2004 election in the US

Xose · Post by **Xose** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 10:40 am

"...some anti-Bush posters, particularly Sr.X, use extremely insulting and inflamatory language. He would make a good propagandist for the enemies of our country."

Wow.

Standing up for human rights for ALL innocent people, regardless of where they live, does not make me an enemy of my country, Corsino.

The last time I checked, our country was supposed to defend democracy, freedom, and liberty FOR ALL. All the current administration has defended are Halliburton stock prices.

I have never insulted any of the other participants of this forum, Corsino. I've merely presented my point of view and why I think the right's is hogwash. If you don't like that, I'm sorry. It's still a free country, no matter how hard Bush tries to change that.

Terechu · Post by **Terechu** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 11:53 am

Ken, just for the record, 3 out of 4 Americans did not vote for George W. Bush, so he is not representing America or the majority of Americans. I find it a little difficult to understand why any criticism of Bush should automatically be interpreted as a criticism to the USA. He doesn't own the flag or the country (I believe Saudi Arabia does

), so please don't compare me to the French.

You might good reasons for voting for Bush, I have extremely good reasons for wanting him out and that's how things stand. Don't read anything into my posts that isn't there. As to language of hatred, I assure you I'm not capable of such a feeling for anyone. But I will rave when a bully whimsically destroys a country and sends other people's children to kill thousands of innocent civilians for personal profit. It's not hatred, it's anger - something very different.

The trouble with speaking one's mind is that it limits conversation.

Take care
Terechu

Ken Menendez · Post by **Ken Menendez** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 12:24 pm

Terechu, all I can say to you is "stuff it". I hope you can translate this into Spanish.

Your comments about Bush, his wife, etc., is extremely biased without fact to the point you could be Michael Moore's right hand woman. Another point, work on your own country's politics, corruption, unemployment, and its social ills. Spain needs all the help it can get. We don't need foreigners telling us what is wrong with our president, and continual Bush bashing.

Where do you get your facts. Three out of four Americans didn't vote for Bush. Beg your pardon, I believe it was very narrow margin, and in the end around 500 votes separated Bush and Gore in Florida. And another thing, in a previous post you blamed Bush for the oil prices. Give me a break. Have you heard of China and its demand for oil in its booming economy? Political strife in Nigeria (I know in your mind its Bush's fault) and Venezuela?

I could go on challenging you but its a waste of time as your mind is set in its beliefs and nothing can change or moderate it. After tomorrow and who ever wins our election nothing will change. Trust me. Politicans are all the same---tell you what they think you want to hear and hope that after the election you are naive enough to forget their promises. And all goes on like it did before. Even the war in Iraq. Kerry will pursue that effort with as much vigor as Bush as the U. S. has much to lose. He will not get help from the Germans and French as he thinks, maybe moral support but no troops, so he will have to commit more resources. If he doesn't he will be faced with a hostile Congress, that in my opinion, will have a Republican majority and will not let Kerry off the hook. Kerry will need to work with Congress to save his back side for any success in his four year term, if he is elected. It will be interesting, if Kerry is elected, your comments by mid-year, 2005.

Xose · Post by **Xose** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:04 pm

First, for the record, here is the final vote tally for 2000:

Bush 50,456,002 (47.87%) 271 Electoral Votes
Gore 50,999,897 (48.38%) 266 Electoral Votes
Nader 2,882,955 (2.74%) 0 Electoral Votes

Ken, I think you owe Terechu an apology for directing your objections to her in such coarse language. Disagreeing with someone is one thing, but telling them to "stuff it" because you don't like their point of view is not acceptable in polite discussion. I'm sure you didn't intent for it to come out sounding mean, but I can see how she might take it that way.

Berodia · Post by **Berodia** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:19 pm

G. W. Bush es tan buen político que hasta Ben Laden hace campaña a su favor.

G. W. Bush is such a good politician (or president), that even Ben Laden is campaigning for Bush.

Un saludo.

[Art: I tweaked Berodia's English translation.]

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 1:28 pm

Things are getting a little heated. I want to let everyone know that I (serving as neutral moderator) have written personal and private notes to members on all sides of the exchange.

I see little good that could come out of posting public requests that some members to cool off or tone down their posts.

Let's all recognize that politics is a highly emotional set of issues, but that we are still united by our interest in Asturias, its people, and its culture as it has played out both in SPain and in other nations.

Abrazos to all,

Bob Martinez

Barbara Alonso Novellino · Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:13 pm

Bob,

I have to say that you are right...HOWEVER

I also have to say that I repeatedly complained about the anti-President Bush bashing. I was told that neither President Bush or Kerry belonged to the forum, therefore, I guess that made President Bush fair game. Politics is a very heated subject with two sides.

You, and the other members of this Forum have to understand, that when you are for a certain politician, whoever he may be, you find it offensive when he is spoken of in such a disrespectful way. I don't care if you like him or not, but I do feel that the Forum members who do should be respected and the negative things should be toned down. If you read back to some of the first postings, you will see that Xose was always ready with a wise crack and a very negative comment. Ken and I just responded to his negativety.

I don't think you can imagine how hard it is/was to open a comment and see the awful things that have been said about MY PRESIDENT...Many times I had all I could do to control my anger and not respond. Somewhere along the line I was asked what offended me...I listed them but that made no difference...it was said repeatedly.

I understand that we all have that common Asturian backround...me probably more than most...My maternal and fraternal Grandparents were from Asturias and settled in West Virginia in the early 1900's so I understand full well our heritage. My Father, who I respected more than anyone else was a Democrat through and through, however, I never heard him say negative things about anyone I chose to vote for. He knew full well that I was a Republican, but respected me and who I voted for.

Xose · Post by **Xose** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:26 pm

I'll say again that I've never disrespected any member of this forum due to their political beliefs...a courtesy not extended to me in kind, I might add.

Xose · Post by **Xose** » Mon Nov 01, 2004 5:33 pm

One other thing, I just want to be sure to remind our Republican members of the forum to don't forget to go out and vote on Wednesday, November 3!

Terechu · Post by **Terechu** » Tue Nov 02, 2004 5:58 am

Ken, I know very well what "stuff it" means, it's gross and disgusting, and disqualifies you as a serious discussion partner. Besides, you are nobody to tell me to shut up.
My figures are very simple: if the total US population is 295 Million people and only 50 million voted for Bush, according to mathematics, less than 20% (17% to be precise) of Americans are Bush-voters.
It's amazing that 17% of the population should hog the flag and the symbols of a country.

Terechu

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:15 am

According to the US Census Bureau, there were 281,421,906 people in the US in 2000, not necessarily all citizens, of voting age, or registered voters. If Xose's figure is correct and we assume that no non-citizens were counted in the census (unrealistic, of course), 17.929% of the population voted for Bush in 2000. There were approximately 130,000,000 registered voters, according to one online source. I don't know how many actually voted. What percent of the population voted for Bush depends, of course, on how we define the population.

I've already voted and I'm off to work. I'm already going to be late. The lines to vote were longer than I remember in years past. I hope that someone will look up more precise figures than I have been able to provide above and share them all of us.

Bob Martinez

Ken Menendez · Post by **Ken Menendez** » Tue Nov 02, 2004 10:46 am

Xose figures for the votes for Bush, Gore and Nader and the electoral count are correct. The following is taken from the U. S. Census Bureau and the Federal Election Commission:

In November, 2000, there were 202.6 million people in the U.S. over 18 years of age, with 186.4 million being U. S. Citizens and eligible to vote. Of that 186 million, 129.6 million were registered to vote, and 110.8 million voted. The total population of the U. S. on April 1, 2000, was 281,421,906. The delta between the 281.4 million people and the 202.6 million aged 18 and over 18 are children not eligible to vote.

As Xose broke down the vote for Bush and Gore, let me expand upon that:

Bush, 50,456,002 votes, or 47.87%, 271 electoral votes, 30 states
Gore, 50,999,897 votes, or 48.38%, 266 electoral votes, 21 states
Nader, 2,882,955 votes, or 2.754%, 0 electoral votes, 0 states

Gore won the popular vote, however, Bush won the number of states and the electoral college. This is very unfortunate in that it creates a divide in our Nation, which we have seen. It is always best if the popular vote and electoral count are for the same person. It also helps develop the argument as to doing away with the Electoral College and going with just the popular vote. If that happens then certain cities and states will control the presidency, such as New York state and city and California areas of Los Angeles and so forth. The voters in other area, mid-west, south, mountain states, will then feel disinfranchised. So goes the theory.

Others receiving votes and representing various other political parties were: Brown (1,606), Browne (384,431), Buchanan(448,895), Dodge (208), Hagelen (83,714), Harris (7,378), Lane (1,044), McReynolds (5,602), Moorehead (4,795), Phillips (98,020), Smith (5,775), Venson (535), and Youngkett (161).

The total for all of the above was 105,326,325. I do not understand the difference between the 105 million votes counted, and the 110 million who voted. Where the 5 million drop is. Otherwise, it appears that 5 million voters did not mark their ballots for any of the candidates for president. I need to do some research on that one. I wanted to post this first.

I can understand Terechu numbers as she presented them. Take any of the numbers above and you can twist, turn and do whatever with them and come away with your own theory to suit your own beliefs and likes and dislikes.

Terechu · Post by **Terechu** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 3:31 am

La suerte está echada. Los norteamericanos han votado y la mayoría de los votantes han preferido que Bush nos gobernara a todos otros 4 años.
Que Dios nos coja confesados.

-----------------------------------------------
The dice are cast. The Americans have voted and most voters have preferred that Bush should govern all of us for another 4 years. God help us!

Terechu

Chris · Post by **Chris** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 6:56 am

Veamos que pasa en los siguientes cuatro años. Y veamos que pasa con las amenazas de Ben Laden. Ahora Estados unidos es uno de los paises mas inseguros del del mundo (situacion elegida por ellos mimos y por su presidente). A que pais se enfrentara(destruira) ahora para desviar la atencion de los americanos.

Gano las elecciones creando una sensacion de miedo y a su vez describiendose a si mismo como el salvador de america y el unico que puede hacer frente al terrorismo mundial(prepotente). Cuando el 11s es el consecuente de la administracion de su padre y de la suya propia.

transalated by (terechu, bob....)
--------------------------------------------

Manny · Post by **Manny** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:25 am

No salgo de mi asombro que personas, que creo estudiadas, digan tal cantidad de gilipolleces. Pedis respeto y tolerancia y sois los menos tolerantes (o a lo mejor los más iluminados). Respetar los resultados, por favor. Si quereis respeto empezar por darlo.

--------------
translated by Xosé

It never ceases to amaze me that people, who I believe are educated, can say so many stupid things. You want respect and tolerance and are the least tolerant (or at best the most enlightened). Respect the results, please. If you want respect start to give some.