obvious voter fraud by dems... as usual.

[Karmashock]

The number of King County ballots counted in the final tally was 899,199 — 3,539 more than the number of participating voters reported in the county's list.


likely took a page out of the chicago play book by having dead people vote... oh yeah, chicago always goes strongly dem every time...

I just find it irritating that dems have a much longer proven history of fraud... and yet an unproven conspiracy theory gets spread in florida by bitter losers and suddenly... "we're" the cheating party?...

It could just be an error here... but I don't know how you get 3539 extra votes when there is no fraud. It might not be organized... it might just be 100 different people working alone to cheat the ballot.

[Bentusi]

mm..

If it was fraud then I expect that it was locally based.

More likely probability is that the paperwork for the registered voters got fucked up.

I mean seriously.. if any sort of large scale fraud was attempted by either party you've got to know some political worker would talk to the press, and then wham-o...no white house for you.

Just seems to be an incredibly large risk for <4000 votes

Edit: How in good lord did Wham-o become a link to Ebay. *looks over the coding, which looks familiar*.. FUCK. Crappy as Spyware! I'm running fucking ad-aware how does this shit survive.. I ran it YESTERDAY. Dumb ass program keeps poping up windows and shit, and now it's linking shit to fucking e-bay!. god damnit

[JADezimar]

You can Get spyware by simply going to the yahoo homepage. Its everywhere.

[Karmashock]

mm..

If it was fraud then I expect that it was locally based.
Fraud is nearly always locally based. The question is whether it was organized or not. Four thousand votes extra is fraud... 10 extra might be paper work.

I am assuming that it wasn't organized... it was likely a small group or even an individual that tried to cheat the system... might even have been a poll opperator... either way, this has just gotten ugly. If the Reps are smart they'll make a big stink about it so that they dems will finally shut the fuck up about florida... if there had been fraud there, then bush wouldn't have kept it... there wasn't... so to finally crush that bullshit, we need to humilate the dems.

More likely probability is that the paperwork for the registered voters got fucked up.

I mean seriously.. if any sort of large scale fraud was attempted by either party you've got to know some political worker would talk to the press, and then wham-o...no white house for you.
Anyone involved in this would be a fanatic... and therefore highly unlikely to talk.

Just seems to be an incredibly large risk for <4000 votes
Its for the governor... and this race is so tight that even 40 votes would be enough.

[Bentusi]

oh, I thought you meant national elections.

Ya, in that case the risk might be concievably worth it.

Democracy in action that..

[Karmashock]

that election is reeeeally tight... like 5 or 10 votes could do it. This fraud comes from a dem county that hadn't reported or was having a recount or something... I'll just cite that in the bad old days of chicago, they would wait to see how many votes they needed before claiming that's how many they had sometimes. That was mostly a hundred years ago... but it condinued to a lesser degree until about 60 years ago... it's mostly clean down there now...

Nationally, the republican don't need many more governors... we've got most of them as is. However, it's pretty significant in washington

[Dibujante]

And you ignore all of the fraud that appeared at Republican polling stations, too. Like physical harassment of voters and touching votes, which is a FELONY. You really can't claim the moral highground, regardless of anything Democrats have or have not done. Further, the final analysis of the 2000 election indicates that, when every vote was counted by hand, Gore had won. Remember, facts are you friends.
Regards,
Dibujante

[Karmashock]

Actually, that line about voting by hand is a lie.

CNN and the New York times counted all the votes by hand after teh state had done so (the state declared bush the winner) and also declared bush the winner again.

However, they didn't make a big deal about it because they're biased fuck holes.


If you would like to counter that, then post a link... I've got mine waiting. ;)

[Dibujante]

Actually, the NYT indicated that Gore won.
Here's a link to a kooky anti-Bush site. Normally, I wouldn't trust them, but they're posting a photocopy of the NYT article in question. I'll trust the photocopy.
http://www.bushwatch.com/gorebush.htm

[tom]

I believe he is talking about the 2004 election, Dibujante

[Dibujante]

He started with the 2004 election but we kind of meandered to the 2000 election and he asked me to post a link about it. So, I have.
Regards,
Dibujante

[Karmashock]

Actually, you're wrong. What this shows is that Bush still wins.

The 'disqualified' ballots were in most cases disqualified for good reason. Convicts, dead people, illegal immigrents... people voting twice.
http://www.bushwatch.com/nytchart.jpg

Of course, I can understand that as a democrat disqualifying the dead to vote is a great blow to your political future.
http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/05.01.09.EmbalmtheVote-X.gif


You're pathetic. Your whole cause is withering on the vine and you don't even know it.

[Dibujante]

Ouch! You just posted a political cartoon in order to prove a point? Those hold no weight, you know.
In fact, most of the people disqualified to vote were people whose last names were similar to the last names of convicted criminals. The voter purge system in Florida got overzealous and removed many legitimate voters.
Also, a political cartoon is not a valid point. Post a real link or you lose.
Regards,
Dibujante.

[Karmashock]

Easy...
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/206969_dead07.html?dpfrom=tsto
And cus' it's true:
http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/05.01.09.EmbalmtheVote-X.gif


The dems have been doing this shit since chicago a hundred years ago... to call us the cheating party is just pathetic.

[Dibujante]

Ouch, you're still citing a political cartoon, and you're adding to it a governor's race that has nothing to do with the Florida election! I guess you don't have a point, after all, except for character assassination.
Regards,
Dibujante

[Karmashock]

My point, jackass, is that only a kook outfit would propose the counting scheme that you said gore would win under. Gore's own system was very biased to begin with... going beyond that is just f'ing shameless.

As to governor's race, that's just to demonstrate that you have no moral high ground.

I can bring up JFK's election if you like... you're degenerate affilation has been pulling this horse shit for generations.

[Tigre]

If you read into the history of the political process in the cities of Boston, New York and Philadelphia, you will find that the Democrats were the worst offenders of fraud and bribery in the 1800's and early 1900's. It wasn't pretty!

[Karmashock]

What? Not the republicans?... But I thought they were red because they worship satan!



oh yeah, the republicans used to be the blue party, till our color was fucking robbed from us...

[stats]

Parlimentary government, multi party system and re-instate THE monarchy. Your lives will become richer!

[Karmashock]

... mind explaining that?

[stats]

No

[Karmashock]

then it's spam... thank you...

[shutupandshave]

If you read into the history of the political process in the cities of Boston, New York and Philadelphia, you will find that the Democrats were the worst offenders of fraud and bribery in the 1800's and early 1900's. It wasn't pretty!
And the US nuked someone just 50 years ago - does it mean they do it all the time now?

[JADezimar]

Quote of Saus
And the US nuked someone just 50 years ago - does it mean they do it all the time now?

Did you miss the part where this thread started out with a recent Democratic election doing that?

[shutupandshave]

Did you miss the part where there is no proof as to who it is?

Does anyone not wonder why someone would cheat if they knew they were going to win?

[JADezimar]

Lol Exactly A democrat one you stupid shit.

[shutupandshave]

Jad, I forgot how much of a monumental dumbass you are sometimes.

[Karmashock]

And the US nuked someone just 50 years ago - does it mean they do it all the time now?

It means that the US can't yell at the Japan about scaring people with it's nuclear weapons.

The Democrats/US accuses the republicans/japanese of cheating/threating people with nukes, even though the democrats/US is the only one with a history of cheating/using or threating people with nukes... in fact, the Democrats/US has specifically cheated/nuked the republicans/japanese in the past.

That's just theoretical... but if you knew how to make an analogy, it would look like that. :thumbup

[shutupandshave]

So what you're saying, is that if a group of people does something wrong, then no matter how far down the line - they shouldn't complain about other people doing the thing they're ancestors did?

[Karmashock]

No, I was just fixing your broken analogy... That doesn't mean I agree with what it is saying or have any reason to make it.


You compared two things together that don't fit. So I fixed it... nothing more or less.

[shutupandshave]

The analogy was fine, you just missed the point.

[Karmashock]

I'm not saying your point was wrong, I'm just saying your analogy didn't make sense.

Yours was general and sloppy, mine was specific both to nuclear weapons and Democrat cheating.

My analogy still makes your point... The US is after all a force for nuclear restraint and disarmament around the world (which you analogized to cheating). But my analogy also highlights that the democrats have no moral high ground in this instance (Just as the US doesn't have much of one with nukes). Which you must admit. Furthermore, my analogy also highlights that the democrats specifically cheated the people that they are accusing of cheating, just as the US would be hassling Japan about nukes though we nuked them in the past.


My analogy makes your point... but is fair about it.

[shutupandshave]

JAD was saying that because democrats cheated a hundred years ago, they cheat now

I was trying to point out the flaw in his logic.

Thank you for the way you said what you said.

[Karmashock]

SUAS, you still must recognize that the Dems have been very openly calling the reps cheaters with no actual proof. Furthermore, they told their local officals to say the reps were cheating even if they didn't see anything. I can show you the offical dem memo if you like. Beyond that, the dems have a much more long standing record of cheating then the reps and should be the last to throw stones.

Are the reps cheating? I've seen no proof of that. Did the Dems cheat in Washington's Governor's race? Apparently 300 of the voter applications are written in the same handwriting... and they all registered democrat...


I'm not saying the Democrat authority did this... I'm saying free citizens decided on their own to subvert the process and they just happen to all be democrats in this case.



What I want from democrats is for them to only call foul when they actually have proof... and if they don't have any they should remember their past and remain a bit more humble.

Are you an American, Suas? I forget...

[JADezimar]

Thats not what I was saying Saus. Again an un-intelligent understanding. Or should I say a play on words. Must I make the Long posts Karma Does to prove my points and not be manipulated. Thats why karma does it. So then in turn you guyz make fun of him?

Anytime anyone makes good points. Everyone on the other side of the forums, Starts bashing those people, And or Manipulates there words. ZZZZ my bann was a good thing. Im plagued with an addiction to assholes.

[shutupandshave]

SUAS, you still must recognize that the Dems have been very openly calling the reps cheaters with no actual proof. Furthermore, they told their local officals to say the reps were cheating even if they didn't see anything. I can show you the offical dem memo if you like. Beyond that, the dems have a much more long standing record of cheating then the reps and should be the last to throw stones.
Well then the Dems should probably start getting some evidence instead of pointing fingers. My point was that because the dems cheated 100 years ago, it does not mean they cheat now, and it does not mean they dont have the right to say other people are cheating.

Are you an American, Suas? I forget...
I dont think my views on freedom are compatible with American views of freedom.

Are the reps cheating? I've seen no proof of that. Did the Dems cheat in Washington's Governor's race? Apparently 300 of the voter applications are written in the same handwriting... and they all registered democrat...
Is there any kind of evidence of this - non-Republican evidence?

To me it seems like there is no evidence of either side cheating...except perhaps the extra votes in a secure dem area, which common sense would tell me a Republican did, but it could well have been an idiot Democrat, or the seat could not have been so secure.

[JADezimar]

So your saying there is no evidence for either side. I remember when you said the rep's Rigged Flordia. What was that all about?

[shutupandshave]

When did I say that?

Link?

I just searched these forums for all posts containing the word "florida" made by username "shutupandshave" there were two. Neither of which had anything to do with rigging votes.

You'd better be able to back this one up JAD.

[JADezimar]

Meh dont have to back anything up. When do you, when making claims about me. Go to the other threads. I merely just say that is the type of argument I expect to c from you :lmao:

[shutupandshave]

As I said in the other thread.

Well JAD, what have I said you've done that you haven't - you find me an example you would like me to back up after you've backed yourself up - and I will go and find whatever needs to be found - okay?

[JADezimar]

Calling muslims faggots.

[shutupandshave]

you find me an example you would like me to back up after you've backed yourself up

Note the word AFTER in there?

That means that you back yourself up, then I will be happy to back myself up.

Also, where did I say that you called Muslims faggots?

[JADezimar]

JAD, you and Karma both insult people because you think they're wrong. I got fed up of it as soon as I met you both, and told you to stfu. Now everyone else is fed up with it. It's because you're rude. In every example I have seen and that I remember - you have started the fights... almost entirely directly. Sometimes you start the fights by saying things like "yeah well everyone from that country are faggots" or "all muslims are stupid faggot terrorists" (the quotes are my intepretations of the way you say things), and people react with amazement at the ridiculousness of a statement like that.

You stated all this in another thread way before I stated my above posts.

Point being, in this posts you say I start the fight every time. Will you go prove where every time I did not Start the insults with you etc. Since we are on this parade to force people to dig up every old dreary posts. Oh and Do not forget if you do. I will stop being lazy and find the posts where You started insulting.

Stop trying to look so innocent.

[shutupandshave]

JAD, you complete moron.

I even said in that post that you did not make those exact statement, and those are just interpretations of what you say.

*slaps forehead* Christ.

That is NOT evidence that I claimed you said muslims were faggots.

However, you've still not found the thing for me. Why do I have to defend myself, and yet you wont defend yourself? I asked first, please go and get some evidence.

[JADezimar]

However, you've still not found the thing for me. Why do I have to defend myself, and yet you wont defend yourself? I asked first, please go and get some evidence.

You posted firsts. I think you should have to find your stuff that you posted firsts. Especially on the part of who alwayz insults firsts. And your interpretation still throws those as my words out there, to hurt my character*

Again If proof is alwayz required you can go firsts. Stop Expecting me not to be lazy and then turn around and be lazy yourself.

Or has the Bloated part of your period making you to lazy, laziness on the comp=laziness in Real LIfe.

[Larsson7]

Fuck. This sucks so much it is unbearable.

[JADezimar]

You enjoy that feeling of Suas Angel?

[shutupandshave]

That last statement was actually funny JAD, however he was referring, I think to your stupidity and the length of this thread (caused by your stupidity)

[JADezimar]

Oh and your not a huge contribution? So Your stupidity? Its just as much anyones option to continue to responding to me as it is mine to them.

[Larsson7]

This thread is deteriorating into a spam filled piece of garbage.

Bring the thread back on topic or it will get locked.

[JADezimar]

Gonna have to start locking them all with Saus. If anyone is willing to, he will go on and on with them. o0

[Karmashock]

Well then the Dems should probably start getting some evidence instead of pointing fingers. My point was that because the dems cheated 100 years ago, it does not mean they cheat now, and it does not mean they dont have the right to say other people are cheating.
My point was that they're the last people to step up and make bullshit charges with their record.


I dont think my views on freedom are compatible with American views of freedom.
I didn't ask that, I asked if you were american. I don't remember... I think you're british, but I could be wrong.


Is there any kind of evidence of this - non-Republican evidence?

To me it seems like there is no evidence of either side cheating...except perhaps the extra votes in a secure dem area, which common sense would tell me a Republican did, but it could well have been an idiot Democrat, or the seat could not have been so secure.
Want a few articles chuckles?
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/206969_dead07.html?dpfrom=tsto

this is just some of it... there were more then 3000 too many votes in that small county then were registered... so just add that to the dead vote.

Seriously, are you an American... because you don't seem very up on our domestic politics for a citizen.

The rep was sworn in despite their felonious deeds...

[shutupandshave]

I think people should be allowed to make accusations freely if they have evidence to back it up. Without that evidence, I think it's just complaining.

Yes I am British, hence not knowing much about US domestic policy.

That link is pretty scary, I am sure it happens all over too... quite often though, it's not cheating, just stupidity and senility that seems to be causing the problems.

[JADezimar]

That link is pretty scary, I am sure it happens all over too... quite often though, it's not cheating, just stupidity and senility that seems to be causing the problems.

Yes lets assume People are making Huge mistakes on good reason for Dems. And lets not assume it was cheating.

[shutupandshave]

If you read that statement JAD, it doesn't say that who the people that made the mistakes voted for - did it?

:fag:

[JADezimar]

Uh huh. Im sure a republican would cheat to lose. yup.

[shutupandshave]

Perhaps they tried cheating and weren't succesful? Perhaps none of the stuff in the post from Karma was evidence of cheating... perhaps it was just a mistake.

Do you want me to explain it you properly?

[JADezimar]

To be sad No I dont play with the words of your posts and understand.

Also that is not what the article is incriminating is it o0

[shutupandshave]

You say you understand, yet you also said it was the Democrats that cheated there.

WHERE is your evidence it was the democrats, and where is your evidence they were cheating?

[JADezimar]

It is my opinion. Did I claim it as fact. Sorry if you decided to read that in to my posts.

[shutupandshave]

And your opinion is based on what facts?

[Karmashock]

I think people should be allowed to make accusations freely if they have evidence to back it up. Without that evidence, I think it's just complaining.

Yes I am British, hence not knowing much about US domestic policy.

That link is pretty scary, I am sure it happens all over too... quite often though, it's not cheating, just stupidity and senility that seems to be causing the problems.
actually, it's more people voting for friends, voting for loved ones, voting for the dead, voting for people that moved away, making up people, registering them, and voting in their name, illegal immigrents voting, convicts and felons voting, etc.


Back in chicago, many counties wouldn't tell the state how many votes they had until they knew how many they 'needed'... at which point they'd just 'have' that many...

about a hundred years ago, you could literally buy votes... as in... here is 10 dollars, now vote while I watch you vote for me.


You're not an American and you just can't relate to our internal politics... The democrats have a history. This is not something you want to stick your nose into without knowing what you're talking about. I forgot you were british and got kind of upset because I sort of assumed you were retarded... but as you're not american, it all makes sense.

Seriously, it's complicated. The reps aren't perfect... but they don't cheat the ballot box... it's just never been the way they've won.

we've bribed whole regions with govenment contracts... but never actual ballot manipulation... at least not since about 120 years ago... but everyone did it then... it was basic. The Dems kept it up until about the the mid thirties... they mostly cleaned up after that... though they were still bad in the south. Mostly cheating black people out of their vote.

[JADezimar]

though they were still bad in the south. Mostly cheating black people out of their vote.

Ya There have been books written on the fould deeds the Dems have done to the african american population. Why do you think there so Christian and to the right in most cases? Cuase the christians actually moved hard along with the right side for there freedoms.

[Karmashock]

we lost them to socialism...

[shutupandshave]

So we're agreed that there is no voter fraud at the moment, and even if there were allegations, there is no evidence to support it?

JAD, which books have been written?
JAD, which facts are you basing your opinions on?

[JADezimar]

1st Opinions Dont need facts they just need a common thing called thought process. 2nd You look for books names. Its been awhile since I watched that Tv program. You act like Im a walking library.

[shutupandshave]

I dont want to look for them.
You say they exist, I say they dont (just for the sake of argument) - you cant find them - that makes me right.

[JADezimar]

No it does not make you right. It may give you that feeling. For the sake of arguing. Is quite lame to make q request for some backup on info. Maybe I should continual ask you. Your asking for the proof in the American System the asker of proof has to Do the Prooving. Or your accusing me of lying I should say, And the Presecutor has to prove it.

[Karmashock]

The voter fraud in this last election is in Washington is obvious... it just isn't linkable to the either party's leadership. We can however link it to a lot of small frauds at least.


As to books... most high school tech books make all the historical points that either of us have made. It's just common knowledge in the US. You're at a disadvantage... have a little humility.
All the jim crow stuff was under dem leadership... to say nothing of the fact that the Dems started the civil war.


The GOP (Grand Old Party) used to be blue... that was our color... for whatever reason the media changed it in the 90's... anyway, that color goes back to the Union uniform. We were the party of abolition... and reform. We have always been the party of modernization... industrialization and small business.

The first republican president was Abraham Lincoln…. The history books are not kind to the democrats in this period… they’re typical jackasses.

[shutupandshave]

Fair enough I fully accept that my knowledge of US internal politics/affairs is far less than yours and probably most (if not almost all) Americans...

Just to clarify though, you're agreeing that there are books about the bad treatment of democrats against black slaves, and you also feel that JAD's statement is fair and weighted?

You mention that these are common knowledge - can you name some off the top of your head? (or can you name some after looking them up?)

[JADezimar]

I know Dollar bills exists, Do yoU? Humor me please.

[shutupandshave]

Yes I do.
I dont think 5 dollar bills exist, but I think 10's 20's and 100's do, I am not sure about 50's. I would assume that they would, but I have never seen one.

[JADezimar]

Theres presidents on those dollar bills right? And we can agree its common knowledge?

[shutupandshave]

Yes I believe so, but I have not seen them all and I could not name each of them.

[JADezimar]

Ok so Why would we know all the names of the books, which are commonly known to exists, but not as common as the everyday dollar? Just trying to heckle us to do extra work?

[shutupandshave]

I dont expect you to know them, but I expect you to know how to find them.

If I said to you, "British notes also have people on them" you would not know what they were, and I would not be able to tell you without looking it up - but if you asked me too - I would... because I believe that I should back up the statement I make with evidence.

[JADezimar]

You asks for evidence of every statement. Even those that are highly probable and highly likely to be true. I See it as heckling. I atleast give you the shadow of the doubtm when It seems plausable.

[shutupandshave]

My question about these books was not doubt, it was merely interest about them.

If I said "yeah I know some books on XXXXX" and it was a topic you were interested in - would you not want to know what the books were called?

[JADezimar]

Well IM interested too, would buy the book of the particuliar guy they interviewed. But the day I watched the program I was not interested and did not pay attention. So There is no way in hell I can remember the specific one I have in mind (Let alone the others Mentioned that day) You seem more adept at searching the web, you take a shot at it.

[shutupandshave]

Okay, that's all you had to say.

[Karmashock]

Fair enough I fully accept that my knowledge of US internal politics/affairs is far less than yours and probably most (if not almost all) Americans...

Just to clarify though, you're agreeing that there are books about the bad treatment of democrats against black slaves, and you also feel that JAD's statement is fair and weighted?

You mention that these are common knowledge - can you name some off the top of your head? (or can you name some after looking them up?)


Well... like I said... it's common knowledge. It's something you'll find in ANY US history text book or any decent encyclopedia.



Now, to be fair, they've broken with that past now for nearly 50~60 years. What happened was that Roosevelt took the party in a more socialist direction and as a result picked up factory workers in the north. As that happened they didn’t need to rely on race issues to sustain their power, but that pissed off the deep southern states the were formerly the democratic base. These states then formed some third parties. They went under some different names... but they were basically the racist piece of shit parties. They never really got any votes out side of like 5 Deep South states... so they decided to give it up. In the mid 60s early 70s the south basically said "ok, if racism isn't cool then we'll vote on something else"... that's basically when they joined the republicans. Now, let it be known that the republicans voted in HIGHER numbers for the civil rights bills of the late 50's and 60's... So the Deep South didn't join the Reps because we were racist... we remain to this day the party of abolition. We defeated slavery.

Anyway, the southerners cared more about their land, farms, business, then they did about socialist hand outs from ucle sam... that's generally why they joined the Reps. The Reps controlled the Midwest, texas, and all the way out to California. The south was more at home with those states, then they were the often-snobbish North. The reps lost California to the dems in the 80's and have been fighting for control of it ever since. Arnold has been our latest victory... though if you look at the maps, basically everyone in California votes rep except for the people in LA and SF... which alone are enough to over power everyone else.... kinda blows.


Anyway... that's some very very basic info... and is high simplified... just sort of to understand and not to write a report with... ;)

[shutupandshave]

okay, well would you mind looking in "ANY US history text book or any decent encyclopedia." for the names of these books that detail how bad the democrats were towards slavery?

I dont have access to ANY US history text books and it seems I dont have any decent encylopedia's either.

Perhaps MVB can look in ANY of his history text books and tell me the names of these books?

[Karmashock]

Dude... in your basic english history text book, does it reference another book right in the text?


No... this is not something that is disputed. The South was dominated by that political faction and that political faction started war with the north over the issue of slavery... and then spent the next 70 years trying to be as nasty to black people as possible.

There is no contraversy here...


What specifically do you want? A website?... I can give you a real basic unbiased source that will clear this up for you.

this is totally basic.

[shutupandshave]

Sure
Prove to me that they were trying to be as nasty to black people as possible.

[Karmashock]

I'm going to google it...
All questions are more or less answered by the below.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Democratic_Party
The Democratic Party was formed from the Andrew Jackson-led "Democratic-Republican" faction of the old Republican Party (now, referred to as the "Democratic-Republicans" for convenience). Following his defeat in the election of 1824 despite having a plurality of the popular vote, Jackson set about building a political coalition strong enough to defeat President John Quincy Adams in the election of 1828. The coalition that he built was the foundation of the subsequent Democratic Party.

In the 1850s, following the disintegration of the Whig Party, the Southern wing of the Democratic Party became increasingly associated with the expansion of slavery, in opposition to the newly revamped United States Republican Party. Democrats in the Northern states opposed this new trend, and at the 1860 nominating convention the Party split and nominated two candidates (see U.S. presidential election, 1860). As a result, the Democrats went down in defeat – part of the chain of events leading up to the United States Civil War. During the war, Northern Democrats fractured into two factions, War Democrats, who supported the military policies of Republican President Abraham Lincoln, and Copperheads, who strongly opposed them.

After the war, the Democrats were a shattered party. Nevertheless, the party benefited from white Southerners' resentment of Reconstruction and consequent hostility to the Republican Party. Once Reconstruction ended, and the disenfranchisement of blacks was re-established, the region was for several decades known as the "Solid South" because it reliably voted Democratic (although neither major party tried to use federal power against the Jim Crow laws that enforced racial segregation). The Democratic Party was also competitive in the mid-Atlantic and lower Midwest. The presidential elections of the years 1876 to 1892 were close, and the Democrats had control of the House of Representatives for most of this period. The reforming Democratic Governor of New York, Grover Cleveland, won the Presidency in 1884 and 1892. In 1888 he won the popular vote but lost the electoral vote, as also happened to the Democratic candidate in 1876, Samuel J. Tilden, and in 2000 to Al Gore.

In 1896 the Democrats chose populist William Jennings Bryan as their candidate, leading to the defection of many conservative Democrats and a decisive loss to Republican William McKinley. The Democrats did not regain the Presidency until William Howard Taft and Theodore Roosevelt split the Republican vote and Woodrow Wilson won with a modest plurality in 1912. The Republicans again took the lead in 1920 by championing laissez-faire regulatory policies.

In 1924 at the Democratic national convention, a resolution denouncing the white-supremacist Ku Klux Klan was introduced, there was much debate and the majority of Democratic delegates voted not to condemn the Klan.

Very good info on "Jim Crow" laws that were put in place to stop black people from voting in the democrat controlled south.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crow



Common fucking knowledge.

Here are the republicans... you read it if you want to have an opinion that means something.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_%28United_States%29
In case you don't even click on it, here is the first few sentences:
John C. Frémont ran as the first Republican nominee for President in 1856, using the political slogan: "Free soil, free labor, free speech, free men, Frémont." Although Frémont's bid was unsuccessful, the party grew especially rapidly in Northeastern and Midwestern states, where slavery had long been prohibited, culminating in a sweep of victories in the Northern states.

Perhaps enlightening as well (Not that in all but the most recent pictures the Republicans are represented by the color Blue. This goes back to the civil war uniform.)...
Election of 1860
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f9/ElectoralCollege1860-Large.png
Election of 1952
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f5/ElectoralCollege1952-Large.png
After the Democrats moved away from racism, things got more complicated... 1968
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/38/ElectoralCollege1968-Large.png
=================================
This is more or less where racism stopped getting enough votes to keep any party going.
=================================
The old racists gave up trying to push their bs and have been voting along different issues ever since. 1972
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/94/ElectoralCollege1972-Large.png


The south went back to the dems in the late 70s and 80s... It wasn't until Clinton that the Dems controlled California and the north east.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/29/ElectoralCollege1992-Large.png
Today the breakup is more or less like this...
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3f/County-by-county.jpg

But race hasn't been an issue in elections for decades... so this is more just good general us election info

[shutupandshave]

None of that proves they were trying to be as nasty as possible.

Why? You cannot prove EVERYBODY'S motives.

It's a moot point... and another example of your sweeping generalisations.

[MVB]

They now are yet again claiming that there was rampant voter fraud and "more than 50% of the nation was PREVENTED from voting." The claims are spearheaded by John Kerry (I LOST ohnoes!).

Also, an anarchist, anti-Bush violent anti-inauguration protest has been planned in DC on the day of the inauguration by the Democrats, and on the News NONE of the democratic spokesman brought in were willing to speak out against it.

[shutupandshave]

Well that's just gay.

Shouldn't have lost should they.

[Karmashock]

None of that proves they were trying to be as nasty as possible.

Why? You cannot prove EVERYBODY'S motives.

It's a moot point... and another example of your sweeping generalisations.
Suas, all you're doing is trying to avoid conceding the point by being so technical that there is no point.


The fact is that the democrats were the party of the south, slavery, jim crow, segregation, and racial bigotry.

They haven't been that party for a long time. I don't associate them with that today and no one should. But at one time they were and there is no mistaking that.


Lincoln was the first republican president. Get over it.

oh yeah... and before you flame
think flibble.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/ian.ridley3/images/flibble.gif

[shutupandshave]

No, the point was - you cant prove the stuff you say, because the stuff you say is innacurate to begin with.

That is the point I have made.

I am not trying to avoid conceding anything. You should know by now, that the way you use language to exaggerate and belittle the opposition is one of the things I dislike most about you. This is an example of an exaggeration.

Why do you think I chose that particular point for you to "prove"? I'll tell you, it's because there is no way you can prove it...and I was hoping that you would be able to see that. Instead you're now changing the posts...telling me what I am thinking, and not understanding the reasoning behind what I say.

[Karmashock]

Suas... seriously dude... what are you claiming?

Are you just trying to annoy me or do you have some point to posting?


I took some pains to explain something to you and you've disrespected my effort.

Why?


I'm trying to treat you with respect so we can have a discussion but all you do is flame.


STOP FLAMING... its fucking boring... I mean, if you were at least entertaining with it, I might not mind... but you're totally devoid of talent on the matter and so I'd just rather you try to talk.

Please...

[shutupandshave]

So pointing out (using no derrogatory terms whatsoever) that what you said was incorrect, is now considered flaming?

You say "STOP FLAMING"
Then you say "... but you're totally devoid of talent on the matter and so I'd just rather you try to talk"

Where was I FLAMING you?

[Karmashock]

What I said was that that political organization did terrible things to those people... they scared them... took away their rights... treated them like animals.


If you don't consider that "as bad as they could make it" then I think you're missing the point.

Furthermore, I'm not blaming them for this today as they're very different. But I think that past should be kept in memory and not shouted down by people that wouldn't know US history from astrophysics.

Furthermore, I did make a very good effort to educate you with that long post... I'm rather disapointed that you didn't use that to understand us a bit better.


Love and Peace, Karmashock.

[shutupandshave]

Yes that political organisation did do terrible things, although they were not the only ones. I just find it easier to discuss if we dont exaggerate to get a point across, as so often, the exaggerations start getting out of control...

I DO however fully appreciate the time you spent explaining that point to me.

I've noticed this before, and I will say it again here - it seems to me that US politics is different to UK politics in it's definitions. Liberal means just that over here - liberal, everyone has the right to live, and we shouldn't criticise everyone... where as liberals over there seem to spend most of there time criticising. I think it's these kinds of differences that cause a lot of the friction in political conversations.

I never realised the Republican party had so much to do with the abolition of slavery - I always assumed it would be the democrats, as democrats = fairness in the UK.

Thanks for the information.

[Karmashock]

no problem...

In the US liberal really means 'socialist'... Seriously, if you actually look at where that term is used... or maybe more european... not in the liberal sense but in the current european socialist politics. Technically all american parties are 'liberal'. Remember our Roots. If we weren't liberal then we wouldn't have resisted the crown.

The republicans existed before the 'new' democrats. Our notion was that freedom of property and people from the government was the best way of doing things. For this reason republicans have always been on the side of businesses large and small because we have always felt that that's what the country should be more about. Business is what people should do... the democrats however think that the government should play a larger role in our lives. This is why I say they're basically socialists. They believe very strongly in wellfare, high taxes, limiting how much people can make or own, and putting larger businesses under direct government control.


The GOP (Grand Old Party) was hurt very badly in the great depression which gave the democrats all they needed to push their socialist agrenda. It's taken us nearly 70 years to even begin to fight that back. We hope to roll back as much of that socialism as we can.


Furthermore, if race is something that is important to you, you should know that the republicans are starting to get the black vote back. Blacks generally went to the democrats because they thought a more involved government would improve their lives. However statistically the more the government has gotten involved the less well they have done. Therefore, they're starting to rethink that. Things like school vouchers are especially attractive as it gives them the ability to go to any school they want bipassing broken inner city schools.

[shutupandshave]

See, now I can understand all that, but there is something in me that says if we need to progress as people, we really need to change the way things work at the moment.

We're never going to have proper space travel, or teleportion and all that stuff until we do...

If Bin Laden had a device that could beam a bomb anywhere in the world....

eventually the power requirements for simple things like planes and cars will be so great that blowing up the powersource would destroy texas....

None of that is possible while we are still hating each other.

[Karmashock]

Suas, we have different opinions of why they are attacking us. Yours is based on the 'why cant we all just get along' theory... Mine is based upon hegemony. If we bring the arab world under our hegemonic umbrella then they won't perceive us as a threat anymore.



Hegemony is a complicated concept. It's more about the mind then about anything physical.

The best example I can think for what hegemony is... "why do you stop at cross walks or stop lights?"... The very rules of society that we all accept are function of that. You obey because you do.





Anyway, if our future is threatened by these people... in a very real way beyond 9/11... You don't want to get in our way... I can't think of anything we wouldn't be capable of... seriously... don't threaten the existence of my nation... not with that big glowing red button blinking in front of us.

We don’t want that… we have enough sins on our nation’s soul… We’ve charted the only path to long standing peace that we can see.


We will not lose, karmashock.

[shutupandshave]

See now I believe that conquoring the spirit and the mind is not so different to conquoring the body.

I remember hearing about how the USSR and the Nazi's brainwashed people for the common good... now I hear that the US are actively going to be doing it?

[Morpheus]

Suas : he will say that you can't compare those with USA, but I tend to agree with you on that. I think that actions "for the common good" start out with very good intentions, only end up leading to very bad consequences.

Karma, if you think WW3 with nuclear weapons can be "won" by USA, then you're crazy. Exaclty how many billion lives it will take to "win" a war like that?

[Karmashock]

See now I believe that conquoring the spirit and the mind is not so different to conquoring the body.

I remember hearing about how the USSR and the Nazi's brainwashed people for the common good... now I hear that the US are actively going to be doing it?
It's not brainwashing. Why do you wear cloths? Is that brainwashing?

It's convention. It's very hard to understand because these are the tools of power. If they were easy to understand then they wouldn't work.

Besides while the two people you mentioned were monsters, we're giving them freedom and a future far brighter then what they had to look forward to without us.


get real.
================================
Karma, if you think WW3 with nuclear weapons can be "won" by USA, then you're crazy. Exaclty how many billion lives it will take to "win" a war like that?
It won't be WW3.

Who would die to stop us? Not many.

This is what we're trying to avoid... we don't want that. But it is an option if we have nothing else. :|

:P
http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/Fallout/fallout2.jpg

[Morpheus]

Besides while the two people you mentioned were monsters, we're giving them freedom and a future far brighter then what they had to look forward to without us.


That is your opinion. Advertise it all you want, but don't be forcing it on someone and saying "it is for your own good". Let them get there on their own. Isn't it what freedom is about?

[Karmashock]

You can't force freedom... It's not possible.


What do you want us to do?... just let anarchy set in?


Get real.

[Morpheus]

In which way that anarchy is threatening USA?

"You can't force freedom" - exactly. Don't try to force it, it causes a negative reaction in return.

And have you ever thought that maybe some contry will come up with a better political and economical system than USA has right now?

[JADezimar]

Hehe it is possible. But It has not been done.

Morph a very huge percentage of any servicemen in Iraq will tell you the normal everyday run of the mill citizen in Iraq wants us there. We are not forcing anything, that was Sadaam.

[Karmashock]

In which way that anarchy is threatening USA?
The anarchy will result in a dictator taking control again... that's bad for us.

Furthermore, we do truely want to help these people.

"You can't force freedom" - exactly. Don't try to force it, it causes a negative reaction in return.
So far, only from europeans.

And have you ever thought that maybe some contry will come up with a better political and economical system than USA has right now?
Name one.

[Morpheus]

Heh, Australia. Does it matter? Present your case to people and leave them alone - there's freedom. Helping oppressed people is a good cause, but I do not believe in wars as means of doing so.

[JADezimar]

Technically there is no war right now.

[shutupandshave]

So far, only from europeans.
Oh okay, so you're saying no Muslims have reacted badly to these events.

An incorrect statement which seemingly has the single purpose of offending.

You believe in forcing democracy on the world Karma, you have said so in another thread - now you dont believe in it?

[Karmashock]

Heh, Australia. Does it matter? Present your case to people and leave them alone - there's freedom. Helping oppressed people is a good cause, but I do not believe in wars as means of doing so.
Australia isn't meaningfully different enough from our system for you to have a point... unless I'm missing something.

Make a clearer case.

When the oppressed are in the hands of tyrants there is no other way.


Furthermore, the Iraqis prefer what we are doing to living under saddam.


These are the ONLY people that really matter in this debate.


STOP what you're about to say. The Iraqis disagree. People in jordan have no rights over then and neither do you. You might say "oh well why is america forcing htem to be be free then?" Again, you can't force people to be free. They were in bondage to a dictator. There is no down side here.




Americans believe in freedom... we believe in it more then I think you realize. It means something different to us then it does to you otherwise you couldn't make these arguements.


Freedom is the right of one and all. For now and all time.




Furthermore, consider the process.

They are electing a representatives.
These reps will debate on a new consitution that the US will not have power over.
They can have pretty much anything in their consitution that they want.
If they want to oppress women, then they have that right.
If they want to ban christians from their country, then they have that right.
If they want to tell america to leave, then they have that right... and we will respect it and LEAVE.


We are freeing people. Iraq is not to be a puppet state. We don't work like that. Iraq will work with us because it 'wants' to.

This is how US power works... we're just that sexy.

[JADezimar]

I would give my manhood to stay free.

[Karmashock]

I'd sooner die then lose my freedom... or my manhood.

[JADezimar]

Well you got me there! Anyways point made. Freedom is way to important. Freedom = life.

[Morpheus]

Once again, I don't think it is our business to fix other countries when there's so much to fix right here. And you know as well as I do that they will be pretty much pressured to have exactly the same ideals and laws that USA has. You might think Iraq is not to be a puppet state, I think it is going to become one.

You're saying that you're rather die than lose your freedom. Iraqis obviously don't want it bad enough to do so to overthrow Saddam on their own... I'll use your own phrase : read the history books, no dictatorship lasts forever...

[Karmashock]

Morpheus,
You have no poetry... The petty squabbles in this nation could only result in a nation like Switzerland if taken to the exclusion of all others. Perhaps you'll get the trains to run on time etc but there will always be something else. Do you want to be remembered for the CooCoo clock (sp)? When this nation finally goes the way of all things into dust, I would like to think we left the world a better place... humanity a little nobler… the future a little brighter.

The legacy of this nation can be freedom or it can be, as you wish, nothing. I have FAITH in the nobility of man, however our species will never be at peace so long as it is mastered over by forces that care nothing for anything but their own petty power and comfort.




There will never be peace until the tyrants have been separated from their tools.


You cannot impose freedom…

So we are either giving them freedom or we are not. We are allowing them to choose their destiny… whatever that might be. But first we must make sure the people have control.


If they elect representatives that draft a constitution based upon oppression and societal misery and it is approved by the people, then that is their choice.

That is their future. However, to walk away before the choices are made is to invite tyranny and it needs no second invitation. Tyrannies are always of the elite and the elite understands power… it is an opportunist of a near geometric perfection. The only way to stop it is to give it no chance.

The people will not choose to return to it. My whole faith in freedom is based upon the fact that ALL humanity should and must be free. It implies that all humanity would prefer freedom to tyranny. If that is false then creed is false.

On faith alone, I cannot be wrong. I cannot accept failure in this. It is like a religion. I believe in freedom to an extent equal to religious radical throughout history. I would die for it a thousand times over. Humanity deserves freedom... What they do with it is their own business... but they must have it. If they throw it away, then that is their choice... and it will be remembered that those people prefered to be slaves.

But I don't think such people exist... that is just the hubris of the tyrant and the bigot.

Love and peace, Karmashock.

[shutupandshave]

I would give my manhood to stay free.
I would also give your manhood for your freedom.

[JADezimar]

Morph
You're saying that you're rather die than lose your freedom. Iraqis obviously don't want it bad enough to do so to overthrow Saddam on their own... I'll use your own phrase : read the history books, no dictatorship lasts forever...

As long as people are under-fed, Have no money, It is hopeless for them to overthrow there dictator. People without food have very little will power and strength. You ever go long times without food? It will destroy you in more ways than 1.

[Morpheus]

Karma, I don't have any problems with your views on it. I just have problems with what's going to happen in reality when USA starts imposing their freedom on everyone else. It is not going to be as pure as you see it. That's why I'd rather see them do it on their own.

[Karmashock]

Morpheus,
Freedom is what you make of it. If the people we give it to can't handle freedom, then they'll ruin it for themselves. That will be their fate and they'll have no one to blame for it but themselves.

We're giving them total control of powers that for THOUSANDS of years have kept them oppressed. They have never been free. Anything is better then before.

They can WRITE ALL THEIR OWN LAWS. Choose ANY ALLIES THEY WANT. Tell the US to GO OR STAY. Whatever they want.

They're the boss.


Furthermore, we're not going to make our next move for a while... Iraq is now a touchstone in the middle east... We can hopefully use it to cause the whole political and social structure of the region to reorganize around democratic lines. Once that happens the threat to my nation and civilization at large (which includes you) is reduced.

The world will be a better happier place for us, Karmashock.

[tom]

*Ahem* Obvious voter fraud by dems...

[Karmashock]

Political discussions that can't range or go off topic and follow tangets are less interesting.


Have some tolerence. I don't think anyone has complained about things going off topic aside from the pointless flames.


I say no to forum nazis, Karmashock.

[tom]

Ok ok

[Morpheus]

:), let me rephrase it a little : I don't think your views on this will apply to reality, mainly because they're too good to be true.

[Karmashock]

Morpheus,
So it won't be perfect... That's life. If you'll accept nothing but perfection then you're the one that's not being realistic. ;)

[Morpheus]

Ok, but if we can't deliver perfect, then we shouldn't deliver at all. We'll just be hated because it is not perfect, where if they come up with something on their own, they can't complain.

[Karmashock]

That's silly. Nothing is ever perfect. Our revolution wasn't perfect. Would you like to be a member of the british empire today? The french revolution was really really messed up... but they'd prefer that to living under the kings.


Freedom is so much better then tyranny that a little screw up here and there is ignorable. Saying we shouldn't do anything unless it is perfect is a copout... its an excuse to do nothing.


We're going to start doing things. We have no choice... if we don't then the other forces will move. Islam and china are trying to build their empires back up. We have to box china in and turn as much of islam into democracies while we still have a chance.

[shutupandshave]

Karma, if Islam is SOOOO bad, why aren't they killing the Chinese at the moment?

[Karmashock]

Because the Chinese slaughter them on a regular basis... look it up. There are some Chinese Muslims and the Chinese kill them when they cause problems... hell the Chinese kill Christians just for preaching.


What is the point of that post anyway? I don't think Muslims are bad people. I hope we can all live in peace together. However, the radicals have declared war on my people... and so my nation is at war. We won't stop until they surrender.

My city has lots of Muslims in it and we all get along just fine. Many of the Iraqi refugees came to LA during the war. We've opened our doors to them. We have a large Armenian community here already who are Christian Arabs... but they were very hospitable to their Arab brothers.


Do not confuse me with Ummon. Ummon and I agree about many things but we disagree on the issue of the inherent evil of Islam. I think elements of Islam are confused and being twisted by tyrannical forces. Ummon thinks Islam is just evil period.

I don't really feel like getting into a big discussion about that. But I will say that I do not view anyone that doesn't view me hostility as an enemy.

It's just that simple.

Love and peace, Karmashock.

[shutupandshave]

oh okay, I thought you said that Islam was inherantly evil.

[Karmashock]

Nope... just tyranny.