Recount in Ohio - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-17-2004, 06:45 AM   #1
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Popmartijn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 32,543
Local Time: 09:55 PM
Recount in Ohio

Hello,

On the Electoral Vote website (http://www.electoral-vote.com) the webmaster stated that there will be a recount in Ohio! No, it isn't initiated by the Democrats, but by the Green and Libertarian parties. The website of the Green Party does mention the initiative (http://www.votecobb.org) even though most mainstream media outlets haven't picked it up, apparently. I did see it mentioned briefly somewhere near the end of an article in the Boston Globe (http://www.boston.com/news/politics/...of_ballots_now):
Quote:
In another twist to the tally, a statewide recount of the presidential vote appears inevitable after a pair of third-party candidates said they have collected enough money to pay for it.

The recount would be conducted after the election results are certified.

The candidates said they are not trying to overturn Bush's victory in Ohio, but just want to ensure that all votes were counted properly in the face of concerns about Election Day irregularities.

"Our bottom line is to stand up for the integrity of the voting process because the voting process is the heart of the democratic process," said Blair Bobier, spokesman for Green Party candidate David Cobb.
So, what are your opinions about this? And in what way might it change the outcome? What will happen if Ohio gets overturned?

C ya!

Marty

P.S. As if 1 recount isn't enough, Nader is demanding a recount in New Hampshire, questioning the accuracy of the optical scanning voting machines: http://www.boston.com/news/local/new..._scan_machines
__________________

__________________
Popmartijn is online now  
Old 11-17-2004, 08:12 AM   #2
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 04:55 PM
I admire Kerry's courage not to repeat Al Gore's crusade all over again. I respected him much more when I saw that he wasn't going to ask for 20 recounts. In logic, he conceded because his numbers were not what they needed to be to win.
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 08:20 AM   #3
War Child
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 706
Local Time: 01:55 PM
I think it needs to be done. And there's no way in hellfire that the dems could demand this without getting hammered by the right wing media machine which dominates political discourse in this country. But I'm certain that someone among the dems has "encouraged" the 3rd partiers to pursue this...if it's true.
__________________
LPU2 is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 08:27 AM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
kobayashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: the ether
Posts: 5,142
Local Time: 04:55 PM
american electoral processes are a joke.

is the right person in the white house this time? seems to be, but i see little evidence of concern in post-mortems concerning this election and the way it was administered. this is a real problem.

kind of undermines your democracy.

edit: though i am not a fan of bush, i should note that i made a bushism in saying 'the way it was administrated.'
__________________
im the candyman. and the candyman is back.
kobayashi is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 08:28 AM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 04:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by LPU2
I think it needs to be done. And there's no way in hellfire that the dems could demand this without getting hammered by the right wing media machine which dominates political discourse in this country. But I'm certain that someone among the dems has "encouraged" the 3rd partiers to pursue this...if it's true.
Third party or democrat... these days, both are anti-Bush propaganda. However, we have something called an election that determines our president every four years. If these third party nuts felt so strongly against Bush, they should've voted for Kerry. And that right wing media machine is: Fox News (fair and balanced?), and what else? The Christian Channel?
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 10:39 AM   #6
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 03:55 PM
Quote:
And there's no way in hellfire that the dems could demand this without getting hammered by the right wing media machine which dominates political discourse in this country.
Of course its the 700 Club channel that carries the right wing media machine and helped beat Kerry.
__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 10:50 AM   #7
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 04:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Flying FuManchu


Of course its the 700 Club channel that carries the right wing media machine and helped beat Kerry.
Exactly. The "right wing media machine" would refer to Fox News and probably nothing else, except Limbaugh, who is not a credible source to begin with.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 11:34 AM   #8
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 340
Local Time: 02:55 PM
This should not be a partisan issue. I wish more Republicans cared more about the process than they do, but their attitude generally seems to be "Bush won, so who cares?" And, in the interest of fairness, I'll add that I wish the small minority of Dems who feel the election was stolen should wake up.

I have no illusions about the result being overturned. There's just as much reason to believe a recount will help Bush as hurt him. But the integrity of the process is important, and should not be discounted by either side.
__________________
strannix is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 11:44 AM   #9
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 03:55 PM
I am actually for it if it helps to improve the election process... I'm all for it... if its primary reason is to undermine (what seems like a legitimate win) a Bush presidency and by promoting conspiracy theories besmirching the name of voters, the Republican party, and the Bush presidency because of sore-loserness...
__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 11:45 AM   #10
War Child
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 706
Local Time: 01:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
Third party or democrat... these days, both are anti-Bush propaganda. However, we have something called an election that determines our president every four years. If these third party nuts felt so strongly against Bush, they should've voted for Kerry. And that right wing media machine is: Fox News (fair and balanced?), and what else? The Christian Channel?
This is a joke, right? I mean, you're not serious, are you? Let me introduce you to the right wing media machine. But before I do I want to be clear. I'm not suggesting that our national media is dominated by the right wing. There's left wing media too (air america, truthout, alternet), and there's mainstream media (the big three, PBS, NPR and most newspapers, which tend to be populated by those who lean more left than right, granted, but who still abide by long-accepted standards of objectivity in journalism).

What I'm saying is that there is a very significant and very powerful media in this country that isn't merely "biased" or "slanted," but actively promotes a right-wing agenda. This includes Fox News, the Washington Times, the New York Post, WorldNetDaily, Drudge, Newsmax, Limbaugh, Hewitt, Ingraham, Hannity, O'Reilly, Medved, Gallagher, Reagan, Coulter, Savage, etc., etc., It's these people who would ridicule amy complaints the democrats made about the election, and make them look foolish for it, regardless of whatever merit they might have.

The Christian Channel? Is there such a thing? Regardless, I doubt Christ would like His name to be associated with anything on the right.
__________________
LPU2 is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 11:59 AM   #11
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 03:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by LPU2


This is a joke, right? I mean, you're not serious, are you? Let me introduce you to the right wing media machine. But before I do I want to be clear. I'm not suggesting that our national media is dominated by the right wing. There's left wing media too (air america, truthout, alternet), and there's mainstream media (the big three, PBS, NPR and most newspapers, which tend to be populated by those who lean more left than right, granted, but who still abide by long-accepted standards of objectivity in journalism).

What I'm saying is that there is a very significant and very powerful media in this country that isn't merely "biased" or "slanted," but actively promotes a right-wing agenda. This includes Fox News, the Washington Times, the New York Post, WorldNetDaily, Drudge, Newsmax, Limbaugh, Hewitt, Ingraham, Hannity, O'Reilly, Medved, Gallagher, Reagan, Coulter, Savage, etc., etc., It's these people who would ridicule amy complaints the democrats made about the election, and make them look foolish for it, regardless of whatever merit they might have.

The Christian Channel? Is there such a thing? Regardless, I doubt Christ would like His name to be associated with anything on the right.
If you stopped listening to AM radio, then more than half the "right wing" media you just listed would be off that list. AM radio does not compare to major media outlets that "pretend" as much as FOX to be unbiased. Hell, I can't even pick up AM radio stations clearly in some parts of where I live.

From what I understand, Drudge is a libertarian, not Republican.

WorldNetDaily- do people actually take everything they put out seriously? I mean, c'mon... WorldNetDaily

Medved, Coulter.... I think Medved may have a show but they make their noise by books, don't they. Count how many anti-Bush books out this past year and a half (or two)... please.

Washington Times and the New York Post have competition with bigger names and bigger audience in the same market - New York Times and Washington Post (liberal slant anyone?)

Fox News vs. CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC... hmmmm ok.... and thats not taking into consideration how crappy AP writing is. Associated Press.
__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 12:07 PM   #12
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 03:55 PM
Also for every conservative blog out there, there is a liberal blog to counter it... AM radio is an effective tool for the Repubs/ conservatives but the liberals have something to call their own in AIR America. Also isn't it true that Rush and Savage attract as many haters or good anount of haters alah Howard Stern to their listening audience? That takes a bite out of the "conservative listener audience.

However, I believe conservative radio is a niche driven market (could be wrong). Niche market isn't as powerful as you make it out to be.

Again add the Hollywood media to the list of pro-liberal media.... and the whole "right wing media machine which dominates political discourse in this country," sounds ludicrous.
__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 12:18 PM   #13
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 04:55 PM
Coulter, now that's hard right. So hard right I don't care for her at all. She's not someone I really admire. And World Net Daily is obviously targeted for the right.

I'm not sure about everyone you listed though, here's some examples:

New York Post? I don't see how they lean to the right at all. I read their review of The Passion of the Christ, and it basically asked for a "politically correct" version of Christianity or "religion" in general. Very secular as usual. As for Hannity, Alan Colmes joins him to even out the debate. I for one enjoy their show, and enjoy both of their opinions. O'Reilly? He's technically not a conservative, he's been both a democrat, republican, and an independent. He stands as a right-leaning independent nowadays. And Reagan... Ron Reagan? He's a hard liberal who still claims Bush stole the 2000 election.
__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 12:30 PM   #14
War Child
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 706
Local Time: 01:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Flying FuManchu


If you stopped listening to AM radio, then more than half the "right wing" media you just listed would be off that list. AM radio does not compare to major media outlets that "pretend" as much as FOX to be unbiased.
You can't just ignore AM radio's impact. Rush Limbaugh alone is on over 600 stations and has over 20 million weekly listeners. That's a helluva reach. The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News is the most watched show on cable TV and it can't even come close to those numbers. You know as well as I do that there is a very powerful right-wing segment in our media. But unless they're calling themselves "fair and balanced" there's nothing wrong with it. But don't deny it exists.

And if I hear one more person hold up the major networks as counters to the kind of sensational bias we see on Fox, I'm gonna lose it.

The problem with the political discourse in this country is that it has nothing to do with discourse. It's this way especially on cable news. It gives you an ILLUSION of debate. The problem is that no one talks about POLICY anymore. They prefer talking about, and perpetuatin, stereotypes (the right wing redneck, the tree-hugging liberal). We spend half our time angry at the extremes, when in reality very few people live out there. And the worst part is that NO ONE (on either side) is ever willing to hear the truth when it comes dressed as opposition.
__________________
LPU2 is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 12:38 PM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 04:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by LPU2


You can't just ignore AM radio's impact. Rush Limbaugh alone is on over 600 stations and has over 20 million weekly listeners. That's a helluva reach. The O'Reilly Factor on Fox News is the most watched show on cable TV and it can't even come close to those numbers. You know as well as I do that there is a very powerful right-wing segment in our media. But unless they're calling themselves "fair and balanced" there's nothing wrong with it. But don't deny it exists.

And if I hear one more person hold up the major networks as counters to the kind of sensational bias we see on Fox, I'm gonna lose it.

The problem with the political discourse in this country is that it has nothing to do with discourse. It's this way especially on cable news. It gives you an ILLUSION of debate. The problem is that no one talks about POLICY anymore. They prefer talking about, and perpetuatin, stereotypes (the right wing redneck, the tree-hugging liberal). We spend half our time angry at the extremes, when in reality very few people live out there. And the worst part is that NO ONE (on either side) is ever willing to hear the truth when it comes dressed as opposition.
Good post. While I do think that Fox News leans toward the right, they aren't slanted. They did report on W's drunk driving when it came out, among other things. I do think that the right has a lot of power in the radio, but I won't deny that there's plenty of Howard Sterns out there who badmouth the president on a daily basis.
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com