Voter Registration - or how the US rejoined the Third World

welsh

Junkmaster
Yes, here's the country that promotes democracy and elections throughout the world, and yet we can't seem to do it right.

You thought the election four years ago, this looks like it's going to be worse.

And what depths are the republicans likely to sink to win the next election?

Someone call in the UN Election Monitors!


Students Have Parties Switched by Bogus Petitions
By Dennis B. Roddy
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Friday 22 October 2004

Registration changed to Republican without consent
Scores of college students in Pennsylvania and Oregon have had their voting registrations switched by teams of canvassers circulating bogus petitions and, in some cases, partially concealed voter registration forms students were requested to sign.

The canvassers have visited campuses asking students to sign petitions advocating lower auto insurance rates, medical marijuana or stricter rape laws, according to elections officials.

After signing their names, the students were pressured into registering with the Republican Party by being told that their signatures otherwise would be invalid, or they were asked to fill out the signature and address portions of blank voter registration forms as proof of citizenship. In multiple instances, students already registered to vote have had their registrations changed without their consent, elections officials said yesterday.

Petition canvassers in Pennsylvania apparently did not identify themselves, although one told a University of Pittsburgh student that he was being paid by the Republican Party.

In another instance, the head of the Oregon Students Association said a canvasser at Portland State University told him he was with Project America Votes, a Republican-backed registration effort.

Elections officials yesterday said the switch in party registration would not affect the students' eligibility to cast ballots for the candidates of their choice on Nov. 2, although it could determine the party primaries in which they could take part in the future. Several said they were mystified why the canvassers would bother to change registrations, although one told a student in Oregon that he was receiving $12 for each new Republican registration.

Students at Indiana University of Pennsylvania and a branch campus of Montgomery County Community College told officials they were tricked into filling out blank voter registration forms, listing their names and addresses when they signed a petition advocating the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes.

"I'm pretty sure that they weren't students," said Erik Strobl, an IUP student who said he signed the petition. Strobl said the canvasser then asked him to put his signature and address on a voter registration card. Although Strobl had already registered to vote as a Democat, he did so when he was told his signature was needed to verify his status as a voter.

Several days later, Strobl received a mailed notification that his party registration had been switched to Republican.

IUP appeared to have been hardest hit by the scam. County voter registration director Donna Hoover said as many as 400 registration suspect forms have arrived in her office. Most of them, she said, changed the registered party of students who had signed up to vote just days earlier during a registration drive by two other groups, America Coming Together and VIP.

"Most of the students had registered Democrat the day before," Hoover said. "I've talked to the sheriff."

Markings on many of the forms appeared to be in the same handwriting, she said.

"I kind of thought there was something odd. I don't even know which party would have done it," Hoover said. "These people circled the different spots [on the form] for the people to fill in."

In Allegheny County, elections director Mark Wolosik referred another case, involving a Squirrel Hill college student, to county detectives. Ruairi McDonnell said his registration was switched from Independent to Republican by someone who circulated a petition to lower auto insurance rates for young drivers on the campus of the University of Pittsburgh last month.

McDonnell said the man instructed him to fill out portions of a voter registration form, although McDonnell told the man he already had registered to vote.

"He then told me I would have to register as a Republican because 'that's how we get our funding.' I said I would not. He kept the form which contained only my name and address and certainly did not indicate I was a Republican," McDonnell said in a letter to the Allegheny County Department of Elections.

Several days later, McDonnell received notice from the elections department that he had changed his registration from Independent to Republican.

In Montgomery, an identical scam took place in September, when students at the Blue Bell campus of Montgomery County Community College were handed the marijuana petition.

"They're just trying to get numbers," said Joseph Passarella, director of elections for Montgomery, who said he has so far received a handful of complaints from students who said their party affiliation had been changed without their consent.

Susan Adams, a spokeswoman for the college, said the petition canvassers did not have permission from the school to work on the campus.

Project America Votes was a name used by canvassers for Sproul & Associates, an Arizona-based consultant under contract with the Republican National Committee.

Nathan Sproul, the firm's owner, yesterday denied that his workers had used petitions to bait students into party switches.

"This is clearly the Democratic plan to make these baseless allegations," said Heather Layman, a spokeswoman for the Republican National Committee. Layman said she was speaking on behalf of Sproul. She said no Sproul workers were involved in such tactics in Oregon or Pennsylvania.

Sproul's role in ostensibly nonpartisan voter registration drives have triggered official investigations in several states, with canvassers alleging they had been told to refuse to register Democrats or to discard Democratic registration forms, leaving voters who thought they had registered off the rolls.
 
bwahahah.jpg


So much for renown American democracy.
 
Indeed!

But at least we haven't sunk to shooting it out over the ballot box.

Let's see we botched the ink in Afghanistan and we can't even count our own votes.

How in the hell do the Republicans think they can impose a democracy on Iraq when they can't even run an election right in the Republican run state that fucked it up four years ago.

Integrity of Florida Virtual Vote in Doubt
By Rachel Konrad
The Associated Press

Friday 22 October 2004

Delray Beach, Fla. - Edward Bitet fought in World War II, built affordable housing for veterans and taught sixth grade. When the Long Island native retired to Florida, he fulfilled another civic duty by becoming a poll worker. But Bitet, 77, isn't volunteering this year — he says he doesn't trust Palm Beach County's electronic voting machines. He walked out of a county demonstration of touch-screen terminals convinced that software bugs could wreak havoc on Nov. 2.

"We lost an election four years ago because they fooled around with the paper ballots and couldn't recount them," said Bitet, a Democrat. "Now we're moving to a system without paper, and they won't even have the ballots to recount. I can't be a part of this."

With polls showing nearly equal numbers of Florida voters for President Bush and Sen. John Kerry, the election's outcome may again hinge on a Florida recount.

And the more that Floridians learn about how voting machines work, the more they question whether the 15 counties with paperless voting systems can accurately count and recount votes.

Problems in those counties — home to just over half the registered voters in the crucial swing state — could delay the results for days or weeks, and even force the courts to step in again and choose the next president.

Given Florida's botched election in 2000, when the Supreme Court halted a recount after 36 days and handed a 537-vote victory to Bush, political tension is palpable in the Sunshine State. Election officials are hoping for a landslide so big that even thousands of deleted or misrecorded ballots won't change the outcome.

But if this proves to be another ultra-close vote, many critics of electronic balloting — including the many Democrats who believe the 2000 election was stolen — say they'll take to the streets.

"I was angry last time. This time it'd be quadruple the anger," said Francois Jean, 27, whose ramshackle ranch house in Miami's Little Haiti neighborhood is festooned with Kerry placards. "The system we were supposed to believe in failed us — like we didn't even vote, like we were aliens from outer space who didn't count."

David Niven, a political science professor at Florida Atlantic University, expects massive demonstrations if exit polling is close and lawsuits and technical problems overshadow a clear victory.

"I don't know if there will be rioting in the streets with pitch forks and torches — after all, many of these people are 75 years old," Niven said. "But it's fair to say that their level of anger will grow exponentially from four years ago."

This time, the outrage wouldn't be over dimpled, pregnant and hanging chads; the state banned the maligned punch cards after 2000. Instead, it would almost certainly be directed at those who decided on the touch-screen machines.

Computer scientists, practically as a profession, don't trust them — not without a range of safeguards that aren't in place for this election. They say the touch screens now in use could alter or delete votes — and that without paper copies, voters will never know if their votes counted.

Add Florida's bitter partisan politics to the stew of voting technology uncertainty and the worries that loom largest aren't about software bugs or hardware glitches but rather the potential for electoral shenanigans.

It's no surprise, then, that black voters in the state are among the most distrustful of e-voting. They've experienced a disproportionate number of problems in elections — from felon voter purges that included non-convicts to early voting polling stations set up miles away from the nearest black neighborhood.

"The Republican Party has tried to disenfranchise us," said Addie Greene, a black Democratic commissioner for Palm Beach County. Greene helped the county purchase 5,000 Sequoia voting machines — then became an active opponent of paperless voting and is asking constituents to send in absentee ballots.

"Palm Beach County will create a stir nationwide that no one ever would believe ... if we're disenfranchised again," she said.

Secretary of State Glenda Hood, Florida's top elections official, and other top Republicans accuse those who challenge the touch-screen machines' reliability of irrationally eroding Americans' faith in democracy. They insist that touch screens are as reliable as paper ballots, with Gov. Jeb Bush maintaining that e-voting critics have bought into "conspiracy theories" and lost their common sense.

The American Civil Liberties Union and other advocacy groups, meanwhile, have sued the state, arguing for better recount guidelines.

U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler, a Boca Raton Democrat, sued and demanded that all counties produce paper records.

In testimony this past week in Fort Lauderdale, the attorney for county elections chiefs said Wexler was playing politics, trying to "squeeze one more vote out" and "regress" to the confusing recounts of the 2000 election.

Florida law requires a manual recount in any race with a victory margin of one-quarter of 1 percent or less. In April, Hood issued an order prohibiting manual recounts on touch screens. The rule was struck down after the ACLU suit. On Oct. 15, exasperated officials issued new guidelines for recounting virtual votes.

The rules require election administrators to install updated software that can search electronic ballot records and tally the number of ballots in which not every race was voted on.

County election supervisors must print out — like a cash register tally of a day's sales — a detailed record of all incomplete ballots to see if they match the number of incomplete ballots the computer said existed when polls closed.

If the numbers don't match, supervisors will recount up to two more times.

It's unclear what would happen if thousands of votes went missing, but election officials insist the safeguards are adequate — for the initial counts and for recounts.

"These systems go through rigorous tests, and before each and every election they are checked again," said Hood spokeswoman Alia Faraj. "When the tests are completed, they're sealed and secured, and the seal is only broken on election day. The systems are working the way they're supposed to."

But computer scientists say bugs or hardware failures could alter or erase votes, causing the machines to record bogus data even before a voter touches the screen.

"We have a saying in computer science: Garbage in, garbage out," said Avi Rubin, a Johns Hopkins University computer scientist and expert on electronic voting. "If you have a machine with a bug or glitch, printing out the incorrect votes is an exercise in futility and an absolute waste of time."
 
Does anyone else think its odd all the "victems" were college students? Pretty much it just looks like they were signing whatever was shoved in front of them.
I wont say is serves them right, but they should know better then to sign something unless they've actually read what they are signing.
 
So Lauren, you are saying that the fault of a deception lies in those who are deceived and not those who deceive?
 
"We lost an election four years ago because they fooled around with the paper ballots and couldn't recount them," said Bitet, a Democrat. "Now we're moving to a system without paper, and they won't even have the ballots to recount. I can't be a part of this."
I stopped reading there.

I no longer give two shits if Bush gets reelected, but this hateful rhetoric has got to stop. It's totally apeshit hatred that makes Democracy in this country falter.

And no, this is still not the most corrupt period of American democracy, the Guilded age takes the cake for that.
 
True enough CC, we have had more corrupt periods in our electoral history. The problem is that most Americans tend to ignore that.

But then maybe the problem is that we are moving back to an earlier age when this kind of politics was acceptable. IN some ways the current field in politics looks a lot like the politics of the 1890s to 1930s than it does the period of 1950-1980.

The question for conservatives is how far back do they want to roll back the progressive movement, because these are the consequences.

We have reached a point where even the rules of politics are being ignored or flaunted for political gain.
 
The word Progressive does not belong in there, I don't really know why it's in there.

Eisenhower was'nt a Progressive and he sounded as bad as any Communist on the 'Military-Industrial' complex.

This is just a natural period of corruption in American history, on both sides. We have our Fox Newses and Haliburtons, you have you're George Soros, Holywood and Michael Moore. We've gone thruough similar periods and come out stronger.

At this point I really hope one candidate manages to just trounce the other, so we can FINALLY STOP FUCKING BITCHING ABOUT 2000!
 
ConstipatedCraprunner said:
The word Progressive does not belong in there, I don't really know why it's in there.

Eisenhower was'nt a Progressive and he sounded as bad as any Communist on the 'Military-Industrial' complex.

This is just a natural period of corruption in American history, on both sides. We have our Fox Newses and Haliburtons, you have you're George Soros, Holywood and Michael Moore. We've gone thruough similar periods and come out stronger.

At this point I really hope one candidate manages to just trounce the other, so we can FINALLY STOP FUCKING BITCHING ABOUT 2000!

While its true that each side has its special interests, there is a big difference between the ACLU and NAACP and the NRA and the Haliburton. Or Sierra Club vs. Exon-Mobil. Or the military-industrial complex vs Vietnam Veterans against War.

That the politics have become particularly contentious and nasty might have something to do with who is in office. A president who came to office without the popular vote manages to divide the country despite his promises to be a unifier. Are you really surprised that you have the Moveon.orgs and the Truthout.coms?

ANd explain to me how telling us about the danger the military industrial complex is somehow communist? Or is it just liberal?

LEts see 1950s-1980s, the expansion an expansion of equal rights, civil rights, ideas like the Great Society, the notion of building, the idea that individuals can achieve based on opportunity, that we should be a country were a person matters more based on their merit than their family? Was this not progress towards a better nation?

Face it CC- the guy in office and his policies, the same conservative values that you have espoused, are sending this country into the toilet.

The Republicans would like to make the Democrats look less patriotic and somehow less Americans. But the Democrats are campaigning to save this country from going down hill. Your guy is the one with his hands on the lever that has been flushing away every major progressive advance of the last 50 years.
 
Could somebody explain just what a "Voter Registration" is? Is it a register of people's voting intentions? For polling purposes?
Does it have any effect on the actual vote?
Or is it registration as a member of that party?

Sorry if I appear somewhat dense, but it's not a term that I'm familiar with.

Either way, it appears that the lection has already taken a turn for the worse, with illegal methods (or at least methods of dubious legality) being used.
 
Big_T_UK said:
Could somebody explain just what a "Voter Registration" is? Is it a register of people's voting intentions? For polling purposes?
Does it have any effect on the actual vote?
Or is it registration as a member of that party?

Sorry if I appear somewhat dense, but it's not a term that I'm familiar with.

Either way, it appears that the lection has already taken a turn for the worse, with illegal methods (or at least methods of dubious legality) being used.

Voter registration- is normally a practice associated with getting citizenship in a state (along with paying taxes and getting a drivers license). Essentially because americans move around a lot and because the political process allows a division between state and federal politics, each individual must register in their state of residence in order to vote in a national or local election. Normally once they register they are good to vote.

In otherwords you must register your right to vote in order to actually vote. If you are not registered you don't have the right to vote.

When people register they often state their party affiliations. This helps the parties know what the political leanings of society are. But there are other political consequences. In some towns or counties you can't get a government job unless you are a member of a party. It's not fair and it's fairly primitive, but your party affiliations can determine your chances to get a job at the local level.

Stating your party affiliations also determines what primaries you can vote in. Many states allow only members of a certain political party to vote in that party's primary.

ANd yes, the election has taken a turn for the worse. It has become a high stakes game, and the higher the stakes make the politics more dirty.
 
While its true that each side has its special interests, there is a big difference between the ACLU and NAACP and the NRA and the Haliburton. Or Sierra Club vs. Exon-Mobil. Or the military-industrial complex vs Vietnam Veterans against War.
No, not really. The primary diffirence is that the Democratic special interests draw on a larger base, while the Republican one draws on a smaller, more intellegent, more powerful one. I, very frankly, think that special interests like Haliburton have less of a harmful effect on America then, say, Unions and old people, like Mr. Ranthreetimeswithnosuccesfuckingidiot.

That the politics have become particularly contentious and nasty might have something to do with who is in office. A president who came to office without the popular vote manages to divide the country despite his promises to be a unifier. Are you really surprised that you have the Moveon.orgs and the Truthout.coms?
It's not his fault he was hated. He was hated long before he showed he was a completely mediocre president. Hell, he did a fairly damn good job in Texas, and he was really on the right side of the law when he came into power, just look at the Supreme Court.

ANd explain to me how telling us about the danger the military industrial complex is somehow communist? Or is it just liberal?
It's a Communist idea, dating back to the earliest days of Marxist Lenninism. Communists and other idiots in the '80s used it as an excuse for the obvious and total corruption of they're system; "HEY, WE MAY BE TOTALL CORRUPT, BUT THEY'RE WORSE, YOU JUST CAN'T SEE IT." There's a reason it's (the complex) often linked to Fascism, because it (the fear of the Complex) has it's roots in Communism.


LEts see 1950s-1980s, the expansion an expansion of equal rights, civil rights, ideas like the Great Society, the notion of building, the idea that individuals can achieve based on opportunity, that we should be a country were a person matters more based on their merit than their family? Was this not progress towards a better nation?
Most of it was, and Bush is doing nothing against any of that. You're rediculous attempt at making Bush look like some President of Gilead is the main reason Bush will probably win electiotion; the stuff that goes beyond the rhetoric and spinning of Darth Rove by the hard left Democrats, like Moore.

Face it CC- the guy in office and his policies, the same conservative values that you have espoused, are sending this country into the toilet.
I no longer support Bush. The guy's not even a conservative; he's not acting against Roe v. Wade, and he's proposing a totally fucking moronic additon to the constitution, not to mention the spending and the Medicare plan.



The Republicans would like to make the Democrats look less patriotic and somehow less Americans. But the Democrats are campaigning to save this country from going down hill. Your guy is the one with his hands on the lever that has been flushing away every major progressive advance of the last 50 years.
Overstatements make you look ignorant rather then bold, welsh.
 
welsh said:
In otherwords you must register your right to vote in order to actually vote. If you are not registered you don't have the right to vote.

When people register they often state their party affiliations.
Ah, yes. We have a similar deal here, called the electoral roll, it was the bit about registering your ties to one party that threw me - we don't do that here.
 
There's something I've been wondering and which it seems you guys would have an opinion about (and sorry if this has been up in a million election threads already). A whole lot is being said and written on the U.S. election these days around the world, and there's one statement made numerous times by suits in documentaries or by anti-Bush people in general: that after the last election he was appointed president, not properly elected. I may be missing something, but as I understand it, what happened was not that someone went to the Supreme Court and said, "Hey, we failed to elect a president so you'll just have to choose one of them." Instead what happened was that the Supreme Court made a ruling or interpretation of the electoral system whose application to the state of affairs led to Bush being elected. Now, if a ruling of the SC by definition settles constitutional disputes, I don't see how it could be said that Bush wasn't elected. It could be argued that the ruling was stupid, perhaps, but not that it was undemocratic, since the court itself and its function is an integral part of the democratic system. There is obviously not one single democratic formalism, as evidenced for instance by the huge difference between the majority and proportional electoral systems. So, the people who bluntly claim Bush wasn't actually elected, are they questioning the integrity of the SC, are they just being sophistic, or is it something else?
 
welsh said:
So Lauren, you are saying that the fault of a deception lies in those who are deceived and not those who deceive?

I'm saying being an idiot and/or lazy is grounds for having bad things happen to you. I'm not saying its okay to trick people like that, but if you're going to sign your name to something, you should probably at least read what it says. I mean, they were TOLD it was a voter registration card in some cases. Is it not safe to assume signing a voter registration card that is blank could very easily be filled in later? Either they didn't read it and therefore didn't know what it was, or they did read it and didn't care. Perhaps thats a somewhat harsh stance to take, but I almost always read the fine print of whatever I'm signing and if something looks a little odd, or doesnt seem to have all the information, I wont sign it. Thats just common sense and if they had done that I would have alot more sympathy for them. Signature scams are everywhere and its easy enough to steal them without actually GIVING them away like these people were.
Of course the set up might have been alot more clever then this report makes it out to be. Even still, I normally don't go around signing things from people I've never met.

That said, I think the dirty politics that have been going on with both sides are rediculous and this is just another example of how shitty things have gotten. Could be worse though.
 
Im just hoping and praying (besides that Bush loses) that their isnt an excuse to stop the election due to recounts and/or voting fraud and/or legal challenges. In the meantime the Republican Supreme Court of All-Mighty Rightousness could decide that on the President on the grounds that "in the meantime the country cant go unled" and keep Bush in on the grounds that "he's already won over the American people once".

Hoping,
The Vault Dweller
 
CCR said:
I no longer give two shits if Bush gets reelected, but this hateful rhetoric has got to stop. It's totally apeshit hatred that makes Democracy in this country falter.
So you are saying that anger about faltering of democracy is what makes democracy falter? What a brilliant conclusion.

This is just a natural period of corruption in American history, on both sides. We have our Fox Newses and Haliburtons, you have you're George Soros, Holywood and Michael Moore. We've gone thruough similar periods and come out stronger.
No, not really. The primary diffirence is that the Democratic special interests draw on a larger base, while the Republican one draws on a smaller, more intellegent, more powerful one. I, very frankly, think that special interests like Haliburton have less of a harmful effect on America then, say, Unions and old people, like Mr. Ranthreetimeswithnosuccesfuckingidiot.
Huh? Organizations representing interests of workers and people who vocally criticize the regime are more dangerous than an immensely powerful corporate complex that is by definition fascist, undemocratic and aimed at gathering wealth and power while keeping common folk in a state of eternal servility, not to mention its media lapdogs that have been brainwashing your nation for years and turning you into a bunch of cowering right-wing corporate drones? Do you even know what you are talking about?

It's not his fault he was hated. He was hated long before he showed he was a completely mediocre president. Hell, he did a fairly damn good job in Texas, and he was really on the right side of the law when he came into power, just look at the Supreme Court.
He is hated for his undemocratic policies, for the blatant manner in which he promotes interests of corporate America, for his social insensitivity and for sending thousands of Americans to die in a global oil war. If that's not his fault, I don't know what is.

It's a Communist idea, dating back to the earliest days of Marxist Lenninism. Communists and other idiots in the '80s used it as an excuse for the obvious and total corruption of they're system; "HEY, WE MAY BE TOTALL CORRUPT, BUT THEY'RE WORSE, YOU JUST CAN'T SEE IT." There's a reason it's (the complex) often linked to Fascism, because it (the fear of the Complex) has it's roots in Communism.
You are absolutely right, McCarthy! It's all a communist plot! Those nefarious red monsters have slipped their hideous tentacles into every pore of western society, and now they are busy deceiving minds of gullible citizens with their ludicrous conspiracy theories!

Reality check - in '80s, communist regimes were in no position to wipe their asses (due to shortage of toilet paper, as well as every other product you can imagine), let alone entangle the west in their heinous plots. The military-industrial complex is real, and quite possibly older than any communist regime. It was born with corporations, oil companies and mass industry, and now it holds the entire world in its claws. On at least one occasion elements of the military-industrial complex attempted a coup d'etat in USA, and only a complete blind moron would expect that their devious activity stopped then. And even if you persist in ignoring their existance, you cannot possibly dispute that with enormous financial wealth also comes a strong desire to usurp political power. Money and politics go hand in hand, and various corporate cabals are as old as capitalism itself. Politicians were aware of their existance long before Eisenhower came, and many feared them and tried to escape their grasp. Some voiced their concerns publicly ("I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies." -- Thomas Jefferson), while others took measures to reform the monetary system and make the government independant on their whims (Abraham Lincoln - we all know what happened to him.)

Oh, but I forgot, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln are 'idiot communists'. No doubt KGB agents abducted them using their secret time machine, brought them to 1989 ( since according to you that was the period when Soviet anti-western activity was strongest and most successful), indoctrinated them and sent them back to their respective time periods to spread leftist propaganda.

Most of it was, and Bush is doing nothing against any of that.
Right... :roll:

You're rediculous attempt at making Bush look like some President of Gilead is the main reason Bush will probably win electiotion; the stuff that goes beyond the rhetoric and spinning of Darth Rove by the hard left Democrats, like Moore.
There is no such thing as a 'hard left' Democrat. Democratic Party is a right-wing party. Hell, entire American political scene is a right-wing scene. Even most moderate Democrat politicians would be considered quite extreme in Croatia. Your whole idea of what is right and what is left is seriously misconcieved, undoubtedly due to bullshit propaganda Fox News keeps feeding you. If Eisenhower and Moore are hard left, then just about every Croatian politician is such a hardened communist that he makes Lenin look like a moderate pussy.

Overstatements make you look ignorant rather then bold, welsh.
Funny you should say that, CCR.
 
CCR is being a bit overzealous.

However, it does seem that the republicans are in a fix this year.

They know their guy is an idiot and at best a mediocre candidate. They know that the guy has botched Iraq, is botching Afghanistan, has weakened us internationally.

They know that his favoritism for the rich and corporate america comes at the expense of the middle class. They know that their tax dollars are being given to corporations in the form of tax breaks. That downsized government turns into expensive outsourcing, and that jobs are going overseas.

They know that the guy is taking away our civil rights, that he's breaking the church-state bond, that he's the first president to make a constitutional amendent with the intention of taking away rights.

They know what they saw at the debates, a president who can't control his emotions, who rules based on faith alone, who's only domestic program "no child left behind" is not a "jobs program". If they were to look further they would know that "no child left behind" is not being funded and is little more than an attempted to bankrupt private education, and thereby further social inequality.

They know all of this. They know that the campaign is about two things- a slanderous campaign against a decorated war veteran and civil servent, and the abuse of fear for political goals- a fear that the administration has helped create.

And they know that if they support this coke adled alcoholic than they are acting as if their brains have been fried. That's why the republicans turn to name calling.

It's a sign of frustration- frustration with what they have to work with, with the results that they have seen and the expectation that "more of the same" is coming.

Hell if I was a republican I would vote Libertarian or for Nader.

The wise choice is not to vote republican this year. Unless you want the GOP to continue in this way- of coddling to the religious right, to take it's policies from corporate america, to overcommit the US in unnecessary international adventures in the business of state building, than don't vote republican.
 
that he's the first president to make a constitutional amendent with the intention of taking away rights.

More like pre-emptively preventing freedoms. Another interesting thing to note, The Preservation of Marriage Act was unconstitutional.

But the Democrats are campaigning to save this country from going down hill.

That's what they're CAMPAIGNING for, sure.
 
Back
Top