Can someone explain?
 

"DSK" wrote

Partly it's a question of sheer numbers. How many hundred million
paper
votes do you all have to tally? How many people have to make it
through
the polls in a day?

About 200 here.



Our ballot was also paper but is an optical scan.


Here in Plowville we have electonic ballet booths. Just touch the
screen and you're counted.


places don't require ID but our area does,

Here, the old ladies at the table know every one.


I still have a slight bit of hope that Ohio will go to Kerry and
give
him the election,


Stop dreaming. Wake up and get to work.



Scott Vernon
Plowville Pa _/)__/)_/)_

"DSK" wrote in message

It's like 1972 (Nixon) all over again... people know they're being lied to
and choose the lies that suit their prejudices & wishful thinking.

I'd like to hallmark this phrase as an archetypal piece of liberal ideology:
that a select few elitist individuals possess the level of intelligence to
run the country while the majority is stupid, senseless, and corrupt. Of
course this same arrogant belief was held by the ruling oligarchy in the
former Soviet Union for decades as well, and look where it got them.

Max

Maxprop wrote:
I'd like to hallmark this phrase as an archetypal piece of liberal ideology:

I'd like to bronze this statement as the ultimate in head-up-the-ass
"neoconservative" stupidity.

You *still* want you call me a "liberal" which proves that
1- you don't know what liberalism is (do know what "is" is?)
2- you don't pay attention
3- facts matter less to you than partisan name-calling

The country has made it's choice. That's good.

I don't like it, however. I don't have to. That damn sure doesn't make
me a liberal. Calling me one makes you a jackass.

Is that clear enough now?

DSK

Maxprop wrote:
Yesterday's voting was at an all-time high for a presidential
election. Turnout exceeded everyone's predictions. As a matter of trivial
fact, Bush won by the greatest number of popular votes in US history as
well.

These statements may well be true, but in light of an ever increasing population a rather meaningless bit
of trivia; now if he won by the greatest percentage, then you might have something of significance.

Cheers
Marty

Max

that's good. I believe we had around a 60% turnout this year, which is
exceptionally high.
What happens to those that don't vote?

Scotty, a typical lazy American


OzOne wrote in message
...
On Wed, 3 Nov 2004 18:20:05 -0500, "Scott Vernon"
scribbled thusly:

What percentage shows up to vote?


At local elections wher voting isn't compulsory, over 78%

At the nationwide (Federal) elections, over 96% turnout and there
was
talk of the exceptionally high turnout at the last election, last
month, so I'd expect the figure was closer to 99%.


Oz1...of the 3 twins.

I welcome you to crackerbox palace,We've been expecting you.

Oz,

Our system differs from your's in that we directly vote for all our
representative. The President & Vice president, all the member of the
Senate (our upper house), representative to the House of Congress
(our lower house) Governors and other local officials, and local laws.

None of our reps are appointed. You vote for a party, the after the
election a party leader is selected to form government (Prime Minister)

Our system is more complicated but is more democratic. We also have a
time limit when or officials most face elections

Hope this helps you to understnd our system. I have a naturalize
american/ dutch friend and haven't been able to make him understand.
YET!

Ole Thom

In article et,
Maxprop wrote:

OzOne wrote in message

Here in Oz, voting is compulsory.

Dictatorial, totalitarian state?

Don't display the appalling state of American education quite so
blatantly.

PDW

In article , Thom
Stewart wrote:

Oz,

Our system differs from your's in that we directly vote for all our
representative. The President & Vice president, all the member of the
Senate (our upper house), representative to the House of Congress
(our lower house) Governors and other local officials, and local laws.

Hmmm. We vote for a local representative based on population. We vote
for candidates running for the Senate, elected 'at large' for each
State & territory. We elect local council members and state govt reps,
both lower & upper houses in most states.

None of our reps are appointed. You vote for a party, the after the
election a party leader is selected to form government (Prime Minister)

No we don't vote for a party at all. We vote for individuals who may be
members of a party - usually are. Exactly the same as your guys being a
Dem or a Rep. The elected members choose the Prime Minister.

Our system is more complicated but is more democratic.

No it's about the same, you just don't understand how our system works.

Also you don't really vote for a President - well you do, but the
electoral college actually selects him. He's not directly elected. This
isn't much if any different from how our system works in practice.
Think about it.

PDW

"DSK" wrote in message

Maxprop wrote:
I'd like to hallmark this phrase as an archetypal piece of liberal
ideology:

I'd like to bronze this statement as the ultimate in head-up-the-ass
"neoconservative" stupidity.

You *still* want you call me a "liberal" which proves that
1- you don't know what liberalism is (do know what "is" is?)

I know precisely what liberalism is. Fact is, you're one of the most
liberal assholes contributing to this NG. Liberal because you espouse big,
all-knowing, all-encompassing government. "Asshole" simply because you are.

2- you don't pay attention

I was formerly amused by your insistence that you're a conservative. More
recently it's grown tedious. You can put perfume on a pig, but at the end
of the day it's still a pig.

3- facts matter less to you than partisan name-calling

You're the name-calling champ, chump. I've only begun to learn from the
master: thou.

The country has made it's choice. That's good.

Actually it's a democratic republic and entitled to make that choice.

I don't like it, however. I don't have to. That damn sure doesn't make
me a liberal. Calling me one makes you a jackass.

Your preference for a particular candidate has nothing to do with it. You
obviously don't read well, Doug. Most likely a product of outcome-based
education, sorry. I called you a liberal because of your redundant
diatribes branding the masses as stupid and unfit to run their own affairs.
I think you honestly believe you know what's best for the rest of us,
despite our preference for some other socio-political ideology. That is a
recurrent theme in virtually every leftist regime in history.

Is that clear enough now?

Ask yourself. You're the comprehensionally-challenged one.

Come out of the closet, Doug. There's no shame in being liberal.
Much.

(Time to killfile me again, Bilgewater Bill the Brainwashed.)

Max

"Jonathan Ganz" wrote in message

Right about where we are today. This country is on a downhill slide. This
is good evidence of it.

Isn't it about time for you to leave, Jon? I'll bet Alec Baldwin, Barbara
Streisand, or Sean Penn will have an extra seat on their private jets for
you, if ya ask nicely.

Max