Rob E Dangerously

but, did the pies taste good?

How is that popcorn staying balanced.. it's on the forearms of Bush and.. oh yeah.. nevermind.. j/k the political books section at my local Barnes and Noble rocks (imo)

a few turnout-related questions #1) Do you believe there really 4 million evangelical voters who stayed home in 2000? It's possible. Although I think a lot of those 4 million live in safe Bush states such as Texas, Utah and so on. States such as Oklahoma only had 55% of registered voters show up in 2000. #2) Will the marriage "protection" amendments in several states deliver some of those voters? Maybe. But, a lot of those amendments will pass easily. An amendment in Oklahoma is leading by 50 points. Although people will show up to vote for Tom Coburn, Brad Carson or a woman who says the CIA put a chip in her head. But i'm pretty sure Alabama will repeal the parts of their constitution relating to school segregation and the poll tax, no matter ceremonial that vote will be. And Alaska could legalize Marijuana, but it'd have the same effect to everyday life as the Alabama amendment.

I don't see a problem with what Israel is doing and I don't see peace in the Middle East happening anytime soon

this ties in for Kerry and Florida: via the Washington Post What's the turnout rate for Senior Citizens? 70 or 80 percent? I'd imagine the efforts to get them out will be vastly expanded this year. And those don't sound like the actions of a scared group. But the actions of a group which is angry and willing to help defeat Bush. One turnout estimate is 121 million. That would be 17 million higher than 1992 and 2000. Either way.. the turnout of 104 million will be surpassed this November. a link on the 121 million estimate: http://www.mydd.com/story/2004/10/21/171752/65#readmore

we could have just tripped him instead of sending those cigars.

(random Pat image) http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/19/...iraq/index.html Pat's record of prediction is pretty lousy. Such as with Hurricanes in Florida (a bit early) or Pat predicting that Bush would win in a 'blowout' ( http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,107258,00.html ) or the fact that Pat had to have surgery for his prostate cancer despite his ability to sense God healing people. Although predicting a war will be messy isn't too hard. But unless Pat is either misquoting Bush, vengeful against Bush for some reason or just being foolish.. the casualty quote was foolish (if it's true). Pat is capable of using an unintentionally foolish quote. (I would expect that Bush probably said something like "there won't be a problem, which is less stupid) Then again.. I'd rather have Bush be President than Pat. If that's really a compliment to anybody. The other day, I realized that Pat hadn't said anything really stupid lately. But God heard me, and Pat fulfilled one of his duties. (random question: Does Pat still show up on the 700 club a lot? I used to watch the show for entertainment a few years ago)

after a quick text search though the Pennsylvania state constitution, there's nothing that suggests that recalls are allowed

That was in reference to the AP poll, not the polls in general. Most other polls are statistical deadlocks. It may be hatred from one race, but it's not inspiring hatred against a specific race. Like i'd have a knife for that. Come on. If Cheney was saying that Kerry couldn't handle nuclear bombs going off in the cities.. then that would be tough to handle. Having said that, I am glad you'll never be in a position of power whatsoever. And what other groups did I miss? 1980 (and there was no incumbent in 2000)

Care to point out where the Constitution mentions specific days for votes? Here one part of the Constitution http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html The elector portions involve the actual electors voting. The first quotation shows that Congress or State Legislatures can make decisions on when elections are held for the House or Senate The second quotation shows that Congress can determine the period of time that electors can be determined. (It seems to have been passed to the states, but Congress has been intrepreted as the US Congress and State legislatures, if I recall correctly. Unless this means that the states can't make their individual laws on the period of time which polls are open) The second part of that quotation says the day the electors vote will be the same thoughout the US. In fact, unless i'm missing something, states could choose to not even hold an election to determine Presidential electors and it would be legal. (They would then pick electors in the legislature. South Carolina did that until 1860. Colorado did it in 1876)

Thune's blowing his load. http://www.aberdeennews.com/mld/aberdeennews/9976074.htm I don't know how to explain South Dakota voting laws. Especially in relation to Linda Daschle. But Early Voting is not the same as voting absentee. Absentee voting is if you have to be gone on election day. Early voting is for when you want to vote early and avoid the rush

2000 poll average, October 31st to November 6th: (info from http://www.pollingreport.com/wh2genT.htm ) Bush - 46.8% Gore - 43.2% Nader - 4% Buchanan - 0.9% Undecided - 5.0% Gallup average, October 31st to November 6th (8 polls) Bush - 47.5% Gore - 43.8% Nader - 4.1% Buchanan - 0.8% Undecided - 4% In that week, there were 53 polls released, 47 with Bush leads, 2 with Gore leads and 4 ties As for the polls from October 14th, 2000 until October 20, 2000 Bush - 45.8% Gore - 42% Nader - 4.2% Buchanan - 0.9% Undecided - 7.2% And here were the four polls released on October 20th, 2000 ABC (tracking): 48-45 Bush Gallup: 51-40 Bush Newsweek - 48-41 Bush Reuters/MSN - 45-44 Bush That week had 30 polls, 28 with Bush leads and 2 ties Gallup average for that week (out of 7 polls) Bush - 48.6% Gore - 41.7% Nader - 3.6% Buchanan - .4% Undecided - 5.7% So yeah.. we'll see who is right and how much Gallup is wrong.

Probably.. His Brother is also 73

I didn't know that Fidel had a son Fidel's brother Raul is next in line

Alan Keyes for the corpse of Ben Tillman Now come on Rob! ...the corpse is too much to offer for Keyes. To be honest.. it's probably a skeleton but it did inspire the Clemson/South Carolina feud, so it might be of historical significance, despite being racist Alan Keyes to the Democrats in exchange for Mel Reynolds

How is a 3 point Kerry lead considered a deadlock? That's like being someone saying you are involved in a traffic jam when the jam is behind you. With the pro-challenger split of undecided voters, a Kerry lead is not good for Bush Somebody needs to get a standard for headlines. But that would require the media change their templates.

Alan Keyes for the corpse of Ben Tillman

When Fidel dies.. make plans to put your money in Cuban cigars because with his old Brother being the "heir".. a civil war will occur

Um, when the topic was "we're going to have casualties" --- it is the EXACT SAME THING. -=Mike Yes and the "response" from Bush was different Pat Robertson should emerge from his 700 Club Tower to clear this up. I'm guessing he misquoted Bush there

Maybe he was referring to his own daughter. -=Mike Did his own daughter pass the peas at dinner? if not, then she is being selfish and she should be stoned to death. Hwaayeeeaahh!

The sound you're hearing is people adding Fidel to their "Death Pools" for 2005. If Fidel broke a hip, then he'd be on his way to death.

a 3 point lead for Kerry isn't much of a 'deadlock' Especially when you consider that the undecideds go for the challenger and all. Her age surprised me too. I didn't expect 66. Maybe she's had some cosmetic work done. Quick, get Drudge on the case. That's not much of an insult. And women don't really ask for apologies, unless you really piss them off. Water under the bridge. Teresa was a translator at the UN. That's sorta like having to deal with children. Any specifics on how comfortable Bush's win will be? I'm guessing comfortable is 60 to 80 EVs Not technically Inspiring racial hatred is race-baiting And Lynching would be considered Murder. There's surrogates, the lesser people, who may test out some stuff, and if it is credible and works, then it goes to the candidate. Anyways, that presses on Bush's credibility. Which is questionable after all the "Intelligence failures" in Iraq. Or in other words, Bush has stretched out our troops by a larger amount than ever. Bush says that he isn't going to do the draft, and you believe him, because he said so. Which is different from what Kerry is doing. Obviously. There's lies and twisting the truth. Due to what Bush was quoted as saying (which was a bad line to say), that gave some material out for people against him to use. But if he has the credibility. He can bounce back there. If they were able to make that claim with the surrogates without anybody noticing, that would be remarkable. And it was a joke anyways. The other terrorist groups here would be Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and the IRA. I'm probably overlooked some other group in Israel. There's other groups which have ties to Al Qaeda (Hambali's group, the Filipino group, one in Egypt, so on) Is something being left out here? Hopefully "War on Terror" isn't just code for "Get rid of people we don't like" but it's "Fight to reduce terrorism" I don't care enough to read my old posts either

Actually.. if you rely on the reports of Pat's prediction. God only told him that the election would be a blowout, not any specifics on who would win. "And he said, Oh, no, our troops are, you know, so well protected, we don‘t have to worry about that" is not the same as "Oh, no, we're not going to have any casualties." That's the main difference. Granted, Pat could have fucked up big time there. I'm sure if he did, he'll mention it sometime. I'm leaning towards "blunder". I don't think Pat Robertson would have anything against Bush.

doesn't Asia have dibs on this seat when Kofi leaves?

The Reade family reunion must rock.. big time