a sense that Liberal Urban types mock their values. In suburban areas, stereotypes like the one above insult voters more directly. If you have just called someone a racist, they are not very likely to then listen to your ideas on Social Security. They are very likely to say, “Fuck you,” and then to pull the Elephant lever on Election Day.
Alice, in an earlier piece that she quotes on this recent post, writes, “Precinct operations are, by their nature, about treating people as individuals, not stereotypes.” This helps avoid making insulting assumptions about voters at the most grass roots level.
Unfortunately, it is not the precinct worker who is usually being quoted in the media. One insulting quote in the media can make it very difficult for a grass roots campaign volunteer to be given the time of day when approaching certain individuals.
The whole, “I know my party called you a racist asshole this morning on Good Morning America, but would you like to talk about the Democrat running for your State House against a man who just voted to knock 31 days off of your daughter’s school day?”
I suppose one good solution here is to get that insulted voter engaged by a friendly face, and that does depend on the precinct volunteers.
Alice’s “guide” for local campaign volunteers is a good, informative read on this subject.
My Assumptions about Winning Red Territories…
There are studies that contain a lot of useful data out there, but Democrats need to be very careful about how they interpret this data and about how they take the attack to the enemy.
Another belief I have is that the centrist swing is actually larger than many people give it credit for, even during these times, though I have not put together any data to support this. I feel the last two Presidential elections saw this swing split fairly evenly between the two candidates.
Now this would lead one to think that I would favor a DLC-style centrist Democratic Party, that Clintonesque (politically) candidates should be where the party focuses its efforts.
The problem is that this approach relies on strong candidates who can capture the center through the force of their personalities. Some years, the strongest just do not rise to the top. The party, by having a strong, clear platform, by delivering a strong message and by wrestling control of the debate away from the opposition, can win without having the Cult of Personality on their side.
When voters vote for a Republican, they know what they are getting. When voters look at Democrats, they are not always sure if they are getting a Dukakis or a Kerry. A Clinton or a Dean. There is no Democrat “Brand,” so to speak. It may seem distasteful to use advertising terms when referring to political issues, but trust me, the Republicans use these tools extensively and have been spanking the Democrats with them since 1992.
So, even by moving the party into the centrist, Republican-lite land, there is still no guarantee of victory since the other side will just brand the candidate as a liberal anyway, or a flip-flopper, or a… Many of the conversations I had with people who were not caught up in the partisan furor last fall tended to express the sentiment, “Bush is an idiot, but I don’t know what Kerry is all about.”
If the Democrats had a strong identity behind Kerry, it would have helped define him for the national audience and it would have helped to insulate him from extremist attacks on his personal credibility. It surely would have been enough to gain several hundred thousand votes in Ohio and Florida.
So, what should “Brand” Democrat look like?
There is a lot of emotion out there that the future DNC leadership will throw some of the core issues onto the bonfire of sacrifice for victories in 2006 and 2008. In fact, a lot of this debate may even be inspired by Rasputin-like Republican whisperers already drooling over their 2006 mid-term slogan, “The Democrats have no values, they will say anything to win!”
Most people are not one-issue voters. Those who are will not change parties because the platform is softened. The Democrats should absolutely not change their platform on the key issues in a vague attempt to reach voters who see devil horns on every donkey.
Still, I believe that could be tremendous value in expanding some of these debates within the party…
There could be value in the Democrats saying, “We will always defend a Woman’s right to choose, but we also want to start working with the opposition on programs that focus on preventing unwanted pregnancies.” And there could be value in building these programs around abstinence, though making sure that they are based on fact and that birth control methods are discussed, as well.
I do not believe that approaches such as these would mean that the Democrats are sacrificing their values. I do believe that it would make them play better among voters with conservative values who, for what ever reason, appear to vote against their economic interests.
I am not talking about running Pro-Life candidates in Republican strongholds; I am talking about running candidates who share the values surrounding the issue with their constituents.
While we will not win swing voters without a tightly controlled message from the Party, and while we will not win conservative values voters by sacrificing the core principals of the party, we will lose election after election if we continue to be defined by the same handful of social issues over and over again.
We cannot be the party of abortionists who want to put condoms into Kindergarten where we can teach them how to use them properly in different gay sex acts.
We can be the party that defends family values by protecting children from the dangers of irresponsible sexual behavior while protecting the rights of all Americans.
When it comes to these issues, it is really more a matter of controlling the message than it is a need to change the core issues themselves. But more than this, it may even be that the focus on these issues in the first place is what is turning off many Red voters.
I do not believe that many of the people who went Republican in November really understood that voting for Bush was voting against their economic interest. The social issues and, more importantly, the War on Terror and the old adage from 1864 about not changing horses in the middle of the stream tilted them over to Bush.
If the noise about the social issues is dampened, there would be more room for the Democrats to focus on what they used to do the best, representing the issues at the heart of blue collar and farming communities.
Okay, it is time to end the rambling attempt at armchair political science now. I will post this and I may review and revise this post in the future. Or, more likely, I will just continue on about these themes in a later post.
Just don’t call me a racist because of where I live and I am happy. And my vote is not at risk, even if you do call me a racist. But I will remember on the battlefield of internal party politics.
I do not know if capturing these suburban voters is going to be as easy as slapping an “I’m first!” line on their hypothetical Commenting tool, but it is a start. Name recognition is huge, and the first name in the spotlight is always going to be harder to beat in many people minds.
I also very much agree with the idea that:
Human beings are social creatures, and the physical presence of a campaign, by itself, can sway voters our way. And physical presence must include personal contact with campaign volunteers.
Just from anecdotal evidence, I would guess that my little, recently developed valley about 40 minutes from downtown Portland, OR went about 2 to 1 for Bush over Kerry. I just moved out here last fall and it was shocking for this Urban Liberal Type to suddenly find myself back in the Republican dominated Suburbs for the first time since high school… But still, its not like we talk much with our neighbors out in these parts.
One other factor that plays where I live, I am in an “older” (built in the early 90s, I am guessing), apartment complex where there are also a high number of immigrants, many from Russia and the former Soviet states. I do not know how they went in the election, if they went at all, but as far as the established middle class goes, my guesstimate comes from the bumper sticker/yard sign counts.
Personally, I agree with Alice that discussions regarding party politics in these neighborhoods tend to stir up a lot of “clichés and stereotypes about suburban voters put forward by those who have never walked a precinct.”
Alice’s post seems to be inspired by an entry yesterday on Mercury Rising that concludes with the sentiment that, in order to engage these neighborhoods, in order to engage my neighborhood, well…
"Placating the exurbs" means placating racists who don't want their tax money going to help people whose skin tone is darker than theirs. Even if this really would get us votes, is this something we really want to do?
At least the Republicans sugar coat their insults with lies before they lay it on me.
Really, this is the sort of rhetoric that is making it difficult to engage with Red voters. In rural areas, it is my belief that there is a sense that Liberal Urban types mock their values. In suburban areas, stereotypes like the one above insult voters more directly. If you have just called someone a racist, they are not very likely to then listen to your ideas on Social Security. They are very likely to say, “Fuck you,” and then to pull the Elephant lever on Election Day.
Alice, in an earlier piece that she quotes on this recent post, writes, “Precinct operations are, by their nature, about treating people as individuals, not stereotypes.” This helps avoid making insulting assumptions about voters at the most grass roots level.
Unfortunately, it is not the precinct worker who is usually being quoted in the media. One insulting quote in the media can make it very difficult for a grass roots campaign volunteer to be given the time of day when approaching certain individuals.
The whole, “I know my party called you a racist asshole this morning on Good Morning America, but would you like to talk about the Democrat running for your State House against a man who just voted to knock 31 days off of your daughter’s school day?”
I suppose one good solution here is to get that insulted voter engaged by a friendly face, and that does depend on the precinct volunteers.
Alice’s “guide” for local campaign volunteers is a good, informative read on this subject.
My Assumptions about Winning Red Territories…
There are studies that contain a lot of useful data out there, but Democrats need to be very careful about how they interpret this data and about how they take the attack to the enemy.
Another belief I have is that the centrist swing is actually larger than many people give it credit for, even during these times, though I have not put together any data to support this. I feel the last two Presidential elections saw this swing split fairly evenly between the two candidates.
Now this would lead one to think that I would favor a DLC-style centrist Democratic Party, that Clintonesque (politically) candidates should be where the party focuses its efforts.
The problem is that this approach relies on strong candidates who can capture the center through the force of their personalities. Some years, the strongest just do not rise to the top. The party, by having a strong, clear platform, by delivering a strong message and by wrestling control of the debate away from the opposition, can win without having the Cult of Personality on their side.
When voters vote for a Republican, they know what they are getting. When voters look at Democrats, they are not always sure if they are getting a Dukakis or a Kerry. A Clinton or a Dean. There is no Democrat “Brand,” so to speak. It may seem distasteful to use advertising terms when referring to political issues, but trust me, the Republicans use these tools extensively and have been spanking the Democrats with them since 1992.
So, even by moving the party into the centrist, Republican-lite land, there is still no guarantee of victory since the other side will just brand the candidate as a liberal anyway, or a flip-flopper, or a… Many of the conversations I had with people who were not caught up in the partisan furor last fall tended to express the sentiment, “Bush is an idiot, but I don’t know what Kerry is all about.”
If the Democrats had a strong identity behind Kerry, it would have helped define him for the national audience and it would have helped to insulate him from extremist attacks on his personal credibility. It surely would have been enough to gain several hundred thousand votes in Ohio and Florida.
So, what should “Brand” Democrat look like?
There is a lot of emotion out there that the future DNC leadership will throw some of the core issues onto the bonfire of sacrifice for victories in 2006 and 2008. In fact, a lot of this debate may even be inspired by Rasputin-like Republican whisperers already drooling over their 2006 mid-term slogan, “The Democrats have no values, they will say anything to win!”
Most people are not one-issue voters. Those who are will not change parties because the platform is softened. The Democrats should absolutely not change their platform on the key issues in a vague attempt to reach voters who see devil horns on every donkey.
Still, I believe that could be tremendous value in expanding some of these debates within the party…
There could be value in the Democrats saying, “We will always defend a Woman’s right to choose, but we also want to start working with the opposition on programs that focus on preventing unwanted pregnancies.” And there could be value in building these programs around abstinence, though making sure that they are based on fact and that birth control methods are discussed, as well.
I do not believe that approaches such as these would mean that the Democrats are sacrificing their values. I do believe that it would make them play better among voters with conservative values who, for what ever reason, appear to vote against their economic interests.
I am not talking about running Pro-Life candidates in Republican strongholds; I am talking about running candidates who share the values surrounding the issue with their constituents.
While we will not win swing voters without a tightly controlled message from the Party, and while we will not win conservative values voters by sacrificing the core principals of the party, we will lose election after election if we continue to be defined by the same handful of social issues over and over again.
We cannot be the party of abortionists who want to put condoms into Kindergarten where we can teach them how to use them properly in different gay sex acts.
We can be the party that defends family values by protecting children from the dangers of irresponsible sexual behavior while protecting the rights of all Americans.
When it comes to these issues, it is really more a matter of controlling the message than it is a need to change the core issues themselves. But more than this, it may even be that the focus on these issues in the first place is what is turning off many Red voters.
I do not believe that many of the people who went Republican in November really understood that voting for Bush was voting against their economic interest. The social issues and, more importantly, the War on Terror and the old adage from 1864 about not changing horses in the middle of the stream tilted them over to Bush.
If the noise about the social issues is dampened, there would be more room for the Democrats to focus on what they used to do the best, representing the issues at the heart of blue collar and farming communities.
Okay, it is time to end the rambling attempt at armchair political science now. I will post this and I may review and revise this post in the future. Or, more likely, I will just continue on about these themes in a later post.
Just don’t call me a racist because of where I live and I am happy. And my vote is not at risk, even if you do call me a racist. But I will remember on the battlefield of internal party politics.
Tuesday, December 28, 2004
100 Ideas to Fix the Democratic Party
Oh yeah... This is good. Now, do we actually have any new ideas?
As a first step, we are collecting ideas from December 14th through January 14th. We will take the best 100 ideas and submit it to the new Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman and to every Democratic U.S. Senator, Member of Congress and Governor.
If you have any ideas and are not already running for DNC Chair, please submit them here...
http://standupdemocrats.org/
As a first step, we are collecting ideas from December 14th through January 14th. We will take the best 100 ideas and submit it to the new Democratic National Committee (DNC) chairman and to every Democratic U.S. Senator, Member of Congress and Governor.
If you have any ideas and are not already running for DNC Chair, please submit them here...
http://standupdemocrats.org/
Sharing Christmas with our Muslim Brothers: Ann Coulter is Crazy... Part 1,472
My, oh my...
I saw this quote on Wonkette this morning and thought she was just taking a snarky, cheap shot at Ann. It's easy and it's a nice warm up exercise for anyone with a conscience and a brain.
To The People Of Islam:
Just think: If we'd invaded your countries, killed your leaders and converted you to Christianity YOU'D ALL BE OPENING CHRISTMAS PRESENTS RIGHT ABOUT NOW!
Merry Christmas
The Wonkette finishes up with...
We're thinking this is one reason to convert most Muslims' haven't thought of, but, ironically, "Because we want to give them Christmas gifts" was actually in the first draft of Colin Powell's UN presentation.
One of these quotes is a cheap shot by the Wonkette; the other is REAL...
Oh, Ann. Al Franken and all the others are right. There is something wrong with you, honey. Admitting that you need help is the first step.
Ann actually put this on her web site. Or whoever runs Ann's website put it on there. Either way, it is there.
We could actually solve this whole mid-east problem by slaughtering all the Jews in Israel and turning control over to the PLO, assassinating every leader in North America, Europe and the former Warsaw Pact and replacing their legislative bodies with Islamic mullahs, and converting the masses to Islam.
Actually, historically, this is not how Muslims operate. In the past, Islamic empires generally leave the local leadership structures in place and do not forcibly convert anyone, though they do levy additional taxes on the new non-Muslim populations.
This slaughter and convert practice more accurately reflects western imperial tactics.
Now, if I seriously suggested the above solution, I'd be labeled crazy. And if I was a Muslim who seriously suggested the above solution, the American government would probably find a way to incarcerate or kill me.
Ann, however, just gets more publicity and sells more books.
Ann is crazy, but she knows where her bread is buttered.
Maybe I am just bitter because my selfish inner child wanted more Christmas presents.
Christmas Cancelled?
Anncoulter.org
UPDATE:
How fun... According to Atrios, it is official: The Liberal Heathen War on Easter began yesterday! After the success we had ruining Christmas, I fear we may be the underdogs here, but let the effort begin anyway.
The War on Easter
I saw this quote on Wonkette this morning and thought she was just taking a snarky, cheap shot at Ann. It's easy and it's a nice warm up exercise for anyone with a conscience and a brain.
To The People Of Islam:
Just think: If we'd invaded your countries, killed your leaders and converted you to Christianity YOU'D ALL BE OPENING CHRISTMAS PRESENTS RIGHT ABOUT NOW!
Merry Christmas
The Wonkette finishes up with...
We're thinking this is one reason to convert most Muslims' haven't thought of, but, ironically, "Because we want to give them Christmas gifts" was actually in the first draft of Colin Powell's UN presentation.
One of these quotes is a cheap shot by the Wonkette; the other is REAL...
Oh, Ann. Al Franken and all the others are right. There is something wrong with you, honey. Admitting that you need help is the first step.
Ann actually put this on her web site. Or whoever runs Ann's website put it on there. Either way, it is there.
We could actually solve this whole mid-east problem by slaughtering all the Jews in Israel and turning control over to the PLO, assassinating every leader in North America, Europe and the former Warsaw Pact and replacing their legislative bodies with Islamic mullahs, and converting the masses to Islam.
Actually, historically, this is not how Muslims operate. In the past, Islamic empires generally leave the local leadership structures in place and do not forcibly convert anyone, though they do levy additional taxes on the new non-Muslim populations.
This slaughter and convert practice more accurately reflects western imperial tactics.
Now, if I seriously suggested the above solution, I'd be labeled crazy. And if I was a Muslim who seriously suggested the above solution, the American government would probably find a way to incarcerate or kill me.
Ann, however, just gets more publicity and sells more books.
Ann is crazy, but she knows where her bread is buttered.
Maybe I am just bitter because my selfish inner child wanted more Christmas presents.
Christmas Cancelled?
Anncoulter.org
UPDATE:
How fun... According to Atrios, it is official: The Liberal Heathen War on Easter began yesterday! After the success we had ruining Christmas, I fear we may be the underdogs here, but let the effort begin anyway.
The War on Easter
Sunday, December 26, 2004
An Absolute, Fundamental Right of a Democratic Society
It is an absolute fundamental of a democratic society that everyone who has the right to vote and casts a ballot should have their vote counted.
So says the godofthebasement.
Someone did not give this god his requested burnt offering, and now he is pissed. In order to appease his vengeance, I will post his e-mail here and I will invite him to be a contributor to this blog.
Hopefully he will be appeased by this post. If not, duck...
He is currently suffering from the work-only web access but he is getting anxious. He may soon hook up from home where he will be free to unleash his wrath upon all of us...
As I said before... He must really hate America.
The Republicans do have an ongoing problem with allowing votes to be counted.
The ongoing trend among Republicans is to first try to stop as many people as they can from voting in the first place via fraudulent felons lists, not putting ballot machines in Democratic precincts, challenging anyone who is not white or has a non-Anglo name and then, among other tactics, by trying to stop votes from being counted.
I am explicitly saying they committed fraud: it is clear that Republicans share no interest in allowing people to vote in the first place or in counting the votes of all eligible voters. It is an absolute fundamental of a democratic society that everyone who has the right to vote and casts a ballot should have their vote counted.
The Republicans have consistently opposed this and have proven themselves to be fundamentally against democracy on both the state and national levels. They are dreaming of a fascist state where it would be illegal to vote against them.
Think that's an exaggeration?
Check out the books by Anne Coulter and Bill O'Reilly. It is terrifying shit.
Republican= Fascist. Period.
They are pure evil and they want to steal from the poor to give to the rich, to steal from the middle class to give to the corporations and to run the country for the benefit of the rich and the powerful...
Sorry about that. My pissedoffedness has no limit and I'm ranting again. Maybe I should start a website [http://democracyindistress.com ?!?]!
Then I could express all of this without dumping it on my friends! godofthebasement.com is a good idea, and I need to get on it. One day I'll learn not to preach to the choir, but not today apparently.
Anyway, Christmas is going well here. This afternoon we went to this bar at this golf course where my sister's friend's husband works and we had a lot to drink. Nothing like getting fucked up with the family. For Christmas morning we're going to go to church to see my Dad play banjo. I guess that is what retired English professors do these days. I've never seen him perform and I'm looking forward to it.
Well that's all the news that is nowhere near fit to print, but clearly fit for a drunken rambling e-mail.
Let's just call it all a run up to a happy new year.
UPDATE: January 1, 2005 - 8:44 AM - A. F. Litt
I just wanted to quickly throw this link up...
It is a good rundown on what constitutes Election Fraud...
Major Tom on "Actionable Fraud" and More!
So says the godofthebasement.
Someone did not give this god his requested burnt offering, and now he is pissed. In order to appease his vengeance, I will post his e-mail here and I will invite him to be a contributor to this blog.
Hopefully he will be appeased by this post. If not, duck...
He is currently suffering from the work-only web access but he is getting anxious. He may soon hook up from home where he will be free to unleash his wrath upon all of us...
As I said before... He must really hate America.
The Republicans do have an ongoing problem with allowing votes to be counted.
The ongoing trend among Republicans is to first try to stop as many people as they can from voting in the first place via fraudulent felons lists, not putting ballot machines in Democratic precincts, challenging anyone who is not white or has a non-Anglo name and then, among other tactics, by trying to stop votes from being counted.
I am explicitly saying they committed fraud: it is clear that Republicans share no interest in allowing people to vote in the first place or in counting the votes of all eligible voters. It is an absolute fundamental of a democratic society that everyone who has the right to vote and casts a ballot should have their vote counted.
The Republicans have consistently opposed this and have proven themselves to be fundamentally against democracy on both the state and national levels. They are dreaming of a fascist state where it would be illegal to vote against them.
Think that's an exaggeration?
Check out the books by Anne Coulter and Bill O'Reilly. It is terrifying shit.
Republican= Fascist. Period.
They are pure evil and they want to steal from the poor to give to the rich, to steal from the middle class to give to the corporations and to run the country for the benefit of the rich and the powerful...
Sorry about that. My pissedoffedness has no limit and I'm ranting again. Maybe I should start a website [http://democracyindistress.com ?!?]!
Then I could express all of this without dumping it on my friends! godofthebasement.com is a good idea, and I need to get on it. One day I'll learn not to preach to the choir, but not today apparently.
Anyway, Christmas is going well here. This afternoon we went to this bar at this golf course where my sister's friend's husband works and we had a lot to drink. Nothing like getting fucked up with the family. For Christmas morning we're going to go to church to see my Dad play banjo. I guess that is what retired English professors do these days. I've never seen him perform and I'm looking forward to it.
Well that's all the news that is nowhere near fit to print, but clearly fit for a drunken rambling e-mail.
Let's just call it all a run up to a happy new year.
UPDATE: January 1, 2005 - 8:44 AM - A. F. Litt
I just wanted to quickly throw this link up...
It is a good rundown on what constitutes Election Fraud...
Major Tom on "Actionable Fraud" and More!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)