[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Here comes the EGO-MANiac again - Ralph's
- To: "David Metcalfe" <stonepony>, <babel-list>
- Subject: Re: Here comes the EGO-MANiac again - Ralph's
- From: "Carol Green" <carolgreen>
- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 14:40:20 -0000
- References: <20080224234244.48400BC0> <000801c877a2$004bbcf0$90fe2752> <EAB20A91D880D04DBAE6BC4B7214E1630945FA23> <003a01c877b2$05031030$90fe2752> <EAB20A91D880D04DBAE6BC4B7214E1630945FA25> <004401c877b5$a199db60$90fe2752> <01e601c877b9$60dcfe50$1233424f>
- Sender: owner-babel-list
OK, point taken. I only really pitched in as there appeared to be people
having a go at Patti for her political beliefs - she has the same democratic
right as anyone else to voice her opinion.
Here's a little Patti video for everyone...
AWAKE FROM YOUR SLUMBER
http://www.mefeedia.com/entry/awake-from-your-slumber/6658759
- carol
----- Original Message -----
From: "David Metcalfe" <stonepony>
To: <babel-list>
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: Here comes the EGO-MANiac again - Ralph's
> Whilst I appreciate the fascination of this debate, could you not carry
> this on offlist because it has now frankly become tedious. No-one on
> either side of this hypothetical debate is going to give in to the other
> and it is therefore completely pointless.
>
> This is a Patti Smith forum.
>
> The only certainty is that come January 2009 Bush will be history. We can
> only hope his fellow Republicans are similarly cast into the political
> wilderness. We will then just have their god forsaken mess to try and
> clear up for the goodness of the rest of the world.
>
> Dave
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Carol Green" <carolgreen>
> To: "Gart, Mitchell" <Mitchell.Gart>;
> <koffeedonutz>; "Anthony J. Rzepela" <spamtony>
> Cc: <babel-list>
> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 1:52 PM
> Subject: Re: Here comes the EGO-MANiac again - Ralph's
>
>
>>I think it is possible that a fair number of people that would otherwise
>>have voted for Nader decided to vote tactically and chose Gore in the
>>knowledge that it was going to be a close call. The other 97,000 clearly
>>didn't find Gore attractive enough to make him their first choice and
>>exercised their democratic right to vote for who they wanted.
>>
>> Question for you - were you satisfied that the recount was accurate and
>> therefore really believe 500 votes would have made a difference?
>>
>> - carol
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Gart, Mitchell" <Mitchell.Gart>
>> To: "Carol Green" <carolgreen>;
>> <koffeedonutz>; "Anthony J. Rzepela" <spamtony>
>> Cc: <babel-list>
>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 1:37 PM
>> Subject: RE: Here comes the EGO-MANiac again - Ralph's
>>
>>
>> Yes, voting is optional and in fact the turnouts are pretty low in the
>> US, lower than in lots of other democracies. Yes some Nader people
>> might not have voted. But some of them would have voted. Can you
>> imagine any of them voting for Bush? That's really hard. Can you
>> imagine a fair number of them voting for Gore? I can, easily. It only
>> would have taken an extra 500 votes out of the 97,000 to put Gore over
>> the top.
>>
>> - Mitch
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Carol Green [mailto:carolgreen]
>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 8:26 AM
>> To: Gart, Mitchell; koffeedonutz; Anthony J. Rzepela
>> Cc: babel-list
>> Subject: Re: Here comes the EGO-MANiac again - Ralph's
>>
>> Even if Nader had pulled out, that doesn't necessarily mean the votes
>> would
>> have gone to either Gore OR Bush. I don't know if in the US you have
>> compulsory turnout, but even if you do there is nothing to stop you
>> turning
>> up and then spoiling your ballot paper, is there?
>>
>> - carol
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Gart, Mitchell" <Mitchell.Gart>
>> To: "Carol Green" <carolgreen>;
>> <koffeedonutz>;
>> "Anthony J. Rzepela" <spamtony>
>> Cc: <babel-list>
>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2008 1:12 PM
>> Subject: RE: Here comes the EGO-MANiac again - Ralph's
>>
>>
>> Carol Green wrote:
>>
>> WHY are you so sure Nader's votes would otherwuse have gone to Gore?
>>
>>
>>
>> In Florida 97,000 people voted for Nader. Bush beat Gore by 500. The
>> point is that all 97,000 wouldn't have had to vote for Gore. Some might
>> not have voted at all if Nader was out of the race. Some might even
>> have voted for Bush. But it seems likely that a plurality of more than
>> 500 would have voted for Gore, putting him over the top.
>>
>> Let me ask this: of the Nader supporters on the list, if Nader hadn't
>> been in the race, how many of you would have voted for Bush?
>>
>> - Mitch
>>
>>
>> --
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database:
>> 269.21.0/1296 - Release Date: 24/02/2008 12:19