1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Robertson says U.S. should 'take out' Venezuela's Chavez

Discussion in 'The OT' started by Nick, Aug 23, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Aug 23, 2005 #21 of 221
    Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002

    Which refutes my argument that both sides were biased ---how? I will point out to you as well that even that recount did not do what i have suggested---recount the votes statewide---it focused on a selected sample of ballots that had not been counted.

    But frankly whether the 2004 US election was "fair" has nothing to do with an election in Venezuela which in turn has nothing to do with whether a minister should advocate that Chavez be assassinated. We would after all assassinate a lot of leaders if voter fraud were adequate justification.

    Robertson has a history of rash statements. I doubt that he means them all literally. I would suspect that the Bush administration cringed at this one. But only they could answer that.
     
  2. Aug 23, 2005 #22 of 221
    Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002

    You are mixing apples and oranges again. That article deals with pre election polls by a particualr pollster not the exit polls discussed above.
     
  3. Aug 23, 2005 #23 of 221
    Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002

    You are mixing apples and oranges again. That article deals with pre election polls by a particular pollster in several elections not the exit polls from 2004 discussed above.
     
  4. Aug 23, 2005 #24 of 221
    Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    I'm really tired of this myth.

    Firstly, the recounts that matter are the legal ones, not the unofficial ones. Claiming that a ballot should be determined legitimate because someone thinks they know who the person INTENDED to vote for but wasn't clear enough to do it isn't making a legitimate recount.

    Ruined ballots happen in every election. The number of ruined ballots in Chicago alone in the 2000 election was 125,000, compared to 174,000 for the entire state of Florida. People screw up their ballots. It happens.

    Secondly, every single vote count--even those taken by the media--show Bush won Florida. The Miami Herald did such an extensive report on it, they turned it into a book you can buy on Amazon. They showed that had the looser count standards Gore wanted been used, Bush's margin would've increased.

    http://qando.net/archives/004158.htm
     
  5. Aug 23, 2005 #25 of 221
    Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    I never stated that any unofficical recount counted---although you seem to trust a particualr one.

    All I ever said was that given the closeness all of the votes should have been recounted---officailly on a statewide basis. It certainly would have been preferable t the scenario of repeated limited and aborted recounts in different areas. One recount and have reasonable certainty that we got it right.

    I never said that it would favor one candidate over the other. Nor is who would win as important to me as getting an accurate result. I have consistently stated that I think that the winner in Florida (and any other state) should be the candidate with the most votes. I have in fact stated that I was disappointed in the behavior of both parties who put the winning the election by any means over determining what the people really thought.

    BTW the only myth is that every analysis showed a Bush win. Here is a link to an admittedly biased article with links to several articles showing the opposite. again the common denominator is that no one wanted to count all the votes. The Democrratic party wnateda selected recount and the Republicans wanted none.

    Maybe I naive here but I would have had a lot more respect for both parties if they had advocated an accurate vote count over their own victory.
     
  6. Aug 23, 2005 #26 of 221
    Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    Assassinations for Jesus. :nono:
     
  7. Aug 23, 2005 #27 of 221
    pjmrt

    pjmrt Hall Of Fame

    3,939
    0
    Jul 17, 2003
    Exactly Capmeister. No vote count is perfect, and one can argue that for a country as large and diverse as the US - that it can't be perfect. But the error is relatively small. The real threat is when one goes in, as in the 2000 election in Florida, and demands recount after recount. Each attempt damages more ballots, possibly altering their "interpretation". And to try an infer what someone meant to do, instead of what they actually did, well that's just plain dangerous. That's like someone robbing a bank, then claiming they should be let go simply because they only intended to make a withdrawl and got confused by the line. Mistakes happen. And when, as in the case of Florida, the Dem's had vans rolling around picking up street people and offering them cigarettes, ... whatever to vote for their guy, telling them to vote for the 3rd candidate on the list since most were not intelligent enough to read or understand a ballot, well its just absurd to hear the Dem's whine about the ballot. No system is perfect. But it works remarkably well.

    But in Venezuela?? If you had the choice to vote for Perot or have your widow cast your ballot - how might our election had turned out. This seems much like the election in Ukraine, except that Venezuela did not have a court with the guts to overrule a thug.
     
  8. Aug 23, 2005 #28 of 221
    RichW

    RichW Hall Of Fame/Supporter DBSTalk Gold Club

    6,526
    0
    Mar 29, 2002
    More deflection from the topic.

    I consider Robertson's comment to be immoral. Venezuela now wants to sell oil to China instead of us. Consequently the country's economy has improved steadily since 1998.
     
  9. Aug 23, 2005 #29 of 221
    Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    What link?
     
  10. Aug 23, 2005 #30 of 221
    Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    Not uncommon in Christianty's history, of course.
     
  11. Aug 23, 2005 #31 of 221
    Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    That's not the law. Someone has to ask for that within a certian time limit. No one did.

    But several ogranizations recounted themselves, as is their right, and didn't find it came out in Gore's favor. So we know what the result would have been 7 ways to Sunday,
     
  12. Aug 23, 2005 #32 of 221
    Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    Sorry about that. Must have fat fingered it----my bad. http://archive.democrats.com/display.cfm?id=181

    Go to Section 3. It links to a number of articles with different results.

    Again I never calimed that Gore won. Just that I disapprove of how the whole thing played out.
     
  13. Aug 23, 2005 #33 of 221
    Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002


    Precisely! That is what I said. That I would have had more respect for both parties if thety did. I did not calim anyone broke the law.
    And no we do NOT know what the real answer is. But the election is over. In fact the whole term of office is. So it is definitey time to move on.
     
  14. Aug 23, 2005 #34 of 221
    Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    It's absurd after all this time that Republicans are still whining about how Bush actually DID win the election. :lol:
     
  15. Aug 23, 2005 #35 of 221
    Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    Democrats.org?

    Heh. Hehehehe. Bwhahahahahahahahaha. You need to find something better than that.

    I checked some of the links--ignoring those that took place in 2000, since it's only in 2001 that the ballots became available for people to look at.

    Many of the links I clicked are dead and merely go to the main page of the organization they were on. If you want me to look at a specific link, I will, and you have to paste it here.

    But one I did find working said this: "Language could have tripped up some voters" It gave reasons how some voters may have--MAY HAVE--voted wrong. It didn't go over ballots and show real votes. Here's an example of the proof you're pointing me toward:

    So, it's collecting votes where people might have thought voting for Lieberman meant voting Libertarian, and so didn't vote?

    Come ON!
     
  16. Aug 23, 2005 #36 of 221
    Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    Actually, people are claiming that Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush and so on broke the law. Carter is. Yes, you may not be--but people ARE claiming it.

    And yes, we do know the real answer--and have known it for some time.
     
  17. Aug 23, 2005 #37 of 221
    pjmrt

    pjmrt Hall Of Fame

    3,939
    0
    Jul 17, 2003
    I didn't hear Robertson's comments, so I don't know what context he might have meant.

    But out of curiosity, (since you seem to be fundamentally opposed to assassination in all cases), if the US had the ability in 1940 to step in and assassinate Adolf Hitler with support from some Germans to complete the coup and retake control of Germany - would you have also opposed that? As much as I dislike the notion of assassination, if it would have prevented the deaths of millions of Jews, and thousands upon thousands of US soldiers -- and I'm not sure exactly how I would have felt about it.

    Bottom line, the US tends to play by the rules - which is good, but not necessarily good for us. The rest of the world generally does not play by the rules. Still I think we are better to stay away from things like assassination unless its an absolute last resort and the threat to American life is clear.
     
  18. Aug 23, 2005 #38 of 221
    Geronimo

    Geronimo Native American Potentate DBSTalk Gold Club

    8,303
    0
    Mar 23, 2002

    Well I know that you think that you do. :) But like I said let's move on. We are way past 2000.
     
  19. Aug 23, 2005 #39 of 221
    Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    Just as a reminder, while indeed half the world's Jewish population was murdered in concentration camps and just "disappeared" (including 1/2 of my family), let's remember the millions of non-Jews also died in the camps. Catholics, cripples, gays, gypsies, and many others. Between 11 and 13 million PEOPLE died in such ways. Not just Jews.
     
  20. Aug 23, 2005 #40 of 221
    Capmeister

    Capmeister Large Hairless ApeCutting Edge: ECHELON '08

    5,222
    2
    Sep 16, 2003
    Is it 2001 already? Man... I was just getting used to writing "year Bush was rightfully elected" on my checks.

    ;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page