Gregory Pratt Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 QUOTE(mr_genius @ Aug 3, 2006 -> 05:17 PM) they probably think the same thing about you. John Kerry supporter. I never liked Kerry much, but yes, I supported him, grudgingly. I think this dialogue is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 3, 2006 -> 05:19 PM) After 6 years of this President, I think a lot of them would actually agree that they are fools. There's a reason why Nader put in so much worse of a showing in 04. Kerry would have been just as bad (probably worse). vote Demorcrat or DIE! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 QUOTE(mr_genius @ Aug 3, 2006 -> 06:25 PM) Kerry would have been just as bad (probably worse). vote Demorcrat or DIE! LOL LOLOLOLOL UR FUNNY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Aug 3, 2006 -> 06:47 PM) LOLOLOLOL UR FUNNY yea dude! go cubs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minors Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 No different than what they did with Nader, and no different than things the left would do if say, Roy Moore or someone like that were to have run against Bush in 04. Nader had almost nothing to do with these loses to Bush. In 2000 Gore screwed himself by not using what works Bill Clinton and by not paying attention to your home state. And the fact that his liberal supporters in FLA couldn't even read or punch a ballot right. If any of these things is done right Gore wins in 2000 if you can't win your homestate then you shouldn't be president. 2004 was a clear victory for Bush and unless Nadar took away 100K votes from Kerry in Ohio or caused Kerry to lose states that went Gore just 4 years earlier. 2004 was much closer to a stomping by Bush than a Kerry win. Kerry had to hang on for victories in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oregon, PA and Michigan and couldn't hold onto New Mexico, Iowa. While Bush only lost NH and had comfortable wins and improved his standing in most of the other states he won in 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(minors @ Aug 3, 2006 -> 05:02 PM) Nader had almost nothing to do with these loses to Bush. In 2000 Gore screwed himself by not using what works Bill Clinton and by not paying attention to your home state. And the fact that his liberal supporters in FLA couldn't even read or punch a ballot right. If any of these things is done right Gore wins in 2000 if you can't win your homestate then you shouldn't be president. 2004 was a clear victory for Bush and unless Nadar took away 100K votes from Kerry in Ohio or caused Kerry to lose states that went Gore just 4 years earlier. 2004 was much closer to a stomping by Bush than a Kerry win. Kerry had to hang on for victories in Minnesota, Wisconsin, Oregon, PA and Michigan and couldn't hold onto New Mexico, Iowa. While Bush only lost NH and had comfortable wins and improved his standing in most of the other states he won in 2000. Did you even pay attention to the subject I was talking about? I was saying that this was absolutely no different than the Republicans dumping money into Nader's campaign in 04, which they did, nor was it any different from waht the Democrats would have done had someone made a run against Bush from the right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 3, 2006 -> 07:08 PM) Did you even pay attention to the subject I was talking about? I was saying that this was absolutely no different than the Republicans dumping money into Nader's campaign in 04, which they did, nor was it any different from waht the Democrats would have done had someone made a run against Bush from the right. looks like both parties had equal levels of competition for votes in 2004 Left Ralph Nader 463,653 David Cobb - Green 119,850 Right Michael Badnarik - Libertarian 397,265 Michael Peroutka - Constitution 144,498 Finance * George W. Bush ® $367,228,801 / 62,040,610 = $5.92 / vote * John Kerry (D) $326,236,288 / 59,028,111 = $5.52 * Ralph Nader (i) $4,566,037 / 463,653 = $9.85 * Michael Badnarik (L) $1,093,013 / 397,265 = $2.75 * Michael Peroutka © $709,087 / 144,498 = $4.91 Edited August 4, 2006 by mr_genius Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 And all I was saying was that a reasonable chunk of Nader's cash came from Republican donors. Here's numbers to back it up. July 04, several tens of thousands of dollars going to Nader by people who also gave to Bush. Why is this something i'm getting hammered on? I can't even figure out what you people are trying to argue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr_genius Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 3, 2006 -> 07:44 PM) And all I was saying was that a reasonable chunk of Nader's cash came from Republican donors. Here's numbers to back it up. July 04, several tens of thousands of dollars going to Nader by people who also gave to Bush. Why is this something i'm getting hammered on? I can't even figure out what you people are trying to argue. no one's hammering you, just a conversation on 3rd party influence. oh, i think Democrats need to start donating heavily to the Libertarian party! send the link to all your Democrat friends http://www.lp.org/members/contribute.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory Pratt Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 3, 2006 -> 07:44 PM) And all I was saying was that a reasonable chunk of Nader's cash came from Republican donors. Here's numbers to back it up. July 04, several tens of thousands of dollars going to Nader by people who also gave to Bush. Why is this something i'm getting hammered on? I can't even figure out what you people are trying to argue. They're hammering you because they think you're easy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minors Posted August 4, 2006 Share Posted August 4, 2006 And all I was saying was that a reasonable chunk of Nader's cash came from Republican donors. Here's numbers to back it up. July 04, several tens of thousands of dollars going to Nader by people who also gave to Bush. Why is this something i'm getting hammered on? I can't even figure out what you people are trying to argue. I wasn't hammering on you I was posting in General. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted August 5, 2006 Share Posted August 5, 2006 Santorum's people even did the signature collecting for the green party. Six staffers on Sen. Rick Santorum's campaign - including an intern who tailed Democratic candidate Bob Casey Jr. in a duck costume - collected voter signatures to help place the Green Party on the fall ballot. The intern, petitions show, collected signatures from voters in five counties in one day. T.J. Rooney, the state Democratic Party chairman, and other Democrats disclosed details of the petition drive that they said offered further evidence of involvement from Santorum supporters to get Carl Romanelli, the Green Party's Senate candidate, on the ballot. Not only did Santorum aides help collect signatures for Romanelli, but Republicans and Santorum supporters put more than $60,000 into the petition drive. It's examples such as the apparent one-person, five-county petition tour - plus unregistered voters, multiple signatures by the same person, and fake names - that could form the basis of a challenge, Rooney said. John Michael Glick - the Santorum intern who has worn a duck costume to hound Casey for "ducking" issues - appeared to have collected signatures in Beaver, Washington, Fayette, Juniata, and Schuylkill Counties, Rooney said. "It's un-ducking-believable," he said. "Instead of his duck attire, one has to ask if he wore a Superman costume that day." Virginia Davis, Santorum's spokeswoman, did not dispute that the senator's campaign staffers collected signatures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samclemens Posted August 6, 2006 Share Posted August 6, 2006 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 5, 2006 -> 05:14 PM) Santorum's people even did the signature collecting for the green party. and Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 25, 2006 Share Posted September 25, 2006 Judge throws Pennsylvania's Green party nominee off the ballot after too many of his signatures were found to be faked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts