Electoral-vote.com Under Heavy Load; Attack?

An anonymous reader writes "Electoral-vote.com (and mirrors electoral-vote2.com through electoral-vote8.com) seem to be very slow at the moment. Votemaster ( A. Tanenbaum) just posted 'All the servers appear to be under attack now, also DNS. I added another large multiprocessor but it doesn't seem to help much. I don't this is going to work. Sorry.' Massive attack or just a large flash crowd? Anybody up for some mirroring so votemaster can concentrate on the polls?" Reader fishwack writes with word that as of 3:46GMT (10:46 PM Eastern time in the U.S.) "the Federal Electoral Commission's Web site is down."

Comments

The Oldest Slashdotting..

[Renraku]

Political zerg.

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[Ziak]

http://www.mirrordot.com/ will cover this site right?

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[websaber]

" Electoral-vote.com Under Heavy Load; Attack?". Great let's slashdot it. That will make their day!

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[NMEismyNME]

Under heavy load? ATTACK!

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[Anonymous Coward]

As a German, I say thank you for re-electing Adolf Hitler! It's about time that fascism comes back, thank you, dear Americans for bringing the old German tradition back to life in your country.

According to CNN, your most important presidential were set on

1. Will bring change 25% (Kerry voters)
2. Clear Stand on Issue 17% (Bush voters)
3. Strong Leader 17% (Bush voters)
4. Honest/Trustworthy 11% (Bush voters! WTF?)
5. Cares About People 9% (Kerry voters)
6. Religious Faith 8% (Bush voters)
7. Intelligent 7% (Kerry voters)

Bush voters strongly favored the following qualities in him according to vote percentage (in that order)

1. Religions faith, 91%
2. Strong leader, 86%
3. Clear stand on issue, 78%
4. Honest/Trustworthy, 70%

Those who favored other qualities voted in majority for Kerry.

In short, America voted for the Fuehrer, the only difference lies in Bush's religion (Methodist, if you believe CNN) and Hitler's "religion". Both were/are very devoted to their own belief. If Bush is honest and trustworthy, Hitler was a nice guy for a family picknick.

Welcome to our class of history repeating, ladies and gentlemen.
Todays topic: how Germany was converted to national-socialism without anyone noticing.

Strong charismatic leadership, stubbornness on any and all issues, strong beliefs in his own ideologic with a sharp division between us=good and them=evil made him popular. Followed by an invasion of other countries for the sake of own safety, profit and glory combined with a willingness in the population to be deceived made Hitler's fascist reality possible.

Thank you and have a nice day.
Tomorrows lesson: how mass internment and industrial genocide begun in Nazi Germany without anyone noticing.

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[Zonnald]

Ah you mean the wealthy industrialists who provide jobs (exploited or otherwise) to the rest of the country - right?

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[sk8king]

Since you mention this topic, I remember seeing this in someone's signature months ago.

http://www.couplescompany.com/Features/Politics/St ructure3.htm

A quote in the article:
An interesting note to end this article:
As of January 2004, the United States fulfills all fourteen points of fascism and all seven warning signs are present. But we're not alone. Israel also fulfills all fourteen points and all seven warning signs as well. Welcome to the new republic, redefined, revised and spun. It is not too late to reverse this in either country, but it will be soon. The first step is realizing it. The second step is getting involved. As the propaganda slogan disguising our current war goes, "Freedom isn't free." But our war for freedom isn't abroad, it's here at home.

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[)-(ellbilly]

What, faacism Your kidding right? Its more like the Communist Manifesto. Heres a gander at 10 Karls points:

1. Abolition of private property and the application of all rent to public purpose.

The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution (1868), and various zoning, school & property taxes. Also the Bureau of Land Management.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

Misapplication of the 16th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, 1913, The Social Security Act of 1936.; Joint House Resolution 192 of 1933; and various State "income" taxes. We call it "paying your fair share".

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

We call it Federal & State estate Tax (1916); or reformed Probate Laws, and limited inheritance via arbitrary inheritance tax statutes.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

We call in government seizures, tax liens, Public "law" 99-570 (1986); Executive order 11490, sections 1205, 2002 which gives private land to the Department of Urban Development; the imprisonment of "terrorists" and those who speak out or write against the "government" (1997 Crime/Terrorist Bill); or the IRS confiscation of property without due process.

5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

We call it the Federal Reserve which is a credit/debt system nationally organized by the Federal Reserve act of 1913. All local banks are members of the Fed system, and are regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transportation in the hands of the State.

We call it the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Department of Transportation (DOT) madated through the ICC act of 1887, the Commissions Act of 1934, The Interstate Commerce Commission established in 1938, The Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Communications Commission, and Executive orders 11490, 10999, as well as State mandated driver's licenses and Department of Transportation regulations.

7. Extention of factories and instruments of production owned by the State, the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

We call it corporate capacity, The Desert Entry Act and The Department of Agriculture. As well as the Department of Commerce and Labor, Department of Interior, the Evironmental Protection Agency, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Bureau of Mines, National Park Service, and the IRS control of business through corporate regulations.

8. Equal liablity of all to labor. Establishment of Industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

We call it the Social Security Administration and The Department of Labor. The National debt and inflation caused by the communal bank has caused the need for a two "income" family. Woman in the workplace since the 1920s, the 19th amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, assorted Socialist Unions, affirmative action, the Federal Public Works Program and of course Executive order 11000.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.

We call it the Planning Reorganization act of 1949 , zoning (Title 17 1910-1990) and Super Corporate Farms, as well as Executive orders 11647, 11731 (ten regions) and Public "law" 89-136.

10. Free education for all children in government schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. etc.

People are being taxed to support what we call "public" schools, which train the young to work for the communal debt system. We also call it the Department of Education, the NEA and Outcome Based "Education".

Seems to me you read teh wrong part of that website ;-)
Cheers,
]-[ellbilly

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[dcam]

All states demonstate some elemtents of facism, marxism etc. You have picked out a number of isolated and frankly insigifigant areas where your country conforms to Marxism.

I have studied the rise of Hitler in some detail. It parallels the current administration pretty closely. That should be a concern. A very big concern.

But I guess you are content in your viewpoint.

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[)-(ellbilly]

.....You have picked out a number of isolated and frankly insigifigant areas where your country conforms to Marxism......

Brainwashing our children by union controlled teachers in our "public schools" is not something I consider insignificant....nor the taking of my property becuase an "indiana bat" was seen but never found on it.
You have no clue
Cheers,
]-[ellbilly

Re:The Oldest Slashdotting..

[dcam]

Insults and hyperbole do not make an cogent argument.

Web site maybe being ddos'd

[StudyOfEfficiency]

Let's post it to Slashdot with a link.

Re:Web site maybe being ddos'd

[lNxUnDeRdOg]

he just thought it was under DDoS....wait till /. get's into full effect....mmmwwwwwhhaaaaaa mmmmmwwwwwahhhaaaaaa....

Re:Web site maybe being ddos'd

[FifthRaven]

Yeah, and that way we'll really make life hell. Now the real question is, "Is this malicious or simply the effect of general interest in the election?" I would hope for the latter, but the voting machines make me think of the former. If we decrease the public's ability to respond to the election, we can steal it more effectively.

Re:Web site maybe being ddos'd

[pyrote]

Let's post it to Slashdot with a link.

Or even Double it or Triple it!

Re:Web site maybe being ddos'd

[davidescott]

Actually in this case its a good thing since he wants the data on massive usage to figure out ways to work around it. Those crazy academics. Makes me think this whole ``election'' thing may have been a ruse to get us to all go to his website.


So why am I a happy camper? We survived an unprecedented triple flash crowd and logged it all. As it turns out, two of the faculty members in my Dept., Maarten van Steen and Guillaume Pierre, are doing research on coping with flash crowds. The research issues include how many replicas to set up, where to place them, how fast to deploy them, and how to do it automatically, in real time, and at minimum cost. To simulate proposed algorithms, you need data about real flash crowds and real attacks, preferably at the same time. And boy oh boy do we have data now. Students interested in this and other areas of computer systems might want to check out the English-language Masters program I am running at the Vrije Universiteit.

Re:Web site maybe being ddos'd

[Fishead]

Malicious would be me hitting "Reload Current Page" constantly...

Re:Web site maybe being ddos'd

[Everybody]

Good idea. But make sure to check each of their servers to see if there's really a DDOS. If you get a page, don't forget to refresh to make sure it was not in your cache!

Re:Web site maybe being ddos'd

[jonadab]

> Let's post it to Slashdot with a link.

At this point, a slashdotting is *NOTHING* compared to the traffic this site
is taking. I guess roughly a third of the schools in North America showed
the site to their students yesterday or earlier last week, and it's one of
the first hits in Google for what is right now an extremely hot topic. Voter
turnout this election was very high -- unprecedently-high in Ohio given that
it rained statewide all day. A lot of people are deeply interested in the
outcome of this election. There are probably several million people reloading
the site several times an hour or more. The guy who set it up intended it
as a site to track the accuracy of pollsters, so he was anticipating mostly
traffic from geeks and academics; what he got was the mother slashdotting of
all time, because projections of the outcome of this election are, as of this
moment, more popular than email.

MSNBC and CNN are sluggish too.

I dont...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't this is going to work.

Me neither :)

And now you are helping out....

[the_rajah]

by /.ing them. Nice going.

Actually I'm currently (23:06 CST) able to get to both fec.gov and Andy's site.

"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain

Seems fine to me

[DJ Wipeout]

I got to the FEC with no problem. electoral-vote.com seemed fine too.

Re:Seems fine to me

[konekoniku]

To be fair, when I tried it earlier in the day (around 6-7pm pst) the primary and mirrors 2-4 were down.

Err wouldn't this incur even more /.?

[Tracer_Bullet82]

n/t

BS

[lNxUnDeRdOg]

I was just there and kept refreshing and everything was working fine....stop crying wolf

Yeah

[Tyndmyr]

It must be under attack, probably by terrorists, who seek to quash our freedom and replace it with...evilness! Because, you know, it doesnt make sense that a site could go down because of insane numbers of people using it. Us slashdotters cant imagine such a thing happening. Besides, who would be going there now, anyhow?

Re:Yeah

[Xepo]

He specifically put up the mirrors because his servers were getting attacked before. It's not just from mass visitation.

Re:Yeah

[CrackerJack9]

I tried the first one and it didn't work, then the second one and it worked...but then it wouldn't refresh. Its crazy! I just don't know how they do it! *severe sarcasm*

Re:Yeah

[56ker]

Perhaps it's being attacked by angry Republicans as his site is currently predicting Kerry ahead by one electoral vote. ;)

Re:Yeah

[jonadab]

> He specifically put up the mirrors because his servers were getting
> attacked before. It's not just from mass visitation.

It actually *could* be just from extreme mass visitation. The last time a
news topic created as much public interest in up-to-the-minute news as this
election has done was 9/11. CNN is sluggish. MSNBC is sluggish. The site
we're talking about is the number one Google result for the phrase "electoral
vote", and it's also one of the top results for several other relevant phrases.

We're talking about *WAY* more traffic than a slashdotting. For one thing,
we're talking about millions of people, not a few hundred thousand geeks.
For another thing, people are reloading the site every five minutes in hopes
of an update. Tannenbaum was thinking "tracking the accuracy of polls", so
he was anticipating mostly geek and academic traffic -- a normal, or perhaps
somewhat larger than normal -- slashdotting or so. He was *not* prepared
for his site to get more traffic than Yahoo and Hotmail combined for 36 hours,
which is what is happening.

There's an election today

[Peter Cooper]

I think these sites might be slow because the US is voting in a Presidential Election today, so people are checking out those sites for the results so far, etc.

Re:There's an election today

[seanadams.com]

Ya think? Maybe we should get slashdot's opinion. Can some submit a story or four?

Re:There's an election today

[RealProgrammer]

Presidential election?

Who's running?

Re:There's an election today

[ktakki]

Who's running?

Darl McBride is running against Richard Stallman, with Theo DeRaadt as a third party candidate.

k.

Re:There's an election today

[identity0]

Nah, it's probobly those confused Uruguayans thinking it's a site for Uruguayan electoral votes. Won't they be suprised to learn Bush is going to be their president...

Re:There's an election today

[teamhasnoi]

What!? Have you been living under a rock?

It's Giant Douche v.s. Turd Sandwitch.

It looks like Turd Sandwitch may take it right now, but it's really going to be up to the Washington Racist Football Team.

Re:There's an election today

[Nos.]

And a badly worded poll that misses several options

Re:There's an election today

[tfoudray]

yeah, although why bother with such sites that speculate when
cnn has roughly 73+% of the votes tallied and online already, and they're actual votes, not just exit polls and such?

Re:There's an election today

[superyooser]

No kidding. Put away the tin foil hats. I'm getting timeout errors on news.yahoo.com and Ohio's government web site. Response on every news site has been slow tonight. And I have 1 megabit DSL.

Re:There's an election today

[Zork the Almighty]

You can do better. It hasn't stopped politicians from beating John Ashcroft , who unlike Cheney, may be alive.

Re:There's an election today

[jamstar7]

Shoot 'em both. I'll write-in Linus Torvalds. Oh, wait, he's not an American citizen. But there's still hope, if they pass the proposed amendment to let the Governator be Prez...

Re:There's an election today

[ceeam]

Josh Woosh and Chuck Berry.

Re:There's an election today

[Tet]

It's Giant Douche v.s. Turd Sandwitch.

Errm... which one's which?

Re:There's an election today

[bhtooefr]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douche

You would use a douche to clean your pussy out.

Re:There's an election today

[marmalade]

ITYM Theo Mora. HTH. HAND.

Re:There's an election today

[eyeye]

Who's running?

One guy who has killed 100,000 people and one guy who hasnt yet.

Re:There's an election today

[216pi]

The Red Sox won.

Re:There's an election today

[AeiwiMaster]

How tolled you that Iraq had weapons of mass destructions ?? CIA !
How tolled you that Bin Laden did 9/11 ?? CIA !

Don't trust CIA.

Re:There's an election today

[Sunnan]

In South Park, Turd Sandwich used a similar font/logotype as Bush/Cheney.

Re:There's an election today

[ConceptJunkie]

Heh heh... look at this: U-are-gay

Re:There's an election today

[Firethorn]

He'd still have to get himself naturalized rather quickly.

The Governator is a US citizen, he's just a naturalized one, instead of either being born a citizen or being in the USA when the constitution was signed.

Under attack by Slashdot editors?

[stoborrobots]

What's this? like the fourth direct link to the site today?

It's available here in GA...

[bergeron76]

I can get to it without issue (from the 24.) network.

Of course, now that it's up on /., you can expect it to experience heavy load.

MicroKernel

[diablobsb]

quick!
switch to a microkernel based OS and webserver we all know would stand up to this attack nicely...
jk :)

Re:MicroKernel

[m4sk0t]

Micro/Kernel 2008

who cares!

[seanadams.com]

right now they're calling florida as "weak kerry" which is nowhere near the case if you look at the figures in so far. Why is this site important?

Re:who cares!

[DataPath]

He updates the site maybe once a day, and based upon a wide number of polls. He's not doing hourly updates as the results come back from different precincts.

Re:who cares!

[Skyfire]

If you notice, "they" (electoral-vote.com) aren't calling anybody for anybody. All he does is post polling data from various sources on one website. That data for Florida is from several days ago.

Re:who cares!

[TopShelf]

It was updated based on the latest polling data, not actual election returns this evening...

Re:who cares!

[Kris_J]

Interestingly, the absolute number of votes between Bush and Kerry in Florida hasn't changed as the count has increased from ~1 million to ~7 million votes counted, which tends to imply an early burst of pro-Bush support rather than a clear win for Bush.

Re:who cares!

[m4sk0t]

Some of us prefer to read averaged sketchy poll results from several days ago instead of looking at real-time stats. Duh!

Re:who cares!

[crazyfreakid]

Actually, he had promised real-time updates tonight with actual results. You can see this at the bottom of the current front page of the website, I believe... but it deosn't seem to have come about, perhaps because he's been so focused on dealing with these attacks.

Re:who cares!

[kinzillah]

you think cnn and fox have actual results? they're standing outside polling people

And why is this a surprise?

[Man in Spandex]

It surely isn't!

help help!

[Fiz Ocelot]

This site seems to under a very huge load! Quick, post it on Slashdot!

heh but on a serious note, there's something over 120 million voters? With such a close election? Doubt it's a hostile attack.

You guys just catching on?

[the_skywise]

I've been unable to contact any of my political blogs all day. My guess is it's called TRAFFIC because people (especially the west coast) are trying to get a sixth sense of what's going on...

Re:You guys just catching on?

[ImaLamer]

Actually my liberal based blog hosted in Houston Texas has been shut down...

...on election day no less.

I'm guessing conspiracy. (My tin-foil hat is already on just in case).

maybe this story is a troll?

[to be a troll]

and they are actually trying to shut them down by posting on slashdot...(?)

isnt the /. affect as good as denial of service?

Attack?

[FiReaNGeL]

Attack? Sure... millions of people across the world hitting refresh in unison... Terrorists!

Seems to be responding just fine.

[Joe Random]

Same here. The site's actually responding faster for me now than it was last night.

Electoral-Vote3.com - Electoral-Vote8.com

[marktaw.com]

http://www.electoral-vote3.com/

through

http://www.electoral-vote8.com/

If one doesn't come up, use another.

Re:Electoral-Vote3.com - Electoral-Vote8.com

[theAedileDecimus]

Actually, electoral-vote9.com seems to be one of them as well, and it is very fast.

Re:Electoral-Vote3.com - Electoral-Vote8.com

[Entropy Unleashed]

I know my first temptation was to just paste one of those text links into my browser's location bar, so here's a good variety of clickies so that www.electoral-vote8.com and www.electoral-vote3.com don't get too badly hit:

http://www.electoral-vote3.com/
http://www.electoral-vote4.com/
http://www.electoral-vote5.com/
http://www.electoral-vote6.com/
http://www.electoral-vote7.com/
http://www.electoral-vote8.com/

Re:Electoral-Vote3.com - Electoral-Vote8.com

[suwain_2]

And if none of those will even resolve to an IP address?

Re:Electoral-Vote3.com - Electoral-Vote8.com

[marktaw.com]

I would've done that too, but I got some "compression error" because of the repetition. I guess I just needed a large enough blurb before it.

Re:Electoral-Vote3.com - Electoral-Vote8.com

[Jugalator]

Didn't you even read the first sentence in the news summary?

Anyway, they all seem to be OK now.

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[camooT]

Don't count your chickens. Assuming you know how to count.

Just perhaps...

[DAldredge]

Perhaps, just perhaps, the site is running slow and getting a lot of hits because of the DAMN ELECTION?

My God, it ain't that hard people. When the major networks not calling the elections till damn near the last moment it should have been expected that web based resources would be placed under a much larger load.

Hell, CNN JUST called Florida.

Coral Mirror

[Milican]

http://electoral-vote.com.nyud.net:8090

JOhn

Internet load today

[aacool]

netcraft reported this already earlier today http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2004/11/02/mirro rs_help_electoralvotecom_blunt_ddos_attacks.html

Mirroring helped

Aljazeera was also down, per Netcraft

I've blogged live about Internet Load all day on my blog today

Re:Internet load today

[psetzer]

It can't be Netcraft. They haven't predicted the death of the Internet due to this load.

Probably not an attack

[Lord Kano]

There have to be millions like me who have been shifting from electoral-vote.com, to drudgereport.com, to foxnews.com, to cnn.com.

Just looking to get the most up to date information.

LK

Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[aardwolf204]

Its good that you provide us apache-crash-happy slashdotters with a link to Electoral-vote.com, come on troops get in there and get that server smoking!

More seriously, can anyone tell my why at this moment the reports are so uneven among the major networks:

NBC: 207 / 199
Yahoo: 237 / 199
Fox: 210 / 144
CBS: 246 / 207

Answer that, then continue to F5, F5, F5...

And do it in firefox, maybe the major news sites will notice in their logs.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Peyna]

CBS is giving Bush Ohio; which is BS when Cuyahoga and Hamilton counties (Cleveland and Cincinnati) have only reported 30-50% of their precincts. Cuyahoga currently shows a significant margin for Kerry, if that trend continues, that's another 100,000 or so Kerry votes in Ohio when it hits 100%. We're going to see the same thing we saw 4 years ago where one network will call a particular state and then find out 4 hours later that a certain place heavy to one side wasn't in yet and it changed the results. At least this time they waited until every poll but Alaska was closed.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Peyna]

Also, it looks like Kerry is set to take Nevada and New Hampshire; if you give Bush every other state that he had the last time, that puts it at 264-274, Colorado, New Mexico, and Ohio are all close enough that if any one of them goes to Kerry, he will probably win.

So there you have, it's down to Ohio (which everyone expected), or Colorado and New Mexico, which no one expected to be much of a deciding factor.

Don't expect this to end tonight; absentee ballots are very likely to be needed in a few states.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Peyna]

Okay, so now it's down to Ohio and New Mexico. If Bush takes Ohio, Kerry takes New Mexico (and NH, the rest of the states follow the trend from 4 years ago), there will be a tie.

Which means we would probably end up with President George Bush and Vice-President John Edwards. That'd be a hoot.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[chill]

Why? Because the trained monkeys at the various networks can only color so fast. That and they're pissed they only get two colors to play with.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[TopShelf]

Go here and you can see the states getting called by each of the networks as it happens. It's been my favorite site to follow tonight...

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Lxy]

From what I've gathered by reading the various sites, each news outlet is using their own modeling software to predict which states are a win for each candidate. Most have backed off and are producing more conservative numbers after the embarrassment of the 2000 election.

Since everyone has their own software, variables are weighted differently. The commonly used variables are previous unofficial polls, previous election data, exit polls, and of course, the actual tallies themselves. California is sitting at 10% reported, but given its track record and previous unfficial poll numbers, it's pretty easy to give California to Kerry. Once Ohio completes their precinct tally, you should see those numbers even up quite a bit.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[TopShelf]

It's pretty much in the bag now - Bush has Ohio, and Kerry would have to run the table to cause a tie. Yikes...

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Anonymous Coward]

Currently:
- Hamilton is at 50% reported, with a 52%/48% split for Bush.
- Cuyahoga is at 90% reported, with Kerry 200k votes ahead.

Ohio overall has Bush ahead by 100k with 87% reported. Looks like they called it correctly.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Peyna]

Bush far from has Ohio; there are countless absentee ballots, plus still many votes in heavy Democratic areas not yet counted. Same goes for Florida on the absentees. Don't expect this to be final for at least a week.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[hacker]

"Which means we would probably end up with President George Bush and Vice-President John Edwards. That'd be a hoot."

Not quite (from electoral-vote.com).

Should the election end up in the Supreme Court, it is not known whether Rehnquist will particpate in the case and vote on the outcome. Should he decline to participate due to ill health, the deadlock in the country might end up in a Court itself deadlocked 4-4. In such an event, the lower court ruling stands but no legal precedent is set. An alternative scenario is that Chief Justice Rehnquist resigns and that President Bush makes a recess appointment, which does not require Senate confirmation. If Bush were to appoint a new justice without Senate confirmation who then cast the deciding vote to make Bush president I fear for the future of the country.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Kenja]

"Don't expect this to be final for at least a week."

Baka. And I was gona stay up all night watching the election.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Peyna]

In the case of a electoral tie, the currently sitting House of Representatives picks the President, the Senate picks the Vice President; yuor talk about the Supreme Court doesn't come into play.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[demachina]

Its interesting exit polls have historically been pretty accurate which is why networks have relied on them for so long, until the Republicans started winning elections and especially as electronic voting came on the scene. As you recall in 2000 VNS exit polling predicted Gore won and he didn't. In 2002 the VNS exit polls mysteriously failed in a massive way and the Republicans had a big win. It was disbanded and an all new AP system was used today.

Today apparently the exit polls were massively swinging to Kerry and it now appears he is losing the election. Curious that exit polls have gone completely south in just the last 4 years.

It leads to two possibilities.

1. The exit polls are really innacurate or maybe Democrat leaners were rigging them, of course rigging exit polls is kind of stupid since they don't count for anything other than maybe putting a little psychic pressure on late voters. Maybe they are just consistently bad but they are a pretty big sampling and its odd they would be as far off as they were apparently today. This is the message Fox and the Republicans were pounding on all night. The exit polls were all wrong and you need to fix them or get rid of them. Unfortunately at this point the exit poll are the only checks and balances we have on the truthfullness of the polls and especially electronic polling.

2. The exit polls were accurate and someone was rigging the vote. Needless to say with widespread use of electronic voting machines, without paper trail, if someone rigged them to skew the vote to the Republicans you would see what we've seen today and it would be hard to prove thats what happened. The exit polls say Kerry wins and the voting machines say Bush wins. Unfortunately with no paper trail we may never know.

If exit polls are wrong it should be setting off alarm bells that either they are wrong or the vote counts are wrong. You should not leap to the conclusion that it must be the exit polls as the media and Republican were tonight and probably will be from now on.

One interesting thing to do would be to lock up a all the electronic voting machines in precincts in Ohio and Florida (Broward and Miami-Dade in particular where there is huge Democratic vote to suppress). Look in particular for precincts where exit polls said one thing and the machines said something else. Be sure to set the date back to the day of the election, set them exactly like they were on election day, and start entering votes on them in a semi random way at about the same rate voters would on all or most of the machines, and see if after a full day of voting they report an accurate vote.

Another interesting exercise would be to correlate the map of precincts with electronic voting with precincts with bogus exit polls and see if there is a correlation.

I think much of the data on them can be found on electionline.org.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[zbuffered]

I hope you've got the bawls.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[DrewCapu]

Let's see how long Bush is stuck at 269 on that webpage.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Kenja]

"I hope you've got the bawls. Would you like to know more?"

Are you coming on to me?

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[polecat_redux]

And do it in firefox, maybe the major news sites will notice in their logs.

And why would they care? Firefox users are the minority, and will be for the forseeable future.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[demachina]

" If ever there was an excuse for armed rebellion against the state, this is it."

I hate to break it to you but the conservatives have more guns and they use them a lot more than liberals and geeks. They kill a lot of animals with them in particular. Why exactly do you think the right wing is so keen on protecting gun ownership. Hint, its not to keep the government in line, its so they can smack down the liberals and minorities if they ever get out of line.

The only thing trending in favor of geeks is they may have superior skills in first person shooters and flight simulators but I'm not sure those skills translate in to meat space.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[DrewCapu]

I guess not that long. Site's down. Oops. He went down to 249 now. Oops, it's down again.

Oh screw it. I'm going to bed.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[grishnav]

Thanks a lot! Killed it! :P

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[morcheeba]

driving home tonight I heard that Boulder County (aka. Republic of Boulder) hasn't been counted yet. We're pretty liberal and, thankfully, we used good old fashion "mark x here" paper ballots.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[pi_rules]

I hate to break it to you but the conservatives have more guns and they use them a lot more than liberals and geeks. They kill a lot of animals with them in particular. Why exactly do you think the right wing is so keen on protecting gun ownership. Hint, its not to keep the government in line, its so they can smack down the liberals and minorities if they ever get out of line.

Wow, there's a sterotype that's way out of line with reality.

Yes, conservatives tend to own some guns here and there. This is actually more appropriately attributed to their rural upbringing, typically, which happens to coincide wih their conservative upbringings and later on decisions in life.

I'm not sure what you mean by more than the "geeks" actually. I'm a shooter, I own guns, and I hang out at shooting ranges. I'm well aware of your typical "bubba" sterotype, with a hunting rifle and a shotgun, but they're actually very nice guys by and large. Gruff sometimes, but nice guys.

The ones you see our there with semi-automatic military pattern firearms? They're often just liberty minded folk. More then often they work in a professional white color job -- they're even geeks quite often! I'm one of 'em.

I've never seen a gun owner advocate shootin' liberals. Sorry, ain't happening.

The only thing trending in favor of geeks is they may have superior skills in first person shooters and flight simulators but I'm not sure those skills translate in to meat space.

They don't translate in the least bit, unless you've got an FPS in mind that shows you how to coordinate magazine changes in your rifle, field strip and clean it as fast as possible in the dark, etc.

If you think playing Counterstrike, or whatever, is going to teach you how to tear apart an AK in the dark and reassmble it in 45 seconds... you've lost touch with reality.

The only thing an FPS will teach you is: conserve ammo and change mags when you're low.

You're missing trigger control, sight picture, weapons maneuvering, determing when to use lethal force (or target idenfication), and a whole mess of other stuff.

Odds are you won't be able to load a magazine with any proficiency your first time trying it. I couldn't, and it took a little time to get used to it and make it a 2nd nature. Double stack rifle mags are easier, and pretty much brain dead, but pistol mags are tougher. Eyes closed and in the dark I can do it like I'm wiping my ass, but I've done it Lord knows how many thousands of times.

The "bubba" conservatives aren't going to shoot you, and they've usually got ZERO interest in understanding that their arms can be turned on actual human targets.

Your FPS skills mean nothing.

Your fellow liberty minded gun owning geeks are a group you entirelly forgot about it seems, or weren't aware they existed.

There's plenty though. Wanna join the club?

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[demachina]

"The exit polls were never all that good numerically."

Yea sure, like I'm gonna believe your anonymous coward BS. Do you have something to support your claim? Here is a pretty good write up with all the methodology and downside to them but it says:

"I have always been a fan of exit polls. Despite the occasional controversies, exit polls remain among the most sophisticated and reliable political surveys available. They will offer an unparalleled look at today's voters in a way that would be impossible without quality survey data. Having said that, they are still just random sample surveys, possessing the usual limitations plus some that are unique to exit polling (I also remain dubious about weighting telephone surveys to match them, but that is another story for another day)."

They have a margin of error like most polls but it sure is odd that margin of error was apparently uniformly in Kerry's favor. You would expect the margin of error would randomly favor Bush in some states and Kerry in others.

"I prefer and honest count without the hoopla."

Now I know you are full of B.S. Where did you develop this certainty the vote counts are always honest or accurate.

Like I said exit polls are the only check we have against potential election rigging. If they disagree wildly with the election results I'm not sayin it means the election was rigged but it suggest it is a possibility

There was a lady on Fox tonight is one of their election specialist. I wish I'd caught her name. She was rabid that if your getting really bad exit polls they are probably right and you have a problem. She apparently has massive experience over many elections. For some reason tonight the exit polls were wildly wrong.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[demachina]

"Wow, there's a sterotype that's way out of line with reality."

It was a joke. Get a sense of humor.

It is kind of a well known trend, Democrats & liberals favor gun control, Republicans & conservatives don't. That is one of the ways we define them in our polarized little world. It kind of follows if you favor gun control you are less likely to have them. I have a small arsenal around here though they are pretty pathetic by rebellion standards, mostly .308 old breech loading hunting rifles. No magazine in sight. I'm glad for you that you are an exception but I doubt you indicate a trend.

I assure you if liberals/minorites got pissed enough about todays election to start an armed revolt the conservatives would be glad to side with and help out the authorities. Not like there is a snow balls chance in hell anybody is going to doing anything about another sham election except parade through the court system until the Supreme Court throws it to the Republicans again. This term the Republicans will get to appoint one or two justices insuring they will always win overwhelming victories in the courts from now on so the Democrats will have to give up even trying that route after this.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[pi_rules]

Sorry, I misunderstood you. It's just that I've seen enough from the "left" that it's possible that somebody would expouse such thoughts and be entirely serious.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[demachina]

Not sure you followed it but I was replying to, quoting and making light of an AC who was proposing the armed rebellion. That one was modded to zero and beloved Slashdot puts those out of sequence so you might have missed it. I think he was entirely serious but unlikely to actually do it.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Glendale2x]

Also, it looks like Kerry is set to take Nevada

Probably not. There's two counties that would go to Kerry for specific reasons: Vegas because it's a large population center, and those tend left, and Washoe county (where I live) because of the university. The rest of the state, while not all that much, may be enough to counter the slim margin Kerry has in Washoe County. And even then, it's barely a landslide victory.

Clark county (Vegas) always goes left, while the rest of the state tends right. Nevada is one of those states where you find a whole lot of nothing outside of Las Vegas and Reno/Sparks. It would honestly surprise me to see NV go Kerry, but it would only be because of Vegas and UNR. The university is strong Kerry and very anti-Bush. As I write this, Bush is winning every county except Clark county.

Real results:

http://nvresults.nv.gov/

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[multimed]

Whatever channel I happened to be watching at the time had a brief discussion on the whole accuracy of exit polls top. First and foremost they emphasized that exit polls were never meant to be used in predicting actual votes, only why people voted the way they did.

They made a few very good points about reasons exit polls may favor Democrats over Republicans which logically sounded rather plausible to me. Republican voters tend to be older--in particular the 65+ people, but even down to 50+ These people tend to be a lot more private in regards to a lot of things--in particular, personal money & politics. I think it's very much a generational thing. When asked by a pollster, a lot of them are going to kindly say "none of your damn business." On top of that, I think though to a lesser degree, Republicans of all ages are less likely to chat about how they voted & why. One last think and this is a bit off the wall--so much is made of the young vote going overwhelmingly towards the Democrats. I'd bet that there are some younger people who vote Republican, but when asked will either defer or even say they voted for the Democrat because they think that's what's expected of them.

If any one of these things is true, even a little bit, then it would definitely be enough to throw off exit polls by at least a percent or two and maybe more.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[mc6809e]

Maybe they aren't polling a good cross section of each state.

Most of Bush's support tends to come for more rural parts of the country, while Kerry's comes from cities.

So, you're doing a poll. Are you going to drive 30 miles to hicksville, USA or are you going to walk down the stairs from your hotel room to the precinct next door to do your polling?

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[demachina]

If you read the post I've put elsewhere in the thread, the exit pollers are supposed to record a basic description of refusers. If they are consistently getting refusals from women or old people it should show up in the refuser data.

"Republicans of all ages are less likely to chat about how they voted & why"

I think you are making up a bunch of crap excuses and don't have a clue if what you are saying has any basis in fact.

When everyone is trying to explain away a discrepancy that wasn't there before 2000 it is a cause for more suspicion not less.

"then it would definitely be enough to throw off exit polls by at least a percent or two and maybe more."

Exit polls have in fact been about the most accurate polls there are up until the Republicans started seizing power and they started going south in 2000. Yes they have a margin of error but its not like they just went completely to hell in the just the last 4 years. If any of your B.S. excuses were valid, they should have always been there, they wouldn't have just started this year.

Many of the exit polls were off by way more than a percent or two at least in early in the day. Apparently the Bush camp was crushed early in the day and the Kerry camp was dancing in the streets. Again why did all your little excuses just kick in lately.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[demachina]

If you ready the MystertPollster link I've posted multiple times in this thread, the precincts that are polled are supposed to be randomly sampled from all the precincts in each state.

I assure you it would be insane to poll only urban precincts. You would be completely wasting your time and the data would be completely worthless. Any remotely clueful in pollster would know that.

I am truly impressed with the fact the number of /. who have posted on this thread trying to explain away and rationalize this glaring discrepancy. You would figure with the number of scientist, engineers, etc on here the reaction would be to solve a mystery instead of making lame attempts to explain it away.

I know the prospect that American elections are being rigged is unpleasant, and it more than likely they aren't, but I assure you elections are rigged all the time around the world, the CIA are experts at it and there is no reason why America is immune. The only way to prevent it is to be real prigs about trying to catch it.

Now that we have electronic voting with no paper trail it has suddenly become a lot easier to do and not get get caught. This election was the easiest one to rig in America's history and it has some key indicators that it may have been. Of course then too maybe all the bible thumpers came out to vote and at this point unless you are evangelical its probably a good time to get out of America. I was waiting to see how this came out but it is about time to emmigrate.

I sure would like to disassemble the code in some of the evoting machins in some precincts where they disagree with the exit polls, unfortunately you have to do it before someone has a chance to change the software loads on them and it ain't gonna happen.

Maybe you could catch if they are rigged by testing them, if you could test them before they are changed, and you get the test setup just right. I'm afraid a smart programmer has rigged them to only flip a couple percent to the Republicans on election day and they are probably disabling the rigging if they detect someone jumping the date around. At least thats what I'd do.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[slashdot.org]

One interesting thing to do would be to lock up a all the electronic voting machines in precincts in Ohio and Florida (Broward and Miami-Dade in particular where there is huge Democratic vote to suppress). Look in particular for precincts where exit polls said one thing and the machines said something else. Be sure to set the date back to the day of the election, set them exactly like they were on election day, and start entering votes on them in a semi random way at about the same rate voters would on all or most of the machines, and see if after a full day of voting they report an accurate vote.

Not a terrible idea, but consider the following psuedo-code:

boolean election_day_ended = false;

function count_vote( candidate )
read_from_non_volatile_storage( &election_day_ended )
if( election_day_ended == false ) {
if( date_and_time > election_day ) {
election_day_ended = true
write_to_non_volatile_storage( &election_day_ended )
}
}

if( election_day_ended ) {
vote = candidate
}
else {
if( random_number_between( 1, 100 ) == 7 ) {
vote = kerry
}
else {
vote = candidate
}
}

This is not a rant _against_ your post at all, I think you have some very interesting points, and I just want to add that there is only one single way to do electronic voting and that's with a paper trail. I can't believe anyone would accept anything else. Even if the machines had Open Source software, *who* really is able to make sure that the correct executable is being used? You could maybe come up with some fancy encryption scheme, but you still have to assume that the polling machine is being delivered by non-trusted people, making this really very complex.

Why are things being made so complex? It's pretty simple, if you can randomly check the machines against their paper trail, all you have to do is count the pieces of paper, count what the stated vote is for and add it all up. They can print the vote in Arial 72pt bold so that there's never _ever_ any misunderstanding. If there's one single paper vote that's off by what the machine reports, well then that's a big fucking problem.

(12:45AM PDT it's pretty much certain that Bush is winning)
Just to get modded down as flamebait I will finish that off with some math I learned from Bill O'Reilly:

So considering the voting result, we are in one big fucking problem. So if I simply do the math, then (voting machine mismatch == big fucking problem, and bush == big fucking problem -> bush == voting machine mismatch)

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[demachina]

I'd already thought of the probability that if the software is rigged they would be checking for someone jumping the date around and posted it a few minutes before you did.

Thats why I switched to wishing I could dissassemble some of the software loads off of machines in precincts that are out of whack with the exit polls, before someone has a chance to replace them.

I, of course, agree that it would be better to not have paperless voting machines at all but that doesn't solve the fact that this election is fishy and, with a few more years of the new Republican party dominating America I think we can stop worrying about fairs election or anybody but right wing extremists and evangelicals dominating the U.S. and the world from now on. Been waiting for this outcome and it looks like its finally time to emigrate and hope I can find a pleasant little corner of the world that America and the bible thumpers will overlook and not fuck up.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[dexter riley]

Every time someone mentions this possibility, I get the theme to "The Odd Couple" stuck in my head.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[N1XIM]

All I have to say is that the system of winning power in the USA that the Right Wing political establishment in the USA has been using is exactly the same type of strategy used by the Right Wing politicians of 1930's Germany. Today we call them Nazis due to the name of the party that eventually won out--but that was in a true multi-party political system; something that we have never has in the USA.
BTW: It seems that the Right Wing parties in Australia are up to the same tatics as their brethren in the USA. Doesn't that bode well for the free world?

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[demachina]

The plan is to renounce it though it takes a lot of work and time to get new citizenship. If you don't renounce it you have to keep paying taxes to the U.S. government once you pass the exemption limit on foreign income. If you pay taxes that means you are supporting and endorsing the insanity the current American government is perpetrating in your name and will apparently be perpetrating for a really long time.

The other obvious advantage to ditching the U.S. passport is Americans are now so increasingly and universally despised in the rest of the world that packing a U.S. passport is just asking for trouble and not any kind of plus anymore.

I'd think you would be kind of sad that your citizenship makes you hated by most of the world now. It wasn't that way just a few years ago before you know who came to town and Americans had the collective frontal lobotomy.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[jallen02]

I suppose thats just a decision you have to make for yourself. But think really hard about what your walking away from. Most people would kill to be in America, blemishes and all.

Jeremy

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Studio A]

I had the same thoughts last night. Looking at the exit polls and the numbers reported by the precincts definitely set alarms off for me. These exit polls are not flawless, but anyone whose taken a research methods course will tell you there should be a closer correlation. Your sugested proofs are interesting. I will personally crunch some numbers to set my mind at ease.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[multimed]

You don't have to be a rude about it and I'm not trying to make up crap excuses. I guess I didn't get the memo detailing the conspiracy to steal the election again. I was trying to logically think through reasons the polls may not have been an accurate representation of the actual vote. Ultimately it may very well be that the polls were right and for some reason the voting was wrong--but that seems a lot less likely (because polls are wrong all the time) and the burden of proof on that should be a hell of a lot higher. Regardless, I find your tone offensive and while I usually enjoy going back and forth with some one with different views, I don't think it's worth my time as you'd rather label my ideas "crap" and "B.S. excuses" than discuss them intelligently.

Re:Gad you gave us a link to slashdot

[Firethorn]

Right wing politicians? Does this name look like a right wing organization? The Nazi's were seriously LEFT wing.

Nazi Party's official name: National Socialist German Workers Party

How Nazis are like the *Radical* Left Wing

I'll note that many of the right are seriously upset about the patriot act, however Kerry's voting record doesn't inspire, given as how he voted for it too. And if you think that Bush is right wing, come talk with some of my friends. I'm a libertarian, and I think Bush is liberal.

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, suppressing the black vote really works.

The polls don't really matter at this point

[YrWrstNtmr]

Actual results and electoral college votes are the ones that matter.

currently(12:18AM eastern):
237-195 (ABC)
234-188(CNN)
246-207(Drudge)

And this is already counting Californa, Kerry's mainstay of the late closing Western states.

Re:Why do ABC and CNN website

[AKAImBatman]

Nebraska's splits their EV's by area. Thus the votes can be split between the candidates. CNN is only calling four out of the five electoral votes.

Don't worry, I had the same question. You just have to drill into the numbers to figure it out. :-)

bbc.co.uk?

[peacefinder]

I haven't been able to get to the Beeb since about 1930 PST. Presumably it's being crushed by the load of legit users, but I wonder if it might be actually under attack, too?

Re:bbc.co.uk?

[Zocalo]

It was a bit flakey earlier on, appeared to briefly go down (DNS and all) but it's been fine ever since. Then again, I am in the UK, so perhaps they have put some geographical based IP filtering in place to alieviate some of the load. Anyway, they are currently showing Bush at 247 and Kerry at 195, but some of their data is *way* out of date compared to CNN, yet some appears to be ahead.

Idea

[mrscorpio]

How about slashdot lending some bandwidth? Certainly it would be a small think to ask the perpetrator of so many past bandwidth spikes that is obviously very capable of handling a heavy load.

Re:Why do ABC and CNN website

[jcenters]

Wow, I was wondering if I was the only one noticing this. At points throughout the night NBC, NBC, CBS, Yahoo, and CNN were WAY different, despite the states being called the same.

CBS often showed Bush with far more electoral votes than the others. Hmm, maybe a subtle apology from Dan Rather?

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[YrWrstNtmr]

and currently, Bush is ahead about 100k in Ohio.

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[Zocalo]

"Don't count your chickens" is right! At the moment the states appear to be going *exactly* as they did in 2000. With only five electoral votes between Bush & Gore in 2000, all it will take is one state to swing to Kerry, and at the moment New Hampshire is starting to look like it might just be that one state... Hell, it's flip-flopped between Bush and Kerry so many times, it's only fitting it should end up Democrat. ;)

Re:Mistake

[WhatAmIDoingHere]

Which site? Electoral-Vote? That's because EV was using POLL RESULTS.

Read the text, don't just look at the pretty pictures.

In Other News

[Jakhel]

Check out the exit polls. Scroll down to what people believe are the most important qualities in a president. Only 7% said intelligence!!!!! HOLY FUCK!!! JESUS CHRIST, is this the country that I'm living in?!?!?!?

Re:In Other News

[Reality Master 101]

Dude, get a grip. That doesn't mean that people think that intelligence isn't important. But it's certainly the case that many intelligent people are utter morons when it comes to politics. There's more to being a good leader than having a good SAT score.

Re:In Other News

[FooAtWFU]

I for one don't care whether my President can solve Fermat's Last Theorem, score a 1600 on the SAT or anything like that. They don't need to. The Presidency is not rocket science. It's not a matter of intelligence, it's a matter of wisdom. This applies to both candidates.

Re:In Other News

[zulux]

Only 7% said intelligence!!!!! HOLY FUCK!!! JESUS CHRIST, is this the country that I'm living in?!?!?!?


Quick!!!! Flee to MENSA land while you can!!!!

Re:In Other News

[mrchaotica]

I agree, the President doesn't have to be a genious. However, I expect him to be at least competant!

Re:In Other News

[DrewCapu]

The guy even admits he often doesn't speak right. What does he do about it? He blames his dad.

Say it with me...

New
Clear

Re:In Other News

[mre5565]

Bush's SAT scores (1200 and change) are a
matter of public record. What are Kerry's?

Re:In Other News

[kfg]

There are very, very many 'intelligent' people with little to no wisdom.

However, there are very, very few stupid people who do.

KFG

Re:In Other News

[Zork the Almighty]

I don't know what to say. I'm stunned.

Re:In Other News

[Rhys]

The scary thing is that more people are concerned about the president's religious preferences/beliefs than his intelligence.

That should scare you.

Re:In Other News

[Desert Raven]

I'm guessing that spelling skills aren't high on your list of qualities either.

Re:In Other News

[Bull999999]

Check out the exit polls [cnn.com]. Scroll down to what people believe are the most important qualities in a president. Only 7% said intelligence!!!!! HOLY FUCK!!! JESUS CHRIST, is this the country that I'm living in?!?!?!?

The same country where girls won't date geeks for their intelligence or programming skills.

Re:In Other News

[wombatmobile]

Only 7% said intelligence!!!!! HOLY FUCK!!! JESUS CHRIST, is this the country that I'm living in?!?!?!?

An intelligent person like you could probably answer that question yourself if you stopped to think.

But don't let me stop you.

Re:In Other News

[mrchaotica]

Well, I'm not running for President! Also, please note the I usually spell "genius" (and most other words) correctly. I'm very sorry I'm not perfect enough for you.

Re:In Other News

[kfg]

No, I'm saying I want Liv Tyler as President so there's at least some reason to watch the State of the Union Address.

KFG

Re:In Other News

[ComputerSherpa]

Not necessarily. What good is intelligence if you don't have a good worldview to guide it?

Re:In Other News

[ErikZ]

Well, no, not really.

Why should it?

I think the top concern that people have, even if they don't realize it, is "Is he married?"

Re:In Other News

[ComputerSherpa]

Mod parent--and great grandparent--troll.

Re:In Other News

[System.out.println()]

In a time when our enemies justify their actions in the name of God, is it wise to have a President who does the same?

Re:In Other News

[mrchaotica]

Hey, buddy, this is politics -- I'm not a troll just because I have an opinion. I think Bush is incompetent (but more importantly, I think he rules according to his religion instead of the law, which is worse). You might disagree, and that's OK. Either way, neither of us is trolling.

I would be a troll if I started spouting stuff like "Bush is the schizophrenic reincarnation of Hitler and Stalin!" or started babbling incoherently in 1337-speak. Hopefully you realize that I'm trying hard to avoid that.

Re:In Other News

[kfg]

Oh, confused, would we?

Yes, we wouldn't. I blame CNN exit polls.

KFG

Re:In Other News

[gottabeme]

The Bible does not state that, "it's perfectly fine to stone people to death." That was in the Old Testament; it is not the law that we are told to live under today.

John 1:1-11

But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group and said to Jesus, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him. But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground. At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. Jesus straightened up and asked her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" "No one, sir," she said. "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."

"...and threaten them with eternal torture." If you love the Lord and serve Him faithfully, you have nothing to fear.

Re:In Other News

[jonfelder]

Did I see Hitler...Ding! Godwin's law says you lose. Sorry, try again in 4 years.

Re:In Other News

[Tim C]

Not necessarily - given the choice between a man of average intelligence and religious views, or a man of extreme intelligence and extreme religious views, I know which I'd rather have as president of the US.

Re:In Other News

[Fortress]

More interesting to me is the Vote by Income chart. Check out how Bush support ramps up with income and Kerry support ramps down. If America were a poorer nation, Kerry would be elected for sure.

Re:In Other News

[PMuse]

There are very, very many 'intelligent' people with little to no wisdom.

Clinton (Int 13, Wis 8, Chr 18)
Gore (Int 17, Wis 12, Chr 6)
Bush (Int 10, Wis 10, Chr 14)
Kerry (Int 15, Wis 15, Chr 10)

Re:In Other News

[argStyopa]

Yes, because for the majority of the country outside the coastal elites, the word "intellectual" is synonymous with "snobbish asswipe".

I'd say it's higher ranked for me, but still not the primary concern. A president is a figurehead; he has coterie of advisors, cabinet members, party flak(E)s, and assorted hangers-on to advise him of the details on any particular issue.

I'd far rather have a person as president of average intelligence but highly ethical and with a strong sense of personal morality, than a 'genius' sociopath with no sense of morality beyond his own self-interest. Hypothetically speaking on both counts, of course.

Re:In Other News

[zerocool^]

I for one don't care whether my President can solve Fermat's Last Theorem, score a 1600 on the SAT or anything like that. They don't need to. The Presidency is not rocket science. It's not a matter of intelligence, it's a matter of wisdom. This applies to both candidates.

It really depends. If your Intelligence is 13ish, and you're human, you can get an extra 4 skill points per level; you can also get Improved Knockdown and Improved Disarm. On the other hand, if you're playing a cleric or a ranger, Wisdom can prove very important, especially for those Will Saving throws.

Oh, what? Election?!? Well, I guess druids are probably liberals.

~Will

Re:In Other News

[BushMuncher]

"However, there are very, very few stupid people who do."

Who do what? Have wisdom? What are you trying to say? Speake anglais?

Re:In Other News

[kfg]

Who do what?

Do be do be do.

Oddly enough I've been listening to Dino, not Frank.

When the moon hits your eye like a big pizza pie, well, I always figured you were pretty much hosed at that point.

KFG

Re:In Other News

[damiam]

No it doesn't. Go reread Godwin's law:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

Nothing about winning or losing there.

Re:In Other News

[N1XIM]

A worldview describes a hell of a lot more than sombody's religion

Re:In Other News

[N1XIM]

Oh give me a fucking break, do you really think that all of Bush's stumping speeches are available online? Since many of them were infused with ad-hoc additions, like those of many other politicians often are, even if the scripts are available they don't meet your standard of accuracy. And yet you are likely one of the Right Wingers whom will unrepentently swing around such accusations as the one you complain about and refuse to explain yourself. If I were not trying to be decent and balanced, according to the original meaning--pre-Nixon, then I would tell you to fuck off, but I'll leave that assumption and accusation for you to make. So now, tell me, am I wrong, and are you going to provide proof if I am?

Re:In Other News

[ComputerSherpa]

I would say that if you're really living your religion, as opposed to just giving it lip service and going to church on Sundays, then it would influence your worldview quite considerably.

Re:In Other News

[mrchaotica]

Not only were you wrong (see the other reply), but somebody else mentioned Hitler way up the page, long before I did.

It under heavy load, what does ./ do? They ./ it!

[borgheron]

Damn fine maneuvering, son. If it wasn't overloaded before, it's sure to get the mother of overloads now! :)

GJC

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[Peyna]

New Hampshire and Nevada look poised to switch to Kerry; if everything else stays the same, that gives us a tie.

I'm glad I voted in Ohio this year.

Alright smartass...

[Art Tatum]

Where's all that "a 20% performance hit is not a big deal" crap now, bigmouth? :-)

Florida

[Slider]

Seeing that this goon webmaster has Florida going to Kerry makes him lose all credibility.

And even though its irrelevant, I am in Florida.

Re:Mistake

[MillionthMonkey]

Why were the exit polls the exact opposite of the vote count?

*sigh*

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't understand why Slashbots assume that people who support Bush are dumb. I don't support Bush; I voted for Kerry. But I don't think that people who voted for Bush are dumb. They just have different priorities, values, and opinions than I do. I just don't get it: I understand Bush bashing (he's a public figure after all), but why bash people who voted for him? Attacking someone who holds a different opinion than you does not help your cause...

Re:*sigh*

[Anonymous Coward]

Please see PIPA's "Separate Realities of Bush and Kerry Supporters" report.

Re:*sigh*

[Anonymous Coward]

You may say that the people who vote for Bush have different values, but that doesn't mean they are informed voters. Simply stated, most Americans are not better than they were four years ago. Hell, I know families who have mothers and fathers that lost their job because of the poor economy. They still voted for Bush... and the sad thing is they couldn't even give me a reason why they did. And sadly, I'm in Ohio where there seems to be a lot of ignorant people who enjoy taking away rights and freedoms. The same people who voted for Bush think the Patriot Act is perfect the way it is. Just look at how most of the state voted for the ban on gay marriage (Hell, it even affects unmarried heterosexual couples, but most were too stupid to realize that).

I just want to say to the rest of the world that I am truly sorry that the American people are too shortsighted to vote for change and that you will most likely have to endure another Bush presidency... I have never felt so ashamed to be an American than I do today.

Re:*sigh*

[mcrbids]

I don't understand why Slashbots assume that people who support Bush are dumb.

Choosing to drive a VW bug is not stupid, unless you're going to haul cement by the ton.

In much the same way, choosing to go with George Bush is not stupid, unless you're trying to run a country.

Now, assume that you're sitting at a construction site, with contractors everywhere. Somebody shows up in a VW full of concrete bags, promsing to make a run to get more.

VW != stupid.

Concrete != stupid.

VW + concrete == stupid.

Simple math, no?

Re:*sigh*

[mrchaotica]

The people who support Bush are choosing Safety over Freedom.
The poeple who support Bush are choosing religious Intolerance over Tolerance.

There are very few opinions in America that are downright wrong*, and these are them!

Being wrong isn't proof of low intelligence, but it is evidence of it.

*where "wrong" is defined as "completely against and opposite to the spirit and intent of the Founding Fathers and the Constitution (esp. the Bill of Rights)."

Re:*sigh*

[EzInKy]

They still voted for Bush... and the sad thing is they couldn't even give me a reason why they did. And sadly, I'm in Ohio where there seems to be a lot of ignorant people who enjoy taking away rights and freedoms. The same people who voted for Bush think the Patriot Act is perfect the way it is. Just look at how most of the state voted for the ban on gay marriage (Hell, it even affects unmarried heterosexual couples, but most were too stupid to realize that).

Or are we too stupid too realize that these are deal breaking issues to them no matter how much they would be willing to compromise on other things? Many really don't even have a problem with civil unions, its only when the word marraige is involved that scares the hell out of them.

Re:*sigh*

[camooT]

I think it has to do with being unable to understand the mentality behind someone who would support a president who chose to bring America into a frivolous war without any substantiable and justifiable cause, resulting in the loss of over a thousand soldiers, and a hundred times that many Iraqi citizens.

And we still don't have Bin Laden.

Can you figure out what's wrong with this picture, Mr. Republican? - not directed at you.

Re:*sigh*

[katharsis83]

No, people like Bush are exactly the type of America that the Founding Fathers expected and wanted. If you read between the lines of the original Constiution, it's clear that a white, Christian, land-owning, upper-class in control America is what they envisioned. The electoral college and the lack of original direct elections for the Senate are clear proof of this; they didn't want the "rabble" interfering in their Republic. Voting was something to be enjoyed by the upper class who have spare time and considerable estates. In their writings, they make direct references that voting was for "gentlemen," and they know better than the rest so they can make intelligent decisions for all - the core idea of a Republican society. The first president of the US was an avid slave owner, and the concept of "democracy" was viewed by Madison, Franklin, et al to be a terrible and dangerous idea that they should do all in their power to suppress. Everyone always envisioned the Founding Fathers as people of great equality - they weren't. George W. Bush and people like him are fulfilling the original American dream of inequality for all save the white Christian landowner. I hate this idea, but that's how the country started out. That's the reason America is the way it is today.

Re:*sigh*

[veg_all]

Yes, I believe that lying and pointless killing are bad. So it would be foolish of me to cast scorn upon anyone who disagreed with me! They're just two opinions like any others after all, equal in god's eyes.

sigh, indeed.

Re:*sigh*

[EzInKy]

Yeah, because the people don't know how to read and don't understand that one can vote against something even if they agree with the spirit of a bill because of the way this particular bill addresses the problem. These people who freak out at the mention of marriage, but are for civil unions, could vote against the bill and instead work to get another bill passed that doesn't take away rights. These people should be voting for bills that grant heterosexual non-married couples and homosexual non-married couples rights, not take them away.

You're preaching to the quire here. But my guess is that they appreciate being told what they should do as much you or I.

Re:*sigh*

[graffix_jones]

The thing that gets me is that these are the same people that called for Clinton's head on a pike because he got a blowjob from an intern... in fact it went as far as impeachment.

Yet here we have a President who has repeatedly lied to the American people about serious issues, has dragged is into an unnecessary war, and is probably the most stubborn, divisive president we've had since Herbert Hoover... yet Bush is still winning the popular vote.

So, either the election's rigged, or we have some seriously misinformed (i.e. 'dumb') individuals voting for Bush.

(I know somebody is gonna point out that this is a false dichotomy, but after looking at the facts, these were the only two logical conclusions I could reach... unless people actually like these qualities in a President, which would make that a third possible conclusion.)

Re:*sigh*

[doorbot.com]

Now, assume that you're sitting at a construction site, with contractors everywhere. Somebody shows up in a VW full of concrete bags, promsing to make a run to get more.

VW != stupid.
Concrete != stupid.
VW + concrete == stupid.

Actually, I think a more accurate analogy would be a depleted uranium shipping palette full of concrete bags (sidenote: this palette has a non-skid, textured surface). You just watched some of the hardest working people in the country drag that sled to the construction site per their boss's orders, and now the boss wants them to make another supply run.

Re:*sigh*

[TummyX]

Exactly. That's exactly why Bush chose rich white male landowners to be his secretary of state and national security advisor.

Re:*sigh*

[Spoing]

1. I just want to say to the rest of the world that I am truly sorry that the American people are too shortsighted to vote for change and that you will most likely have to endure another Bush presidency... I have never felt so ashamed to be an American than I do today.

You forgot 'and depressed' after 'so ashamed'. Otherwise, perfect.

Re:*sigh*

[Max Threshold]

Colin Powell is white. I don't care what color his skin is, the motherfucker is white.

Condi is a token nothing. Watch for her to be made a scapegoat when the time comes.

Re:*sigh*

[mrchaotica]

Actually, I've pointed exactly this out to the people who want to get rid of the Electoral College, with a slight modification. It is my interpretation that they wanted intelligent, informed, and moral people to be making decisions -- I agree with you on this. However, I believe the criteria of "white, Christian, land-owning, upper-class" was merely the most convenient way to find such people. Since then, circumstances have changed, and it is now accepted that anyone could be intelligent, informed, and moral regardless of race, religion, or class (Amendments 15, 1, and 24 respectively). So, it seems reasonable to me to dismiss the the actions of the Founding Fathers that were appropriate to the time, but no longer relevant. Instead, we should focus on their words and ideals, which have stood the test of time much more successfully.

I assert that Republicanism (the system of government, not the political party) wasn't designed to protect the "haves" from the "have-nots;" it was designed to protect the "cares and knows" from the "care-nots and know-nots." Unfortunately, it seems to have failed today, since so many people have succumbed to Bush's fearmongering (fears of terrorism, fears of religious and moral diversity). They have forgotten that freedom is the basic principle of our country, and are instead are trying to inflict their morals on the rest of us (who, I should point out, are no less moral -- we might just have slightly different ones).

This is not Republicanism! It is Democracy, it is the "rabble," and it is mob rule.

Re:*sigh*

[LardBrattish]

The people who support Bush are choosing Safety over Freedom.

No, they're choosing a "bite me" foreign policy which makes America and especially American nationals overseas a lot less safe. So you're less safe AND less free.

Re:*sigh*

[TummyX]

You can tell Colin is white because the black brain thinks differently from the white brain right........?

Re:*sigh*

[mrchaotica]

Well, that may be true. But they at least think they're choosing safety, and in an election perception is more influential than reality.

So yeah, I could have qualified my statement with "perceived Safety," but that would have ruined the cadence of my post.

Re:*sigh*

[cheekyboy]

How would blind people know? But in any case, Colin is a sell out and a dumbass for believing the fake evidence of WMD etc... hahaha what a NOB, even I saw right thru that without all CIA help.

Maybe his 'slave' mentality from the old days made him 'listen 100%' to his WHITE masters 'rumsfeld and chaney'

Re:*sigh*

[LardBrattish]

I'm immensely frustrated that a lazy, lying, incompetent, Coke-addled fuckwit is capable of getting over 50% of the popular vote. I mean, we know the President's been smoking crack but the whole country??!!! What the?!

Re:*sigh*

[mrchaotica]

No. You can tell Colin is "white" because black culture is different from white culture. See Fresh Prince of Bel-Air for more information.

It's worth noting that I've read articles by black people condemning black culture (by that I mean things like gangsta rap, "The Man keeping us down," and the idea among black children that it's somehow cool to be ignorant and disruptive in school). They believe that it is defeatist and unnecessary, and that the only things keeping black people "down" are themselves. This would be the kind of black person that would be similar to Colin Powell, and that the parent calls "white."

Re:*sigh*

[SQL Error]

The thing is, you can't vote "Anyone But Bush".

You can not vote, or you can vote for Nader or Badnarik - in which case your vote is merely a symbol of your estrangement from mainstream politics. Fair enough.

Or you can vote for Kerry, who stands for... Stands for... Who knows? Really, who knows? He might have gone to war in Iraq. He voted for the recent war - but against the first, UN-endorsed, war. He voted against the bill to pay for the war. (After he voted for it, he says.)

But he would have done everything differently! He says. What? Doesn't say. How? Doesn't say. But he has a plan! What is it? It's a plan!

Lame. Utterly lame. Much as I dislike many of Bush's policies, at least he has policies and we know what they are. Kerry is a hollow man, a shell, a windsock. The absolute last thing we need for president. Hell, Nader would be preferable.

Re:*sigh*

[mrchaotica]

I agree; I'm actually ashamed to be American at the moment.

Also, if you didn't notice, I think "Safety over Freedom" is a bad thing. I wasn't trying to rationalize why the sheeple picked Bush; I was complaining about it.

Re:*sigh*

[mrchaotica]

Well, I recall that in the first debate Kerry seemed to have a relatively concrete plan for Iraq. Also, some of his "flip-flopping" isn't a bad thing. He initially supported the Iraq war when (and I believe because) the CIA claimed they had WMDs. When circumstances changed and it became known that the CIA was wrong, Kerry changed with them. I prefer that to someone who keeps charging down the same wrong path, despite reality.

Plus, as a Democrat, I could at least count on Kerry to be pro-choice and not anti-gay, and care at least a little bit about the environment.

I do regret voting for him a little though; despite Georgia being firmly Republican, I thought there could be a chance of him winning. I should have just voted for Badnarik. I'll use the excuse that it was my first presidential election (I'm 20) -- I won't make that mistake again.

Re:*sigh*

[amorangi]

Bush supporters aren't dumb?

72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%).

57% also believe, incorrectly, that Charles Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program.

75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda.

63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found.

55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission.

69% of Bush supporters don't recognize that the majority of people in the world oppose the US having gone to war with Iraq.

57% of Bush supporters assume that the majority of people in the world would favour Bush's reelection.

51% incorrectly assume he favours US participation in the Kyoto treaty.

69% incorrectly assume he favours the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

72% incorrectly assume he favours the treaty banning land mines.

53% incorrectly assume he favours the International Criminal Court.

74% incorrectly assumes that he favours including labour and environmental standards in trade agreements.

What DO you call people who are so ignorant if not dumb?

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Pres_Election_ 04 /html/new_10_21_04.html

Re:*sigh*

[TummyX]

Oh, I get it. This has something to do with John Edwards' two Americas huh?

Re:*sigh*

[TummyX]

Disgusting. So you don't treat people as individuals, you treat people by which "group" they act like?

If you have african ancestry but are republican then you must be white!!!

You guys don't realise how racist you are.

Re:*sigh*

[sean000]

>I don't understand why Slashbots assume that >people who support Bush are dumb. I assume that Bush supporters are often dumb because when asked why they like Bush they say things like, "He'll look ya in th' eye," and "He's a straight shooter." Kerry supporters cite real issues far more often than Bush supporters, who are often unaware of issues beyond the war on terror. Since Bush is screwing up that war, just like so many other things, it tells me that his supporters on the whole must lack the critical thinking skills necessary to come to a logical conclusion regarding their President's performance. We should dump the electoral college and require voters to pass an issues quiz before casting a ballot. If you can correctly match the major candidates to their positions on a dozen or so issues, you get to vote. Sound a bit fascist? To paraphrase our nimrod leader, "It's hard work." You should do your homework if you have the responsibility to choose a leader who can make or break so much in the world. We really should be more careful.

Re:*sigh*

[Overzeetop]

yes, he did. The views expressed by both are in lock-step with white-christian-male-landowner beliefs. Just because your a black/woman/jew/etc. doesn't mean that you can't have views which are contrary to your stereotype.

(And, of course, the rest of that cabinet looks pretty pasty-white to me.)

Re:*sigh*

[PMuse]

That's the reason America is the way it is today.

Right. Because if the US had direct popular presidential elections, that would have fixed this mess. [Bush 51%, Kerry 48%]

Face it, Americans have voted to deny their shame. Bush told them that the US had done right. Kerry told them it had done wrong. They drank the koolaid. It's going to take another full Vietnam-sytle awfulness for Americans to change course; they're incapable of seeing disaster until after it's happened.

Re:*sigh*

[Zorilla]

George Carlin said it best:

"Louis Farrakhan is openly black. Colin Powell is openly white - he just happens to be black."

Re:*sigh*

[BenEnglishAtHome]

...the Founding Fathers expected and wanted...a white, Christian, land-owning, upper-class in control... The first president of the US was an avid slave owner...

The first president of the US wasn't a Christian. He, like some other FFs, was a Deist. He thought there was a higher power. He went to church because that was the accepted way of expressing one's spirituality in those days. But he left before Communion, always, because that would have been a symbolic acceptance of the whole set of Christian beliefs, something he simply didn't accept.

Can you imagine a Presidential candidate today getting up and leaving church before communion and being quoted in the press as saying "Well, I believe in a higher power and all, but this whole 'body of Christ' thing is more than I can swallow.* I think those Christians are nice people and I'll share their meetings, but I'm not really one of them"? He'd be pilloried. He couldn't get elected dog catcher.

(*) - That's humor, for those of you who didn't recognize it.

Do you really mean to imply that Shrub is a spiritual descendant of Washington? That both of them share similar goals and visions for this country? Washington had the strength of his convictions and enough humanity to admit that he didn't know all the answers and, certainly, enough good sense not to intimate that his actions were the result of God whispering in his ear.

I find your assertion that Bush is "fulfilling the original American dream" offensive on a dozen levels. He wouldn't know "the original American dream" if it bit him in the ass.

Re:*sigh*

[TummyX]

How would blind people know?


WTF? Here's an idea: Treating everyone as an individual rather than collectives will end racism.

I guess you don't think Kofi Annan is black cause he wears western suits and married a "white" woman huh?

Hell, most African americans probably aren't black to you because they don't speak their native african tongue nor live in mud huts.

You're such a biggot and don't even know it. That's sad.

Re:*sigh*

[stanmann]

You misspelled president as scapegoat. I know it's an easy mistake to make since many feel the need to blame everything on someone and the president is convenient.

Re:*sigh*

[stanmann]

FOr someone who you can count on to be pro-gay, he sure gave Lynn Cheney a hard time.

Re:*sigh*

[quetzalc0atl]

you are forgetting one thing: we are not a democracy.

we are a constitutional republic, and with good reason. guys like thomas paine were pushing for a pure democracy, with no president, just the power to the people. unfortunately, this would have been the worst thing that could have happened since the average iq of early americans was probably around that of an eggplant.

we were fortunate that our revolution was conducted by educated, intelligent, _middle class_ guys. it was not a revolution of aristocracy (as never faired well in britain) and it certainly was not a revolution of the poor (like the abomination that happened in france). it was somewhere in between, and we are all better off for it's moderation.

you make it sound like the founding fathers just wanted to "surpress" the people...nothing could be farther from the truth.

the truth is that democracy conflicts with the idea of personal rights. in a true democracy, the majority rules on every issue. so what is to prevent the majority from wanting to take away my property, for instance? or say, force me to pay half of my earned salary to social programs?

this may seem more clear when 51 % of the people figure out how to make the other 49 % pay all of the taxes.

here and now in the 21st century we are still pondering these questions that seemed obvious to the founding fathers. shows that we have come a long way alright. we have chosen a path of moderation, one that includes both the republican and democratic concerns, but the moment that we let this fall out of balance is when we will regret it.

Re:*sigh*

[aknutberson]

The first president of the US wasn't a Christian.

There's a nice roundup here of Washington quotes concerning religion. One I like from the treaty of Tripoli (negotiated under Washington, signed by Adams):

"As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."

Though this trip was planned months in advance, it's still true that I'm leaving for Canada tomorrow, looking for a job!

Re:*sigh*

[brad3378]

Ain't that the truth!
somebody mod this guy up

Re:*sigh*

[infinite9]

Face it, Americans have voted to deny their shame. Bush told them that the US had done right. Kerry told them it had done wrong. They drank the koolaid. It's going to take another full Vietnam-sytle awfulness for Americans to change course; they're incapable of seeing disaster until after it's happened.


I find it ironic that you're more willing to accuse 51% of the american population of being in denial rather than accepting youself that 51% of the american population may be right.

Re:*sigh*

[Darby]

FOr someone who you can count on to be pro-gay, he sure gave Lynn Cheney a hard time.

No he didn't.

He was pointing out the utter hypocricy of the
Bush administration.
They claim to be all about family values, yet Cheney is perfectly happy to sit there and allow Bush to push a constitutional amendment stating flat out that Cheney's own fucking daughter is not a human, not an American, and thus should be stripped of basic fundamental human rights just because of how their own fucking god made her.

It is relevant, it is topical, and it clearly demonstrated that these people are ruled primarily by ignorant hatred.
The sad fact we see now is that so are most Americans.

Re:*sigh*

[stanmann]

Ok, the not human/american, Bush Sr said that, not Shrub.

Second, If you want to claim that marriage is a fundamental right, sure but gays can get married in a bisexual union just like heterosexuals. Oh, you want monosexual unions as well. well that isn't marriage. And marriage is NOT a fundamental right. Further, lynn cheney isn't just cheney's kid, she's also a "valued" member of the team. this from bush, cheney and others. She works behind the scenes doing phone canvassing, and other behind the scenes stuff, for all we know she could have edited the last state of the union address.

Re:*sigh*

[FenwayFrank]

Simple math, no?

No: it's Fuzzy math!

Re:*sigh*

[Darby]

Ok, the not human/american, Bush Sr said that, not Shrub.

Second, If you want to claim that marriage is a fundamental right, sure but gays can get married in a bisexual union just like heterosexuals. Oh, you want monosexual unions as well. well that isn't marriage. And marriage is NOT a fundamental right.

You're completely missing the point. Actions speak far louder than words.

Marriage has a very limited meaning as far as the government is concerned.
It is essentially limited to filing taxes jointly, default inheritance, nad most importantly the ability to visit their spouse when they are dying in the hospital.

That is basically it. Unless, of course, that is you want the government coming into your church and telling you who and how you can marry?
If you aren't in favor of that then only hypocricy would allow you to be in favor of this.

So are you denying that visiting your loved one on their death bed is a fundamental human right?

Those are the only things that the anti- gay marriage people are trying to deny them. To push a constitutional amendment to deny visitation rights to one segment of the population due to how they were born is truly sickening.

How would you feel if you were not allowed that right because you are blond (or whatever)

That is why it is flat out saying that they are less than human, because all it is intended to do is to limit basic rights to punish them for how they were born. Nothing else.

Re:*sigh*

[JoshMooney]

If you were running (since this is slashdot) a huge amount of servers, for example. You're upgrading all of the servers and this is taking you a lot of time And all of a sudden, the company has to cut jobs. Are they going to cut yours in the middle of doing this mission critical task? Obviously not. Many voted for Bush because they believed that Kerry was too retarted to finish what Bush had started.

Re:*sigh*

[PostItNote]

I find it ironic that you're more willing to accuse 51% of the american population of being in denial rather than accepting youself that 51% of the american population may be right.

True. Which is why I find myself wondering if there is something I don't know. I've been reading the American Conservative, New York Times, Washington Post, BBC, and the Christian Science Monitor for a bout a year now.

Nothing I read in ANY of those magazines convinced me that a single thing that Bush has done in office is something I agree with. Let me say that agin. I have tried hard and cannot think of a single thing that he has done that I agree with. I agree with many of the things he's said, but the "Clean Air Act" wasn't, and neither was the "Healthy Forests Initiative". The USAPATRIOT Act is a shame, and Iraq is based on a lie. I support balanced budgets, and he claims to, but HE DESTROYED OUR SURPLUS. I'm not going to see a dime of my social security.

And now he gets reelected?!? This man who has said that as an atheist I can't be a "real American"?!? What am I missing?

I've read the bible - it says nothing about abortion, and very little about homosexuality. It says a lot about peace, love, understanding, loving your neighbor, turning the other cheek, and helping the poor. So why are Christians voting for this man? What am I missing?

Why are most military men voting for a guy who cut combat pay and veteran's benefits? What do they see driving them to vote for him?

Re:*sigh*

[Max Threshold]

Please check your history. The Civil War wasn't about ending slavery.

If Republicans truly cared about blacks, they wouldn't have sold them out in 1877. They would have parceled out the plantations and given blacks their due. Forty acres and a mule... remember that shit? We're still waiting.

Re:*sigh*

[Max Threshold]

Yeah, right.

MLK was a leader.

Jesse Jackson is a leader.

Alan Keyes is a leader, albeit one I don't always agree with.

Rice and Powell are puppets.

Re:*sigh*

[Max Threshold]

No, you can tell he's white because the white brain thinks differently from the human brain.

Just as gender is not necessarily biologically determined... neither is whiteness.

Re:*sigh*

[White Roses]

You spend a lot of time on what marriage isn't. So, tell me what it is. Seriously, I'm interested to know. Is it simply a union between a man and a woman? That's it? Is it a loving union showing one's commitment to one another? Or is it a religious ceremony in the eyes of the Lord, a right of santification?

The first case, well, what about a man who has a sex change? The second, why not any two consenting adults? And the third, well, if it's that, then the government has no business in it anyway, it's a religious matter and that's that.

But, please, you define marriage, and then tell me precisely why any two consenting adults cannot enter in to it in a governmentally sanctioned, legally binding fashion.

Oh, and then tell me why the union of two consenting adults that you don't know, don't care about and most likely will never meet in your life has any effect on you whatsoever. How does my marriage have any effect on you? How about Taco's marriage? How about the marriage of Gabe over at Penny Arcade? Any effect on you at all, name it. Now tell me, how would it be different if I married someone the same sex as myself, or if Gabe married Spiderman, or Taco married the main Slashsot server. Fire away. Hell, send your response right to my e-mail, it's listed above.

I want to know what makes people who think like you tick on this subject.

it looks like Bush will win

[Dr Kool, PhD]

And it looks like he'll win the popular vote too. I know this won't be a popular decision on slashdot, but the fact is that America has spoken. If only techies had a right to vote then yes, Kerry would have won, but to become President you have to have widespread support.

To everyone pi$$ed off - the world isn't coming to an end, Bush isn't Hitler, the US isn't turning into Nazi Germany. Actually I think this country is pretty awesome, and I'm proud to be an American.

Re:it looks like Bush will win

[Anonymous Coward]

If ever there was an excuse for armed rebellion against the state, this is it. Bush is unintelligent and even though the majority of Americans think he is qualified, WE KNOW BETTER AND WE ARE SMARTER. Here at Slashdot, we pride ourselves as the party of the open-minded and accepting (so long as you agree with our views). SO LET'S REFUSE TO ACCEPT THE ELECTION RESULTS. We know they cheated (the details and facts are irrevelant). Power to the "people".

Re:it looks like Bush will win

[mrchaotica]

Suck it up! When we stop being divided, we open the door to single-party totalitarianism.

When we stop being divided, we stop being free.

Re:it looks like Bush will win

[Gentlewhisper]

and I'm proud to be an American.

Yes yes yes... you are your opinions. And I am very proud that I'm not you, nor am I an American :)

Re:it looks like Bush will win

[Anonymous Coward]

Bush isn't Hitler

No, but he's acting a lot like Hitler did right before he began genocide.

Re:it looks like Bush will win

[cylcyl]

It looks like the door is open and totalitarianism is streaming in.

we'll show them what a flood really is!

[junk]

and we should all jump over to one of the sites to check it out! that'll show those DDOS bastards! they can't push out nearly as much bandwidth as all of /.!

Hmm

[Orne]

Is it just me, or is this guy (who's supposed to be this networking guru) is a little too careless with interchanging the words "attack" with "under heavy load"...

Look, your site just got posted twice to Slashdot, not to mention Fark a few times, and is trumpeting itself as one of the best statistical predictors. Who knows how many other people have it hotlinked (since it had been promoting a Kerry win for a while), and are just clicking Refresh to see what you've changed... That doesn't correllate with a malicious attempt to block usage of your website by hogging network resources in a denial of service style "attack"... besides, it's not like the information you're presenting is all that unique, it's just your opinion after all, an opinion shared by 48% of the voting public. And at the end of the day, he's seeing network load because he just doesn't have the monetary resources that a CNN or Yahoo does to throw another server or 6 up when under heavy usage...

But it doesn't matter anyways, since the content of the site isn't updating today with what we're learning of the polls... New Jersey for Kerry (as he predicted), Florida has gone Bush (which he didn't), which puts Bush as the winnner. His site still reads Kerry, which I'm not surprised, as he freely admits he's a Kerry supporter. We'll probably have it all sorted out in a few hours.

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[Zocalo]

Then again, New Mexico is currently showing as a swing to Bush according to CNN's 52% of reported precincts, which would cancel out Nevada. I'll say one thing for this Electoral College system you have over there in the US; it certainly keeps the tension up until the bitter end...

Website

[Antony-Kyre]

http://electoral-vote.caida.org/

Right...

[iamdrscience]

The site was slow when it was first linked to on slashdot (I could not connect the first time I tried), so why the hell is it so surprising that it's going down during the peak of the election when even more people will be viewing it and viewing it repeatedly? This isn't an "attack", just a lot of people using up a lot of bandwidth.

Re:Thunderdome!!!!!

[Kenshin]

I hope they play that "dramatic battle" music from when Kirk fought Spock on Star Trek...

Coral?

[Lord_Dweomer]

Might this be a good time to start using Coral caches?

Nice Job...

[jstaylor11]

Nice job jack ass, you just slashdotted them. That's going to help.

Obligatory Futurama Reference...

[supermonkeyball]

On the TV, candidate Jack Johnson is debating candidate John Jackson.

Johnson: It's time someone had the courage to stand up and say: I'm against those things that everybody hates!
Jackson: Now, I respect my opponent. I think he's a good man. But, quite frankly, I agree with everything he just said!
Fry: These are the candidates? They sound like clones. [Squints] Wait a minute. They are clones!
Leela: Don't let their identical DNA fool you. They differ on some key issues.
Johnson: I say your three cent titanium tax goes too far!
Jackson: And I say your three cent titanium tax doesn't go too far enough!

Script found Here

His co-workers are researching flash crowds.

[abb3w]

This is slashdotters way of being helpful.

Who cares?

[chadpnet]

That site is far from accurate with respect to the data already reported.

So am I just missing the updates

[Ralconte]

I haven't seen an update since this morning. Everytime I check its the same data -- a prediction. It hasn't been updated with the latest reports. Was it supposed to?

Re:So am I just missing the updates

[/dev/trash]

Actually I think he was only doing it to see how well the polling data before the election was.

In case you think this is over tonight

[Peyna]

just some of the problems that went down today.

It won't be over at least a week if not longer. So long as it's decided by inauguration day, we'll be okay.

Re:In case you think this is over tonight

[/dev/trash]

No it needs to be decided by the first week in Dec. when the Electoral college votes.

Re:In case you think this is over tonight

[AndroidCat]

Great. Rule by Geek. We'd probably end up with an overclocked Guillotine.

Re:In case you think this is over tonight

[flibberdi]

I found an interesting link, not that it will change anyones mind about anything (do people ever change their minds??).Observers say

Hear Fox News Live (!) Via Internet

[d102804]

Go to Yahoo! News. It has a link to a live audio feed for Fox News.

Who cares if "electoral-vote.com" is down? Get the best news and analysis live (!) via the Internet.

Re:Hear Fox News Live (!) Via Internet

[beppu]

tf?

Shut The Fox Up ;-)

They're the best at manipulating your mind, maybe, but I wouldn't put too much faith in what Fox News has to say.

Re:Hear Fox News Live (!) Via Internet

[N1XIM]

The Republican Noise Machine By David Brock, SHould clear this up for you.....
BTW: He used to be a reporter for the conservative press in the USA, so he isn't full of shit. (Unlike, some would say, Al Franken, whom frankly is just overly abrasive and a little quick to judge.)
It is highly odd that in our "Shining City Upon a Hill" (to quote Pres. Reagan's horrible misuse of a biblical metaphor) the press is held to such low standards that reality TV seems to be more down to earth (and truthful) on most days.

Tie

[mortonda]

so I'm not the only one who sees the potential for a tie... I didn't even realize that it was possible before. I got a funny feeling about this...

I think I heard that the decision could then go to the House of Representatives for vote. I'm not sure about that, though.

Re:Tie

[EvilOpie]

yeah, that is correct. And it doesn't necessarly have to be a tie, I think that 270 is the magic number. If no candidates reach 270 electoral college votes (even if one candidate has more votes than the other) then the house of representatives selects the next president.

Re:Everybody hold on to your butts....

[Anonymous Coward]

If ever there was an excuse for armed rebellion against the state, this is it. Bush is unintelligent and even though the majority of Americans think he is qualified, WE KNOW BETTER AND WE ARE SMARTER. Here at Slashdot, we pride ourselves as the party of the open-minded and accepting (so long as you agree with our views). SO LET'S REFUSE TO ACCEPT THE ELECTION RESULTS. We know they cheated (the details and facts are irrevelant). Power to the "people"!

Um... low tech, TV is good at this.

[NotQuiteReal]

This is one thing that I do watch TV for.

Election returns.

Re:Um... low tech, TV is good at this.

[DrVxD]

> Election returns.

And, of course, Election reruns :)

Re:Everybody hold on to your butts....

[Pov]

Perhaps you should rethink your analysis a little. Some southern states are known to vote based upon their beliefs on abortion, etc., but by your analysis Bush would be the overwhelming favorite considering the United States is overwhelmingly Christian and overwhelminging against gay marriage.

On jobs I think you're seeing that not everyone blames Bush and in fact many are thankful of his actions. I think it would be difficult to rationally blame Bush for any significant loss of jobs in the United States. You could very much claim he hasn't done enough to recover them quickly enough, but the loss was clearly beyond the control of any mere president.

Just because the country's voting is very polar doesn't mean you have to see the candidates that way. In reality Bush and Kerry are not all that dissimilar on most issues including the economy, gay marriage and the issues in Iraq.

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[Lord Kano]

I'm black. I voted for Bush.

I don't see the point you're trying to make.

LK

Re:It also doesn't

[Clark_Griswold]

Which "part" of Mane are you talking about? Does anyone know where the split ends?

Hmm, I may have to mullet over for a while.

-You're not my REAL dad!

Re:Everybody hold on to your butts....

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a variety of reasons one could vote against the President. It's pretty apparent that Bush is relatively anti-science, anti-technology, and and anti-environment. I don't care about his campaign speeched, I'm talking about his actions over the course of four years. It's also clear that he failed with foreign policy and the economy. He pissed off almost all our allies and has failed to provide the necessary stimulants to improve the economy and unemployment. I don't think I need to quote the worldwide polls or the unemployment rates compared to past presidents. He sat on the assault weapons ban (Even if it was rather worthless) despite his campaign rhetoric of supporting an assault weapons ban.

Ultimately, I think most Americans believe that America should be better off than it is now and that they are not better off now than they were four years ago. Sadly, most Americans don't understand the concept and symbolism involved in voting against incumbent to signify their displeasure with the current state of the country. A vote for Kerry, no matter how similar his views may be, is still a vote for change and Americans seem to have decided that we don't need change.

Re:Everybody hold on to your butts....

[demachina]

"On jobs I think you're seeing that not everyone blames Bush and in fact many are thankful of his actions."

Excepting for the obvious fact that Bush and the Republicans LOOOOVVVVVVEEEEEE outsourcing. They want all their big business cronies to send all their jobs to China and India as fast as they can and tap all that dirt cheap, heavily oppressed labor. I assure Republicans could care less about anyone who is low to middle income and works for a living other than they will be glad to sucker votes out of them using security(fear and safety) and morality(abortion and gay) issues while they screw them economically.

In fairness its not like Democrats treat working people any better lately since they led the charge on NAFTA which broke the floodgate on outsourceing.

Of course the Republicans have also been doing everthing they can to slash overtime and drive down real income for working people. And they managed to shift a couple percent of the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class with their tax cuts.

Other than that I guess your right Bush and the Republicans are like the best friends working people have ever had.

One good thing...

[teamhasnoi]

Fritz Hollings is gone. (Has enough entertainment money to retire?? It's telling that the 3rd Google result is opensecrets.org...)

As an Ohio voter...

[devphil]

...I was reassured that the votes in my precinct, and those all around mine, were plain ol' simple punch cards. No Diebold BS yet.

I also made damn' sure that there was no dangling chad (hi Chad!) on the back of my ballot before I turned it in. So if Ohio fucks up the election like Florida did, it is entirely not my fault.

back up

[npfscayle]

servers are back up @ a decent speed it looks like

This doesn't say much.

[abb3w]

The results from 2000 accurately pick the final result so far on every state that's been called so far (I'm waiting for the Old Grey Lady's calls myself, but so far no network has made a FL2K "oops" this time), although with different margins. FL turned a little redder-- it looks like the margin won't be less than 1000 votes this time there. Furthermore, FL is an unhappy one to miscall, carrying 27 electoral votes.

More interesting will be the Votemaster's analysis of which pollsters' methodologies seemed soundest this time around, in hopes of better info for 2008... assuming out new Electronic Voting Machine Overlords bother with elections then. =)

Last chance to vote for HULK

[xmas2003]

The halloween webcam shuts down in 20 minutes - your last chance to vote for Hulk for President and try to DDOS that site ...

Re:Mistake

[bnenning]

Why were the exit polls the exact opposite of the vote count?

Because the exit polls don't have close to a representative sample. For example, the early ones today that showed Kerry doing better than expected had 59% women.

Re:Does anyone get the feeling

[dbIII]

Is everyone in the US *truly* this dumb to vote for a guy who has done nothing *for* us and everything *to* us?

Don't worry about it - just dodge the draft when it comes since you will be in good company.

Looks like six years in a cage in Cuba without charge for the guys there - if there was anything to charge them with someone competant would have charged them by now. It looks like they are still being held since it's too embarrassing to admit that you stuffed up and held someone without charge for two and a half years.

Look forward to more exciting half-planned military adventures in far flung places.

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[Bull999999]

New Hampshire and Nevada look poised to switch to Kerry; if everything else stays the same, that gives us a tie.

The problem is that if both of them manage to end up of 269 votes each, the House of Representatives will end up deciding who gets to be the winner. And it looks like the Republicans will end up controlling the House, which would most likely lean toward Bush. This means that we may end up with the House deciding who gets to be the president this time around instead of the Supreme Court.

Re:Enough is enough!

[geminidomino]

Considered that when MiniLove^W DHS first started prowling a few years ago. Turns out we ain't welcome.

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[mog007]

(The Electoral College) certainly keeps the tension up until the bitter end...

And with this brilliant winner-take-all system in place it means that someone can lose... and still win! Just like four years ago... Yeah, what a good idea, let's invalidate the votes.

stupid wise people

[wotevah]

Intelligence has not much to do with the above, though it can definitely help there. Can you imagine a wise person lacking intelligence though ?

Re:stupid wise people

[N1XIM]

"He" wasn't stupid either, if you know anything about learning disabilities......

Google

[hckrdave]

Why dont you wake some one up @ google and have them cache it ever 3 min :-)

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[cheekyboy]

Are you seriously that stupid?

No one hates america, they only hate the goverment, its your duty as per history and revolutions and civil wars that show you, HATE YOUR GOVT.

Good luck AC, hope you end up in iraq when you get conscripted and when your pensions are dry an d your US$ is worth 5cents.

Re:The webmaster was the guy who made MINUX!?

[tazan]

Yes, when I saw he'd picked Kerry the other day I knew Bush was in.

Everything is slow.

[bs_02_06_02]

Yahoo's Politics page has been slow at times. The State of Ohio election pages have been slow. The State of Florida was slow until the networks called it a win for W. Everyone is busy, everyone is reloading, waiting for the newest updates, taking a lot of hits, and when something doesn't load, impatient people hit reload. And if someone posted the site on Slashdot, that compounds the problem.

they rejiggered results!

[veg_all]

They had Bush at 269, a tie and win for him, then for a few minutes it was:

ITERATOR_ACCESS_FAILED -- DBD::mysql::st execute failed: You have an error in your SQL syntax near 'ORDER BY rcvd_date DESC' at line 1 [for Statement "SELECT ...(etc)

and now Bush is back at 249 because they took Ohio away for the time being.

Re:they rejiggered results!

[LiquidCoooled]

Sounds like a Diebold machine ;)

Allright!!!!

[nounderscores]

BUSH KERRY 2004!!!!!ONE!!!

Now that's a show I'd watch.

Re:Does anyone get the feeling

[Bull999999]

The bad news for Kerry is that while majority of voters in the 18-25 age group voted for Kerry but that group also had the worst voter turn out as well. I guess getting drunk or playing games all night is more important than voting for their future.

Re:Does anyone get the feeling

[mrchaotica]

Looks like six years in a cage in Cuba without charge for the guys there - if there was anything to charge them with someone competant would have charged them by now.

On the "bright" side, Bush can afford to look stupid now (if he wins).

Bush is going to win -- now what?

[Anonymous Coward]

How depressing. At this time, Kerry would need to get 80% of the remaining Ohio votes just to not lose.

On the other hand, I considered that Bush losing was in effect letting Bush off easy. What he deserves is to be arrested for his criminal acts as president.

So the question now is how to remove him from office. Impeachment? Or is it possible for a criminal prosecution entity of the U.S. gov't to built a case against him? How can we make sure this happens?

Bush diverted our resources away from the war on terror so that Cheney could pay back his company for the hundreds of millions he made as CEO. That was an absolutely criminal act. The security of the U.S. has been threatened by Bush's imcompetence and U.S. servicemen and women have died to make Cheney's friends richer than already rich.

The analogy to chess would be trading you queen for a pawn. Saddam was nothing, he was beat down in the first gulf war, and kept down for 10 years. He was not a credible threat and not a clear a present danger.

I hope people will continue the fight to not let Bush's illegal and criminally irresponsible acts go unchecked.

Re:Bush is going to win -- now what?

[Sheetrock]

I don't know. It looks like it's going into what looks like another (approximately) fifty-fifty situation with Bush as president, hopefully without the same debacle as the 2000 election, and all I can think is that (approximately) 50% of voting Americans believe that the ends justify the means.

I'm liberal enough to be dejected about this, but perhaps this is a sign that the country wants to take things in a new direction. There's all sorts of things one can be upset about (no-bid contracts, a more aggressive defense policy, civil rights) but the points about all of these have already been made to U.S. citizens with the results you observe: Republican majority of the House and the Senate and a probable Republican president.

The DNC was so eager to pin their loss in 2000 on Nader. What would the results have been if they didn't put their energies into downplaying Dean and screwing Nader out of ballot spots? I suggest we're screwed not because Bush is about to win, but because things are this close when the Democrats should have been able to hit this one out of the park. The two parties are not as different as we might hope.

Four years of interesting times. And on the bright side, things are divided enough to keep trolling interesting for at least that long.

ontopic BTW: nearly everything election-related that I've visited has been slow as hell or down. verifiedvoting.org has sucked until tonight, which suggests heightened usage of online vote research resources. But we knew that already.

Re:Bush is going to win -- now what?

[EzInKy]

So the question now is how to remove him from office. Impeachment?

With both an electoral and Congressional majority that's hardly likely.

Re:Bush is going to win -- now what?

[Thomas Miconi]

Simple.

We're doomed.

Thomas-

Re:Bush is going to win -- now what?

[jedaustin]

On the other hand, I considered that Bush losing was in effect letting Bush off easy. What he deserves is to be arrested for his criminal acts as president.

Time to take your medication... or lay off the weed a bit :)

Re:Bush is going to win -- now what?

[BandwidthHog]

There's three options for those of us in the 49% column:

Grab your passport and go.

Sit around and bitch about it.

Get out there and get people to give a damn.

Re:Enough is enough!

[mrchaotica]

Leaving is unpatriotic. Revolt (i.e., excercise your 2nd Amendment rights) instead!

CoDeeN (planet-lab CDN)

[Treker]

http://www.electoral-vote.com.nyud.net:8090/

^-- dynamic proxy caching mirror. it'll stay as up to date as possible. the technology behind it is on planet-lab.org (under User Services).

Hope this helps!

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[izomiac]

Yeah, go by a popular vote, I could just picture it:

City tax rate: 20%
Rural tax rate: 70%

or something equally likely to cause revolts.

there I was looking for less cautious projections

[edgarde]

Couldn't get thru either on servers 1-8. Still can't get the map. All 3 networks & CNN were too Florida-shocked to call states without obvious majorities. I was wanting more data sooner. Thus a CNN-driven slashdotting.

The cowardly broadcasters were right too. Poll data earlier today had many people convinced Bush had blown it big time, and Kerry was going to run away with the contested states. You could hear the pundits catching themselves constantly, like they knew there'd be a Kerry win but had to keep it secret -- at one point (disgusting George F. Will wannabee) Tucker Carlson (sp? I don't care) blurted out Kerry would win, probably really satisfied with what a genius he would look like by being the first to call it. When Florida went to Bush everyone's tone changed conspicuously.

For what it's worth, electoral[dash]vote[dot]com says Kerry's ahead by one point. Still no image map on #1, and #3 times out.

Re:Take your pick, Osama!

[Anonymous Coward]

RESUME
George W. Bush
The White House, USA

EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE LAW ENFORCEMENT: I was arrested in Kennebunkport, Maine in 1976 for driving under the influence of alcohol. I pled guilty, paid a fine, and had my driver's license suspended for 30 days. My Texas driving record has been "lost" and is not available.

MILITARY: I joined the Texas Air National Guard and went AWOL. I refused to take a drug test or answer any questions about my drug use. By joining the Texas Air National Guard, I was able to avoid combat duty in Vietnam.

COLLEGE: I graduated from Yale University. I was a cheerleader.

PAST WORK EXPERIENCE: I ran for U.S. Congress and lost. I began my career in the oil business in Midland, Texas in 1975. I bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil in Texas. The company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock. I bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using taxpayer money. With the help of my father and our right-wing friends in the oil industry (including Enron CEO Ken Lay), I was elected Governor of Texas.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS GOVERNOR: I changed Texas pollution laws to favor power and oil companies, making Texas the most polluted state in the Union. During my tenure, Houston replaced Los Angeles as the most smog-ridden city in America. I cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas treasury to the tune of billions in borrowed money. I set the record for the most executions by any Governor in American history. With the help of my brother, the Governor of Florida, and my father's appointments to the Supreme Court, I became President after losing by over 500,000 votes.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS AS PRESIDENT: I invaded and occupied two countries at a continuing cost of over one billion dollars per week. I spent the U.S. surplus and effectively bankrupted the U.S. Treasury. I shattered the record for the largest annual deficit in U.S. history. I set an economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12-month period. I set the all-time record for the biggest drop in the history of the U.S. stock market. I am the first president in U.S. history to enter office with a criminal record. I set the all-time record for most days on vacation in any one year period. After taking-off the entire month of August, I presided over the worst security failure in U.S.history. I am supporting development of a nuclear "Tactical Bunker Buster," a WMD. In my State Of The Union Address, I lied about our reasons for attacking Iraq, then blamed the lies on our British friends. I set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips by a U.S. president. In my first year in office over 2-million Americans lost their jobs and that trend continues every month. I set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12-month period. I appointed more convicted criminals to administration than any president in U.S. history. I set the record for least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television. I presided over the biggest energy crisis in U.S. history and refused to intervene when corruption involving the oil industry was revealed. I presided over the highest gasoline prices in U.S. history. I have cut health care benefits for war veterans and support a cut in duty benefits for active duty troops and their families-in war time. I have set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously protest me in public venues (15 million people) shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind. I've broken more international treaties than any president in U.S. history. I'm proud that the members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in U.S. history. My "poorest millionaire," Condoleeza Rice, has a Chevron oil tanker named after her. I am the first president in U.S. history to order an unprovoked, pre-emptive attack and the military occupation of a sovereign nation. I did so against the will of the United Nations, the majority of U.S. citizens, and the world community. I created th

Re:Everybody hold on to your butts....

[DisKurzion]

Amazing. People who hold their values over their job. I'll be damned. What will they think of next?

People who fight for them? Die for them?

One more option

[Shihar]

Last election I watched an exit poller. He had no method of randomly selecting people to poll as far as I could tell. The only pattern I could see is that he seemed to be more inclined to ask pretty young woman.

Conspiracy theories aside, I think it is just bad polling. Democrats are generally younger. Younger people are generally prettier and look more approachable. It might be a small effect, but do it a few thousand times and it adds up. I am not saying that it isn't worth looking into, but my gut guess would be that it is simply poor random selection.

Re:One more option

[demachina]

Read this. It does explain the methodlogy they are supposed to use though obviously they can't force the pollers to actually do it. Are you sure you were watching a real exit poller or just a creative guy who figured out an innovative way to meet "cute girls".

They certainly aren't suppose to gender bias because it would stick out like a sore thumb in the statistics. They are supposed to pick every 10th or 20th voter, and record evenly spaced results throughout the day. When they get a refusal they are supposed to record the basic characteristics of the refuser so it can be accounted for, and pick the next voter.

They really should be substantially more accurate than the pre election polls because they are actually sampling real voters and not trying to guess likely voters. Needless to say you can't do anything if voters just lie though I'd be inclined to think statisticly you would get an equal number of voters lieing that they voted for Bush and Kerry.

Re:One more option

[cheekyboy]

nahh

I tell you theres millions of old people hiding in those crappy houses and old people homes, they are secretly voting for Bush, not that those old people live in reality, ie A free home, free food, free meds, free entertainment, never leave the compound, always around people 75plus, no wonder they are voting NUTSO, especially if they are gettting a bit nutso around 80plus. Maybe they miss 1954.

Re:One more option

[mzs]

According to the exit polling statistics from CNN it would indeed seem to be the case that more women participated in the exit polls:

Male (46%)
Female (54%)

Moreover considering that according to the same exit polls women favored Kerry by 52% while men favored Bush by 54%, that may lend credence to the hypothesis that simply the fact that more women were interviewed at the polling place than men had a non-negligible influence on the exit polling results.

Also, consider the leads of 1-2% in the exit polls, what was the margin of error in the exit polls? It has been a long night, time for me to finally hit the sack...

Re:One more option

[Matje]

your argument doesn't quite hold. what if the ratio of men vs. women who actually voted is 46/54, just like the exit poll ratio you quote?

In that case there is no reason to believe that the fact that more women were interviewed at the exit pll has skewed the outcome of the exit poll.

Re:One more option

[demachina]

If they are doing the polls according to Hoyle they should have refuser data on whether more men were refusing the poll than women. They really are supposed to be taking every nth voter, recording data on refusals and taking the next voter. There shouldn't be a gender bias unless there is an actual gender bias in the voters or there is a gender bias in the refusers. Unfortunately I didn't see the refuser data at first blush.

The one obvious thing you notice in this data is Kerry apparently lost a big chunk of women voters compared to Gore and probably explains the difference in the popular vote. Apparently the politics of fear worked on them, or maybe Kerry just sucked worse than Gore.

Tomorrow it will be interesting to go through the state numbers to see where they differ from the poll results and maybe correlate to evoting states and see if there is a chance some of the swing states were stolen.

All in all it appears likely Bush did win the popular vote and as much as I'd wish the win was due to rigging it appears there is a good chance that it just indicates the majority of Americans actually like Bush and by my standards that suggests they are not good people. Its also apparent that evangelicals now completely dominate America government and that is really not good unless you are one.

Re:One more option

[FreeUser]

All in all it appears likely Bush did win the popular vote and as much as I'd wish the win was due to rigging it appears there is a good chance that it just indicates the majority of Americans actually like Bush and by my standards that suggests they are not good people. Its also apparent that evangelicals now completely dominate America government and that is really not good unless you are one.

It's not even good if you are an evangelical.

Each of these fools (even my Mormon-converted family) thinks it will be their religion that comes out on top once they've managed to turn our secular nation into a theocratic state.

Whatever religion becomes the defacto religion of government (right now it is clearly the Methodists, but who knows where it will be by the time the last of the separation of church and state has been eroded), most evangelicals will discover they don't belong to the ruling sect.

As a result, they will discover that their own freedom of religion is significantly reduced, perhaps eliminated altogether. It won't just be non-Christians who are discriminated against and disempowered, it will be a big chunk of the Christians themselves, including those evangelicals that don't happen to belong to The President's Church.

For that matter, a fair number of people belonging to The President's Church will probably find their freedoms a thing of the past as well.

It truly is appalling how low America has sunk. We really do deserve the political, social, economic, and cultural isolation the Bush administration is bringing down on America. It is ironic that we fought the Korean War and the Vietnam War because we bought into the notion of the "Domino Theory," in which the Communists (the "Al Q'aida" boogeyman of the day) would economically and politically isolate America, until the rest of the world was a part of their economy and we stood alone. Were that to happen, America would dwindle to insignificance ... our strength always came from our trade with other nations and our diplomacy, of which our military was a key component, but not the major component.

Now we are isolating ourselves more effectively than the Communists ever dreamed of doing, and it appears the average American voter has been frightened enough, hateful enough, bigoted enough, or just plain stupid enough to embrace the policies and the idiots who are doing this to us.

We've earned the consiquence of our own foolishness. I just hope they aren't as severe as I fear they'll be.

Re:One more option

[theredrabbit]

It is my hope that the rest of our nation, the ones with that extra synapse that tells you Bush is an utter disaster, doesn't lay down without posing some good questions (should any church that decided to get involved with the elcetion process loose their tax exempt status?); Should the encouragement of church involvement by the Bush campaign be challenged as unconstitutional? Is it true that it is only in the past two elections that exit polls are suddenly wholey inacurate? Shouldn't this be subject to some kind of scientific scrutiny? Oh, and shouldn't we condsider impeaching a president who contradicts intelligence about alluminum pipes in order to justify an unjustifialble war- blatantly lieing to congress and the American people? Didn't the Republicans take our previous democratic president to court under a much less greivous offence? Isn't it time to take the gloves off and start fighting dirty with the rest of them? Do we have a chance if we don't?

Re:One more option

[demachina]

"For that matter, a fair number of people belonging to The President's Church will probably find their freedoms a thing of the past as well."

This isn't really plausible. All evangelicals are a big, unified voting block. They have a commonality of views that cross their denominational lines. If you splintered it, which is what you are talking about you would screw up their power base.

I doubt you will find anybody in the evangelical block or the politicians they elected caring about denominational quibling. As long as its white, protestant, bible thumping, anti abortion, anti gays, anti drugs, anti sex, anti rock and roll, pro war, pro wealth, and pro America dominating the world this group is going to back it and hang together.

The only people its going to discriminate against are the non religious and non Christian. I imagine Catholics will fair OK though maybe not as well as Protestants.

These things should be coming as as soon as the Supreme court and the rest of the courts are stacked in the republicans favor:

- abortion will be outlawed in all forms
- the prohibition on prayer in schools will be lifted and it will become mandatory again in the conservative states
- gay marriage will be banned, then any legal recognition of civil unions. Conservative states will outlaw sodomy again and which is basically outlawing homosexuality and shove it back in to the closet
- three strike laws and the war on drugs will reign and the prison population will continue to swell to the point the U.S. locks up more people per capita than the most repressive dictatorships. Of course thats already happened.

School prayer is the sweeping social change. If you and your children don't subscribe to the Christian faith, your children are going to suffer. Either your children play along and eventually turn Christian or they face isolation and ridicule. It wouldn't be particularly suprising if it extends in to the workplace and business with evangelicals getting unspoken preference in hiring and evangelical businessmen get preference in contracts and business.

It is interesting that in the Oklahoma senate race the Republican candidate was branded as to conservative for Oklahoma and was at risk. For example he'd been suggesting lesbians were taking over the schools and that girls shouldn't be allowed in the restrooms together. He won comfortably indicating its impossible to be to conservative for bible thumping Oklahoma.

As an aside it is interesting to note who is up on the stock market this morning which is a true indicator of who won the election and who will be cashing in for four more years:

Halliburton
Lockheed and Boeing
Drug companies
Diebold (up 2%)
Tech stocks are up though I'm not sure they are the biggest benefactors of Republican pork. Google topped $200 which maybe just suspects the bulls want to go on a little rampage not that the rich will keep getting richer and everyone else will keep getting poorer.

Re:One more option

[demachina]

"and shouldn't we condsider impeaching a president who contradicts intelligence about alluminum pipes in order to justify an unjustifialble war- blatantly lieing to congress and the American people?"

Uh, the people can't impeach a President. All the people can do is vote him out or overthrow him. They didn't do the former and the later is unlikely.

The House has to impeach and the Senate has to approve. In case you haven't noticed the Republicans have a stranglehold on both houses of Congress which is why there haven't been any "gates" like Watergate in this administration though numerous candidates exists. This is also why all the investigations in to the wrongdoing end up being white washes and slaps on the wrist. The Republicans can quite literally get away with murder and torture now and it will just be more so once they finally get to stack the Supreme Court this term. Next on their list after that is to do whatever it takes to get to 60 seats in the senate in 2006. At that point they can DO ANYTHING THEY WANT as long as they keep their evangelical base happy with them (which they can just by banning abortion, homosexuality and instituting prayer in public schools).

Fact is the evangelicals and the extreme right wing are unified, organized, funded and willing to be ruthless. Liberals are in a disorganized, fragmented, shambles mostly thanks to the fact they have to hang their hats on the bankrupt Democrats who are now in complete collapse.

For engaging in torture in Abu Graib so far only enlisted soldiers have been convicted, officers and the civilian leadership came out unscathed. That is the military code, you don't try loyal officers who keep their mouths shut, the officers stay loyal to the civilians leadership and they cover each other's asses. Its OK to hang the enlisted scapegoats out to dry.

Re:One more option

[demachina]

I dont think the pollsters ask verbal questions other than whether they will fill out the exit poll. Its a printed questionairre.

Check. One more slashdotter trying to rationalize why the exit polls failed 3 elections in a row.

Re:One more option

[demachina]

Again the polsters are supposed to be tracking the essentials for the refuseniks especially age, race and gender and its supposed to be used to correct the results if there is a trend among refusers.

Re:One more option

[Firethorn]

A couple of theories for this:

1) Republicans are more likely to say "none of your business"
2) Polsters aren;t budging from the larger cities, so smaller, more conservative rural precincts are underrepresented.

Re:One more option

[Firethorn]

1: paragraph breaks are your friend ;)

It is my hope that the rest of our nation, the ones with that extra synapse that tells you Bush is an utter disaster

Bush may be a disaster, but I've studied Kerry and I believe that he would be an utter and complete disaster.

should any church that decided to get involved with the election process loose their tax exempt status?

Yes. As should the ACLU

Should the encouragement of church involvement by the Bush campaign be challenged as unconstitutional?

It's not unconstitutional. They're allowed to campaign how they like. Now if the church endorses them they should lose their tax exempt status, but that's a decision for the church.

Is it true that it is only in the past two elections that exit polls are suddenly wholey inaccurate? Shouldn't this be subject to some kind of scientific scrutiny?

Sure, but I seem to remember that the same thing happened to Carter.

Oh, and shouldn't we consider impeaching a president who contradicts intelligence about aluminum pipes in order to justify an unjustifialble war- blatantly lieing to congress and the American people?

Well, I believe that he believed what he said. He made decisions based on intellegence that later turned out to be flawed. But they have found that Saddam was ready to restart various WMD programs given the opportunity. Personally, I think that WMD's were low on the list of reasons to remove Saddam Hussein from power, but were used because that was what other countries would be most worried about.

Didn't the Republicans take our previous democratic president to court under a much less greivous offence? Isn't it time to take the gloves off and start fighting dirty with the rest of them? Do we have a chance if we don't?

I found most of the anger at the previous president to be for his lying before congress, more than the act. Besides, there have been multiple investigations into 9/11 and Iraq, and I haven't heard any calls by them for impeachment.

Re:One more option

[theredrabbit]

"Bush may be a disaster, but I've studied Kerry and I believe that he would be an utter and complete disaster." Bush has proven to be a disaster. Better a proven disaster than a "might be" disaster? Your studies must be incredibly insightful; why don't you post them? Especially the parts that persuaded you that he would be even more of an incompetent diplomat. "I believe that he believed what he said." What you beleive is wrong. It is understandable to not want to fathom the idea of a war based soley upon lies, but that is what you have. Investigators said that the tubes were inadiquate for gas centrifuges and they were intended for "traditional" weapons. This was revealed to the president before speaking to congress. Not to mention Richard Clark's statements on the entire matter- you must think that he IS the liar. "...anger at the previous president to be for his lying before congress, more than the act." So, lying to congress about a private affair is somehow worse than, say... lying to them and us in effort to engage in a war for (what was the reason? WMD? Nope. Links to Al Queda? Nope. Liberation of the Iraqis from tyranny? Oh, well I guess they'll use that one for now), and causing the death of thousands of people, many of whom were Iraqi civilians? It would seem, at times, to me, that some people only see value in life as it resides in the womb or in the form of a stem cell, but in the world it is somehow less precious. The ACLU strives to protect the liberties of all people (perhaps, at times to a fault), but, Churches strive to destroy the liberties of thoes who disagree with their values. Big difference. Religious values played a paramount role in this election, do you disagree? "Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch towards uniformity." -Thomas Jefferson, Notes on Virginia, 1782. "Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State." -Thomas Jefferson, letter to Danbury Baptist Association, CT., Jan. 1, 1802 "History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance of which their civil as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purposes." -Thomas Jefferson to Alexander von Humboldt, Dec. 6, 1813. I believe these quotes to be relivent in this time, when the Neo Conservatives (unlike our founding fathers) have joined with the Christian Coalition in an effort to take control of this country, allowing little room, if any, for the questioning of their authority, because they believe it to be ordained by God himself. Does this not strike you as dangerous? Because if it doesn't there are others that believe similarly, and I assure you they are dangerous.

Re:One more option

[theredrabbit]

Ok, if paragrahps were my friend, they would show up when I put them in (HTML?) Hey, learn someth'n new everyday ;)

Re:One more option

[theredrabbit]

I do believe we are very much on the same page here; my condolences in reference to todays news.

Re:One more option

[Firethorn]

I find plain old text setting to work well, it still recognizes the common html tags. Maybe I should say that preview is your friend ;).

Remember, if you use html, you have to use the P tag to mark your paragraphs.

Re:One more option

[Firethorn]

Better a proven disaster than a "might be" disaster
There's no "might be" to it. He would have been a complete and utter disaster. I actually support Bush on the war(I've wanted Iraq taken care of for a long time), and I've seen Kerry's voting record. Just about everything I objected to about Bush, Kerry's worse.

Your studies must be incredibly insightful; why don't you post them?
I didn't exactly compile a report, keep links and references. If I had, I would of had a book.

Investigators said that the tubes were inadiquate for gas centrifuges and they were intended for "traditional" weapons
The tubes were so short of a story that I don't remember seeing it. Why don't you post links?(Googles)
Hmm... Yeah, looks fishy. Some of Bush's staff said that they could be used in gas centrifuges, some disagreed. Bush decided to pursue the more serious possibility. Richard Clark? Who's that? (googles a bit) Oh yeah. He's the Clinton appointee that Bush kept for continuity until he ended up resigning due to "differences of opinion".
lying to them and us in effort to engage in a war
One of the things that the investigation was trying to determine. Basically the most that they have is that Bush emphasized the immediate danger. Intelligence given to the president was bad.
WMD: They've found plenty of evidence that Saddam was looking at restarting his programs as soon as he could do it
Links to Al Queda: They've found them, and to other terrorist groups.
Liberation from tyranny: They've already found more bodies in mass graves than Bosnia.
Violation of peace agreement: He kicked out the inspectors, divereted oil-for-food funds, tried to import items for forbidden weapons systems, continued attacks on American forces...

It would seem, at times, to me, that some people only see value in life as it resides in the womb or in the form of a stem cell, but in the world it is somehow less precious
It's a matter of innocence. An unborn baby/embryo by definition is innocent to them. Congratulations, you found something that I am closer to Kerry on. It's just not a big issue for me, as I figure the research will be done elsewhere.

I'm sure that religion played a role in this, as it does anytime abortion comes up. Do you remember Kerry going after the Catholic vote as he's catholic, despite the fact that the Catholic church is strictly pro-life? People have changed churches because of this (and other) issues.

Re:One more option

[theredrabbit]

The aluminum tubing they found in Iraq was only the most damning evidence they had for WMD, it turned out to be not so damning.

The latest PBS special: NOW with Bill Moyers was very revealing on the entire Iraqi snafu.

Richard Clark was the counter-terrorism czar through the last four daministrations, and he resigned because Bush Jr. wouldn't let him do his job.

Re:One more option

[Firethorn]

That's funny, I thought that the chemical weapon that was used as a roadside bomb was pretty telling.

I thought the "unusual levels" of nerve toxins in the river was telling (did they dump nerve gas in the river, or a major part of their supply of bug killer?), the fact that Saddam didn't allow inspectors in for a long time, and limited their movements when he did under enormous US pressure. The fact that he kept trying to shoot down planes patrolling the no-fly zones. The various sheniagans with the oil-for-food program.

Re:One more option

[theredrabbit]

I learned from Frontline (Great news program on public broadcasting) that Saddam was not complying with the UN, and that Rumsfeld and Wolfawitz really had it out for the guy. I never thought the issue should have been swept under the rug nor dealt with. I do, however, think the timing and the manner in which Saddam was dealt with was poor, to say the least.

Bin Laden, the terrorist behind the 9/11 attacks, should have been our primary focus, if counter-terrorism was our true mission. He is now laughing at us, and can you blame him?

I simply do not believe that we are doing the right thing by this war. In spite of Saddam's atrocities, there are certain "rules of engagement". By Saddam not attacking any nation or posing any eminent threat to us (which has pretty much been proven), we set a new precedence for war by attacking Iraq. It could very well come back to haunt us (as well our dismissal of the Geneva Conventions will come back to haunt us). It was hasty and I have to question the motives behind it.

I am not without compassion. There are numerous dictators around the world that do not share our values- it's the nature of the beast. But, is it not incredibly arrogant to think America should be the ultimate savior? Maybe the people don't want to be saved, maybe we CAN'T save them. And what of all civilians that have been killed- how did we "save" them or their families? There are are a plethora of atrocities being commited around the world and numerous UN sanctions being ignored. Why don't we invade them too? Or, more appropriately, why did we REALLY invade Iraq? Because we should know what our soldiers are dieing for. If they told us the truth, maybe we would not have agreed. And maybe, that's why they lied.

Email from a friend:

Following is an interesting, and perhaps timely, quote by Mr. William Shakespeare [I guess some things will never change]:

Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword.

It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind... And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry.

Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded with patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader, and gladly so. How do I know?

For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar.

"Thoes who can not remember the past are doomed to repeat it."- George Santayana

Re:One more option

[Firethorn]

As most large entities, like corporations, the united states military can do multiple things at the same time without losing "focus". Just because it isn't on the news doesn't mean that we aren't looking for Bin Laden. And I doubt he's laughing, after all, his attack that was intended to drive us out of the region resulted in us invading two countries in the region. I do think that Bush would have gone after Saddam anyways, and that we should have supported Afganistan such that they'd be a prospering country now, rather than spending years under the boot of the Taliban and such.

As for dismissing the Geneva conventions- We've followed them above and beyond. And I support the conviction of any soldier who commits gross violations of those standards (Oh, and Abu Ghraib doesn't really apply- those prisoners weren't soldiers or political prisoners, and thus are not mentioned in the conventions.)

But, is it not incredibly arrogant to think America should be the ultimate savior?

We aren't. And I'm agnostic, so I'm not sure about any ultimate. We're the last chance in many ways. We come in when the nastiness in a region gets to the point of affecting us.

There are are a plethora of atrocities being commited around the world and numerous UN sanctions being ignored. Why don't we invade them too?

One invasion at a time? We can handle a number of 'holding' missions, due to sheer size, but most areas end will end up being like Iraq for a period of time. People(and nations) complain if we do, and complain if we don't...

Nice quote... However, don't think that my patriotism is blind. I think that the case for any invasion or war needs to be carefully made. My default position is to stay out of it if it doesn't impact our borders. But if we do go in, we need to do it completely. I don't view it as Gulf War I & II, I view it as the Gulf War, complete with ten year cease-fire.

If Kerry had been for smaller government, less regulation, a strong military stance (his actions after the war ruined him for me), pro-gun(he voted for every anti-gun bill to come his way), and trustworthy, I wouldn't have just voted for him, I would of campaigned for him.

Don't think that Bush is right wing, he isn't. I consider him too liberal for my tastes. Neither am I part of the 'religious right'. Terms such as "libertarion", "constitutionalist", and "Jacksonian" describe me.

Re:Hmm

[multimed]

Look, your site just got posted twice to Slashdot, not to mention Fark a few times, and is trumpeting itself as one of the best statistical predictors.

And you left off the real biggie--google for electoral map, electoral vote, electoral college map (and probably others) and his site will be the top result. Considering everyone I know uses google often out of habbit even when they actually know the URL, that's some major traffic. Dude, you've made a popular site that, because of the election, is extremely susseptible to flashmobs. Get over it.

Slip up

[sqrt(2)]

Anyone catch CNN around 7:00PM-7:30PM? A guy was standing outside of the window, behind the hosts, his shirt had written on it, "Fuck This Shit" all clearly visible for a good 15 seconds before they cut away. Then, they went back to the same shot with him in it!

Re:Slip up

[reverius]

Yeah... it's here

Re:Everybody hold on to your butts....

[N3WBI3]

Uh huh, and the president who signed NAFTA nad GAT into law was??

Re:Take your pick, Osama!

[DankNinja]

Yup, do what the bully says, he might not beat you up and take your lunch money.

Ain't need no smaats, gots my bros

[Shihar]

When you vote for a president, you vote for two types of presidents. You vote for guys who are run on committee, or guys that run on their own power. Bush, without a doubt, relies on heavily on his cabinet. Clinton on the other hand was a guy who liked to do a lot himself. Dumber presidents tend to run more like Bush does. I personally don't think either method is better then the other. Sure, it is nice to know that the president can make decisions on his own, but I also don't mind if the president goes to his economics guy before he makes an economics decision. The more important piece is that YOU as a voter know what type of guy your voting for is. If you are voting for a guy who listens to his cabinet a lot, then I suggest checking into them to make sure that they are the kind of people you want controlling the executive branch of the government.

Re:Ain't need no smaats, gots my bros

[fiftyfly]

Rephrased as: "A smart president might attempt, and accomplish, much as an individual. A stupid one has no alternative to being lead around by the nose like a dog by his (largely unelected) cronies.".

Yay! I can see how the two are on par.

Re:Ain't need no smaats, gots my bros

[Shihar]

Cute saying, but largely untrue. Regan was a good speaker, but that is about it. He also let his advisors decide a lot. Love or hate what he did, he did a lot. Personally, it doesn't bother me if the president looks outside his limited sphere of knowledge to decide things. Bush is a prime example. He might not be the smartest tool in the shed, but love or hate him, you can't deny Cheney is a sharp guy.

The real question is how I feel about the people advising president. I just consider it one more flavor to chose from. Do I want a guy who runs everything through his advisors and there for gets a veriety of options, or do I want a guy who is independent and so less likely to waiver?

Not that it matters now that Bush has clinched the race, but both Kerry and Bush were guys who ran off their advisors. Bush did it more then Kerry, but Kerry was no Clinton. Whatever the case, we can ponder the question for four more years before we need to worry about it again.

300 replies and no one has mentioned this...

[whiteSanjuro]

the article text says "Federal Electoral Commission" but fec.gov is the website for the "Federal Election Commission." i can't believe i'm the first to notice this inconsistency, and this is not a spelling nazi check, but a reality check on the fact that people will believe anything that sounds credible even though it is an actual Orwellian manipulation of language to control thoughts.

Re:The webmaster was the guy who made MINUX!?

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean MINIX?

Best part is...

[koolB]

Polls for kerry, hate america, more polls for kerry, F9/11, more pools for kerry, wrold thinks we dumb.

Result: Bush wins.

PS. Fok U World.

Re:Best part is...

[EzInKy]

olls for kerry, hate america, more polls for kerry, F9/11, more pools for kerry, wrold thinks we dumb.

Result: Bush wins.

PS. Fok U World.


You are probably trolling but I was afraid this might happen as the world pushed harder and harder to influence the US to dump Bush, never expected him to get over 50% of the vote though.

Re:Best part is...

[Anonymous Coward]

I expected Bush to get at least 53% of the popular vote and maybe as much as 55%, I'm surprised it was actually this close.

I'm relieved, too. A few of you out there may remember the Carter presidency. Jimmy Carter is, I'm sure, a nice guy. His heart's in the right place. He's not dumb in an IQ sense of the word (he was chosen by Hyman Rickover as a reactor officer). But he was a terrible president, the worst one of my lifetime (I was born during the Kennedy administration, to give perspective).

John Kerry would have been as bad as that, maybe worse. He's not quite as incompetent as a leader (maybe close, though), but he more than makes up for it on other fronts. Fellow Americans, count your blessing that John Kerry has lost this election.

And as for those Europeans who favor appeasement of terrorism, I can't say much except "Didn't you learn anything the last time this happened? We did. We won't let it happen again."

this is sad

[Dr Kool, PhD]

Kerry is down by 120,000 votes in Ohio, yet he still won't give it up. Anyone who has ever taken a statistics class will tell you that the probability of 120,000 of 175,000 votes going one way given that the sample of votes is split 50/50 is ZERO. And of course that doesn't take into account how many of these provisional ballots will even be accepted... a bunch of the provisional voters probably weren't even registered. Anyway, Kerry is finished.

Did anyone else think Edwards' "non-concession" speech was retarded?? He tried to pump up the crowd... but they knew it was over. Then he decided to dance around the stage giving thumbs up signs!!! LOL.

Re:this is sad

[Dusabre]

I'll just post the figures to back this up:

Kerry is 125,000 votes down.

There remain 250,000 absentee votes to be cast.

Notice straight away that Kerry MUST take 125,000 to even catch up. That leaves only 125,000 votes to divvy up. The least he can get to beat Bush is 62,501 (with Bush getting 62,499).

Thats mean Kerry hast to take 187,501 votes out of 250,000 absentee votes = 75%.

Which would be a total landslide. Which doesn't fit in with the 50/50% split amongst other Ohio votres.

So, Ohio is Bush.

Re:this is sad

[t_allardyce]

Do we know where those 250k votes are from or are they evenly distributed around the state? Kerry got 67% in Cuyahoga for example, ok so its true Bush took most parts of Ohio, but if by some fluke of luck 250,000 Cuyahoga voters were still to be counted there would still be a chance for Kerry! Ah fuck it, what am I saying, hes lost! But either way its not over until all votes are cast...

Re:this is sad

[stanmann]

Did he shout "developers developers developers" because that would be funny?

Re:this is sad

[bmrh]

Huh? Anyone who has taken a statistics class, (anyone who passed, anyway), would know never to say the probability is "ZERO", but that it is smaller than an arbitrarily chosen confidence factor (such as 0.01, or 0.005).

if u believe in god, are u really wise?

[cheekyboy]

we know that god as a deity that controls humans is false and that HELL doesnt exist, and the church is the biggest human control con ever with perhaps beneficial results, ie taming those dumb-asses out there that otherwise would be nutcases with nothing to live for.

Just consider the fact that if HELL doesnt exist, then there goes *ALL* motive to being good for god and society and being religeous. Thats why we have this 'god' embedded into our punny lame scared brains.

Its ironic that humans have to 'believe' in something not prooven and false that would normally under mental assesment qualify you to the loony bin, but because this 'loony fantasy' keeps society from breaking down, its accepted as 'normal'.

Think about it, if GOD really did make the universe/humans etc... he dont really give a ratts ass if we all nuke and kill everyone last of us. Why? because he can go and remake it all again and try version 72.3 with a few tweaks of improvements.

You are 100% free, even 100% free to not even acknowledge god, aslong as you can refrain from exterminating your selves as a society.

Re:if u believe in god, are u really wise?

[nels_tomlinson]

we know that god as a deity that controls humans is false and that HELL doesnt exist ...

If you can prove that, by all means share with the rest of us. The general consensus is that there isn't any proof for either side of the argument, so you'd be doing a great service by setting us all straight.

I won't be holding my breath, of course: better minds than yours have tried and failed at this.

Re:if u believe in god, are u really wise?

[Minna Kirai]

The general consensus is that there isn't any proof for either side of the argument,

No, the concensus is that gods don't exist, and that all religions are lies.

In a worldwide survey asking each living human if each individual religion is true or false, no religion will ever get a majority asserting its correctness. Therefore, the people agree: all religions are wrong.

Re:if u believe in god, are u really wise?

[gottabeme]

Some statistician you are.

Re:if u believe in god, are u really wise?

[curtoid]

No, the concensus is that gods don't exist, and that all religions are lies.

The only reason that the "consensus" says this is because people don't particularly care for the alternative. Everybody wants to be their own god.
Nice try, but that is a dangerous position to take, since you have no inherent power - and will wither and squirm like a worm when the time comes to set the record straight.

In a worldwide survey asking each living human if each individual religion is true or false, no religion will ever get a majority asserting its correctness. Therefore, the people agree: all religions are wrong.

God is not elected by the popular vote, as you suppose. But you are rather in the midst of a lifelong true/false examination in which you must get every answer correct. Or else.

Re:if u believe in god, are u really wise?

[halivar]

In a worldwide survey asking each living human if each individual religion is true or false

Funny; Gallup never called me for that one. I must have been in the shower.

Re:if u believe in god, are u really wise?

[macromegas]

Didnt that god guy die somewhere around the last quarter of the 19th century? Nah, when did Ockham live? oops, guess HE stinks a lot already.

Re:Does anyone get the feeling

[cheekyboy]

draft dodge ideas;

1. say your gay.
2. say you have token 20000 LSD trips in the last 5 years, and you see colors 24/7
3. get a broken leg
4. smoke tonnes of pot

Re:This is beatiful...

[slaida1]

I'll save this and when next "terrorist" attack on US soil happens, I'll just point you that "what, weren't you supposed to be safer from terrorism? "

Nyaahaha.. =D

Re:Thunderdome!!!!!

[tsm_sf]

I'll wager sixty quatloos on the newcomer.

---
This post generated by KarmaBot (www.karmabot.com)

Uhm.

[bruthasj]

I'm pretty sure submitting this to slashdot.org will not resolve the issue. Not sure though.

the story

[lublu]

The story goes....
What, Bush is at lead!
(Reload)
What, Bush is still at lead!
(Reload)
Bush is still at lead, fsck!
(Reload)
Fsck!
(Reload)
Fsck! Fsck!
(Reload)

.... etc.

This just in..IRAN

[DigiShaman]

I ripped from CNN.com. I take no credit for this. I'm just the messenger.

Speaking to reporters hours before Americans headed to the polls Tuesday, he said he had no personal preference between Sen. John Kerry and U.S. President George W. Bush.

"But I hope whoever is the winner, either Bush or Kerry will act realistically and rationally in the long-term interest of the United States to reduce tension by not interfering in the internal affairs of other countries," Khatami said.

Most Iranian leaders and officials have shied away from commenting on the U.S. elections until now. But some believe a Bush victory may lead to greater tension in the Middle East and possibly a military attack against Iran, which Bush has branded as being a part of an "axis of evil" along with Iraq and North Korea.

European negotiators have recently engaged in talks with Iranian representatives in an attempt to ease fears in the United States and Europe that Iran is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

Iran recently rejected proposals from European negotiators to indefinitely suspend its program in exchange for incentives.

During the talks in Vienna -- the headquarters of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) -- negotiators for Britain, Germany and France offered to supply nuclear fuel for Iran's planned power plants and enhance trade and political relations.

The proposals were a last-ditch effort before the next meeting of the IAEA board of governors scheduled for November 25.

Iran's Islamic Republic News Agency reported that the Iranian delegates told the Europeans that "restricting Iran's access to nuclear technology marks a red line for the country and it would not be acceptable at all."

Note: previously, the Iran officials were quoted to say "Death to America". Yup, Iran is about to get their raghead ass handed back to them. Thank GOD Bush will be elected. We got the bomb, we will need someone to use it if need be.

Sounds like....

[EvilStein]

Someone needs to load balance web servers a bit better. :P

Made it Worse

[alset_tech]

Take a bad thing and make it worse by encouraging every slashdotter to see how slow it really is. Nice to know that no matter how bad server load gets, the /. crowd is ready to tip the scales so that they come crashing down! Woooooohoo!

Re:The webmaster was the guy who made MINUX!?

[isometrick]

Yeah, he means MINIX, the microkernel based O.S. developed by Andrew S. Tanenbaum. As far as I can tell, Minux is a small Linux distribution developed by Roland Wehren.

Tanenbaum is the owner of electoral-vote.com.

Re:Does anyone get the feeling

[dbIII]

draft dodge ideas;

Just ask some of the Republicans what they did in the war and you'll get a few draft dodge ideas.

As for Clinton - would you pass up a Rhodes scholarship?

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[DrMrLordX]

You call Washington, DC an educated part of the United States? Have you taken a look at their school system lately? Apparently not.

No shit Sherlock ...

[ayjay29]

>>Electoral-vote.com Under Heavy Load; Attack?

>>An anonymous reader writes "Electoral-vote.com (and mirrors electoral-vote2.com through electoral-vote8.com) seem to be very slow at the moment.

No shit Sherlock, it's called the slashdot effect...

You forgot....

[System.out.println()]

"Is he white?"
"Is he a he?"

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[Lord Kano]

But this doesn't change the fact than many african americans are democrats & that there have been numerous high-profile cases of some conservatives preventing voting by minorities, many of whom would vote for the other guy.

You can't assume that. The vast majority of black people in the US vote democrat. That's a given, but you can never conclude that any individual black person is going to vote that way solely upon the basis of race.

I was pretending to be willfully ignorant so that I could point out that the person was being bigoted while accusing others of bigotry.

LK

Re:mod parent up

[jtev]

As a far right wing libertarian "faggot" I would prefer bush to win, however I feel he's handled the war quite well. I do hate it when my libertarian ideals and my imperialistic ideals conflict though. Such is life, and I wish you the greatest of enjoyment.

election office

[steffel]

not the election systems are the problem ... look here: http://www.blogigo.de/steffel/entry/32340 :-)

Re:They did hate America's government...

[Anonymous Coward]

The only problem there is this: we will never know for sure if Ohio was delivered to Bush by the voters ... or by Diebold Inc.

We were a mirror...

[cachedout]

Well, we were a mirror on www.electoral-vote7.com until we were pulled from DNS earlier this evening. We handled the load without a problem, even while hostrocket.com got crushed. Our services were voluntary and we neither asked for or received any compensation for our mirror. We served about 10 million hits today on the website today and peaked at about 2.5 mil/hour earlier in the day.

I don't know why we and the other non-hostrocket.com mirrors were pulled from the DNS round-robin, but I do know that the decsion to remove us and the other non-hostrocket sites from the DNS round-robin for www.electoral-vote.com was made without consulting us (which is fine, it just seemed a bit odd.) After we were pulled, hostrocket.com basically tipped over and the site went down hard.

What an Obvious Ploy

[Trikenstein]

Think about it.

Yeah, that's right.

You figured it out after you clicked the link, the page losded fine, didn't you....

Thank you, Osama Bin Laden . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

for ensuring 4 more years of George W. Bush. Yech!

Re:Thank you, Osama Bin Laden . . .

[multimed]

Sure because that's the only effect that could have. Whatever. I'm interesting in seeing some polling of how this effected the way people voted--for some people I definitely believe it could have pushed them a bit to Bush (if they were undecided or weren't going to vote). But I also think that for many people seeing Osama again and being reminded that Bush's military actions have still not been able to capture/kill him would have the exact opposite effect. Either way, the effects are probably greatly overrated anyway--I would say the percentage of people who were undecided, changed their mind or were actually motivated to vote as a result of the Osama video was extremely small.

How to steal an election ...

[quarkscat]

in five easy steps: (1) shell out $4 Billion USD for "new & improved" eVoting machines (with no paper audit trail) (2) buy off, or cook the figures on polling data for the last 3 months of the campaign -- raise public expectations for your result (3) disenfranchise racial minorities in key states, and employ (VOA-RNC) registrar "aids" in other states to foil the registrations of your political opposition party (4) on election day, create just enough problems with the eVoting machines to distract the public's attention from the real crime scene, hacking the backend vote "accumulators" (5) PROFIT! (Enron, Carlyle Group, Halliburton, ChevronTexaco, KBR, & Saudi slush fund)

Re:Hmm

[tokachu(k)]

First off, there's a big difference between "heavy load" and "attack". You can usually tell the difference by looking at the network traffic, which I'm sure he had done, and seeing if there are lots of matching TCP sequence numbers (the sequence number is constant in the "industry-standard" syn-flooders for Windows).

Second, it's a tad strange that, for every time Bush is not a sure-fire winner, his site is attacked. That could be some bias, but that's what the webmaster says.

Which states use Diebold machines?

[rseuhs]

Does anybody know which states used Diebold machines in these elections?

AFAIK Florida used them and Bush won this swing state by a comfortable (but not too large) margin....

Maybe we can compare where electronic voting machines were used and who won.

Re:Which states use Diebold machines?

[nadamsieee]

Georgia is entirely a Diebold operation. :(

Bias:Im no fan of Bush..

[ikejam]

or for that matter Kerry.. ..but for all this while you could blame him, the screwed up balloting system etc etc for all his incursions into international peace, justice and of probably furthering the terrorist base.... ..now the american public has taken the blame and the responsibilty upon itself...Awright whoever voted him probably didnt seem the blame part..but it looks like the war (im not ogign into the ethics part, im sure e'oen has their own deep-set views on that by now) have now been officialy christened by the American ppl, which is disheartening..

i didnt mean this to be offensive though i admit it probably is to lot of ppl..

ahh, yoyo. the memories...

[notAyank]

sadly, gone are the days when monash takes 2 years to suspend your undergraduate account...

Research..........?

[afxgrin]

And obviously there is no research benefit to delibrately linking the site to Slashdot over and over again.......

"We survived an unprecedented triple flash crowd and logged it all," writes Tanenbaum. "As it turns out, two of the faculty members in my department, Maarten van Steen and Guillaume Pierre, are doing research on coping with flash crowds. The research issues include how many replicas to set up, where to place them, how fast to deploy them, and how to do it automatically, in real time, and at minimum cost. To simulate proposed algorithms, you need data about real flash crowds and real attacks, preferably at the same time. And boy oh boy do we have data now."

Re:4 MORE WARS

[mmkkbb]

mod parent funny after reading grandparent...

Search Traffic

[lcfactor]

I can't help but point out that if you were going to google last night for any information about the electoral vote count in any given state, this site was first on the hit parade. Sure are a lot of americans with broadband these days...

I'd doubt attack...

[Omicron]

With all of those new voters out there (either first time due to age, or first time due to voter drives) I imagine a lot of people going "Huh? The Electoral wha???".

Last night, I was explaining the system to my girlfriend - who I got to vote for her first time yesterday - about the system.

I went out on google to look up something w/ her, and this website was the first hit. Sounded good to me, so I went to it. No go - I figured there are just a lot of people doing the same thing!

Re:Hmm

[Alsee]

Is it just me, or is this guy (who's supposed to be this networking guru) is a little too careless with interchanging the words "attack" with "under heavy load"

It's you, and you don't know what you are talking about.

Yes, his site is "under heavy load". His site is ALSO under attack. He is one of the best and most respected computer scientists in the world. He has been recording this the user flood AND attack data, and he has been taking the attack "lemons" and making lemonade - putting it to good use in scientific research for designing systems better able to handle flash-flood and attacks. He has documented both flood attacks and sophisticated hack attacks, and is now documenting attacks on the DNS system itself.

We don't know the identities of the attackers, but there's little doubt that it is coming from radical Bush supporters.

he just doesn't have the monetary resources that a CNN or Yahoo does to throw another server or 6 up when under heavy usage

Actually he has been doing an incredible job of throwing up multiple heavy-duty servers in active response to his typical heavy usage AND simultaneous Slashdotting AND simultaneous DOS attacks AND simultaneous hack attacks.

For a private citizen he is throwing up essentially corporate-level capacity, and HIGHER than corporate level security.

But it doesn't matter anyways, since the content of the site isn't updating today with what we're learning of the polls

Because he's been tied up responding by the attacks.

His site still reads Kerry, which I'm not surprised, as he freely admits he's a Kerry supporter.

No, his site still read Kerry because the latest polls had indeed indicated Florida leaning to Kerry, and because he has been unable to update the data due to the attack (almost certainly pro-Bushies attacking). He has been scrupulously honest in refecting the best available data, even when it showed Bush winning.

-

Re:Hear Fox News, Brain Dead Via Internet!

[xtermin8]

Fox news on yahoo? I think this post is a joke, but I'm kinda too sickened that Fox broadcasts at all to laugh about it. Are you trying to get them slashdotted? Are you a Murdoch publicist? Maybe you should stop pimping Murdoch's *ick, go home and reconsider your life.

Re:Hmm

[Alsee]

Obvious question, but why on Earth would Bush supporters want to attack that site right now? Surely they'd enjoy nothing more than seeing him have to post a highly embarrassing explanation of why he got it so utterly wrong.

Well we are rather blurring the meaning of "right now", but his site has been under varying levels of almost continuous attack for quite some time, and that attack continued at least through polling nite.

The attackers apparently hated him for providing anti-Bush commentary on his site, and because his site showed Kerry ahead about half the time. I'm sure their hatred had no interest in hearing his post-election commentary.

a highly embarrassing explanation of why he got it so utterly wrong.

There's nothign emdarrasing about it. The race was quite tight in critical states, and the polls were indeed tipping back and forth. He presented the best available data.

If you check, his major error was Florida, and that was a poll done by FOX NEWS. Fox News had Florida 5% for Kerry. And no matter which way you think the media is biased, there is no disputing that Fox News is more to Bush's side than any other major TV news.

There were minor flips in NM IA and WI, all within the margin of error, and balancing out to a wopping 2 electotial vote effect. And in fact electoral-vote UNDER predicted Kerry's vote there.

It all comes down to the fact that Florida was polling pretty heavy for Kerry, but the vote was pretty heavy for Bush. that was not electoral-vote's fault. It merely means the polling was wrong or the vote was wrong. It was most likely bad polling, but I hate to admit part of me hopes there will be a revelation of election fraud in Florida. I would really hate to see such exlection curruption in our election system, but I'd also realy hate to have Bush fsck us over another 4 years. If Bush appoints Supreme Court Justices we're going to be SCREWED for the next two or three DECADES.

-

This is old, outdated news.

[libertynews]

Take a look at the site, its back up and running. The overload happened yesterday and last night, but you could still get mirrors of it using a nyud.net cache

Re:Hmm

[almiki]

Is it just me, or is this guy (who's supposed to be this networking guru) is a little too careless with interchanging the words "attack" with "under heavy load"...

Well, last night (for the span of a few hours at least, from around 5PM to late EST) the domains electoral-vote4.com through electoral-vote9.com were not even resolving, as in nslookup was timing out. electoral-vote.com through electoral-vote3.com were resolving fine, though I couldn't connect. Can that really be explained by "heavy load"?

Sorry about the link

[sk8king]

Here is the link to the article.

Could someone either backup or refute what this article is telling me. It is pretty scary.

Re:Sorry about the link

[VoidWraith]

I disagree with what the article says. I don't see hate crimes, sexism, classism in the USA. I see rampant stupidity, corporate domination, and susceptibility to the Mass Media. The "Fourteen Points" seem to generalize themselves to a point that they can encompass the USA, and even so, some of them don't. I don't see rampant sexism, I see a primarily male government, but not because of sexism. I DO see things like "Powerful and Continuing Nationalism" and "Identification of enemies and Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause." However for the most part, I do not think that the U.S. actually fits in with the definitions provided for Fascism.

Even Slashdot was slow yesterday

[michaelmalak]

As was my blog, but I'm on a shared server so I can't say for sure it was my site :-)

Re:LOL BUSH IS WINNING YOU COMMIES!

[izomiac]

It's called an example, and besides, the states don't even have to do a popular vote. They could do their own electorial system with their counties (making campaigning in those states virtually pointless) or even just let their senators and representatives vote (as they used to do). What if one canidate were to promise to clear-cut all lumber in America in order to provide free houses (just an example). He could quite possibly win the popular vote because of people wanting the free houses, but loose the electorial vote because he'd loose the states that would be loosing their forests. The electorial system makes votes matter. If we didn't have it then why would anybody campaign in Ohio, with a mere 4% of the population? So without the electorial vote you could afford to screw over the country so long as you keep the populated area happy.

Re:Everybody hold on to your butts....

[Darby]

Amazing. People who hold their values over their job. I'll be damned. What will they think of next?

People who fight for them? Die for them?

Sure, that sounds decent at first, until you actually think about it and realise that the only "values" that they are voting based on is that they be allowed to oppress others at gunpoint because they aren't the same as them.

Seriously, the people who are voting on so-called moral issues are the most immoral people around.
Their idea of morality is stopping others from living their lives how they see fit.

Bunch of ignorant immoral slimebags.

Just a sidenote on the 'leader' thing.

[macromegas]

You realize that it exactly translates to Führer, right?

Re:Why do ABC and CNN website

[Dynedain]

CBS was always the last one making the call, repeatedly saying "We think it's important to be right instead of first"

Interesting browser stats

[kerb]

the electoral-vote has an average of 500K hits
and firefox has 13% browser share :)
http://www.sitemeter.com/default.asp?action=st ats& site=s10ElectoralVote&report=13

Re:Everybody hold on to your butts....

[Pov]

They do love it and they should. It's good for the American economy to outsource low paying jobs to other countries, thus creating high paying jobs here. The Democrats know this just as well as the Republicans do and that's why we have NAFTA, etc. They may not like to admit it because of union affiliations, but no one, even Kerry (if you look at his real positions, not the ones he shouted for the camera once he was running for President), denies that outsourcing is a good thing.

Re:Everybody hold on to your butts....

[Pov]

I absolutely agree with you that there were many reasons to vote against George Bush. My post's main point was responding to the previous post's rather poor analysis of the reasoning behind his victory. It just isn't that simple.

For instance, I happen to disagree with you about Bush's handling of the economy. I believe his handling of the economy was just short of brilliant (and undeniably gutsy) and I believe history will side with me. I think his bold and aggressive moves made a big difference in the shallowness and relatively short period of this market correction. I honestly believe we could have had another Great Depresssion and his moves helped in the prevention of it. But hey, I've been wrong many times before and I'm willing to admit that I could be very very wrong. However, my opinion, right or wrong has nothing to do with not understanding concepts or symbolism and I think you should recognize that my disagreement with you says very little about my intelligence or that of others like me.

Most Americans *want* the US to be better off than it is now. And as you said, America has decided we don't need a change in order to get there. I don't believe it's from lack of understanding that they reached this conclusion.

Republicans less likely to respond to polls?

[Firethorn]

I think that he has a valid point.

1) Politics, and political party, is a function of personality, upbringing, and a number of other influences.
2) Personality traits affect the chances that any particular individual will participate in a poll.

Given that personality plays a part in choosing a party, and a part in participating in a poll, it's a valid hypothesis that members of different parties have different percentages of poll participation. In this case it would be expressed as a lower percentage of republicans participating in polls. It just has to be tested.

SAT scores

[Firethorn]

Bush: 1206
Kerry: 1190

reference

BUSH IS A FASCIST THAT EATS CHILDREN

[Shihar]

As a result, they will discover that their own freedom of religion is significantly reduced, perhaps eliminated altogether.

For fucks sake, grow up. Bush is not going to take away anyone's freedom of religion. If you have eaten up the "anyone but Bush!" propaganda so badly that you have deluded yourself into thinking Bush not only likes eating small orphans, but also wants to TAKE AWAY FREEDOM OF RELIGOION!!111!!!!, you need take a deep breath and come back to reality.

Bush is not going to affect your freedom of religion. Bush isn't even fucking conservative. Bush is a moderate Republican in every sense of the word. This nation has had far more conservative presidents then Bush. Congratulations on the Democrats for working their base up into a frenzy while managing to convince the other half of the nation that their base is made up of babbling idiots who are convinced that Bush is the second coming of Hitler. If there is any reason why the Democrats lost, it is because the average working stiff say the Democratic base of ravenous college students trying to compare Bush with Hitler and blew them off as the idiots they are.

Look, I wanted Kerry to win. A democrat as the president, Republicans in congress, and the sweet sound of grid lock is music to my ears. I don't want Bush to have a free reign to push through legislation. That said, as much as I really don't like Bush, I don't make myself sound like a fucking idiot by declaring that for his next evil trick he will eat the flesh off a still living child while sending anyone who isn't Christian to a death camp.

The democrats lost because they encourage people to sound like raving idiots, much like yourself. Not that the Republicans don't have their fare share of raving idiots, they at least managed to keep their idiots from marching around decrying Kerry as Stalin.

Re:BUSH IS A FASCIST THAT EATS CHILDREN

[theredrabbit]

I agree that he is not a baby-eater (at least not in public), but I still think he is dangerous.