The only thing that I detest more than GW Bush are some whiny know-it-all liberals! Especially the ones who rant and rave over the electoral college and the election of 2000!

In Jackson we have an alt-paper called the Jackson Free Press, run of course by some liberal wack-jobs. Their "blog" section has been pretty busy and if you disagree with the editor, she'll log on and come brow-beat you!
JFP is all about brow-beating the larger, more liberal Clarion-Liar newspaper owned by the media behemoth, Gannett (they own USA Today). JFP has a misson statement of serving the local news that the larger media outlets don't pick up on, but actually, the JFP is only about discrediting the Clarion-Liar. Articles and op-ed pieces point out over and over how bad the CL sucks, when actually, everyone who reads the CL know they suck.

So, if you are interested, show up and give em hell!

<a href='http://www.jacksonfreepress.com' target='_blank'>Jacktown liberal whack-jobs blog here!</a>

I consider the Carrion Liar to be one of the worst newspapers I have read. The idiotorial board for the paper is a profoundly clueless bunch. It never ceases to amaze me what those bozos write in their little blurbs.

KlutzDio I Wrote:The only thing that I detest more than GW Bush are some whiny know-it-all liberals! Especially the ones who rant and rave over the electoral college and the election of 2000!

That's an interesting statement since the liberal's poster boy, William Jefferson Clinton, was elected to his first term as President with only 43% of the popular vote! :eek:

NewspaperRebel Wrote:

KlutzDio I Wrote:The only thing that I detest more than GW Bush are some whiny know-it-all liberals! Especially the ones who rant and rave over the electoral college and the election of 2000!

That's an interesting statement since the liberal's poster boy, William Jefferson Clinton, was elected to his first term as President with only 43% of the popular vote! :eek:

Out of three candidates Clinton received 43.3% of the popular vote. Bush recieved 37.7% and Perot 19.0%. Your point?

The point is that the President is elected by the Electorial College, not the popular vote. See Article II of our constitution.

NewspaperRebel Wrote:The point is that the President is elected by the Electorial College, not the popular vote. See Article II of our constitution.

So, you needed Clinton's percentage of the popular vote to illustrate a point about 5th grade civics? Mmmmmkay....

No, it's just to point out to the liberals on this board that just because their boy Al Bore won the popular vote in 2000, he wasn't elected President because he didn't get the majority of the Electorial College votes.

As Wry said, "The Democratic candidate for president in 2004 is going to get a "McGovern style" defeat from W". The Democrats might carry Washington D.C.

NewspaperRebel Wrote:No, it's just to point out to the liberals on this board that just because their boy Al Bore won the popular vote in 2000, he wasn't elected President because he didn't get the majority of the Electorial College votes.

As Wry said, "The Democratic candidate for president in 2004 is going to get a "McGovern style" defeat from W". The Democrats might carry Washington D.C.

Wrong on all counts, as is usually the case with neocons. Clinton did win a majority because it was a three man race. Al Gore lost a 5-4 split decision in the Supreme Court.

Clark is gaining momentum. If he emerges as the candidate for the Dems, the current (P)residential appointee will have a major fight on his hands.

The Rhodes Scholar Four Star General vs. the Yale C Student Chickenhawk. That would be an interesting contest.

My kinda election result.

Oddball Wrote:

NewspaperRebel Wrote:No, it's just to point out to the liberals on this board that just because their boy Al Bore won the popular vote in 2000, he wasn't elected President because he didn't get the majority of the Electorial College votes.

As Wry said, "The Democratic candidate for president in 2004 is going to get a "McGovern style" defeat from W".&nbsp; The Democrats might carry Washington D.C.

Wrong on all counts, as is usually the case with neocons. Clinton did win a majority because it was a three man race. Al Gore lost a 5-4 split decision in the Supreme Court.

Clark is gaining momentum. If he emerges as the candidate for the Dems, the current (P)residential appointee will have a major fight on his hands.

The Rhodes Scholar Four Star General vs. the Yale C Student Chickenhawk. That would be an interesting contest.

Bush will win handily vs. Dean, who has become the liberal media God.

When the 2008 election rolls around, Gulliani will be there to keep it going for the Republicans.

The only problem with your theory is that there is no liberal media. ALL of the media congomerates are owned by conservatives who push their interests. THEY want Dean because they think he's beatable. They don't want Clark. Problem is, Clark has a lot of backing and will have a shot at the nomination.

Oddball Wrote:Wrong on all counts, as is usually the case with neocons. Clinton did win a majority because it was a three man race. Al Gore lost a 5-4 split decision in the Supreme Court.

Wrong. 43% is NOT the majority of the population....which IS what is in question with liberals about GW's election. He gathered the majority of the votes, but not the majority of the population. And you're talking about 5th grade civics?

RebelKev Wrote:

Oddball Wrote:Wrong on all counts, as is usually the case with neocons. Clinton did win a majority because it was a three man race. Al Gore lost a 5-4 split decision in the Supreme Court.

Wrong. 43% is NOT the majority of the population....which IS what is in question with liberals about GW's election. He gathered the majority of the votes, but not the majority of the population. And you're talking about 5th grade civics?

Okay, now you need lessons in second grade math? Dividing something by three and expecting 50% is rather stupid, don't you think?

georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:

My kinda election result.

Funny!

If you had studied history, you'd realize Nixon was pretty liberal for a Repugnican!

Do we have to have the same argument about "Hail to the Thief!" everytime someone mentions 2000?

Once more. . .Dumbya won the electoral college ONLY because his bubba Jeb secured Florida. All of us awake in Civics remembers the difference between the majority vote and the electoral college, which actually elects el presidente. We can call each other names (clean names, mind you! We want no cotton pickin' cursing on this here board. . .is cotton pickin' racist? We'll have no fiddle-sticking cursing on this here board! Even though it's clean and tolerant, it's also politically correct, when it suits the powers that be!) all day long but I, for one, would like to make my way back to the point at hand.

I think the point that ought to be answered by defenders of Dumbya is this:

Were the election results fair and accurate in Florida?

Gentlemen, your rebuttal, if you please?