McCain wins Florida primary...
 

On Jan 30, 3:30�am, "Jim" wrote:


Hope you're right. There's just something wrong when a political party can
deprive any voter of the right to have his vote counted in the selection
process. Might even be unconstitutional.


A party primary is not a state election. It's a polling of party
members to see how the state delegates should be appportioned and
assigned.
Talk aout depriving people of the right to vote.......you can't even
vote in a political primary (in most states) unless you are willing to
proclaim that you are either a Democrat or a Republican. Independents,
libertarians, socialists, etc are turned away from the polls.

We had an open primary in WA until a few years ago. I am no longer
allowed to participate in the primary elections in this state because
I am unwilling to lie and claim to be a D or an R. The justification
is: the parties have a right to pick thier own candidates.
Unaffiliated voters have the right to vote for whomever they choose in
the actual election.

The Constitution doesn't guarantee anybody the right to participate in
the pre-election processes of any specific political parties- and
that's what a primary election is about.

McCain wins Florida primary...
 

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 30, 3:30�am, "Jim" wrote:

Hope you're right. There's just something wrong when a political party can
deprive any voter of the right to have his vote counted in the selection
process. Might even be unconstitutional.


A party primary is not a state election. It's a polling of party
members to see how the state delegates should be appportioned and
assigned.
Talk aout depriving people of the right to vote.......you can't even
vote in a political primary (in most states) unless you are willing to
proclaim that you are either a Democrat or a Republican. Independents,
libertarians, socialists, etc are turned away from the polls.

We had an open primary in WA until a few years ago. I am no longer
allowed to participate in the primary elections in this state because
I am unwilling to lie and claim to be a D or an R. The justification
is: the parties have a right to pick thier own candidates.
Unaffiliated voters have the right to vote for whomever they choose in
the actual election.

The Constitution doesn't guarantee anybody the right to participate in
the pre-election processes of any specific political parties- and
that's what a primary election is about.


On the other hand, I believe in closed primaries, and, to take it a step
further, I believe in voting-booth primaries only, not caucuses. Voters
should be able to decide on their own, in the privacy of a voting booth,
who they want to support.

Independents should be able to vote in primaries, too, but only to
indicate a preference, not to pick a party's candidate.

McCain wins Florida primary...
 

HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 30, 3:30�am, "Jim" wrote:

Hope you're right. There's just something wrong when a political
party can
deprive any voter of the right to have his vote counted in the selection
process. Might even be unconstitutional.


A party primary is not a state election. It's a polling of party
members to see how the state delegates should be appportioned and
assigned.
Talk aout depriving people of the right to vote.......you can't even
vote in a political primary (in most states) unless you are willing to
proclaim that you are either a Democrat or a Republican. Independents,
libertarians, socialists, etc are turned away from the polls.

We had an open primary in WA until a few years ago. I am no longer
allowed to participate in the primary elections in this state because
I am unwilling to lie and claim to be a D or an R. The justification
is: the parties have a right to pick thier own candidates.
Unaffiliated voters have the right to vote for whomever they choose in
the actual election.

The Constitution doesn't guarantee anybody the right to participate in
the pre-election processes of any specific political parties- and
that's what a primary election is about.


On the other hand, I believe in closed primaries, and, to take it a step
further, I believe in voting-booth primaries only, not caucuses. Voters
should be able to decide on their own, in the privacy of a voting booth,
who they want to support.

Independents should be able to vote in primaries, too, but only to
indicate a preference, not to pick a party's candidate.

Harry,
Did anyone ask you what you prefer?

McCain wins Florida primary...
 

HK wrote:

The Democrats are going to need their supporters in Florida to carry
that state later this year, and I am sure some sort of accommodate will
be worked out so the Sunshine State delegates are seated at the
convention and have voting privileges. The party wants motivated voters.


Well, I suppose they could give themselves a boost by heckling people
at the polls and pulling republican signs out of peoples yards.

hey! it's worked in the past hasn't it?

McCain wins Florida primary...
 

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:44:49 -0500, wrote:

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:44:42 -0500, "Jim"
wrote:

This is basically the real estate agent relief act of 2008.

It should help. You might see an uptick in RE activity.

We are already seeing new home orders. All they had to do was drop the
price to a more realistic level. The real tax problem is the
government was spending, based on that artifically inflated home
value. Home prices are down 25-30% but government spending is still
gong up.

25/30%?

Maybe in some over inflated markets - not around here.

McCain wins Florida primary...
 

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 06:44:42 -0500, "Jim"
wrote:

This is basically the real estate agent relief act of 2008.

It should help. You might see an uptick in RE activity.

We are already seeing new home orders. All they had to do was drop the
price to a more realistic level. The real tax problem is the
government was spending, based on that artifically inflated home
value. Home prices are down 25-30% but government spending is still
gong up.


Hopefully there aren't too many stories like this one lurking beneath the
surface in other communities:

http://www.rochesternews.com/extra/amico/0514amico.html

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/...213amico.shtml

The town is small enough, and the number of overvalued houses high enough
that when the assessments were corrected, the town budget had to be
completely reworked.

McCain wins Florida primary...
 

McCain wins Florida primary...
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:49:20 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

Your guess is as good as mine on this, but I think a Hillary-Barack
ticket would be unstoppable.
Barack-Hillary would be better.

Barack/Bill Richardson would be the tough one to beat. He could say he
was sending Richardson on the road to fill in the gaps in his foreign
policy experience.

Hillary vs McCain will leave all of the anti-war people with no
attractive candidate. That may depress turnout and really make this a
crap shoot. I think the solid voters at that point will be the people
who are against Hillary no matter who else is running (the NRA vote,
Pro-lifers and other dependable turnout)


Are you kidding? After nearly eight years of being BUSHwhacked, every DEM
in the country will vote for Hillary *or* Barack, along with a majority of
independents.

There's very little difference between Hillary or Barack on ending Bush's
war. Hillary has said she will have a formal plan for doing so within 60
days of assuming office.


Don't get too excited about anybody's plan, regardless of their political
party. Decisions will be made based on the miserable reality of the
situation, not on what politicians say on television.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/30/wa...iJ978I5aagtojQ

McCain wins Florida primary...
 

On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:14:16 -0500, HK wrote:


There's very little difference between Hillary or Barack on ending
Bush's war. Hillary has said she will have a formal plan for doing so
within 60 days of assuming office.

You know, I was against this war from the start, but there is something
about invading a country, wiping out it's government structure, and then
leaving it in shambles, that doesn't set well with me. It seems to me,
we now have a duty. How much of a duty? How many lives? I don't know,
but I'll be interested in the debate without the Nitwit and his unending
"terrorists" statements. I wonder if we will ever learn the real reason
for this war. It sure as hell wasn't WMD.

McCain wins Florida primary...
 

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 12:14:16 -0500, HK wrote:


There's very little difference between Hillary or Barack on ending
Bush's war. Hillary has said she will have a formal plan for doing so
within 60 days of assuming office.

You know, I was against this war from the start, but there is something
about invading a country, wiping out it's government structure, and then
leaving it in shambles, that doesn't set well with me. It seems to me,
we now have a duty. How much of a duty? How many lives? I don't know,
but I'll be interested in the debate without the Nitwit and his unending
"terrorists" statements. I wonder if we will ever learn the real reason
for this war. It sure as hell wasn't WMD.


Do you enjoy vomiting? Read this:

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/boo...46199575&itm=1

There's much more to it than just A.Q. Khan. Quite a bit about the stuff we
found, the stuff we didn't find, and how we blew it over and over and over
and over......