Democratic Convention -- What's the point?

[widebody911]

Originally posted by LynnsABCs
A county official said a new backup system would prevent electronic voting data from being lost in the future.

There's a bit of a red herring here. The overwhelming concern with electronic voting is tampering with the data, either during the voting process (ie subversive code) or after the fact. One the data is modified, there's no way to know. All backups would do is give you a redundant copy of bogus data.

I recommend you check out http://www.blackboxvoting.org/ for examples of electronic voting oddities that have already occurred.

"It's not the people who vote that count. It's the people who count the votes." (a quote frequently mis-attributed to Joseph Stalin)

[gaijinda]

I love the way the convention is not covered by the major networks. Let the wags and the wonks sit through it, and Joe six-pack can read about it in the next days paper or listen to the DJs joke about it on the drive to work... The NY Daily News has a glowing article about THK - when those that actually watched it found her a bore. Same for Kennedy, Kephart and Dashle. Where do they find these old windbags?
As for Obama - as only Nixon could go to China, only he could say something like this:
"Go into any inner-city neighborhood, and folks will tell you that government alone can't teach kids to learn--they know that parents have to parent, that children can't achieve unless we raise their expectations and turn off the television sets and eradicate the slander that says a black youth with a book is acting white,"

Originally posted by island911
Democratic Convention -- What's the point

Bill went so he could get some blow jobs. Hillary went to kick off her campaign '08 - also to prove she's still a c*nt.

[Beethoven]

Dr. Wilson, ever the gentleman.
Ever tried the what the air is like outside the gutter? Or are you perhaps twelve years old and experience the first onrush of hormones?

Beetho, from you, that's a compliment. Many affections to you.

[Rot 911]

Originally posted by Mark Wilson
Beetho, from you, that's a compliment. Many affections to you.

But you notice he didn't disagree with you?

[Beethoven]

Well, with you guys it seems to be either nether body regions or Hitler that orient your political compass. Looks like a pretty unhappy world to me.

Which d-erection do you think President Clinton's compass is pointing? Here... little intern.........

Maybe it's both sides that are driven by primal urges. I'm sure that you, Mr Beetho, because of your superiority are above all that. All hail you.

[lendaddy]

I think it's pretty obvious that it has been a flop so far. The ratings are pathetic and the speakers have for the most part been lacking. Obama is a good speaker, but other than one anti-war line I didn';t hear anything the Republicans disagree with. Alot of civil rights stuff etc... great, who do you think wrote most of the civil rights legislation? THK was awefull! I listened to the whole thing and still don't know what her point was. She mentioned her husband ONE time???? Whatever though, she's not a player here, and probably had no business occupying such an important slot. Will the epulican Convention be any better? Who knows,, but damn I hope so, this has been bad!

[dd74]

Hmmm...it hasn't been covered as highly as I remember other conventions in the past...

I don't think the republicans will do much better in the ratings, though.

[widebody911]

OTOH, what is the point of the convention, other than to get drunk & laid (Democrats), or drunk and feel up an altar boy (Republicans).

[lendaddy]

Well said, and unbiased Brian. I agree pretty much entirely. Tonight and tomorrow could erase all the bad so far, we'll see. One thing I will note is that the delegates don't seem one bit too happy with the tone so far. Did you hear the reception for Dean? That was/is their guy.

[dd74]

Originally posted by lendaddy
Well said, and unbiased Brian. I agree pretty much entirely. Tonight and tomorrow could erase all the bad so far, we'll see. One thing I will note is that the delegates don't seem one bit too happy with the tone so far. Did you hear the reception for Dean? That was/is their guy.

This is a very good point, and brought out by - of all people - Michael Moore in an interview with Ted Koppel. No, not all of the delegates are very happy. There seems to be a split down party lines as to what the party's hopes are. Some people want Kerry, and there are others who just want Bush out, but would like to see someone else running. Also, many delegates want the U.S. completely out of Iraq now, while Kerry has stated that the troops will stay - so there is some fundamental party-line disagreement already beginning to assemble - and the man hasn't even officially accepted the nomination!

Interesting. I agree, in a sense, that the party is fractured; if at all, it better get a command performance in the remaining days - and that can only come from Kerry. Unfortunately, Kerry is not a convincing speaker. And I'm not sure his wife helped. People are starting to dislike THK. They see a re-spawning of Hilary Clinton in this woman - or maybe something even worse.

[SteveStromberg]

The Dems Should just raise the The Hammer and Sickle flag.

[widebody911]

Originally posted by SteveStromberg
The Dems Should just raise the The Hammer and Sickle flag.

Why would they try to co-opt the Republican flag?

[Superman]

In a sense, I kinda agree with Island, sort of, but not completely. My first reaction was that this remark (Why are the Dems making speeches) came from someone who lacks the ability to recognize the appropriate or significant or important platform positions held by Dems. You do not like their views, so why should you recognize the importance of their convention.

But then I yoga'd and chanted some mantras, read some Holy Script, calmed down and realized that this relates to my main complaint. The Dems have absolutely not placed their platform in the public eye. In my view, the Democratic Party has failed miserably to get its message, and beliefs and platforms, out there before Americans so they can have a clear choice. And the opportunity is lost now, because it's time for both parties to try to capture the "middle ground."

What I think is perhaps the most interesting observation here is that, in spite of the Dems' complete failure in getting its philosophy packaged and placed on the shelf for consumption, roughly half the nation shares its belief systema and regularly shows that at election time. Let's see, last time we elected a "president" the Democratic candidate got, MORE VOTES than the fellow who was anointed "president."

Almost as interesting is Mul's insistence that he believes in democracy, while at the same time casting the liberal majority of voters as "traitors." Another head-scratcher is his reliance on Rush Limbaugh for information. That, in itself, is certainly a curiosity, but Mul goes so far as to publicly announce his trust in that lying druggie whom the rest of the country finds either amusing or pathetic. Or both, alternately. I think Mr. Franken moved on to other targets because he wanted some challenge in his work. Poking holes in Rush's rhetoric is elementary-school stuff. But hey, Mul's buying it and bragging about it.

[lendaddy]

"Let's see, last time we elected a "president" the Democratic candidate got, MORE VOTES than the fellow who was anointed "president."

You really need to get this outta your head. The fact is unimportant. Presidential elections are campaigned by STATE. Bush all but ignored several staes as did Gore. It is no surprise that the states ignored by Bush have the higest population hence he ignored ALOT of voters. Not because he wanted to, but because you have to to make efficient use of your funds. We dont know what would happen in the popular vote if we campaigned for it, and neither do you.

[Beethoven]

I'm not sure I share these sceptical accounts of the convention, or the belief that the Dems haven't managed to get their message accross, or the idea that if people only knew the real Kerry they would like him more.
The reason why we're seeing so little movement in the polls is that people have long made up their minds. We've entered an era when people vote according to values rather than issues, and no amount of information will convince them otherwise. It doesn't matter to them that two Joint Chiefs of Staff are supporting Kerry because he doesn't represent their values. The Republicans have done a fabulous job converting every political decision (which ideally should be rational and value-free) into a decisive moral issue, a la abortion, and when they run out of steam, or things are going badly for them in Iraq, they're inserting a new value item into the debate, like gay marriage.
Someone like Mul (who once posted a photo showing Bush among soldiers, adding: God, I love this man) is the ideal product of this strategy. It's the end of modern democracy and the beginning of a new middle ages, where you swear allegiance to your lord (and his family!) regardless how stupid or debauched he may be.

[Superman]

No Lendaddy, I am not asserting that the electoral college system, with a little interpretive input from the US Supreme Court, chose the wrong guy. I get it. Your post suggests you missed my point. Mul keeps talking about us liberals as traitors, and says he also believes in democracy. I just think that suggesting the majority of voters in a democracy are traitors, is a curious concept. Perhaps he can help me reconcile those two views like apparently he and Rush have.

[lendaddy]

I was not addressing your dispute with Mull, I was addressing something you have brought up many times:

That Gore won the popular vote, as if it matters. That's all. If the election were determined that way, the campaigns and therefore the results would be very different.