It's not about ignoring the obvious, because you could take all of those things a hundred different ways. There is no "fact" regarding the ego hypothesis, because it's all a bunch of people trying to find some way to sling mud. Incidentally, why don't you go ahead and tell me what sort of ego boost losing a presidential election is. Don't worry, I'll wait.
As far as I know, to get a party on the National ballot, you have to get 5% of the vote. If you do, at least the next election will have three parties on the ballot. That is a major change, and is a lot of the reason that it is so hard to run currently.
Incidentally, the reasons he did not stick with the Green Party have a lot more to do with the Green Party and mistakes/confusion there than with Nader.
There is why he says he runs, then there is why others say he runs (ego). When he attempted to get 5% of the votes in order to get the party on the ballot, how is that not a movement for change? Even an unsuccessful attempt is still an attempt. I have seen ZERO, nothing, to back up the "ego" claims.
Or that, yeah. The current "hey now, I'm not an Arab" really doesn't do it for me, since it never really addresses the fact that the whole attack is juvenile and embarrassing.
At least he's not attempting to say "yeah, I'll do that, no problem."
Re:It is all about the platform.
on
Is AMD Dead Yet?
·
· Score: 1
Well, at the time of writing, their website appears to be down so I can't tell you 100%. But, at the moment, I do know the OptiPlex 740 is an AMD. My understanding is that there will always be an AMD offering in this line. I'm not 100% sure about their home machines, but if anything, they are expanding the availability of AMD chips in their lines.
Re:Shorting AMD stock: NASDAQ figures
on
Is AMD Dead Yet?
·
· Score: 1
I don't think the reason for that is slow chipsets. The reason I've replaced the last few computers has not been slow CPU's, it's invariably been something else (damaged hardware, wanting to keep up with shitty operating systems, etc.). And they do have voice recognition -- just doesn't work that well... but I'm not sure that's due to slow chips.
Re:It is all about the platform.
on
Is AMD Dead Yet?
·
· Score: 3, Informative
Absolutely untrue, and this is straight from Dell.
Unfortunate that "closet Muslim" is an insult. I frankly think that everyone would do well to completely ignore digs at his name. I'm not totally sure that it bears addressing.
I'd like to be a democrat, but none of them seem to have anything worthwhile to say until after they lose the election. The current crop is a little better, but as someone pointed out earlier, Obama is quite happy to make charismatic speeches about how he's going to work together with Republicans to change the world. That's nice, but how does he propose to get Republicans to support things that they are obviously very much against (the child health care bill recently is an example)? I think it's naive.
I want to be one of twelve. What kind of legal system do we have where no one will serve in it? You don't want to be in a jury, move to a different country. I think the fact that they let people out is bullshit (though I do understand someone living hand to mouth not being able to afford the loss of pay -- jury pay is probably still paltry).
First time I read that, I thought it was his lawyer in the hall folding pants. It's extremely amusing to me at this point that that did not grab my attention at the time.:)
http://www.alternet.org/election08/77346/...it talks about how, before Kerry was seen as a flip-flopper, Bush's media advisor laid out his plan during an interview. I'm not sure it really matters who they run as long as they can't combat this stuff. You can find some sort of way to discredit almost anyone, and if it isn't addressed as bullshit right away it gets into the public subconscious.
Thanks for writing this. I hate to read the 90% here too -- I already knew otherwise, but it's a little disappointing to see so many idiots parroting bullshit on a site that one might think has some intelligent users.
See the "egomaniac" thing everyplace. Now, considering you and all the other people say that probably know precisely dick about Nader, and the media regularly calls Nader an egomaniac, it really looks like you're just parroting with no personal knowledge.
Don't be a jackass. If Gore ran a good campaign, he'd have won. Hell, if he took a stand on important issues, I'd have voted for him. He didn't. I voted for the best candidate. It's not my fault that you, and many others, didn't. If anyone failed America, it was the folks who voted Democrat while they weren't worth voting for.
Really? Let's take a step back for a moment -- why was this the closest Presidential election in American history? Gore's shit campaign? Republican meddling? Ralph Nader's margin NEVER should have mattered in an election where a man with a fairly distinguished record was running against an apish former cokehead. You can't blame that on Nader.
I have to say, though, parent is incorrect on almost everything. All of those things he said about the other candidates were what the media says was true of them. In reality, to me, the reason Gore didn't win is that he didn't stand for what he stood for. In reality, that's the same thing Kerry did. Look at Gore now -- did he believe all of the things he says and does now in 2000? Maybe, but it certainly seems as if he was told not to say any of it. Every time the Republicans have sandbagged Democrats with ASININE bullshit (look at what Bush has done and compare it to anything that the Democratic candidates have), there has been no tough response that points out how stupid it all is. The debates of 2004 showed Kerry basically failing to intelligently hit back on any question.
I suppose too wishy-washy could be true, but I call it a failure to actually stand for anything. Not that the Republicans truthfully stood for anything either, but at least they put on a better show.
Slashdot Mirror
It's not about ignoring the obvious, because you could take all of those things a hundred different ways. There is no "fact" regarding the ego hypothesis, because it's all a bunch of people trying to find some way to sling mud. Incidentally, why don't you go ahead and tell me what sort of ego boost losing a presidential election is. Don't worry, I'll wait.
As far as I know, to get a party on the National ballot, you have to get 5% of the vote. If you do, at least the next election will have three parties on the ballot. That is a major change, and is a lot of the reason that it is so hard to run currently.
Incidentally, the reasons he did not stick with the Green Party have a lot more to do with the Green Party and mistakes/confusion there than with Nader.
People can barely operate the radio while driving without getting into an accident. Now we want them to make hydrogen?
There is why he says he runs, then there is why others say he runs (ego). When he attempted to get 5% of the votes in order to get the party on the ballot, how is that not a movement for change? Even an unsuccessful attempt is still an attempt. I have seen ZERO, nothing, to back up the "ego" claims.
Or that, yeah. The current "hey now, I'm not an Arab" really doesn't do it for me, since it never really addresses the fact that the whole attack is juvenile and embarrassing.
At least he's not attempting to say "yeah, I'll do that, no problem."
Well, at the time of writing, their website appears to be down so I can't tell you 100%. But, at the moment, I do know the OptiPlex 740 is an AMD. My understanding is that there will always be an AMD offering in this line. I'm not 100% sure about their home machines, but if anything, they are expanding the availability of AMD chips in their lines.
I don't think the reason for that is slow chipsets. The reason I've replaced the last few computers has not been slow CPU's, it's invariably been something else (damaged hardware, wanting to keep up with shitty operating systems, etc.). And they do have voice recognition -- just doesn't work that well... but I'm not sure that's due to slow chips.
Absolutely untrue, and this is straight from Dell.
It is really hard to live here sometimes...
Who the fuck hasn't heard of France?!
Fair enough, but it should have been a landslide! I know that taking Nader's percentage and adding it to Gore will not create such a condition.
Unfortunate that "closet Muslim" is an insult. I frankly think that everyone would do well to completely ignore digs at his name. I'm not totally sure that it bears addressing.
Like "use your head" isn't argumentative.
I'd like to be a democrat, but none of them seem to have anything worthwhile to say until after they lose the election. The current crop is a little better, but as someone pointed out earlier, Obama is quite happy to make charismatic speeches about how he's going to work together with Republicans to change the world. That's nice, but how does he propose to get Republicans to support things that they are obviously very much against (the child health care bill recently is an example)? I think it's naive.
I always knew US citizens were a bunch of turkeys.
I want to be one of twelve. What kind of legal system do we have where no one will serve in it? You don't want to be in a jury, move to a different country. I think the fact that they let people out is bullshit (though I do understand someone living hand to mouth not being able to afford the loss of pay -- jury pay is probably still paltry).
First time I read that, I thought it was his lawyer in the hall folding pants. It's extremely amusing to me at this point that that did not grab my attention at the time. :)
This is actually a very interesting article:
...it talks about how, before Kerry was seen as a flip-flopper, Bush's media advisor laid out his plan during an interview. I'm not sure it really matters who they run as long as they can't combat this stuff. You can find some sort of way to discredit almost anyone, and if it isn't addressed as bullshit right away it gets into the public subconscious.
http://www.alternet.org/election08/77346/
Why does one need to drive in order to advocate for auto safety?
Thanks for writing this. I hate to read the 90% here too -- I already knew otherwise, but it's a little disappointing to see so many idiots parroting bullshit on a site that one might think has some intelligent users.
If you're voting based on what other people will do, your vote already means nothing.
See the "egomaniac" thing everyplace. Now, considering you and all the other people say that probably know precisely dick about Nader, and the media regularly calls Nader an egomaniac, it really looks like you're just parroting with no personal knowledge.
Don't be a jackass. If Gore ran a good campaign, he'd have won. Hell, if he took a stand on important issues, I'd have voted for him. He didn't. I voted for the best candidate. It's not my fault that you, and many others, didn't. If anyone failed America, it was the folks who voted Democrat while they weren't worth voting for.
If I were convinced that the one of the other candidates were better for the greater good, I'd have been voting for them from the get-go.
Really? Let's take a step back for a moment -- why was this the closest Presidential election in American history? Gore's shit campaign? Republican meddling? Ralph Nader's margin NEVER should have mattered in an election where a man with a fairly distinguished record was running against an apish former cokehead. You can't blame that on Nader.
It's kinda too bad he forced you to wear a seatbelt, isn't it?
That's what everyone has done so far.
I have to say, though, parent is incorrect on almost everything. All of those things he said about the other candidates were what the media says was true of them. In reality, to me, the reason Gore didn't win is that he didn't stand for what he stood for. In reality, that's the same thing Kerry did. Look at Gore now -- did he believe all of the things he says and does now in 2000? Maybe, but it certainly seems as if he was told not to say any of it. Every time the Republicans have sandbagged Democrats with ASININE bullshit (look at what Bush has done and compare it to anything that the Democratic candidates have), there has been no tough response that points out how stupid it all is. The debates of 2004 showed Kerry basically failing to intelligently hit back on any question.
I suppose too wishy-washy could be true, but I call it a failure to actually stand for anything. Not that the Republicans truthfully stood for anything either, but at least they put on a better show.