how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
- Thread starter DimeDR
- Start date
Munchkin Man
EOG Dedicated
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
The preponderance of the evidence clearly shows that the manner in which George W. Bush won the last two Presidential elections was fair and square and that he won with dignity and honor.
Munchkin Man
The preponderance of the evidence clearly shows that the manner in which George W. Bush won the last two Presidential elections was fair and square and that he won with dignity and honor.
Munchkin Man
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO
:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO
DimeDR
Banned
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
yeah i guess not merlin, you are bron with all the knowledge you need... HBO seemed it was important enough to sponsor, have you ever watched anything on hbo ... what sources do you use for your info .... you are truly a cretin with extremely limited creative flow and no thirst for truth, sad life you and your eog serpents lead
yeah i guess not merlin, you are bron with all the knowledge you need... HBO seemed it was important enough to sponsor, have you ever watched anything on hbo ... what sources do you use for your info .... you are truly a cretin with extremely limited creative flow and no thirst for truth, sad life you and your eog serpents lead
Munchkin Man
EOG Dedicated
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
The Munchkin Man didn't have to.
One of the greatest things about becoming an enlightened born-again conservative is that it gives you a "sixth sense" that helps you sense and detect that which is right and true, as well as that which is BS.
The Munchkin Man detected BS the instant the Munchkin Man clicked on your link.
Munchkin Man
The Munchkin Man didn't have to.
One of the greatest things about becoming an enlightened born-again conservative is that it gives you a "sixth sense" that helps you sense and detect that which is right and true, as well as that which is BS.
The Munchkin Man detected BS the instant the Munchkin Man clicked on your link.
Munchkin Man
ZZ CREAM
EOG Master
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
Even Stevie Wonder could see that Bush and his Brother and the Powers that be in Florida and on the US Supreme Court gave Bush the election. I believe that the preponderance of evidence was only to be believed if your 'news' organization resembles a miniature animal that begins with 'F" and ends with an 'OX" handing out Kool-Aid like Jim Jones.
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
they don't wanna see or hear about anything that doesn't blow up, crash, or wear a bikini. they also don't ever want out of their fat white bloated comfort zone, hence the hilbilly who has an enlightened sense of what to and what to not listen to. meaning: only listens to what reaffirms his premonitions and is agreeable to his prejudices. good luck converting the middle aged zombies.
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
October 6, 2003
Study shows Fox News viewers misinformed about war, Iraq, WMD, Iran Contra and anything else they want a simpleton to fall for.
Posted October 6th, 2003 at 11:43 am Share This | Spotlight | Permalink
I have naively believed for years that staying informed about current events by getting some news is better than blissful ignorance derived from getting no news. Then Fox News Channel helped demonstrate just how wrong I was.
The Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland conducted a thorough study of public knowledge and attitudes about current events and the war on terrorism. Researchers found that the public?s mistaken impressions of three facets of U.S. foreign policy ? discovery of alleged WMD in Iraq, alleged Iraqi involvement in 9/11, and international support for a U.S. invasion of Iraq ? helped fuel support for the war.
While the PIPA study concluded that most Americans (over 60%) held at least one of these mistaken impressions, the researchers also concluded that Americans? opinions were shaped in large part by which news outlet they relied upon to receive their information.
As the researchers explained in their report, ?The extent of Americans? misperceptions vary significantly depending on their source of news. Those who receive most of their news from Fox News are more likely than average to have misperceptions. Those who receive most of their news from NPR or PBS are less likely to have misperceptions. These variations cannot simply be explained as a result of differences in the demographic characteristics of each audience, because these variations can also be found when comparing the demographic subgroups of each audience.?
Almost shocking was the extent to which Fox News viewers were mistaken. Those who relied on the conservative network for news, PIPA reported, were ?three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions. In the audience for NPR/PBS, however, there was an overwhelming majority who did not have any of the three misperceptions, and hardly any had all three.?
Looking at the misperceptions one at a time, people were asked, for example, if the U.S. had discovered the alleged stockpiles of WMD in Iraq since the war began. Just 11% of those who relied on newspapers as their ?primary news source? incorrectly believed that U.S. forces had made such a discovery. Only slightly more ? 17% ? of those who relied on NPR and PBS were wrong. Yet 33% of Fox News viewers were wrong, far ahead of those who relied on any other outlet.
Likewise, when people were asked if the U.S. had ?clear evidence? that Saddam Hussein was ?working closely with al Queda,? similar results were found. Only 16% of NPR and PBS listeners/viewers believed that the U.S. has such evidence, while 67% of Fox News viewers were under that mistaken impression.
Overall, 80 percent of those who relied on Fox News as their primary news source believed at least one of the three misperceptions. Viewers/listeners/readers of other news outlets didn?t even come close to this total.
In other words, Fox News viewers are literally less informed about these basic facts. They have, put simply, been led to believe things that are simply not true. These poor dupes would have done better in this survey, statistically speaking, if they received no news at all and simply guessed whether the claims were accurate.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig --> And, in addition to a fun bash-Fox-athon, I wanted to add that the PIPA study also documented that those who relied on newspapers as their primary news source were better informed than those who watched any of the television news broadcasts. The only folks more informed than newspaper readers __________________
October 6, 2003
Study shows Fox News viewers misinformed about war, Iraq, WMD, Iran Contra and anything else they want a simpleton to fall for.
Posted October 6th, 2003 at 11:43 am Share This | Spotlight | Permalink
I have naively believed for years that staying informed about current events by getting some news is better than blissful ignorance derived from getting no news. Then Fox News Channel helped demonstrate just how wrong I was.
The Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland conducted a thorough study of public knowledge and attitudes about current events and the war on terrorism. Researchers found that the public?s mistaken impressions of three facets of U.S. foreign policy ? discovery of alleged WMD in Iraq, alleged Iraqi involvement in 9/11, and international support for a U.S. invasion of Iraq ? helped fuel support for the war.
While the PIPA study concluded that most Americans (over 60%) held at least one of these mistaken impressions, the researchers also concluded that Americans? opinions were shaped in large part by which news outlet they relied upon to receive their information.
As the researchers explained in their report, ?The extent of Americans? misperceptions vary significantly depending on their source of news. Those who receive most of their news from Fox News are more likely than average to have misperceptions. Those who receive most of their news from NPR or PBS are less likely to have misperceptions. These variations cannot simply be explained as a result of differences in the demographic characteristics of each audience, because these variations can also be found when comparing the demographic subgroups of each audience.?
Almost shocking was the extent to which Fox News viewers were mistaken. Those who relied on the conservative network for news, PIPA reported, were ?three times more likely than the next nearest network to hold all three misperceptions. In the audience for NPR/PBS, however, there was an overwhelming majority who did not have any of the three misperceptions, and hardly any had all three.?
Looking at the misperceptions one at a time, people were asked, for example, if the U.S. had discovered the alleged stockpiles of WMD in Iraq since the war began. Just 11% of those who relied on newspapers as their ?primary news source? incorrectly believed that U.S. forces had made such a discovery. Only slightly more ? 17% ? of those who relied on NPR and PBS were wrong. Yet 33% of Fox News viewers were wrong, far ahead of those who relied on any other outlet.
Likewise, when people were asked if the U.S. had ?clear evidence? that Saddam Hussein was ?working closely with al Queda,? similar results were found. Only 16% of NPR and PBS listeners/viewers believed that the U.S. has such evidence, while 67% of Fox News viewers were under that mistaken impression.
Overall, 80 percent of those who relied on Fox News as their primary news source believed at least one of the three misperceptions. Viewers/listeners/readers of other news outlets didn?t even come close to this total.
In other words, Fox News viewers are literally less informed about these basic facts. They have, put simply, been led to believe things that are simply not true. These poor dupes would have done better in this survey, statistically speaking, if they received no news at all and simply guessed whether the claims were accurate.
<!-- / message --><!-- sig --> And, in addition to a fun bash-Fox-athon, I wanted to add that the PIPA study also documented that those who relied on newspapers as their primary news source were better informed than those who watched any of the television news broadcasts. The only folks more informed than newspaper readers __________________
DimeDR
Banned
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
thor,
these guys never reply to anything with logic or discussion, the mods here claim that they shouldnt enter threads minus intent of debating, yet they NEVER EVER do...
there isnt one righty who can duel with any of us and its just like MJs.... my only hope is newbies can discern and spread the word and see the already dead eog right wing posters for the unmotivated, brain addled creatures they are
thor,
these guys never reply to anything with logic or discussion, the mods here claim that they shouldnt enter threads minus intent of debating, yet they NEVER EVER do...
there isnt one righty who can duel with any of us and its just like MJs.... my only hope is newbies can discern and spread the word and see the already dead eog right wing posters for the unmotivated, brain addled creatures they are
DimeDR
Banned
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
ps thor,
a guy i know who is very bright thinks it was OBL for 9/11 and had no idea the tapes were faked, yet he argued his face red until i showed him all the tapes then he said OH? and got real quiet ...
see, if these stooges actually read then would slowly learn, but since the munchies and the merlins are hatched with a priori knowledge and omnipotent auras, they dont need to learn anything again in their lifes--they got it all figured and stacked in the barn
ps thor,
a guy i know who is very bright thinks it was OBL for 9/11 and had no idea the tapes were faked, yet he argued his face red until i showed him all the tapes then he said OH? and got real quiet ...
see, if these stooges actually read then would slowly learn, but since the munchies and the merlins are hatched with a priori knowledge and omnipotent auras, they dont need to learn anything again in their lifes--they got it all figured and stacked in the barn
Munchkin Man
EOG Dedicated
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
Don't knock a priori knowledge and omnipotent auras if you haven't tried them.
For the purpose of thinking great, feeling great, looking great, and just plain being great, they can't be beat.
Munchkin Man
Don't knock a priori knowledge and omnipotent auras if you haven't tried them.
For the purpose of thinking great, feeling great, looking great, and just plain being great, they can't be beat.
Munchkin Man
Munchkin Man
EOG Dedicated
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
The Munchkin Man knows better than to place any credence in any tapes which have been doctored and faked and which originated from dubious sources and their anti-American agendas.
Munchkin Man
The Munchkin Man knows better than to place any credence in any tapes which have been doctored and faked and which originated from dubious sources and their anti-American agendas.
Munchkin Man
DimeDR
Banned
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
umm munchy with your omnipotent auras you should readily know that the said tapes have been verified and found by the usa gov. identifying OBL as the bogey man responsible and taking credit for 9/11--get with sharpening your prescient tools
umm munchy with your omnipotent auras you should readily know that the said tapes have been verified and found by the usa gov. identifying OBL as the bogey man responsible and taking credit for 9/11--get with sharpening your prescient tools
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
nice try old man
USATODAY.com - Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed
Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed
By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY
<table style="width: 190px; height: 99px;" class="sidebar" align="right" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td rowspan="4">
</td> <td>
</td> </tr> <tr> <td class="inside-label" align="right">
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.
The Florida Supreme Court ordered Dec. 8 that each of these ballots, which registered no presidential vote when run through counting machines, be examined by hand to determine whether a voter's intent could be discerned. On Dec. 9, the U.S. Supreme Court stopped the hand count before it was completed. That gave Bush Florida's 25 electoral votes, one more than he needed to win the presidency.
USA TODAY, The Miami Herald and Knight Ridder newspapers hired the national accounting firm BDO Seidman to examine undervote ballots in Florida's 67 counties. The accountants provided a report on what they found on each of the ballots.
The newspapers then applied the accounting firm's findings to four standards used in Florida and elsewhere to determine when an undervote ballot becomes a legal vote. By three of the standards, Bush holds the lead. The fourth standard gives Gore a razor-thin win.
The results reveal a stunning irony. The way Gore wanted the ballots recounted helped Bush, and the standard that Gore felt offered him the least hope may have given him an extremely narrow victory. The vote totals vary depending on the standard used:
Gore's main strategy throughout the post-election dispute was to secure a recount of any kind in the hope of reversing the certified result. Bush's strategy was to stop the recount while he was ahead. But his views on how recounts should be done, in the counties where they were underway, would have been potentially disastrous for him if used statewide.
Bush and Gore were informed Tuesday of the new study's results. Both declined comment. But White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said, "The President believes, just as the American people do, that this election was settled months ago. The voters spoke, and George W. Bush won."
The newspapers' study took three months to complete and cost more than $500,000. It involved 27 accountants who examined and categorized ballots as they were held up by county election officials.
The study has limitations. There is variability in what different observers see on ballots. Election officials, who sorted the undervotes for examination and then handled them for the accountants' inspection, often did not provide exactly the same number of undervotes recorded on election night.
Even so, the outcome shows a consistent and decisive pattern: the more lenient the standard, the better Bush does. Because Gore fought for the lenient standard, it may be more difficult now for Democrats to argue that the election was lost in the chambers of the U.S. Supreme Court rather than the voting booths of Florida.
The study helps answer the question: What would have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the hand count of undervotes?
However, it does not answer all the questions surrounding another set of Florida ballots: the 110,000 "overvotes," which machines recorded as having more than one presidential vote. These ballots were rejected by the machines and were considered invalid. Some Democrats say if all of Florida's overvote ballots were examined by hand to learn voters' intent, their candidate would have prevailed.
USA TODAY, The Miami Herald and Gannett and Knight Ridder newspapers also are examining Florida's overvotes for a study to be published later this spring. Overvotes contain some valid votes, mostly instances when a voter marked the oval next to a candidate's name and then wrote in the name of the same candidate.
No candidate requested a hand count of overvotes, and no court — federal or state — ordered one. The U.S. Supreme Court cited the state court's failure to include the overvotes in its recount order as an example of arbitrariness.
Immediately after Gore conceded the election to Bush, The Miami Herald began to evaluate what might have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the recount of undervotes.
Florida is one of the few states that permit members of the public to examine ballots after they've been cast. The Miami Herald and the BDO Seidman accounting firm began examining ballots on Dec. 18. USA TODAY joined the project in January. The last undervote ballot was examined March 13.
Florida law requires that political parties be notified of ballot inspections. The Republican and Democratic parties took different approaches to the three months of ballot inspections.
The Democrats took a hands-off approach. They rarely showed up at election offices during the evaluation. "We want to see what you find. It's not our role to be at the table with you," Tony Welch, spokesman for the Florida Democratic Party, said during the newspapers' study. "If we're spinning and the Republicans are spinning, people won't believe the result."
He said at the time that the party expected the outcome would show that Gore received more votes than Bush.
By contrast, the Republicans attended every ballot inspection. They devoted hundreds of days of staff and volunteer time. The party delayed cutting its post-election staff of field directors from 12 to 6 so it could staff the ballot inspections. Some Republicans took meticulous notes on the contents of the ballots. Others just watched. The Republican Party of Florida published a daily internal memo called "Reality Check," which critiqued the media efforts to examine ballots.
In an interview before the results were released, Mark Wallace, a Republican lawyer assigned to critique the media inspections, said, "The media appear ready to offer unprecedented liberal standards for judging what is a vote. The appropriate legal standard is what was in place on Election Day: cleanly punched cards only."
Before this election, almost nothing was known by the public and by political parties about what types of marks appear on undervotes and overvotes, which make up about 2% of ballots cast nationally. The newspapers' study shows how both parties predicted incorrectly which of these ballots would help them.
Democrats and Republicans noted that voter errors on punch-card voting machines were most frequent in low-income and predominantly minority precincts. Because these voters tend to vote Democratic, the disputed votes were assumed to be a rich trove of support for Gore.
Likewise, both parties noted that the 41 Florida counties that used optical-scan ballots, a system similar to standardized school tests, tended to vote Republican.
Bush supporters attacked Gore for asking for hand counts in three Democratic-leaning counties. If any hand count occurred, it should include the Republican-leaning optical-scan counties, too, the Bush supporters said.
The USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows that the Democratic and Republican assumptions were largely wrong. The undervote ballots actually break down into two distinct categories:
For example, in Duval County, where Jacksonville is the county seat, Bush defeated Gore 58%-41%. Among the undervotes, Bush defeated Gore 60%-32% under the lenient standard and by similarly comfortable numbers under all standards. Bush picked up a net of 930 votes, including 602 dimples.
Likewise, in Miami-Dade, where Gore hoped to score big gains, he received 51% of the marked undervotes, about the same as the 52% that he got in the official count.
The study shows that these errors were disproportionately common among Democratic voters. For example, in Orange County, home of Orlando, Gore edged Bush 50%-48% in the election. But Gore won the undervotes by 64%-33%, giving him a net gain of 137 votes. That accounted for half of the 261 votes Gore gained in optical-scan counties, which Bush won overall by 53%-44%.
The study found that optical-scan counties are the only places where Gore actually picked up more votes than Bush: 1,036 to 775 for Bush.
In the punch-card counties, where Gore had placed his hopes, his chances of winning a hand count were washed away. On dimples alone, Bush gained 1,188 votes. When all the possibilities are combined — dimples, hanging chads, clean punches — Bush outdid Gore by 8,302 to 6,559.
USA TODAY's analysis is based on accepting Bush's official 537-vote margin. This figure includes hand counts completed in Broward and Volusia counties before the U.S. Supreme Court intervened.
The newspaper also accepted hand counts completed in Palm Beach, Manatee, Escambia, Hamilton and Madison counties, plus 139 precincts in Miami-Dade.
These hand counts, which were never certified, reduced Bush's lead to 188 — the starting point for USA TODAY's analysis.
The newspaper excluded these counties from its analysis. However, BDO Seidman collected data in these counties, and they are available on USATODAY.com.
In the end, Florida's presidential election remains remarkably close by any standard: 2,912,790 to 2,912,253 in the official count.
In an election this close, the winner often depends on the rules and how they are enforced.
nice try old man
USATODAY.com - Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed
Newspapers' recount shows Bush prevailed
By Dennis Cauchon, USA TODAY
<table style="width: 190px; height: 99px;" class="sidebar" align="right" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"> <tbody><tr> <td rowspan="4">
</td> <td></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="inside-label" align="right">
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td></tr><tr><td>
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes — more than triple his official 537-vote margin — if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election.
The Florida Supreme Court ordered Dec. 8 that each of these ballots, which registered no presidential vote when run through counting machines, be examined by hand to determine whether a voter's intent could be discerned. On Dec. 9, the U.S. Supreme Court stopped the hand count before it was completed. That gave Bush Florida's 25 electoral votes, one more than he needed to win the presidency.
USA TODAY, The Miami Herald and Knight Ridder newspapers hired the national accounting firm BDO Seidman to examine undervote ballots in Florida's 67 counties. The accountants provided a report on what they found on each of the ballots.
The newspapers then applied the accounting firm's findings to four standards used in Florida and elsewhere to determine when an undervote ballot becomes a legal vote. By three of the standards, Bush holds the lead. The fourth standard gives Gore a razor-thin win.
The results reveal a stunning irony. The way Gore wanted the ballots recounted helped Bush, and the standard that Gore felt offered him the least hope may have given him an extremely narrow victory. The vote totals vary depending on the standard used:
- Lenient standard. This standard, which was advocated by Gore, would count any alteration in a chad — the small perforated box that is punched to cast a vote — as evidence of a voter's intent. The alteration can range from a mere dimple, or indentation, in a chad to its removal. Contrary to Gore's hopes, the USA TODAY study reveals that this standard favors Bush and gives the Republican his biggest margin: 1,665 votes.
- Palm Beach standard. Palm Beach County election officials considered dimples as votes only if dimples also were found in other races on the same ballot. They reasoned that a voter would demonstrate similar voting patterns on the ballot. This standard — attacked by Republicans as arbitrary — also gives Bush a win, by 884 votes, according to the USA TODAY review.
- Two-corner standard. Most states with well-defined rules say that a chad with two or more corners removed is a legal vote. Under this standard, Bush wins by 363.
- Strict standard. This "clean punch" standard would only count fully removed chads as legal votes. The USA TODAY study shows that Gore would have won Florida by 3 votes if this standard were applied to undervotes.
Gore's main strategy throughout the post-election dispute was to secure a recount of any kind in the hope of reversing the certified result. Bush's strategy was to stop the recount while he was ahead. But his views on how recounts should be done, in the counties where they were underway, would have been potentially disastrous for him if used statewide.
Bush and Gore were informed Tuesday of the new study's results. Both declined comment. But White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said, "The President believes, just as the American people do, that this election was settled months ago. The voters spoke, and George W. Bush won."
The newspapers' study took three months to complete and cost more than $500,000. It involved 27 accountants who examined and categorized ballots as they were held up by county election officials.
The study has limitations. There is variability in what different observers see on ballots. Election officials, who sorted the undervotes for examination and then handled them for the accountants' inspection, often did not provide exactly the same number of undervotes recorded on election night.
Even so, the outcome shows a consistent and decisive pattern: the more lenient the standard, the better Bush does. Because Gore fought for the lenient standard, it may be more difficult now for Democrats to argue that the election was lost in the chambers of the U.S. Supreme Court rather than the voting booths of Florida.
The study helps answer the question: What would have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the hand count of undervotes?
However, it does not answer all the questions surrounding another set of Florida ballots: the 110,000 "overvotes," which machines recorded as having more than one presidential vote. These ballots were rejected by the machines and were considered invalid. Some Democrats say if all of Florida's overvote ballots were examined by hand to learn voters' intent, their candidate would have prevailed.
USA TODAY, The Miami Herald and Gannett and Knight Ridder newspapers also are examining Florida's overvotes for a study to be published later this spring. Overvotes contain some valid votes, mostly instances when a voter marked the oval next to a candidate's name and then wrote in the name of the same candidate.
No candidate requested a hand count of overvotes, and no court — federal or state — ordered one. The U.S. Supreme Court cited the state court's failure to include the overvotes in its recount order as an example of arbitrariness.
Immediately after Gore conceded the election to Bush, The Miami Herald began to evaluate what might have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not stopped the recount of undervotes.
Florida is one of the few states that permit members of the public to examine ballots after they've been cast. The Miami Herald and the BDO Seidman accounting firm began examining ballots on Dec. 18. USA TODAY joined the project in January. The last undervote ballot was examined March 13.
Florida law requires that political parties be notified of ballot inspections. The Republican and Democratic parties took different approaches to the three months of ballot inspections.
The Democrats took a hands-off approach. They rarely showed up at election offices during the evaluation. "We want to see what you find. It's not our role to be at the table with you," Tony Welch, spokesman for the Florida Democratic Party, said during the newspapers' study. "If we're spinning and the Republicans are spinning, people won't believe the result."
He said at the time that the party expected the outcome would show that Gore received more votes than Bush.
By contrast, the Republicans attended every ballot inspection. They devoted hundreds of days of staff and volunteer time. The party delayed cutting its post-election staff of field directors from 12 to 6 so it could staff the ballot inspections. Some Republicans took meticulous notes on the contents of the ballots. Others just watched. The Republican Party of Florida published a daily internal memo called "Reality Check," which critiqued the media efforts to examine ballots.
In an interview before the results were released, Mark Wallace, a Republican lawyer assigned to critique the media inspections, said, "The media appear ready to offer unprecedented liberal standards for judging what is a vote. The appropriate legal standard is what was in place on Election Day: cleanly punched cards only."
Before this election, almost nothing was known by the public and by political parties about what types of marks appear on undervotes and overvotes, which make up about 2% of ballots cast nationally. The newspapers' study shows how both parties predicted incorrectly which of these ballots would help them.
Democrats and Republicans noted that voter errors on punch-card voting machines were most frequent in low-income and predominantly minority precincts. Because these voters tend to vote Democratic, the disputed votes were assumed to be a rich trove of support for Gore.
Likewise, both parties noted that the 41 Florida counties that used optical-scan ballots, a system similar to standardized school tests, tended to vote Republican.
Bush supporters attacked Gore for asking for hand counts in three Democratic-leaning counties. If any hand count occurred, it should include the Republican-leaning optical-scan counties, too, the Bush supporters said.
The USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows that the Democratic and Republican assumptions were largely wrong. The undervote ballots actually break down into two distinct categories:
- Undervotes in punch-card counties. In the 22 punch-card counties in which BDO Seidman examined undervotes, 56% of the 35,761 ballots had some kind of mark on them.
For example, in Duval County, where Jacksonville is the county seat, Bush defeated Gore 58%-41%. Among the undervotes, Bush defeated Gore 60%-32% under the lenient standard and by similarly comfortable numbers under all standards. Bush picked up a net of 930 votes, including 602 dimples.
Likewise, in Miami-Dade, where Gore hoped to score big gains, he received 51% of the marked undervotes, about the same as the 52% that he got in the official count.
- Undervotes in optical-scan counties. In the 37 optical-scan counties in which BDO Seidman examined undervotes, one third of 5,623 ballots had discernible votes.
The study shows that these errors were disproportionately common among Democratic voters. For example, in Orange County, home of Orlando, Gore edged Bush 50%-48% in the election. But Gore won the undervotes by 64%-33%, giving him a net gain of 137 votes. That accounted for half of the 261 votes Gore gained in optical-scan counties, which Bush won overall by 53%-44%.
The study found that optical-scan counties are the only places where Gore actually picked up more votes than Bush: 1,036 to 775 for Bush.
In the punch-card counties, where Gore had placed his hopes, his chances of winning a hand count were washed away. On dimples alone, Bush gained 1,188 votes. When all the possibilities are combined — dimples, hanging chads, clean punches — Bush outdid Gore by 8,302 to 6,559.
USA TODAY's analysis is based on accepting Bush's official 537-vote margin. This figure includes hand counts completed in Broward and Volusia counties before the U.S. Supreme Court intervened.
The newspaper also accepted hand counts completed in Palm Beach, Manatee, Escambia, Hamilton and Madison counties, plus 139 precincts in Miami-Dade.
These hand counts, which were never certified, reduced Bush's lead to 188 — the starting point for USA TODAY's analysis.
The newspaper excluded these counties from its analysis. However, BDO Seidman collected data in these counties, and they are available on USATODAY.com.
In the end, Florida's presidential election remains remarkably close by any standard: 2,912,790 to 2,912,253 in the official count.
In an election this close, the winner often depends on the rules and how they are enforced.
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
...and 2004
The New York Times > Washington > Ohio Recount Gives a Smaller Margin to Bush
<nyt_headline version="1.0" type=" "> Ohio Recount Gives a Smaller Margin to Bush
Published: December 29, 2004
INCINNATI, Dec. 28 - A recount of the presidential election in Ohio that was finished on Tuesday showed that President Bush won the election here by about 300 fewer votes than initially recorded.
The recount of Ohio's 88 counties showed that Senator John Kerry gained 734 votes, with Mr. Bush picking up 449 after elections officials allowed more than 1,100 previously disqualified ballots to be counted in the second tally.
Ohio proved to be the key state for Mr. Bush, who needed its 20 electoral votes to capture the election. Mr. Kerry conceded when Ohio fell into the Republican column but later said he supported the recount.
The state has become an emblem of continuing ailments in the nation's electoral process, because of Election Day events like seven-hour lines that drove voters away from the polls, malfunctioning machines, poorly trained poll workers who directed people to the wrong polling places and uneven policies about the use of provisional ballots, which were given to voters whose registration was contested. The Green and Libertarian Parties asked for the recount and raised $113,600 to help pay for it as required under state law.
The recount, conducted over the past three weeks, showed that Mr. Bush won Ohio by 118,457 votes. Most county elections officials completed their recounts last week, but the state had to wait for Lucas County, where Toledo is located, to complete its tally. Lucas County reported the results of its recount on Tuesday.
The secretary of state's office had earlier reported that Mr. Bush won Ohio by 118,775 votes and plans to record the newest tally officially later this week.
Representatives in Ohio for the Green presidential candidate, David Cobb, and the Libertarian candidate, Michael Badnarik, said on Tuesday that the recount achieved one of their goals, to scrutinize Ohio's election process. While they said they never expected to change the results of the presidential vote in Ohio, they said they wanted an overhaul of Ohio's election system.
"We knew the recount would address the irregularities that were reported," said Paul Dumouchelle, secretary of the Green Party of Ohio. "And as a small political party, we saw it in our interest to challenge the election in Ohio. The system is rusty because the two major parties have set up barriers to fair access to the ballot."
Mr. Dumouchelle lives in Delaware, Ohio, where the first legal challenge was filed after the election.
The Rev. Jesse Jackson, who also challenged the initial tally, has said the State Supreme Court should have thrown out the initial results and ordered a new election because people in some urban areas were never able to cast their ballots and many voters saw their ballots unfairly discarded.
Daniel Trevas, a spokesman for the Ohio Democratic Party, said Democrats supported the recount but found that county elections officials sometimes ignored requests by recount observers to see rejected absentee and provisional ballots, and were not informed about procedures used to recount and reject ballots.
"Some of these boards did not give us full access during the recount," Mr. Trevas said.
He said that in one county, Clermont County, in southwest Ohio, numerous complaints were filed by Democrats and the two independent parties when access to recount procedures was ignored.
"We have to continue to be more persistent so we bring satisfaction to the voters of Ohio," Mr. Trevas said.
...and 2004
The New York Times > Washington > Ohio Recount Gives a Smaller Margin to Bush
<nyt_headline version="1.0" type=" "> Ohio Recount Gives a Smaller Margin to Bush
Published: December 29, 2004
INCINNATI, Dec. 28 - A recount of the presidential election in Ohio that was finished on Tuesday showed that President Bush won the election here by about 300 fewer votes than initially recorded.The recount of Ohio's 88 counties showed that Senator John Kerry gained 734 votes, with Mr. Bush picking up 449 after elections officials allowed more than 1,100 previously disqualified ballots to be counted in the second tally.
Ohio proved to be the key state for Mr. Bush, who needed its 20 electoral votes to capture the election. Mr. Kerry conceded when Ohio fell into the Republican column but later said he supported the recount.
The state has become an emblem of continuing ailments in the nation's electoral process, because of Election Day events like seven-hour lines that drove voters away from the polls, malfunctioning machines, poorly trained poll workers who directed people to the wrong polling places and uneven policies about the use of provisional ballots, which were given to voters whose registration was contested. The Green and Libertarian Parties asked for the recount and raised $113,600 to help pay for it as required under state law.
The recount, conducted over the past three weeks, showed that Mr. Bush won Ohio by 118,457 votes. Most county elections officials completed their recounts last week, but the state had to wait for Lucas County, where Toledo is located, to complete its tally. Lucas County reported the results of its recount on Tuesday.
The secretary of state's office had earlier reported that Mr. Bush won Ohio by 118,775 votes and plans to record the newest tally officially later this week.
Representatives in Ohio for the Green presidential candidate, David Cobb, and the Libertarian candidate, Michael Badnarik, said on Tuesday that the recount achieved one of their goals, to scrutinize Ohio's election process. While they said they never expected to change the results of the presidential vote in Ohio, they said they wanted an overhaul of Ohio's election system.
"We knew the recount would address the irregularities that were reported," said Paul Dumouchelle, secretary of the Green Party of Ohio. "And as a small political party, we saw it in our interest to challenge the election in Ohio. The system is rusty because the two major parties have set up barriers to fair access to the ballot."
Mr. Dumouchelle lives in Delaware, Ohio, where the first legal challenge was filed after the election.
The Rev. Jesse Jackson, who also challenged the initial tally, has said the State Supreme Court should have thrown out the initial results and ordered a new election because people in some urban areas were never able to cast their ballots and many voters saw their ballots unfairly discarded.
Daniel Trevas, a spokesman for the Ohio Democratic Party, said Democrats supported the recount but found that county elections officials sometimes ignored requests by recount observers to see rejected absentee and provisional ballots, and were not informed about procedures used to recount and reject ballots.
"Some of these boards did not give us full access during the recount," Mr. Trevas said.
He said that in one county, Clermont County, in southwest Ohio, numerous complaints were filed by Democrats and the two independent parties when access to recount procedures was ignored.
"We have to continue to be more persistent so we bring satisfaction to the voters of Ohio," Mr. Trevas said.
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
Dime you are arguing with a guy Munchkin man who is broke and lives off of the gov't with a fake illness but thinks like a neocon.:+clueless Enuff said on that one. Oh and the one moderator who oversees this board thinks just like Munchkinman so what can you expect?
You have a guy who owns the company of diebold promising a Bush win in Ohio before the election and of course the big hold up was in Ohio.:+clueless I told my brother two months before the election that if the Dems didn't win Ohio its over and sure enough that was the state with all the confusion. By the way i only saw one so called liberal in ten years cry to the moderators to get a guy banned. The phony so called conservatives run in the hundreds. These are clueless clowns who probably are so controlled by their wives that they come to these type of sites to try to control ones thoughts. Their mission isn't to debate it is to get one banned. In their defense they are a lot better over here then at MJ's. Their is a slew of them across the street tho.
there is a reason that study came out about Fox news is for dummies. It was to show them maybe they are being misled. These are followers in life. Not leaders.
Dime you are arguing with a guy Munchkin man who is broke and lives off of the gov't with a fake illness but thinks like a neocon.:+clueless Enuff said on that one. Oh and the one moderator who oversees this board thinks just like Munchkinman so what can you expect?
You have a guy who owns the company of diebold promising a Bush win in Ohio before the election and of course the big hold up was in Ohio.:+clueless I told my brother two months before the election that if the Dems didn't win Ohio its over and sure enough that was the state with all the confusion. By the way i only saw one so called liberal in ten years cry to the moderators to get a guy banned. The phony so called conservatives run in the hundreds. These are clueless clowns who probably are so controlled by their wives that they come to these type of sites to try to control ones thoughts. Their mission isn't to debate it is to get one banned. In their defense they are a lot better over here then at MJ's. Their is a slew of them across the street tho.
there is a reason that study came out about Fox news is for dummies. It was to show them maybe they are being misled. These are followers in life. Not leaders.
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
anybody seen any hanging chads laying around in Florida ??
anybody seen any hanging chads laying around in Florida ??
ZZ CREAM
EOG Master
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
Or any more Jews voting for Pat Buchanon?
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
ZZ didn't Pat come out and say no way he should have gotten all those votes? I wish the Dems would still an election for a change so i can go around gloating like a douchebag instead of being pissed off that i wasted my time voting when it meant nothing.
ZZ didn't Pat come out and say no way he should have gotten all those votes? I wish the Dems would still an election for a change so i can go around gloating like a douchebag instead of being pissed off that i wasted my time voting when it meant nothing.
Munchkin Man
EOG Dedicated
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
Enough said?
The Munchkin Man begs to differ.
Given the following facts:
***The Munchkin Man is poor.
***The Munchkin is on disability.
The Munchkin Man acknowledges that the two facts cited above are true.
Now then:
Why should these two facts cast a cloud of credibility and integrity upon the Munchkin Man's conservative beliefs?
Are you saying that a person who is poor and on disabiity has a moral obligation to be a liberal?
Please explain.
The Munchkin Man is confused.
In closing, the Munchkin Man would like to wish you a Happy 4th of July.
Best Wishes,
Munchkin Man
Enough said?
The Munchkin Man begs to differ.
Given the following facts:
***The Munchkin Man is poor.
***The Munchkin is on disability.
The Munchkin Man acknowledges that the two facts cited above are true.
Now then:
Why should these two facts cast a cloud of credibility and integrity upon the Munchkin Man's conservative beliefs?
Are you saying that a person who is poor and on disabiity has a moral obligation to be a liberal?
Please explain.
The Munchkin Man is confused.
In closing, the Munchkin Man would like to wish you a Happy 4th of July.
Best Wishes,
Munchkin Man
ZZ CREAM
EOG Master
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
Are you inferring that people that voted for the last presidential Appointee, George Bush, are douchebags?:+textinb3 :+textinb3 :+textinb3
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
You are sponging off of the same programs that liberals created and you allegedly hate:+clueless. Do you think you would be able to collect that check if Republicans were in office the majority of your lifetime? There would be no program called disability. This make you a hypocrite to the tenth power. Go get a job and stop sponging off the gov't since you feel hard work is the way to go. I see people at Walmart who have the IQ of a shoebox working. Welcum to Walmart now get off your fat ass and get to work because im tired of paying your check you neocon thinking cancer to this country. Oh and you have a nice fourth also. Nah nevermind forget about that last statement. Anyone proud of their vote that has killed over 4000 of our brothers can kiss my ass.
You are sponging off of the same programs that liberals created and you allegedly hate:+clueless. Do you think you would be able to collect that check if Republicans were in office the majority of your lifetime? There would be no program called disability. This make you a hypocrite to the tenth power. Go get a job and stop sponging off the gov't since you feel hard work is the way to go. I see people at Walmart who have the IQ of a shoebox working. Welcum to Walmart now get off your fat ass and get to work because im tired of paying your check you neocon thinking cancer to this country. Oh and you have a nice fourth also. Nah nevermind forget about that last statement. Anyone proud of their vote that has killed over 4000 of our brothers can kiss my ass.
Munchkin Man
EOG Dedicated
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
The Munchkin Man has never "alleged" to have hated anybody.
That's because the Munchkin Man does not hate anybody.
The Munchkin Man does not hate the liberals.
The Munchkin Man loves the liberals.
What the Munchkin Man hates are the delusions and faulty belief systems possessed by many liberals.
Just as Jesus loved the sinners but hated their sins, the Munchkin Man loves the liberals but hates their beliefs.
Yes, most certainly.
The Republicans have already been in office during the majority of the Munchkin Man's lifetime.
The Munchkin Man is 58 years old.
There was a Democratic President in office during 22 of those years.
There was a Republican President in office during 36 of those years.
Oh really, now?
Please allow the Munchkin Man to ask you a history question.
Who was the U.S. President who signed the American Disabilities Act (ADA) into law?
THE ANSWER:
President George H.W. Bush in 1990
In case you have forgotten, he was a Republican.
Duh!
That's right.
Please don't feel bad.
The Munchkin Man still wants to wish you a Happy 4th of July.
Maybe you will have time to go out and catch yourself a crow and barbeque it on your outdoor grill.
Enjoy.
Happy 4th of July!
Munchkin Man
The Munchkin Man has never "alleged" to have hated anybody.
That's because the Munchkin Man does not hate anybody.
The Munchkin Man does not hate the liberals.
The Munchkin Man loves the liberals.
What the Munchkin Man hates are the delusions and faulty belief systems possessed by many liberals.
Just as Jesus loved the sinners but hated their sins, the Munchkin Man loves the liberals but hates their beliefs.
Yes, most certainly.
The Republicans have already been in office during the majority of the Munchkin Man's lifetime.
The Munchkin Man is 58 years old.
There was a Democratic President in office during 22 of those years.
There was a Republican President in office during 36 of those years.
Oh really, now?
Please allow the Munchkin Man to ask you a history question.
Who was the U.S. President who signed the American Disabilities Act (ADA) into law?
THE ANSWER:
President George H.W. Bush in 1990
In case you have forgotten, he was a Republican.
Duh!
That's right.
Please don't feel bad.
The Munchkin Man still wants to wish you a Happy 4th of July.
Maybe you will have time to go out and catch yourself a crow and barbeque it on your outdoor grill.
Enjoy.
Happy 4th of July!
Munchkin Man
DimeDR
Banned
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
munchy,
you believe in ghosts? have you ever seen god, talked to him? who do you believe so powerfully that told you he exists? poor gullible third person, munchy, cloud deities and your foggy arrested mind, but if your faith makes you sleep better, just like my electric blanket in the winter, more power to myths ...
hey munchy, you know that in the olden days people thought hercules existed? were they just stupid or were they told by someone they trusted that he performed those impressive twelve labors i thought that aegean stables yarn was a doozy, almost as good as jesus jump starting lazarus--sheep cubed LMAO
<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle>[FONT=EurostileBold,Helvetica,Arial,Times New Roman]
The cleansing of the Augeias stables, one of the twelve labors
of Herakles, from the east side metope of the temple of Zeus.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Resurrection of Lazarus by Juan de Flandes, around 1500
munchy,
you believe in ghosts? have you ever seen god, talked to him? who do you believe so powerfully that told you he exists? poor gullible third person, munchy, cloud deities and your foggy arrested mind, but if your faith makes you sleep better, just like my electric blanket in the winter, more power to myths ...
hey munchy, you know that in the olden days people thought hercules existed? were they just stupid or were they told by someone they trusted that he performed those impressive twelve labors
i thought that aegean stables yarn was a doozy, almost as good as jesus jump starting lazarus--sheep cubed LMAO<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD align=middle>[FONT=EurostileBold,Helvetica,Arial,Times New Roman]
The cleansing of the Augeias stables, one of the twelve labors
of Herakles, from the east side metope of the temple of Zeus.
[/FONT]
</TD></TR><TR><TD></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Resurrection of Lazarus by Juan de Flandes, around 1500
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
Did he get shamed into signing that bill Munchy? Wasn't the dems in control ovf congress? Look who has been fighting it every step of the way Munchy. Your hero's that is who
Why Is the GOP Ignoring the Disabled?
12/3/2007 at 02:06 PM
In an election that has all the trappings of being the most contentious in recent history, GOP candidates have steadfastly ignored the issues affecting disabled Americans at every step along the way, and have taken little flack for doing so. Composed of over 50 million Americans, the disabled community represents a huge segment of the voting populace. Its members have been drastically affected by the federal government’s inability to protect them from discrimination under the American Disabilities Act (ADA)—a statute that has been eviscerated by a narrow Supreme Court interpretation—leading to overt and legal discrimination in the workplace. Of the severely disabled, over 26% reside in poverty and only 13% are able to work. However, thanks to the passage of the Help America Vote act, every disabled individual—including the blind and deaf—will be provided with a reasonable opportunity to vote in 2008. For these reasons, it seems strange that the Republicans appear to be surrendering the disabled vote to the Democratic Party, but their actions yield few if any other conclusions. In April of this year, the American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD) sent out a packet of questions to all of the major presidential candidates. The inquiry was a collaborative effort that included the National Council on Independent Living and Self Advocates Become Empowered. Five Democrats, including frontrunners Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards, returned the survey completed. None of the Republicans candidates responded. In early November, the AAPD hosted a candidate forum in New Hampshire where hundreds of individuals with disabilities came to listen to presidential hopefuls talk about their plans to provide equality, opportunity, and access to the disabled. “People with disabilities have a right to be full participants in all aspects of society," said AAPD President Andrew Imparto while at the forum. “We need leadership from the top,” he added. So, who showed up at the AAPD’s presidential forum?
Seven of the eight major Democratic candidates and none of the Republicans except for John McCain, who was only able to participate by phone.
In a recent post on his assistive technology blog, disability columnist John Williams noted that no Republican candidates have responded to his inquires regarding disability as well. A visit to the Republican National Committee website reveals little to no mention of disability issues either, while the Democratic National Committee features a full section about disability issues on its site. Neither the Democratic nor the Republican candidates emphasize disability issues on their specific campaign websites, but Democratic candidates have stressed their commitment to those with disabilities on numerous occasions. At the New Hampshire AAPD forum, front-runner Hillary Clinton promised to reinstate her husband’s executive order that called on federal agencies to hire 100,000 people with disabilities in five years. In the AAPD questionnaire, Obama, Edwards, former New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, and Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd all stated that they would appoint a permanent assistant to the President for disability policy, if elected. In addition, three of the Democratic candidates have either suffered from or been directly affected by a disability themselves. Dodd, who authored provisions of the Help America Vote Act and co-sponsored the Americans with Disability Act in 1975, has taken much of his personal inspiration on the issue from his sister Carolyn, who is visually impaired. Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel has publically talked about his struggle with dyslexia as a child, and Congressman Dennis Kucinich needed extensive speech therapy when he was in grade school to deal with a chronic stutter. Can a GOP president show equal support for the disabled? Despite its lack of response in the current electoral cycle, Republicans have championed a substantial amount of disability related legislation in the past. In a 2003 AAPD memo, President Jim Aparto praised the work of President Bush on disability issues and admitted that his organization hasn’t always been “even handed or fair” when assessing Republican contributions to disability issues. He went on to tout numerous appointments of disability champions by Republicans, and then reminded the public that it was George H. Bush who signed the ADA and Civil Rights Restoration Act into law in 1990. In his tenure, Bush, along with the Republicans in Congress, also supported the Help America Vote Act, and a current effort to reinstate the intent of the ADA has attracted sponsorship and support from both sides of the aisle. So, why are the Republicans so shy about stumping for the disabled in The main reason may lie in the GOP’s current move towards a hard-line stance on fiscal conservatism. Throughout the primary debate season, Republican presidential hopefuls have allotted much of their efforts to capturing the title of ‘Fiscal Conservative King,’ in the hope of differentiating themselves from their peers and the Democrats. Front-runners Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney have been particularly prone to spar about who will cut more wasteful government programs, which may be part of the reason why the GOP doesn’t want to make providing for the disability community part of its 2007 electoral campaign. The majority of programs for the disabled incorporate subsidies and funding from the government. For a party trying to re-define its image as more economical after eight years of heightened spending, touting the need for services and programs for the disabled—no matter how necessary and pragmatic they are—may not make seem to make much political sense. Unfortunately for the Republicans, their lack of discourse about disability provisions makes their miscues on the issue stand out. In a recent news story, it was unveiled that GOP front-runner Rudy Giuliani billed the New York City Office of the Disabled for more than $10,00 dollars worth of security detail and travel expenses during adulterous trysts in Long Island with now current wife, Judith Nathan. If no positive rhetoric is generated by the GOP in the next 9 months, such misdeeds will be what disabled voters will associate with the Republicans, when they arrive at the ballot box in November.
Did he get shamed into signing that bill Munchy? Wasn't the dems in control ovf congress? Look who has been fighting it every step of the way Munchy. Your hero's that is who
Why Is the GOP Ignoring the Disabled?
12/3/2007 at 02:06 PM
In an election that has all the trappings of being the most contentious in recent history, GOP candidates have steadfastly ignored the issues affecting disabled Americans at every step along the way, and have taken little flack for doing so. Composed of over 50 million Americans, the disabled community represents a huge segment of the voting populace. Its members have been drastically affected by the federal government’s inability to protect them from discrimination under the American Disabilities Act (ADA)—a statute that has been eviscerated by a narrow Supreme Court interpretation—leading to overt and legal discrimination in the workplace. Of the severely disabled, over 26% reside in poverty and only 13% are able to work. However, thanks to the passage of the Help America Vote act, every disabled individual—including the blind and deaf—will be provided with a reasonable opportunity to vote in 2008. For these reasons, it seems strange that the Republicans appear to be surrendering the disabled vote to the Democratic Party, but their actions yield few if any other conclusions. In April of this year, the American Association of People with Disabilities (AAPD) sent out a packet of questions to all of the major presidential candidates. The inquiry was a collaborative effort that included the National Council on Independent Living and Self Advocates Become Empowered. Five Democrats, including frontrunners Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards, returned the survey completed. None of the Republicans candidates responded. In early November, the AAPD hosted a candidate forum in New Hampshire where hundreds of individuals with disabilities came to listen to presidential hopefuls talk about their plans to provide equality, opportunity, and access to the disabled. “People with disabilities have a right to be full participants in all aspects of society," said AAPD President Andrew Imparto while at the forum. “We need leadership from the top,” he added. So, who showed up at the AAPD’s presidential forum?
Seven of the eight major Democratic candidates and none of the Republicans except for John McCain, who was only able to participate by phone.
In a recent post on his assistive technology blog, disability columnist John Williams noted that no Republican candidates have responded to his inquires regarding disability as well. A visit to the Republican National Committee website reveals little to no mention of disability issues either, while the Democratic National Committee features a full section about disability issues on its site. Neither the Democratic nor the Republican candidates emphasize disability issues on their specific campaign websites, but Democratic candidates have stressed their commitment to those with disabilities on numerous occasions. At the New Hampshire AAPD forum, front-runner Hillary Clinton promised to reinstate her husband’s executive order that called on federal agencies to hire 100,000 people with disabilities in five years. In the AAPD questionnaire, Obama, Edwards, former New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, and Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd all stated that they would appoint a permanent assistant to the President for disability policy, if elected. In addition, three of the Democratic candidates have either suffered from or been directly affected by a disability themselves. Dodd, who authored provisions of the Help America Vote Act and co-sponsored the Americans with Disability Act in 1975, has taken much of his personal inspiration on the issue from his sister Carolyn, who is visually impaired. Former Alaska Senator Mike Gravel has publically talked about his struggle with dyslexia as a child, and Congressman Dennis Kucinich needed extensive speech therapy when he was in grade school to deal with a chronic stutter. Can a GOP president show equal support for the disabled? Despite its lack of response in the current electoral cycle, Republicans have championed a substantial amount of disability related legislation in the past. In a 2003 AAPD memo, President Jim Aparto praised the work of President Bush on disability issues and admitted that his organization hasn’t always been “even handed or fair” when assessing Republican contributions to disability issues. He went on to tout numerous appointments of disability champions by Republicans, and then reminded the public that it was George H. Bush who signed the ADA and Civil Rights Restoration Act into law in 1990. In his tenure, Bush, along with the Republicans in Congress, also supported the Help America Vote Act, and a current effort to reinstate the intent of the ADA has attracted sponsorship and support from both sides of the aisle. So, why are the Republicans so shy about stumping for the disabled in The main reason may lie in the GOP’s current move towards a hard-line stance on fiscal conservatism. Throughout the primary debate season, Republican presidential hopefuls have allotted much of their efforts to capturing the title of ‘Fiscal Conservative King,’ in the hope of differentiating themselves from their peers and the Democrats. Front-runners Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney have been particularly prone to spar about who will cut more wasteful government programs, which may be part of the reason why the GOP doesn’t want to make providing for the disability community part of its 2007 electoral campaign. The majority of programs for the disabled incorporate subsidies and funding from the government. For a party trying to re-define its image as more economical after eight years of heightened spending, touting the need for services and programs for the disabled—no matter how necessary and pragmatic they are—may not make seem to make much political sense. Unfortunately for the Republicans, their lack of discourse about disability provisions makes their miscues on the issue stand out. In a recent news story, it was unveiled that GOP front-runner Rudy Giuliani billed the New York City Office of the Disabled for more than $10,00 dollars worth of security detail and travel expenses during adulterous trysts in Long Island with now current wife, Judith Nathan. If no positive rhetoric is generated by the GOP in the next 9 months, such misdeeds will be what disabled voters will associate with the Republicans, when they arrive at the ballot box in November.
Last edited:
ZZ CREAM
EOG Master
Re: how the repubs stole the last two prez elections for the idiot
Politically, Republicans (as a rule) have very little compassion for anyone or anything. Compassion is seen as weakness in their eyes. The funny thing is, most identify themselves as Christians and do not see the hypocrisy in their not following Christ's precepts of living.
Politically, Republicans (as a rule) have very little compassion for anyone or anything. Compassion is seen as weakness in their eyes. The funny thing is, most identify themselves as Christians and do not see the hypocrisy in their not following Christ's precepts of living.