Already tired of hearing the whining.

Post by **thibodeaux** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 4:54 pm

1) Oh, now it's "etc." Well well. At any rate, the gay marriage thing passed in Ohio with 76% (3.2M to 2M). That's a margin of about 1.2M votes. Bush's margin of victory in the state was about 140k votes---which is about the same as in 2000. I suppose that doesn't disprove your hypothesis, but I don't think it lends it any support either.

2) Yeah, OK.

Post by **TPRJones** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:52 pm

You can find a full breakdown of who voted for the Ohio thingy and their exit poll data here:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTIO.....0.html

The key item for this discussion would be the very last one. Of the people voting for Bush, 81% voted FOR the initiative and 19% voted AGAINST. Of the people voting for Kerry, 41% voted FOR the initiative and 59% voted AGAINST.

Looks to me like this ballot initiative didn't impact the Presidential results all that much. There were plenty of homophobes voting for Kerry in the election. Which seems like a bit of an oxymoron, but hey.

Post by **TheCatt** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 6:56 pm

Well, I think what we need is:

% of people voting this time that didnt vote previously, and why.

Post by **thibodeaux** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 7:50 pm

I still say you're reaching.

Post by **TheCatt** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:13 pm

I think there's plenty of circumstantial evidence pointing to it.

And in NC, circumstantial evidence is allowed.

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:16 pm

I'm not sure what snipping foreskins has to do with anything.

Post by **thibodeaux** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 11:39 am

Is this humor, too?

Post by **GORDON** » Fri Nov 12, 2004 12:08 pm

thibodeaux wrote:Is this humor, too?

Posted that before. It started the "crap like this divides the country" fight.

Post by **thibodeaux** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 10:54 am

TheCatt wrote:It's called humour.

Is this humor?

They--rural, red-state voters, the denizens of the exurbs--are not real Americans. They are rubes, fools, and hate-mongers.

mbilderback · Post by **mbilderback** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 12:27 pm

thibodeaux wrote:
TheCatt wrote:It's called humour.

Is this humor?

They--rural, red-state voters, the denizens of the exurbs--are not real Americans. They are rubes, fools, and hate-mongers.

I read his first page, but I wasn't going to waste my time reading his second or further. I find the hypocrisy in his words to be amusing and disheartening. His extremist lefty view is as bad as the extreme rights. Hasn't anyone thought that perhaps the truth is somewhere between the crap that the two extremes spew? And for the last time, QUIT WHINING! I understand you lost, I understand you're upset. Use your energy to produce worthwhile commentary as to how to better things, not this social seperatism crap.

Just to be specific, I love how he says that liberalists views like compassion drive cities like New York.....uh, yeah, when I think compassion, the first thing that pops into my head is New York...riiiiight.

Post by **Cakedaddy** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 12:58 pm

thibodeaux wrote:
TheCatt wrote:It's called humour.

Is this humor?

They--rural, red-state voters, the denizens of the exurbs--are not real Americans. They are rubes, fools, and hate-mongers.

Take a look at Michigan in that second map. . .

Fucking Detroit. . . . I wonder if I can get it moved to California.

Looks like Cleveland is Ohio's Detroit.

Edited By Cakedaddy on 1100627970

Post by **thibodeaux** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:38 pm

If I'm not mistaken, the thesis of this article is that the Democrats "are the party of urban America." But then, how does that explain why Kerry did so well in places like Claiborne County, MS; Hancock County, Georgia; and Allendale County, South Carolina? These are places where voter turnout was around 5,000 people---hardly what you'd call "urban,"---yet they went pretty strongly for Kerry. Why is that, I wonder?

If I were the kind of person who indulged in stereotypes, I might hazard a guess, but I'll leave that to the compassionate and tolerant types in the Urban Archipelago.

Post by **Cakedaddy** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:21 pm

Archipelago

Check out the big brain on Thib.

Had to look that one up. You're so deep. . . (I know, that's what she said)

Post by **thibodeaux** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:34 pm

Well, to be fair, it IS in the title of that article I linked.

Post by **Cakedaddy** » Tue Nov 16, 2004 3:01 pm

ahhhhhh. I just look at the pictures.

Post by **Vince** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 8:14 am

TheCatt wrote:1) Yes, that's my belief, Ohio tipped to Bush cuz of gay marriage intiative, etc.

One of the blue states (I forget which one) went to Kerry while passing an anti-gay marriage initiative at the same time.

I think this is the thing Kerry supporters are clinging to rather than accept that their guy had less character and fewer leadership qualities.

Post by **thibodeaux** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 9:04 am

Vince wrote:One of the blue states (I forget which one) went to Kerry while passing an anti-gay marriage initiative at the same time.

Oregon and Michigan, both.

Post by **TheCatt** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:25 pm

Vince wrote:
TheCatt wrote:1) Yes, that's my belief, Ohio tipped to Bush cuz of gay marriage intiative, etc.

One of the blue states (I forget which one) went to Kerry while passing an anti-gay marriage initiative at the same time.

I think this is the thing Kerry supporters are clinging to rather than accept that their guy had less character and fewer leadership qualities.

Oregon, the one that passed the gay marriage ban by the slimmest majority. (57-43, I think).

If I wanted someone who made bad decisions, stuck to them, and called that leadership, I'd vote for a monkey.

Bush is a leader to those who believe in an authoritarian system of leadership. Say: military, or business from the 50s-80s. Me, I want more.

Edited By TheCatt on 1100748834

Post by **Vince** » Thu Nov 18, 2004 3:44 am

TheCatt wrote:If I wanted someone who made bad decisions, stuck to them, and called that leadership, I'd vote for a monkey.

At least he made decisions.

Post by **TheCatt** » Thu Nov 18, 2004 9:17 pm

Vince wrote:
TheCatt wrote:If I wanted someone who made bad decisions, stuck to them, and called that leadership, I'd vote for a monkey.

At least he made decisions.

So did Custer.