View Full Version : Interesting tid-bits Nov. 2 2004
- The Election - Clearly, the biggest news of the day, or the year for that matter. The whole country seems wired, to the extreme. This election will go down in history as one of the most important ever, for a number of reasons; The war in Iraq, stem cell research, the draft, same-sex marriage, and maybe most importantly, the appointment of several Supreme Court justices in the next four years, all contribute to making this an election to remember.
- The Economy - Two of the most trusted indicators for the economy, major law firms and IPOs, are both reporting a vibrant and robust economy, with more IPO's on the roster than in 1999, a solid economical year, to be sure. Major law firms are once again up to speed and busy, busy, busy with litigation on the business front. The recession is history, and this fact will have significant effect on the election today.
- MTV in politics - At this point in time, most everyone is aware of MTVs involvment in the political arena. However, I have never seen MTV launch a campaign of this magnitude in any past election. The 18-24 age group is clearly one of the most important this time around. Historically, this group has been the one with the least representation at the polls, but this year seems to be turning the tide. Record numbers of young folks are streaming to the polls today, the effect remains to be seen. In years past, Mnay from this age group have registered, but blown off actually voting. In past post registration polls, only 3 out of 10 in this age group polled before the election had still intended on voting. This year it is 6 out of 10. An impressive change.
- Attack of the Lawyer Brigade - 25,000 lawyears have been dispatched to the swing states. 10,000 democratic lawyers, 8,500 republican, and around 6,000 from other groups, such as the ALCU, and the NAACP. Most of these individuals are donating their time to ensure a fair election. After all the ballot snafu's and felon flushing of the 2000 election, people aren't taking any chances this time around.
There are more interesting things to chat about today, but I am at work and must wrap this up at this time.
GO OUT AND VOTE TODAY!!! IT IS IMPORTANT!!
Anonymous Last
11-02-04, 12:54 PM
It's crazy where I live. I have never seen a turn out like this here in this city before for any election. It's like a zoo! The downtown streets are crowded. I had a hard time getting to work today. It has never been like this.
Also the NAACP is every where with black (Election Protection) t-shirts, walkie talkies and lawyers making sure that no one is bullied at the polls.
If you are not wearing a I voted sticker than you are a target. Even the bums are all out being political and I just thought it was free pancake day.
Do you happen to live in a swing state AL?
Good thread/post. :)
I live in a swing state (PA), but my polling place is relatively small/local, so there was virtually no line. I brought my iPod and everything, in case there was a wait, but apparently that's only an issue in more crowded areas.
Anonymous Last
11-02-04, 01:10 PM
Do you happen to live in a swing state AL?
Yes. I live in Milwaukee Wisconsin.
2wrongs
11-02-04, 03:23 PM
- MTV in politics - At this point in time, most everyone is aware of MTVs involvment in the political arena. However, I have never seen MTV launch a campaign of this magnitude in any past election. The 18-24 age group is clearly one of the most important this time around. Historically, this group has been the one with the least representation at the polls, but this year seems to be turning the tide. Record numbers of young folks are streaming to the polls today, the effect remains to be seen. In years past, Mnay from this age group have registered, but blown off actually voting. In past post registration polls, only 3 out of 10 in this age group polled before the election had still intended on voting. This year it is 6 out of 10. An impressive change.
I think it's great. The more people voting the better democracy works. However, I'm a little concerned about the younger voters voting because P-Diddy told them to. Informed voting is so necessary to this election. Oh well, this is going to be exciting tonight...
I think it's great. The more people voting the better democracy works. However, I'm a little concerned about the younger voters voting because P-Diddy told them to. Informed voting is so necessary to this election. Oh well, this is going to be exciting tonight...
I thought about this last night as I watched a bit of the coverage. After some thought though, I figured it's still better that they go out and vote for the wrong reasons than note vote at all. Even if they vote for someone they were told to vote for this time, next time (since they are now registered), they will probably make it out to the polls, and perhaps put more thought into the choices then...
Piddzilla
11-02-04, 05:09 PM
I thought about this last night as I watched a bit of the coverage. After some thought though, I figured it's still better that they go out and vote for the wrong reasons than note vote at all. Even if they vote for someone they were told to vote for this time, next time (since they are now registered), they will probably make it out to the polls, and perhaps put more thought into the choices then...
Yes, and I don't see why voting because P Diddy told you so should be worse than voting because anybody else you look up to told you so. There are kids who don't give a **** about what mom or dad says, or perhaps don't have a dad at all. So I think it's good that guys like P Diddy take their responsibility as role models and actually encourage kids to do a good thing.
Henry The Kid
11-02-04, 05:10 PM
I think it's great. The more people voting the better democracy works. However, I'm a little concerned about the younger voters voting because P-Diddy told them to. Informed voting is so necessary to this election. Oh well, this is going to be exciting tonight...
It's no different than a lot of kids voting just because their parents told them to.
Henry The Kid
11-02-04, 05:10 PM
Yes, and I don't see why voting because P Diddy told you so should be worse than voting because anybody else you look up to told you so. There are kids who don't give a **** about what mom or dad says, or perhaps don't have a dad at all. So I think it's good that guys like P Diddy take their responsibility as role models and actually encourage kids to do a good thing.
Beat me to it.
SamsoniteDelilah
11-02-04, 05:24 PM
- - Attack of the Lawyer Brigade - 25,000 lawyears have been dispatched to the swing states. 10,000 democratic lawyers, 8,500 republican, and around 6,000 from other groups, such as the ALCU, and the NAACP. Most of these individuals are donating their time to ensure a fair election. After all the ballot snafu's and felon flushing of the 2000 election, people aren't taking any chances this time around.
Not 100% effective...
A lawyer friend in Philly reports that many of the more heavily Democrat polling places have been moved within the last two weeks. At her polling place, there was ONE machine and it was broken. She has, at this writing, been unable to vote. :(
allthatglitters
11-02-04, 07:48 PM
Personally I just want it to be over. Its not because I can't vote yet and don't care, it is because I have had enough of all the bickering I hear at school. The problem I have with MTV telling kids to vote is the fact that they are implying who to vote for, without giving any real un-biased facts on the matter. I've talked to so many teens (my age and above 18) who, on both sides of the matter, couldn't tell you exactly what sort of policies they believe in or even what some of the policies are about. They're only line of defense and offense in a political debate is the propoganda they willingly believe. I am not cynical of the political sytsem, just the next generation to run it.
2wrongs
11-02-04, 07:55 PM
Yes, and I don't see why voting because P Diddy told you so should be worse than voting because anybody else you look up to told you so. There are kids who don't give a **** about what mom or dad says, or perhaps don't have a dad at all. So I think it's good that guys like P Diddy take their responsibility as role models and actually encourage kids to do a good thing.
Where was P Diddy four years ago? I can't really recall but I don't remember Hollywood getting THIS involved. Cut me some slack guys, if Hollywood and rock stars were promoting the opposition for you, would you like it? I'm just saying that anyone with a soap box is on it and using their popularity and influence to get the kids to be their minions. It's a tad irritating. I'm not going to cry foul if Kerry wins and Hollywood won't be the reason if he does. I'm just making observations.
Anonymous Last
11-03-04, 12:33 AM
I remember the good ol' days when Mtv had tons of cartoons, Beavis and his Butthead, Aeon and her Flux, Liquid Television, The Maxx and The Head. There was all kinds of little clay animated MTV logo station identification spots, twisted anime and sock puppets that talked a lot of *****. Damn I wish they would bring that crap back on a regular basis.
I want my Mtv...instead of all that jiggy crap that's on their now.
I blame that Piss Diddy guy, screw that fake studio gangster trying to run a marathon and getting political all of a sudden. With Biggie gone, this diddy dope bastard isn't crap.
Sorry guys... but I needed to vent with all this chit chit chatter on MTV.
Piddzilla
11-03-04, 06:06 AM
Where was P Diddy four years ago? I can't really recall but I don't remember Hollywood getting THIS involved. Cut me some slack guys, if Hollywood and rock stars were promoting the opposition for you, would you like it? I'm just saying that anyone with a soap box is on it and using their popularity and influence to get the kids to be their minions. It's a tad irritating. I'm not going to cry foul if Kerry wins and Hollywood won't be the reason if he does. I'm just making observations.
As I said before, why is it worse when Hollywood and rock stars tell you who to vote for than others telling you the same thing? What you're telling me is that only people actually campaigning actively for Bush or Kerry are allowed to tell you who to vote for. You think you will get an objective analysis from any of those people? And let me ask you how worried you are about Fox being conservative compared to MTV apparently being liberal? The one thing seems to be more worrying to you than the other... I really wonder why...
A major news channel, who is supposed to bring people political insight, to be "fair and balanced", is being implicitly conservative 24 hrs/day, 365 days/year. Does this bother you? No, but when P Diddy says "Yo, vote for Kerry!" just before the election you go through the roof. Most of times it's better to be objective than to be biased. But it's always better to be openly partial, like P Diddy, than to be falsely objective, like Fox News.
And Kid Rock, Jessica Simpson and Britney all support Bush. [Oh no, all my favourite artists!!]
Tea Barking
11-03-04, 08:51 AM
I dont watch mtv anymore.
Nobody should need hasbeen celebs telling people who they should vote for, i bet they havent got an independent veiw in their little tiny heads.
Celebs and politicians make me mad :furious:
Anonymous Last
11-03-04, 04:49 PM
http://www.bagend.net/avatar/uberavatar.gif
That can be a promising avatar.
SamsoniteDelilah
11-03-04, 05:03 PM
Personally I just want it to be over. Its not because I can't vote yet and don't care, it is because I have had enough of all the bickering I hear at school. The problem I have with MTV telling kids to vote is the fact that they are implying who to vote for, without giving any real un-biased facts on the matter. I've talked to so many teens (my age and above 18) who, on both sides of the matter, couldn't tell you exactly what sort of policies they believe in or even what some of the policies are about. They're only line of defense and offense in a political debate is the propoganda they willingly believe. I am not cynical of the political sytsem, just the next generation to run it.
I've been thinking about your post since I read it yesterday, Glitter, and a few things have popped into my head:
If 'kids' of 18, 19, 20 are old enough to vote, then they're old enough to think about this stuff, just like everyone else. No one is ever going to give an objective opinion on where your vote should be cast - no one is objective. So there's no point to complaining that the propaganda you're hearing is partisan. It always will be. Learning to sort out the information from the high-gloss packaging is part of the deal for adults in any arena - voting, dating, job choices, you name it. Better it start early, really. Otherwise, we end up with adults who try to think like kids; "let the government think about the big issues, I just want to take care of me" and we elect people with no environmental vision who destroy our standing in the world community by ignoring the consequences of selfish decisions.
I'm really not arguing with anything you said except the last line - because it's not just the next generation that is clueless. It's 51% of the country.
This is not an either-or decision: it can be bad when people vote only because P. Diddy told them to, or because their dad told them to. All in all, the only benefit to uninformed voting is the potential that it will become informed voting down the line.
it's not just the next generation that is clueless. It's 51% of the country. It's precisely that kind of attitude -- the attitude that is not content with mere disagreement, but only with the questioning of motive or even intelligence -- that has the Democratic party in relative shambles right now.
SamsoniteDelilah
11-03-04, 05:35 PM
I'd argue that the failure to question motive is exactly why the country is in the shambles it's in: we've been led to war under false pretenses and way too many people don't want to face that fact.
The view that the current administration has questionable motives can reasonably be held; what's not reasonable is the claim that those who feel otherwise are "clueless." It's that kind of elitism...that tendency to assume the worst of dissenters, that is hurting the Democratic party. It's also far more divisive than anything our current President is doing.
Under what "false pretenses" were we led to war, by the way?
Anonymous Last
11-03-04, 06:06 PM
I like everyone here and the election is over. I'm happy for those who got the president they wanted and I'm sorry for the ones that didn't.
But it was a good ride this election year no matter what was put down on either side. *And on that note we cue the the music.*
America we love you! http://www.drakeshangout.com/pics/animated/sexypartiesavatar.gif
The view that the current administration has questionable motives can reasonably be held; what's not reasonable is the claim that those who feel otherwise are "clueless." It's that kind of elitism...that tendency to assume the worst of dissenters, that is hurting the Democratic party. It's also far more divisive than anything our current President is doing.
Hmm, taking the approach of "you're either with us or against us" assumes the best of dissenters of course ;) :p
Anyways, i'm more worried about those who think the way Iraq was tackled has helped deal with the problem of Islamic militants ('terror'). And indeed, those that think the Bu****es have taken wise steps when it comes to dealing with that issue. That's one of the more flabbergasting 'achievements' of the Bush admin.
I like this particular piece of exit-polling btw.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40484000/gif/_40484021_issue_voting_gra203.gif
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3973197.stm
I feel sorry for Republican voters now. They're so terrified ;) :rolleyes:
SamsoniteDelilah
11-03-04, 06:10 PM
You speak as if it's just the Liberals using that tactic. I've been dressed down on this very board as practically worse than Satan for believing that a woman should have the right to choose if she has a baby. The condecension behind the "Family Values" mantra is revolting. What you're seeing from me is backlash. I'm not in the habit of passing judgement on others' opinions or choices, but I'm fed up with it coming my way.
Re your question about motives, if you think we went to war with Iraq for altruistic reasons, purely to oust an evil man, then your history books were written by the Brothers Grimm - the Disney versions. We went to war because Iraq decided to accept the Euro as payment for oil, which weakened the dollar and cost us total control over who gets oil. WMD my Great Aunt Fanny.
Incidentally, I need your response re the last PM I sent you. :)
2wrongs
11-03-04, 06:16 PM
You speak as if it's just the Liberals using that tactic. I've been dressed down on this very board as practically worse than Satan for believing that a woman should have the right to choose if she has a baby. The condecension behind the "Family Values" mantra is revolting. What you're seeing from me is backlash. I'm not in the habit of passing judgement on others' opinions or choices, but I'm fed up with it coming my way.
You shouldn't be shocked.
You full well know that the topic of abortion is hot. If you take the side of choice it is well known that you are critisized for not protecting human life. Don't let people's anger over this issue surprise you. It's sensitive and if your feelings get hurt over it then let's stop talking about it on the boards. It's not really a debate to be had over the internet...things get heated way too quickly.
SamsoniteDelilah
11-03-04, 06:18 PM
...Anyways, i'm more worried about those who think the way Iraq was tackled has helped deal with the problem of Islamic militants ('terror'). And indeed, those that think the Bu****es have taken wise steps when it comes to dealing with that issue. That's one of the more flabbergasting 'achievements' of the Bush admin.
This is the thing that's twisting my guts today.
I can't help but notice that those states that were the hardest hit by 9-11 (NY and NJ) voted Kerry. Landslide, Kerry. Those who buried their friends and relatives got the wake-up call: our policies are getting us killed.
I can't fathom how those who said they wanted Bush in power to "protect us from the terrorists" see him as actually protecting us at all. He can't fight the terrorists themselves - the situation is breeding them faster than we can kill them, when we manage to find them. The only hope is to look into the cause of the hatred. The fact is, we're a nation of selfish bullies, and we're hated for it with growing fervor. Unless that changes, we're screwed, no matter who's in the driver's seat. To think otherwise IS naive, sorry if that's offensive but it's the truth.
Henry The Kid
11-03-04, 06:59 PM
The view that the current administration has questionable motives can reasonably be held; what's not reasonable is the claim that those who feel otherwise are "clueless." It's that kind of elitism...that tendency to assume the worst of dissenters, that is hurting the Democratic party. It's also far more divisive than anything our current President is doing.
Under what "false pretenses" were we led to war, by the way?
What's hurting the democratic party is that ever since FDR, they have consistently held the belief that his policies actually helped us.
What's going to hurt the republicans soon is that they've become democrats too, more or less. Apart from social issues of course.
There's going to be a major policy shift soon. I think Kerry losing is going to have a very positive effect.
SamsoniteDelilah
11-03-04, 07:01 PM
You shouldn't be shocked.
You full well know that the topic of abortion is hot. If you take the side of choice it is well known that you are critisized for not protecting human life. Don't let people's anger over this issue surprise you. It's sensitive and if your feelings get hurt over it then let's stop talking about it on the boards. It's not really a debate to be had over the internet...things get heated way too quickly.
just saw this... you skipped my first sentance. The rest was illustration of the first sentance, which was my point. Now you're responding to the illustration as if it was the point. I'm not going for it.
Some great posts in this thread, glad it got going.
I just read this article, and at first was a bit taken aback (just a quick peruseal of the headline will tell you why), but the guy wraps it up well, and makes some interesting points...
grain of salt folks....
To vote, or not to vote (http://www.reason.com/hod/bmd110204.shtml)
-Cheers
Read this article today, I think it's important to note that Title III was added to the patriot act by the then democratic senate,, with Sen. John Kerry the champion of the movement. The new senate has kicked into action folks.
Here is the first section of the article, and a link to follow.
Citizen Snoops Forever by John Berlau
As the House and Senate in this week's "lame duck" session wrangle over differences on immigration and Pentagon authority in the intelligence overhaul bill, civil libertarians should be very concerned about another section of the bill that many members of both bodies seem to agree on. The intelligence bill seeks to end the "sunset" clause of what experts say is one of the most privacy-harming sections of the USA PATRIOT Act, allowing it to be extended permanently without congressional review. This is the section of the bill supposedly designed to fight money laundering by forcing businesses to conduct even more routine customer surveillance. And it does so even though the 9/11 Commission report casts heavy doubt on the effectiveness of know-your-customer type programs at fighting terrorism...
Article conclusion... (http://www.reason.com/hod/jb120604.shtml)
I find the article a bit troubling, hoping to get some thoughts out of you folks.
SamsoniteDelilah
12-06-04, 09:16 PM
I don't guess they intend to do any training of those who'll be digging into our pasts... or anyone verifying the data that is dug up? I mean... passing a law that compels people to snoop doesn't begin to mean they're qualified to do so... or even honest.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.