The Fracturing of a Party... - Page 14 - 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 02-11-2008, 06:51 PM   #196
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26


Except for the part where he said, "Look specifically at the results in the Bible Belt of Ohio."

But, other than him pointing to the facts and numbers, he didn't point to any facts and numbers.
He points to the increase in the turnout there, but does not say that without the amendment on the ballot, Bush would have lost the election. Voter turnout for the Republicans was up throughout the entire country, regardless of whether the amendment was on the ballot, and in the vast majority of states it was not.
__________________

__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 06:55 PM   #197
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow
He points to the increase in the turnout there, but does not say that without the amendment on the ballot, Bush would have lost the election.
Actually, he pretty much did say that.

Either way, you've gone out of your way to defend bigotry.
__________________

__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 06:58 PM   #198
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 02:10 AM
don't look now, but it's on the 2008 ballot for Florida.

but don't worry, it's not intended to drive up evangelical turnout or to placate conservative voters who shudder at voting for the less-hateful Giuliani (who was the likely nominee when the amendment was proposed) or McCain.

no, there's no strategy behind this at all. none whatsoever.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 06:59 PM   #199
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26


Actually, he pretty much did say that.

Either way, you've gone out of your way to defend bigotry.
Actually, if you read what he said, he didn't.

How is challenging the idea that Bush won the 2004 election because of a particular amendment that did not make it on the ballot in most states make someone a defender of bigotry?
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:02 PM   #200
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow
Actually, if you read what he said, he didn't.

How is challenging the idea that Bush won the 2004 election because of a particular amendment that did not make it on the ballot in most states make someone a defender of bigotry?
It doesn't matter he said to you, though, does it? I mean, really, even if he said that, you'd still say, "It's not REAL evidence." Last I check, there wasn't a place on ballots to indicate reasons for voting, so you base reasons off the people and the analysts. Based on that, it's clear that what Irvine said is correct.

I'm not saying that you've gone out of your way defending bigotry on this issue, I'm talking about things like specifically attempting to admonish BVS for calling them what they are.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:05 PM   #201
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
don't look now, but it's on the 2008 ballot for Florida.

but don't worry, it's not intended to drive up evangelical turnout or to placate conservative voters who shudder at voting for the less-hateful Giuliani (who was the likely nominee when the amendment was proposed) or McCain.

no, there's no strategy behind this at all. none whatsoever.
What someone believes may work for them politically is not the issue here. Politics is littered with plans and strategies that never produced their intended results. The issue is claiming that without a particular amendment on the ballot in 11 of states, Bush would have lost the election. The results for the 2004 election show that voter turnout for Republicans was up all across the country, including the 39 states where the amendment was not on the ballot. Bottom line, having that amendment on the ballot does not explain increased Republican voter turnout since it was up everywhere else as well where it was not on the ballot.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:09 PM   #202
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:10 AM
Quote:
"I'd be naïve if I didn't say it helped," said Robert T. Bennett, chairman of the Ohio Republican Party. "And it helped most in what we refer to as the Bible Belt area of southeastern and southwestern Ohio, where we had the largest percentage increase in support for the president."
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:11 PM   #203
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,473
Local Time: 02:10 AM
the increase in Republican turnout was due to Resolution 1441.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:12 PM   #204
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26


It doesn't matter he said to you, though, does it? I mean, really, even if he said that, you'd still say, "It's not REAL evidence." Last I check, there wasn't a place on ballots to indicate reasons for voting, so you base reasons off the people and the analysts. Based on that, it's clear that what Irvine said is correct.

I'm not saying that you've gone out of your way defending bigotry on this issue, I'm talking about things like specifically attempting to admonish BVS for calling them what they are.
You can't call someone a bigot if you in fact do not know how they voted on the issue or do not actually know anything about them other than that their an evangelical or a registered Republican.

Republican voter turnout was UP in nearly every single State in the country. Not just the 11 states where the amendment was on the ballot. Bennett thinks the amendment helped because voter turnout was higher in a particular area of Ohio, but he can't actually prove that, and he is certainly NOT claiming Bush would have lost if the amendment had not been on the ballot.

Increased Republican turnout was not a case isolated to Ohio. Every state in the Union experienced increased Republican turnout, regardless of whether the amendment was on the ballot or not.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:15 PM   #205
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26
The fact that a particular area of Ohio had the largest increase in percentage turnout from the previous election doesn't prove that the result would not have happened if the amendment had not been on the ballot. AGAIN, look at the 39 states where the amendment was not on the ballot. They all had large increases in Republican turnout.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:18 PM   #206
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Strongbow
You can't call someone a bigot if you in fact do not know how they voted on the issue or do not actually know anything about them other than that their an evangelical or a registered Republican.

Republican voter turnout was UP in nearly every single State in the country. Not just the 11 states where the amendment was on the ballot. Bennett thinks the amendment helped because voter turnout was higher in a particular area of Ohio, but he can't actually prove that, and he is certainly NOT claiming Bush would have lost if the amendment had not been on the ballot.

Increased Republican turnout was not a case isolated to Ohio. Every state in the Union experienced increased Republican turnout, regardless of whether the amendment was on the ballot or not.
We're calling the people who are against gay rights bigots.

But, here's the thing: Bennett is an EXPERT. He knows more than you do. His area of expertise is Republican voters in Ohio. He said the amendment helped. He said turnout was highest in the Bible Belt counties. Higher than your overall Republican turnout.

It's all a matter of connecting the dots. For example:



In this drawing, connecting the dots creates the image of George Washington, 1st President of the United States.

In the same way, connecting the dots of evangelicals, this amendment, and the increase in voters in the evangelical counties being higher than in any other county in the state all paint the same picture ... the one Irvine's been talking about.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:26 PM   #207
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26


We're calling the people who are against gay rights bigots.

But, here's the thing: Bennett is an EXPERT. He knows more than you do. His area of expertise is Republican voters in Ohio. He said the amendment helped. He said turnout was highest in the Bible Belt counties. Higher than your overall Republican turnout.

It's all a matter of connecting the dots. For example:



In this drawing, connecting the dots creates the image of George Washington, 1st President of the United States.

In the same way, connecting the dots of evangelicals, this amendment, and the increase in voters in the evangelical counties being higher than in any other county in the state all paint the same picture ... the one Irvine's been talking about.
The fact is that Republican turnout was UP in every State in the country regardless of whether or not the amendment was on the ballot. Bennett thinks that it helped, but considering what happened in states without the amendment on the ballot, its doubtful that it did. States like Pennsylvania and Indiana had increased Republican voter turnout, but there was no gay amendment on the ballot.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:30 PM   #208
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 02:10 AM
In what counties did turnout increase most in Ohio?

The ones Bennett referenced.

Which counties are considered the "Bible Belt" counties of Ohio?

The ones Bennett referenced.

Evangelicals tend to hold what issue as one of their biggest motivators?

Banning gay marriage.

What amendment was in the state of Ohio?

Hmmm...

Not. That. Hard.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:38 PM   #209
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,943
Local Time: 07:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by phillyfan26
In what counties did turnout increase most in Ohio?

The ones Bennett referenced.

Which counties are considered the "Bible Belt" counties of Ohio?

The ones Bennett referenced.

Evangelicals tend to hold what issue as one of their biggest motivators?

Banning gay marriage.

What amendment was in the state of Ohio?

Hmmm...

Not. That. Hard.
Was Ohio the only state in the country to experience an increase in Republican voter turnout? NO

In fact every state experienced what Ohio experienced even though the vast majority of them did not have a certain amendment on the ballot.

Increased Republican voter turnout was not an event isolated to Ohio or states with the amendment on the ballot.
__________________
Strongbow is offline  
Old 02-11-2008, 07:40 PM   #210
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,655
Local Time: 01:10 AM
Fracturing of a party, we've gotten off topic...
__________________

__________________
BVS 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 02:10 AM.


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