Worse case election scenarios...
-
I had a paranoid thought while taking my shower this morning. I found myself wondering what would happen if we have a repeat of the 2000 election - Bush wins by a slim electoral margin after the Supreme Court acts to stop attempts at recounts in some key state. The left in this country, and most (all?) of the people of the rest of the planet, are already foaming at the mouth angry with Bush. They already appear to believe that the antiquated democractic institutions of the U.S. have failed and that we have morhped into some kind of fascist like state where hordes of racist, christian zealots, brain washed by government controlled media and handicapped by a badly failed educational system, grant power to a capitalist controlled puppet government to protect them from the evil terrorists. In short, it seems to me that the Bush haters are not all that different in their basic world view from what motivates the terrorists - fear and loathing for the international system that maintains the virtually incalcuable hegemony of the U.S. Would such an event push people in any significant way to begin entertaining the possibility of an alliance with the terrorists? In other words, is there even a remote possibility that another "illigitimate" Bush term could provide the stimulus for an almost global terrorist movmement aimed at the U.S., with a much broader and deeper recruiting pool than just Islamic fanatics? Precisely how mad are people now, and how much angrier can they get? EDIT] Factoring in environmental issues, rising gas prices, etc.[/EDIT] "We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." David Barton , "As good an interpreter of the U.S. Constitution as any damned liberal"
a) you underestimate the loath of the terries, and overestimate the rage of the rest. b) Bush being reelected again will be yet another proof of the world being over the edge. Won't stop most of us going to the movies though. c) You might inquire at the UN for hep with democratic elections
we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen -
Well, yes. I mean, thats why I have them. If I thought some other view was better I would probably promote it instead. Wouldn't you? As so often happens as political systems evolve over time, what Moore considers to be the best for the country, I consider to be the worse, and vice versa. There really is very little room for compromise, and it is that very polarization that was the motivation for my original question.
-
Well, yes. I mean, thats why I have them. If I thought some other view was better I would probably promote it instead. Wouldn't you? As so often happens as political systems evolve over time, what Moore considers to be the best for the country, I consider to be the worse, and vice versa. There really is very little room for compromise, and it is that very polarization that was the motivation for my original question.
-
a) you underestimate the loath of the terries, and overestimate the rage of the rest. b) Bush being reelected again will be yet another proof of the world being over the edge. Won't stop most of us going to the movies though. c) You might inquire at the UN for hep with democratic elections
we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
sighist || Agile Programming | doxygenpeterchen wrote: You might inquire at the UN for hep with democratic elections Democrats Request U.N. Election Observers[^] ----------------------------------------------------- Bush To Iraqi Militants: 'Please Stop Bringing It On' - The Onion "Moore's prominent presence in the news brings to light some serious questions, such as 'Can't he at least try to look presentable?'" - The Onion
-
Stan Shannon wrote: I'm not suggesting at all that opposition to Bush is related to terrorism. I am asking whether or not it could become that given sufficient motivation. is this just preparation for upcoming comments should any protestors get out of hand in NYC ?
Mr. Bush's advisers said they were girding for the most extensive street demonstrations at any political convention since the Democrats nominated Hubert H. Humphrey in Chicago in 1968. But in contrast to that convention, which was severely undermined by televised displays of street rioting, Republicans said they would seek to turn any disruptions to their advantage, by portraying protests by even independent activists as Democratic-sanctioned displays of disrespect for a sitting president.
Chris Losinger wrote: independent activists How will they distinguish the few Indies in attendance from the sea of protesters mobilized by the DNC? I think the whole notion of protesting at a convention is just plain stupid. What do they hope to accomplish? It will not affect who gets nominated or change the party platform. I am sure that the networks will probably give the protesters more airtime than will be given to the convention. Maybe it will degrade into rioting, violence and looting, but that will only be an indictment of the wacos on the left...not Bush. Gary Kirkham A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose. - Jim Elliot Me blog, You read
-
Chris Losinger wrote: independent activists How will they distinguish the few Indies in attendance from the sea of protesters mobilized by the DNC? I think the whole notion of protesting at a convention is just plain stupid. What do they hope to accomplish? It will not affect who gets nominated or change the party platform. I am sure that the networks will probably give the protesters more airtime than will be given to the convention. Maybe it will degrade into rioting, violence and looting, but that will only be an indictment of the wacos on the left...not Bush. Gary Kirkham A working Program is one that has only unobserved bugs He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose. - Jim Elliot Me blog, You read
-
Chris Losinger wrote: yet our entire government is designed around the concept. Absolutely. And I think the next few years will test just how well designed it is.
-
I had a paranoid thought while taking my shower this morning. I found myself wondering what would happen if we have a repeat of the 2000 election - Bush wins by a slim electoral margin after the Supreme Court acts to stop attempts at recounts in some key state. The left in this country, and most (all?) of the people of the rest of the planet, are already foaming at the mouth angry with Bush. They already appear to believe that the antiquated democractic institutions of the U.S. have failed and that we have morhped into some kind of fascist like state where hordes of racist, christian zealots, brain washed by government controlled media and handicapped by a badly failed educational system, grant power to a capitalist controlled puppet government to protect them from the evil terrorists. In short, it seems to me that the Bush haters are not all that different in their basic world view from what motivates the terrorists - fear and loathing for the international system that maintains the virtually incalcuable hegemony of the U.S. Would such an event push people in any significant way to begin entertaining the possibility of an alliance with the terrorists? In other words, is there even a remote possibility that another "illigitimate" Bush term could provide the stimulus for an almost global terrorist movmement aimed at the U.S., with a much broader and deeper recruiting pool than just Islamic fanatics? Precisely how mad are people now, and how much angrier can they get? EDIT] Factoring in environmental issues, rising gas prices, etc.[/EDIT] "We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." David Barton , "As good an interpreter of the U.S. Constitution as any damned liberal"
So, you see me as a terrorist. That's nice. Fuck you too. -- ...Coca Cola, sometimes war...
-
So, you see me as a terrorist. That's nice. Fuck you too. -- ...Coca Cola, sometimes war...
Just asking a question.
-
a) you underestimate the loath of the terries, and overestimate the rage of the rest. b) Bush being reelected again will be yet another proof of the world being over the edge. Won't stop most of us going to the movies though. c) You might inquire at the UN for hep with democratic elections
we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen"terries" :confused: peterchen wrote: c) You might inquire at the UN for hep with democratic elections I'm sure the U.S. will ignore any input from that quarter.
-
Well, yes. I mean, thats why I have them. If I thought some other view was better I would probably promote it instead. Wouldn't you? As so often happens as political systems evolve over time, what Moore considers to be the best for the country, I consider to be the worse, and vice versa. There really is very little room for compromise, and it is that very polarization that was the motivation for my original question.
Can I play? :-D Stan Shannon wrote: If I thought some other view was better I would probably promote it instead. Your views contradict themselves and can therefore be considered irrelevant. The fact that you don't attempt to defend or clarify the contradictions previously illustrated is evidence that you lack the capacity for "rational thought". Now what?
I have a new Gold rating and I'm not afraid to use it.
-pete
-
Just asking a question.
Stan Shannon wrote: In short, it seems to me that the Bush haters are not all that different in their basic world view from what motivates the terrorists - fear and loathing for the international system that maintains the virtually incalcuable hegemony of the U.S. That was not a question, but a statement. I am nothing like a terrorist, and I am offended by those who compare me with terrorists. -- ...Coca Cola, sometimes war...
-
If the 2004 election was won fair and square by Bush with no hint of e-voting fraud, or fixing of voter list or any other subtle vote tampering, I as an ex-pat American in Canada would grin and bear 4 more years of Bush. If there is voter fraud, whatever it takes to right the wrong should be used. I very much doubt this will lead to huge grass-roots violent protests. But it is not impossible. Al Qaeda is bizarre backwards Islamic extremist orgaization that speaks Arabic exclusively, believes in the very anti-democratic concept of Sharia Law and and an integrated theocracy. I don't see any connection at all. ----------------------------- All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Jeff Bogan wrote: If there is voter fraud on whose part. did you read the post the other day abut 48,000 individuals that are registered to vote in both New York and Florida? Oddly enough 68% were Democrats, 12% were Republicans. Sounds as though there might have been significant fraud in 2000 Florida voting, but not as you have assumed - but on the part of Democrats. Mike "liberals are being driven crazy by the fact that Bush is so popular with Americans, and thus by the realization that anyone to the left of center is utterly marginal." JAMES TRAUB NY Times "I don't want a president who is friends with France or Germany" Me Paraphrasing Kerry: I've spoken to many world leaders - they all look at me and say, you've got to win. I just can't tell you who they are, I have a secret plan for Iraq Me
-
Stan Shannon wrote: In short, it seems to me that the Bush haters are not all that different in their basic world view from what motivates the terrorists - fear and loathing for the international system that maintains the virtually incalcuable hegemony of the U.S. That was not a question, but a statement. I am nothing like a terrorist, and I am offended by those who compare me with terrorists. -- ...Coca Cola, sometimes war...
-
I had a paranoid thought while taking my shower this morning. I found myself wondering what would happen if we have a repeat of the 2000 election - Bush wins by a slim electoral margin after the Supreme Court acts to stop attempts at recounts in some key state. The left in this country, and most (all?) of the people of the rest of the planet, are already foaming at the mouth angry with Bush. They already appear to believe that the antiquated democractic institutions of the U.S. have failed and that we have morhped into some kind of fascist like state where hordes of racist, christian zealots, brain washed by government controlled media and handicapped by a badly failed educational system, grant power to a capitalist controlled puppet government to protect them from the evil terrorists. In short, it seems to me that the Bush haters are not all that different in their basic world view from what motivates the terrorists - fear and loathing for the international system that maintains the virtually incalcuable hegemony of the U.S. Would such an event push people in any significant way to begin entertaining the possibility of an alliance with the terrorists? In other words, is there even a remote possibility that another "illigitimate" Bush term could provide the stimulus for an almost global terrorist movmement aimed at the U.S., with a much broader and deeper recruiting pool than just Islamic fanatics? Precisely how mad are people now, and how much angrier can they get? EDIT] Factoring in environmental issues, rising gas prices, etc.[/EDIT] "We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God." David Barton , "As good an interpreter of the U.S. Constitution as any damned liberal"
Good post Stan. Sure another election like the last one will be bad for the spirit of the US people. Especially as the president is the incumbent. Regardz Colin J Davies Attention: Watch this signature for an upcoming announcement that will affect you.
-
Stan Shannon wrote: In short, it seems to me that the Bush haters are not all that different in their basic world view from what motivates the terrorists - fear and loathing for the international system that maintains the virtually incalcuable hegemony of the U.S. That was not a question, but a statement. I am nothing like a terrorist, and I am offended by those who compare me with terrorists. -- ...Coca Cola, sometimes war...
I'm not implying that anyone is a terrorist only that given: a) A perceived collapse in democratic institutions within the U.S. b) The already quite real contempt and loathing for Bush, et al. c) The existence of already well organizezd and funded terrorist networks. d) At least some degree of philosophical commonality between the left and the existing terrorist infrastructure (in that they both appear to believe that the economic and military power of the U.S. is a threat, if nothing else). How great is the probability that *some* on the left could be tempted to avail themselves of the most readily available means of striking back at the U.S. Is the probability 0 or higher?
-
Can I play? :-D Stan Shannon wrote: If I thought some other view was better I would probably promote it instead. Your views contradict themselves and can therefore be considered irrelevant. The fact that you don't attempt to defend or clarify the contradictions previously illustrated is evidence that you lack the capacity for "rational thought". Now what?
I have a new Gold rating and I'm not afraid to use it.
-pete
palbano wrote: Your views contradict themselves and can therefore be considered irrelevant. I obviously don't believe they do. Could you cite an example?
-
Paul Lyons wrote: In terms of total dollars, yes. As a percentage of GDP, it is not even close. And when waaas the highest debt/GDP ratio? Post-WW2. I am willing to bet it was under Bush Sr. Also you fail to mention the fact there has been very little inflation, and the GDP expanded greatly under Clinton. Who incidently managed to eliminate deficits and post surplus and the longest running positive growth cycle in the 20th century. The Feds having been keeping prime rates low and more importantly mortgage rate at an all time low. This has resulted in a building boom that has sustained this economy but by increasing debt of the average person by quite a bit. This does not address the trade deficit, and is not helped at all by the destruction of manufacturing jobs. The Asians increasingly taking over manufacturing, pilfering our intellectual property, and keeping their currency artificially low. These are issues that the executive branch should be taking care of and are not. ----------------------------- All truth passes through 3 stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Jeff Bogan wrote: And when waaas the highest debt/GDP ratio? Post-WW2. I am willing to bet it was under Bush Sr. No, it was after WWII with the most recent peak coming in '95. Jeff Bogan wrote: Also you fail to mention the fact there has been very little inflation, and the GDP expanded greatly under Clinton. Who incidently managed to eliminate deficits and post surplus and the longest running positive growth cycle in the 20th century. And to remind you, I said you made some good points... I am not discounting any of the previous expansion or any of the credit that should be dispensed to the Fed, Congress, and the Clinton Administration. Again, you need to gain a better understanding of the FOMC actions on the economy and the business cycles that drive it. I personally don't give a hoot which of the mutton heads winds up in the white house! Either way, both choices are pathetic!
Paul Lyons, CCPL
Certified Code Project Lurker -
We already know that the US will have a civil war in 2005. John Titor, the time traveler from 2036 says so: For a few months now, I have been trying to alert anyone that would listen to the possibility of a civil war in the United States in 2005... Take a close look at the county-by-county voting map from the last elections.[^] :-D ----------------------------------------------------- Bush To Iraqi Militants: 'Please Stop Bringing It On' - The Onion "Moore's prominent presence in the news brings to light some serious questions, such as 'Can't he at least try to look presentable?'" - The Onion
Brit wrote: We already know that the US will have a civil war in 2005. John Titor, Is that John Titor's first prediction that can be tested? Regardz Colin J Davies Attention: Watch this signature for an upcoming announcement that will affect you.
-
I'm not implying that anyone is a terrorist only that given: a) A perceived collapse in democratic institutions within the U.S. b) The already quite real contempt and loathing for Bush, et al. c) The existence of already well organizezd and funded terrorist networks. d) At least some degree of philosophical commonality between the left and the existing terrorist infrastructure (in that they both appear to believe that the economic and military power of the U.S. is a threat, if nothing else). How great is the probability that *some* on the left could be tempted to avail themselves of the most readily available means of striking back at the U.S. Is the probability 0 or higher?
Stan Shannon wrote: How great is the probability that *some* on the left could be tempted to avail themselves of the most readily available means of striking back at the U.S. Yeah and what is the probability (at any point in time) of a bunch of right wing extremists attempting to take over the country? Above zero? Well there ya go, we'd better watch out! We even have evidence of how pissed off those crazies get when a Democrat is President. You know what I think? I think if Kerry wins, the terrorists are going to align themselves with the wing nuts to take over the country! SHIT, I forgot to build my bunker! Really Stan, your argument is falling down all over the place. Do you really believe that the lefties in this country are going to jump ship to wage war against the US with AQ? Just because we don't agree with your vision for it? Get a fucking grip man. BTW, I know you're going to answer Yes to the last question, so don't even bother. You'd be better off spending that time building your bunker and finding your tinfoil hat. I still haven't found what I'm lookin' for - U2