Some Democrats Are Sensing Missed Opportunities
Democrats Struggle To Seize Opportunity
What not a big fan of the times, how about the NYT or post, more your suiting perhaps?
Some Democrats Are Sensing Missed Opportunities
Democrats Struggle To Seize Opportunity
What not a big fan of the times, how about the NYT or post, more your suiting perhaps?
This is utter horseshlt.
The Dims are not getting shut out of the media. They are just not cohesive enough as a group to take advantage of the Repugs f*ckups. Lord knows that Bush and the rest of the GOP currently in power have given them many, many opportunites to jump on. However, there seems to be too little directional leadership. When the Dims screw the pooch, the Repugs are right there with press releases and talking point memos going out to each member to pound the point home.
As to the Dims, it appears as if they are all fighting their own battles instead of making a coordinated effort to be on the same page and get the same message out there. That is why they are and have been in the minority since the mid 90s. The GOP has handed them their collective a$$es when it comes to groupthink/groupspeak.
Horsh*t, eh?
Fairness Doctrine? Puh-leeze.
How many "Major Announcements" did the Propagandist pull off during the 2004 campaign that garnered him 15-, 30-min. spots on all news network channels that ended up being campaign speeches?
And, I didn't say completely shut out, they are all but shut out. They get very little positive coverage.
Look at Reid forcing the Senate into a closed session over the lack of that Phase II of the investigation? How did that come off? Like the Democrats were obstructionists, not that they wanted to get to the truth which would lead to the impeachment of the Propagandist and DICK.
Fairness Doctrine? Puh-leeze.
How many "Major Announcements" did the Propagandist pull off during the 2004 campaign that garnered him 15-, 30-min. spots on all news network channels that ended up being campaign speeches?
And, I didn't say completely shut out, they are all but shut out. They get very little positive coverage.
Look at Reid forcing the Senate into a closed session over the lack of that Phase II of the investigation? How did that come off? Like the Democrats were obstructionists, not that they wanted to get to the truth which would lead to the impeachment of the Propagandist and DICK.
How many times do I have to say that I am independent and am not part of the Democratic party? Geez, I don't like most of the democrats... Election integrity should be VERY IMPORTANT TO EVERY AMERICAN! I wrote papers on this stuff just 2 years ago and it is no better now after 2 screwed up elections.. do you think there isn't a problem? Or is it just okay as long as your party is in control? Quit the "I am on the winning side, so I don't care how it is won" nonsense.
First off, Bush earned that right to manipulate the media by being the incumbent. I don't like the practice, but that is a long-standing routine that every President in the modern era has utilized during re-election campaigning.
As for Reid, they came off looking like obstructionists because the GOP recovered quickly from the blindsiding b*tchslap that they took and hit the airwaves with Senator after Senator and talking head after talking head singing the same song in perfect tempo. THAT is why they looked bad. The initial moments after that session, the Dems were being touted as getting tough and starting to stand up for their beliefs. And then what did they do? DICK. They sat idly as the GOP ran down anyone they saw with a mic or notepad.
If they want to have a chance in Nov., they had better start coming up with their own little catchphrases and start a chorus of repetition. Otherwise, they will be right back where they are now, in the minority.
The Propagandist has earned no such right to manipulate the media. They own the damned media! Was Clinton manipulating the media to blast that semen-stained dress 24/7? :roll:
Did the media stand up to the barage of GOP Senators and demand a timeline on when the Phase II report would be out (notice we're four months down the road and still nothing on that report)? NO.
Did the media stand up to the barage of GOP Senators and demand a timeline on when the Phase II report would be out (notice we're four months down the road and still nothing on that report)? NO.
Sorry, but it is not a conspiracy theory to say that elections in this country are wrought with corruption. We use voting machines controlled by heavy GOP contributors that have gone out and said they will "deliver" the election to their candidate.. Diebold systems have no paper trail, buggy beta software, and no way to detect hampering. Their machines have been banned in multiple states already, however, majorly important states like Ohio and Florida are still using Diebold machines. With no way to ensure accuracy, in addition partisan poll makers, you believe that it is a conspiracy to say that elections are corrupt? What about the people within Diebold that have been caught lieing by states(California, Maryland)? That a conspiracy too?
Stolen elections? There was no recount in Florida because Florida did not have legislature specifying exactly how a recount would be handled to ensure continuity. Guess what... Clarified legislation has yet to be introduced. All of the mishandling and disenfranchisement in Florida in 2000 and it was all dismissed and the Supreme Court appointed Bush... It was not through our normal means.
If you see no problems with this because your current party wins, you are unamerican. Being American means ensuring fairness through the democratic process... This is not being done...
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
Ding! Ding! Ding!
I've said this every time the subject has come up. If the Dems had any kind of leadership they would get their factional party together and focus on some kind of national strategy. (And "Lookie at what the Rs screwed up now" is not a strategy)
So long as they keep playing things the way they have been, the congressional races will remain local events. In an environment like that the incumbant (Most likely an R right now) has an incredible advantage. The Rs can screw up time after time after time and the Ds will still have an incredibly difficult time taking back the house & senate.
The Rs won the congress by nationalizing what were previously local elections with the Contract With America. The Dems have nothing like this. And frankly, I doubt they could come up with something like it.
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
What are you smoking? There was no recount in Florida in 2000? What planet were you on for the weeks and weeks after the election? Florida had several recounts. What's more, they had legislation that detailed how a recount was to occur. It said that if the result was within 1/2 of a percentage point there would be a recount and proceedures were spelled out on how to conduct that recount.
It was the Florida SC that decided to eff things up by making up laws on the fly to give the advantage to Gore.
Man... Not only can people like you not accept the facts but now you have to re-write the history to fit your crazy conspiracy theories. And then you wonder why nobody takes you seriously.
There was no final statewide recount. Remember? The SCOTUS ruled 7-2 that current recounts must stop. It then ruled 5-4 that a statewide recount was necessary but that the time remaining until the electoral college met was not sufficient time to perform that recount.
I am a political science major.. I wrote a paper on it. They had no mention on HOW to do the recount in 2000... Would you like me to quote the Supreme Court for you? I'll post it in a few... Here is a summary of what happened with the SOURCE-
On December 12, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Florida Supreme Court?s decision. The Court opined that the actual process for the recount caused concerns. The Florida Court?s order did not specify guidelines for how to conduct the recount. Therefore, county canvassing boards were forced to pull together judges who had no training in interpreting ballots to do the count. Therefore, it was found that the recount lacked protection of the fundamental right of voters to have every vote counted uniformly, such as would be under the authority of a single state judicial officer. All seven Justices agreed that there were constitutional problems with the recount ordered, but disagreed on the proper remedy.
Bush v. Gore,121 S.Ct. 525 (Fla. 2000).
The U.S. Supreme Court explained that one overseer was necessary to ensure uniformity in the vote count. In other words, they wanted all the votes to be counted in a uniform manner.
Here is a QUOTE from the SCOTUS:
On December 22, 2000, the Florida Supreme Court, in accordance with the order by the U.S. Supreme Court, issued the following opinion.
?The Supreme Court ultimately mandated that any manual recount be concluded December 12, 2000 at 12. In light of the time of the release of the Supreme Court opinion, these tasks and this deadline could not possibly be met. Moreover, upon reflection, we conclude that development of a specific uniform standard necessary to ensure equal application and to secure the fundamental right to vote throughout the State of Florida should be left to the body we believe best equipped to study and address it, the legislature.?
Here is a quote from Justice Stevens in his dissention to the U.S. Supreme Court?s December 12, 2000 decision.
?It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today?s decision. One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this years Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nations confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law. I respectfully dissent.?
Bush v. Gore,121 S.Ct. 525 (Fla. 2000).
PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD show me how this is REVISIONIST! Did you even KNOW what happened when you made that IGNORANT post? Jesus Christ.. it had nothing at ALL to do with Gore!
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
There absolutely was a recount. There was no state-wide manual recount. And that gets us into pregnant and hanging chads which is way off topic and was probably beaten to death on this board already...
I now return you to your regularly scheduled thread...
Problem with people like you is that you don't even KNOW history. History and facts are conspiracy theories to you.
Remain ignorant. Please. It's quite amusing.
There was no recount... It wasn't allowed by the SCOTUS... here you go Ignoramous..
On December 12, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Florida Supreme Court?s decision. The Court opined that the actual process for the recount caused concerns. The Florida Court?s order did not specify guidelines for how to conduct the recount. Therefore, county canvassing boards were forced to pull together judges who had no training in interpreting ballots to do the count. Therefore, it was found that the recount lacked protection of the fundamental right of voters to have every vote counted uniformly, such as would be under the authority of a single state judicial officer. All seven Justices agreed that there were constitutional problems with the recount ordered, but disagreed on the proper remedy.
Bush v. Gore,121 S.Ct. 525 (Fla. 2000).
The U.S. Supreme Court explained that one overseer was necessary to ensure uniformity in the vote count. In other words, they wanted all the votes to be counted in a uniform manner.
Here is a QUOTE from the SCOTUS:
On December 22, 2000, the Florida Supreme Court, in accordance with the order by the U.S. Supreme Court, issued the following opinion.
?The Supreme Court ultimately mandated that any manual recount be concluded December 12, 2000 at 12. In light of the time of the release of the Supreme Court opinion, these tasks and this deadline could not possibly be met. Moreover, upon reflection, we conclude that development of a specific uniform standard necessary to ensure equal application and to secure the fundamental right to vote throughout the State of Florida should be left to the body we believe best equipped to study and address it, the legislature.?
As I said, this still has not been addressed...
Here is a quote from Justice Stevens in his dissention to the U.S. Supreme Court?s December 12, 2000 decision.
?It is confidence in the men and women who administer the judicial system that is the true backbone of the rule of law. Time will one day heal the wound to that confidence that will be inflicted by today?s decision. One thing, however, is certain. Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of the winner of this years Presidential election, the identity of the loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nations confidence in the judge as an impartial guardian of the rule of law. I respectfully dissent.?
Bush v. Gore,121 S.Ct. 525 (Fla. 2000).
THere you go, all the proof you want. The funny thing was that you ended your post with the INCREDIBLY IRONIC: "
It was the Florida SC that decided to eff things up by making up laws on the fly to give the advantage to Gore.
Man... Not only can people like you not accept the facts but now you have to re-write the history to fit your crazy conspiracy theories. "
You throw a crazy conspiracy theory after posting false information...
All this talk about a national strategy is premature. The Contract with America was introduced 6 weeks before the 1994 Congressional Elections. It is now March 2006. The inside politics discussions of are the Democrats doing enough is just for the hardcore politics people. Real people are not focus on the elections. Right now is the time to find candidates, raise money and organize.
All this talk now about a strategy or a national message is too early and will be forgotten by September. You trot out ideas now and 1). no one will remember them 2). Republicans can attack the ideas. 3). conditions may change by September.
So I say, when your opponents are attacking each other or have kicking themselves in the balls with Katrina, ethical problems, Port Security - let them. Don't throw them a lifesaver by joining in - let them drown in the mess they created.
What I meant was there was no final statewide recount after the SCOTUS stopped the partial recounts that were currently underway. Sorry for any confusion.
There was a statewide recount originally when the margin between the two candidates was so small. A statewide recount was mandated.
I think there's some confusion as to which statewide recount is being discussed.
Anyway...it's gone off-topic enough.
Originally posted by: conjur
There was a statewide recount originally when the margin between the two candidates was so small. A statewide recount was mandated.
I think there's some confusion as to which statewide recount is being discussed.
Anyway...it's gone off-topic enough.
This is all based on a response to my post.. hence the direct quotes of it.. I'll repeat it again for you
"There was no recount in Florida because Florida did not have legislature specifying exactly how a recount would be handled to ensure continuity. Guess what... Clarified legislation has yet to be introduced. All of the mishandling and disenfranchisement in Florida in 2000 and it was all dismissed and the Supreme Court appointed Bush... It was not through our normal means. "
As I said, there was no OFFICIAL RECOUNT BECAUSE THERE WAS NO UNIFORMITY... I don't care if they started to recount it because it was found null and void because of the reasons stated above.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_US_presidential_election
That recount (a machine recount) was completed by Nov. 10.
So was that post of mine. There was a *statewide* machine recount as *mandated* by Florida law. However, there wasn't a manual statewide recount as the SCOTUS ruled there wasn't a statewide method to determine what was or wasn't a vote and there wasn't enough time to establish one.
sandorski
No Lifer
- Oct 10, 1999
- 70,784
- 6,343
- 126
Unfortunetly, Bush's approval rating doesn't translate directly to others within his Party. The Democrats should paste their Republican opponnents with reminders of how much those opponents supported the unpopular Bush, that's probably the best strategy 4tw.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 400
Facebook
Twitter