Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 11/25/2002 8:05:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/26/2002 8:10:38 AM EDT by ilikelegs]
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 8:12:36 PM EDT
Done. Gore 89% Bush 11% Hit it guys.
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 8:13:11 PM EDT
Done.
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 8:23:09 PM EDT
gore is a moron. he and tipper were on the today show not long ago and the whines of the popular vote and lost election echoed in the air. reminded me of a snl skit.... let's see....how does that saying go that some wise person said? oh yes. "is it better to be gored by boar, or bored by a gore?"
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 8:50:09 PM EDT
Gore 83% Bush 15% Other 1%
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 8:53:14 PM EDT
I just received a porno spam email, BUT!!! the to list was www.algore04.com. Yet another perverted porn site [puke]
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 8:56:56 PM EDT
Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?
View Quote
Absolutely not, but I'm not naive enough to blame my own problems on the President. Too bad more people don't agree with me!z
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 8:57:34 PM EDT
My post in the "Comments to Gore": [b]Gore, do your party a favor and BOW OUT NOW. The last thing we need is another loser candidate. LOOK AT THE POLLS, you're a loser! You should run, but I'm not talking about for president, I'm talking about running away from politics and becoming a lumberjack or something. Just go away before you cause more disruption within your party by yet ANOTHER loss.[/b]
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 8:58:34 PM EDT
KILL THE POLL- We're still down.
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 9:46:52 PM EDT
Gore 77 Bush 20 Other 2 Total 97 Flood it. Are y'all reading this hypocracy? This pathetic spew? HAHAHA!
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 9:47:49 PM EDT
algoresupport2004@presidency.com Have at it...
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 9:56:12 PM EDT
75-22% now.....
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 10:29:50 PM EDT
[b]"Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?"[/b] I was all ready with a snappy comeback for that question before I opened this thread: "Who are you, Al Gore?"
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 10:35:16 PM EDT
72-25% i wonder if he will sue to include this poll when they count the ballots?
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 10:39:51 PM EDT
Make a Contribution :: Direct Payment -or- Accept Offer | View Contributors | (?) We currently have $0.00 in our chest. You can use this space for a personal message about Community Chest. Just go to the My Community tab in your Control Center, click the Manage Community Chest button, and you will see the message space at the bottom of the
View Quote
WHAT!?? "$0.00 in our chest" how can that be? f___ing loser.
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 10:47:57 PM EDT
Don't bother. Better to let him gain a false sense of security. [:D]
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 10:56:18 PM EDT
No I am not better off. In 2000 I still had a job. Actually I had a job all through the klinton/gore administration, but none since bush took office.
Link Posted: 11/25/2002 11:08:37 PM EDT
A.G... 70.37% G.B. 27.78% other 1.85%
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 4:33:13 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 4:45:09 AM EDT
I clicked on GWB but it wouldn't up the numbers any....[shock]....hmmmmm...
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:17:22 AM EDT
[b]Are you better off than you were 4 years ago in 2004? [/b] Only if the AWB sunsets.....
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:19:18 AM EDT
Originally Posted By mikNtx: ... the whines of the popular vote and lost election echoed in the air ...
View Quote
I'm not defending, endorsing, or supporting Al Gore in any way, but anyone who thinks of the electoral college system as anything other than a tool for the preservation of a two-party government, is delusional. In 2000, I wasn't too keen on either major candidate, but I couldn't help but find it somewhat disconcerting to think that a man could win the popular vote by over 250,000 and still lose the election. The Democrats and Republicans both use the electoral college to squeeze out competition from grass-roots candidates and third parties, and maintain a duopoly over the American political process. Anyone who values a truly democratic process of electing our President should be screaming from the highest hill for a constitutional amendment to abolish the electoral college. Just my $0.02. iiioxx
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:20:54 AM EDT
78/40 Keep hitting them. Range 2 clicks fire for effect!
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:27:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Frog_Legs: 78/40 Keep hitting them. Range 2 clicks fire for effect!
View Quote
78/40?? ENRON math strikes again.
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:31:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:35:22 AM EDT
First of all, I am better off than I was when Gore was running the country. Second, we need to encourage Al to run. We should be sending him money. I feel better about him in the race than Kerry, Edwards, or God help us Hitlery. GunLvr
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:38:01 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:39:24 AM EDT
60.47% George W. Bush (45) 34.88% Other (6) (display visitors suggestions) 4.65% Total of votes: 129
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:42:00 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: No I am not better off. In 2000 I still had a job. Actually I had a job all through the klinton/gore administration, but none since bush took office.
View Quote
I've been in a similar situation. I lost my last full-time job shortly after Bush took office, and I have been walking the tightrope of self-employment ever since. I don't blame Bush at all for losing my job. I lost my job because like a lot of others, the president of my company was a crook. However, I AM starting to blame Bush for my inability to find a new job. In a few months, it will have been 2 years since I had a steady paycheck coming in. I have NEVER gone so long without steady work. I'm all for Homeland Security and National Defense, but if Bush doesn't stop spending all of his time trying to find an excuse to invade Iraq, and start expending some real effort to get the economy rolling again, there isn't going to be much left at home worth defending. His strategy so far has been limited to corporate insurance subsidies and tax cuts that benefit mainly corporations and the very wealthy. This strikes me as hauntingly similar to the "trickle-down" economic theory of the Reagan administration. It didn't work in the 80's, it isn't going to work now. If Bush (and the Congress in general) were really concerned about the American economy they'd stop giving tax breaks and government contracts to companies that are exporting their workforce overseas or south of the border and reincorporating in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying US corporate taxes. Everyday, more manufacturing jobs go to Mexico and more IT jobs go to India, and our tax dollars are subsidizing it.
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:45:15 AM EDT
Originally Posted By Arock:
Originally Posted By Frog_Legs: 78/40 Keep hitting them. Range 2 clicks fire for effect!
View Quote
78/40?? ENRON math strikes again.
View Quote
I think that was the total vote numbers, however, I did not specify so I'll take a Mulligan.[BD]
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 5:55:38 AM EDT
[b]Man...I'm serious now...lets give him Hell in a Hand Basket!!!!!!!!![/b] Al Gore (78) 58.21% George W. Bush (50) 37.31% Other (6) (display visitors suggestions) 4.48% Total of votes: 134
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 6:09:44 AM EDT
Done. Al 78 GWB 54 other 6 MM419
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 6:27:52 AM EDT
I'll vote for Bush on this pole just for spite, but I won't vote for him in '04.
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 6:42:29 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 6:48:27 AM EDT
Originally Posted By iiioxx:
Originally Posted By mikNtx: ... the whines of the popular vote and lost election echoed in the air ...
View Quote
I'm not defending, endorsing, or supporting Al Gore in any way, but anyone who thinks of the electoral college system as anything other than a tool for the preservation of a two-party government, is delusional. In 2000, I wasn't too keen on either major candidate, but I couldn't help but find it somewhat disconcerting to think that a man could win the popular vote by over 250,000 and still lose the election. The Democrats and Republicans both use the electoral college to squeeze out competition from grass-roots candidates and third parties, and maintain a duopoly over the American political process. Anyone who values a truly democratic process of electing our President should be screaming from the highest hill for a constitutional amendment to abolish the electoral college. Just my $0.02. iiioxx
View Quote
True democracy is when a 3 wolves and a sheep vote on what's for dinner. Are you sure that's what you want?
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 7:10:03 AM EDT
iiioxx=[:K]??? You decide. BTW, please welcome Balzac72 and mcnielsen as the newest members of Algore 2004!
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 8:11:03 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 8:30:53 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 8:40:00 AM EDT
Done. GW is less than two points behind The Tree now... Speaks volumes, considering it's a DEM site!
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 8:47:19 AM EDT
There it is! Al Gore Support Poll In 2004 who will you vote for? Al Gore (78) 47.85% George W. Bush (79) 48.47% Other (6) (display visitors suggestions) 3.68% Total of votes: 163
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 8:54:36 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:13:59 AM EDT
voted again from work bush is ahead 50 - 46%
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:14:19 AM EDT
In 2004 who will you vote for? Al Gore (78) 46.15% George W. Bush (85) 50.3% Other (6) (display visitors suggestions) 3.55% Total of votes: 169
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:18:22 AM EDT
Hahahahahahahaha! Gore is losing (86 to 78) on his own "Support Center". [^]
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:20:20 AM EDT
AlGore: 45.61% (78) GWB: 50.88% (87) Other: 3.51% (6) Give 'em the guns, boys! [50]
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:35:12 AM EDT
Al Gore (78) 45.09% George W. Bush (89) 51.45% Other (6) 3.47% Total of votes: 173 Lol! Scott
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:37:24 AM EDT
Originally Posted By iiioxx:
Originally Posted By mikNtx: ... the whines of the popular vote and lost election echoed in the air ...
View Quote
I'm not defending, endorsing, or supporting Al Gore in any way, but anyone who thinks of the electoral college system as anything other than a tool for the preservation of a two-party government, is delusional. In 2000, I wasn't too keen on either major candidate, but I couldn't help but find it somewhat disconcerting to think that a man could win the popular vote by over 250,000 and still lose the election. The Democrats and Republicans both use the electoral college to squeeze out competition from grass-roots candidates and third parties, and maintain a duopoly over the American political process. Anyone who values a truly democratic process of electing our President should be screaming from the highest hill for a constitutional amendment to abolish the electoral college. Just my $0.02. iiioxx
View Quote
It's as well you raise the issue. First, let me suggest you look at the map of the last election, showing which states went for whom. I think it will be abundantly clear that the last election was an illustration of the GOOD reasons for the Electoral College. The map will show what a small portion of the country went for Gore. Looking at it from the practical side, that small part of the country, albeit with large population centers would dictate to the rest of us. This is precisely the reason for the College. When the Constitution was written, three was already concern that the large population centers would exercise an undue amount of control over the rest of the country. Without the Electoral College, a self-appointed elite would live in small areas, and the rest of us would be serfs on the land, without rights, but existing to serve. Look at the map. The graphic really drives the point home. Sorry I don't have a reference here, but there had been one posted a while back. And, I'm sure there would be some popping up in a search engine. As far as the two party system is concerned, I have my own dislikes about it. Yes, all too often I have to hold my nose while voting. But, in a total popular vote election, thre would be an even greater chance of dictatorship by the winning party. Votes would be drained from one , and the other would have an apparently "greater mandate." Even if there were a 51% requirement in the law, I still point to the argument above regarding the Electoral College.
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:37:59 AM EDT
Al Gore Support Poll In 2004 who will you vote for? Al Gore (78) 44.83% George W. Bush (90) 51.72% Other (6) (display visitors suggestions) 3.45% Total of votes: 174 ARH
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:50:19 AM EDT
I had the pleasure of meeting Mr. and Mrs. Gore last week at the Tattered Cover down in LODO. Many members of this site gave me advice on preparing for the event, and although I don't remember the name of the guy/gal who suggested that I fill up on burritos before the visit, I did get a real kick out of that, and was smiling broadly as I walked up to the Gores 'cause I had the image of farting as I shook Mr. Gore's hand in mind. I bought both of the books, and had the photo collection (Can't remember the title. . .both books are still down in the bag in the trunk. If you're interested, then do a web search.) addressed to my parents. I hope that my father's eyes will recover from the terribly high roll that is sure to follow the Christmas morning unwrapping and recognition of the authors and signatures. You know how celebrities, except for athletes, generally look quite small in person? Well, not the case for Mr. Gore. The guy is huge. Seemed like a pro quarterback to me.
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:51:41 AM EDT
Wanted to add this separately, as it's actually along the lines of the thread. This "better off" (or "worse" as the case may be) is an argument that likely will be a major point in the next election. The results of the recent Congressional elections surprised me because of it. I think we need to remember that the current decline in the economy results from two things, one of which is only slightly under control of the President. The first problem is that the economy of the 90's was basically a fraud. Everything was simply talked up. Anyone in Economics will tell you that a lot of economics is perception, and resultant self-fulfilling prophesies (I'm in ecstacy, everything is wonderful, Dr. Pangloss was a pessimist. Go spend. If enough people follow it, business picks up). Anything with dot com skyrocketed. Certain people (rolling eyes) hollered how they were of the "new age" and it was a "new economy." Anyone around the Market for any time can tell you that "no tree grows to the sky." That the puffery came back down is simply natural. I submit that nothing deviated strongly from a long term trend line. So, the aberration in terms of an upward spike was just that, an oddity. There were profits to be made in both directions - IF you got the timing right. Things were not to such an hysteria before. This is a return to normalcy in the overall structure of the economy. The only real benefits were some gains in productivity resulting from new technology. The other problem, one which directly affects most people, is that many jobs went overseas. There are a variety of reasons for this, mostly boiling down to simple corporate greed. What is the President to do about this? Tell them they can't go? There would be some screaming about that, I'm sure. In this case, it might have merit, but in a larger sense it would truly expand the power too much. I think the President does need to exercise some behind the scenes influence to stop the "job flight." In addition, such corporations should not be bailed out if they fail. As far as the crooks go, simply enforce the law. I think Bush should be credited that he did not help out the Enron boys. Though, if I were president I'd want to personslly strip them down to their underwear and sell their assets and put the money into the raided pension funds.
Link Posted: 11/26/2002 9:58:41 AM EDT
Al Gore Support Poll In 2004 who will you vote for? Al Gore (78) 44.07% George W. Bush (93) 52.54% Other (6) (display visitors suggestions) 3.39% Total of votes: 177
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top