Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Election Day Still a Long Way Off

By Molly Ivins, AlterNet. Posted October 19, 2006.


I'm not close to calling this election, and I'm sure not into celebrating anything yet.
Ivins

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Also by Molly Ivins

Molly Ivins AlterNet Archive
An archive of the great progressive columnist's writings.
Jun 21, 2007

Stand Up Against the "Surge"
We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders and we need to raise hell.
Jan 12, 2007

Now They're All For Bipartisanship
Apparently, the people of this country did not elect liberals to Congress last week. Nope, they elected populists!
Nov 15, 2006

More stories by Molly Ivins

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Stunning coincidence. The verdict in the long-running trial of Saddam Hussein in Iraq is now due two days before our congressional elections in November. Astounding. How ineffable.

Sometimes you know the Republicans have just lost the rag completely. This week, Dick Cheney said to Rush Limbaugh regarding the Iraqi government, "If you look at the general, overall situation, they're doing remarkably well." The vice president also acknowledged there's some concern because the war wasn't over "instantaneously." We have now been in Iraq just one month shy of the entire time it took us to fight World War II. Seventy Americans dead so far in October. Electricity in Iraq this year hit its lowest levels since the war started.

What infuriates me about this is the lying. WHY can't they level with us? Just on the general, overall situation.

Put me in the depressive Dems camp. We always look good going into the last two weeks, until we get hit with that wall of Republican money (though I do think Ohio is beyond political recall at this point for the R's). Of course, both sides always complain about unfair advertising, but I must admit that almost all political advertising strikes me as ludicrous and I don't notice the D's looking simon-pure. A little shading, a little emphasis here and there -- I'm hard to shock on political ads, but I do get more than miffed when they take the truth and just stand it on its head.

For example, if ever there has been a friend to Social Security it would be Rep. Chet Edwards from Waco, Texas, a D loyal to the FDR, LBJ and government-exists-to-serve-the-people tradition. So what are the R's attacking him on? Not supporting Social Security. All this kind of thing does is render political debate completely meaningless.

The argument now is that D's have a seven-point structural deficit going into any election. I see the problem, I just have no idea what the actual numbers are.

Let's start with the easy end, the Senate. From the book "Off Center" by Jacob S. Hacker and Paul Pierson, as recently quoted by Eric Alterman in his blog: "The mismatch between popular votes and electoral outcomes is even more striking in the Senate. Combining the last three Senate elections, Democrats have actually won 2.5 million more votes than Republicans. Yet now they hold only 44 seats in that 100-person chamber because Republicans dominate the less populous states that are so heavily overrepresented in the Senate. As journalist Hendrik Hertzberg (of the New Yorker) notes, if you treat each senator as representing half that state's population, then the Senate's 55 Republicans currently represent 131 million people, while the 44 Democrats represent 161 million people."

OK, we all know about the small-state advantage in the Senate. How did the People's House get so far out of fair? Paul Krugman explains: "The key point is that African-Americans, who overwhelmingly vote Democratic, are highly concentrated in a few districts. This means that in close elections many Democratic votes are, as political analysts say, wasted -- they simply add to huge majorities in a small number of districts, while the more widely spread Republican vote allows the GOP to win by narrower margins in a larger number of districts."

I should also point out that Democrats used to pack minority voters into the same districts when they drew the redistricting lines because of simple racism. Minority candidates need more votes to win, as polling consistently shows them several points ahead of where they actually finish because some people still cannot bring themselves to vote for black politicians even if they agree with them.

For instance, race is a factor this year in Harold Ford's Tennessee Senate contest -- even though political people keep pretending it's not.

I'm the one who has been writing for two years that the American people are fed up with the war in Iraq and with the Bush administration's lies and incompetence. I'm the one that keeps beating the Washington press corps about the head over how out of touch it is. I'm the one who has been insisting there's a Democratic tide out here, and that the people are so far ahead of the politicians and the media it's painful to watch.

So how come I'm not thrilled? Because I watched this happen two years ago -- same rejection of the Iraq war, same disgust with Bush and Co., same understanding Republicans are for the rich, period, same polls showing D's with the lead going right into Election Day. And the same geographic gerrymander and same wall of money in the last two weeks. I'm not close to calling this election, and I'm sure not into celebrating anything yet.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: ivins, molly, bush, election06

Molly Ivins writes about politics, Texas and other bizarre happenings.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
You forgot one thing
Posted by: lb on Oct 19, 2006 4:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They cheat. The news out of Ohio today was not good. Blackwell (who got a rousing positive review today on the op-ed page of the WSJ) is purging the voting rolls. In the close elections, those machines ALWAYS go the way of the GOP.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You forgot one thing Posted by: tlees2
you wonder
Posted by: richardpmendola on Oct 19, 2006 5:06 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You wonder just how masocistic the red state people can be. I really don't know that ANYONE is better off under our regime unless the criterion for better is coints in the pockets of a pitiful few lost souls.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They are disingenuous because it works so well
Posted by: Bic Pentameter on Oct 19, 2006 5:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As I recently commented under another article, one thing we have shown these last 6 years is that you can fool enough of the people enough of the time. You don't have to fool all of the people. Why be candid and lose seats?

But the American people have allowed this to happen. In the 70s we had voter apathy. Then enlightened self-interest gave way to common self-interest. Life, specifically government and politics, got more complicated and harder to stay on top of. Then we got lots of gadgets, shifting economic realities, rising medical costs - distractions and immediate concerns.

Also, our culture changed. We began to celebrate the smart aleck that makes a bundle and laughs all the way to the bank, and chest thumping bravado. We constantly heard 'no rules, just right', 'break the rules', 'have it your way' - it's all about you, you're the only one you need to consider.

At the same time, the honorable works of Marshall and Pigou that gave us The External Costs of Production and The Economics of Social Welfare (think FDR and LBJ) were demonized as next to socialism, which is next to communism. This was replaced by the Coase theorem which, simply stated, says that the market can always more efficiently do whatever government might attempt to do. Business emraced the concept immediately and after a spate of Reagan style free-wheeling, Coase received a Nobel prize in '91 for the piece which was written in '61.

We failed to see it as a practical adjunct to the more important earlier works by not considering whether the market actually would do what government might consider worthwhile or neccesary. As a result, we have inadvertantly also learned that it isn't wise to discover by actual experiment how well the market can run government - the very government charged with the responsibility of regulating the market.

So now, legislation is often written by consultants and lobbyists in the employ of the industries that it would pretend to regulate. And too few of us see any problem with that, or we think that one crook is as bad as the next. Even if I provide email addresses, I cannot get a single co-worker to email their congressperson. They complain about everything, but only on the most superficial and ill-informed basis.

Only now that the war in Iraq looks messy and it has become less blasphemous to criticize the administration do they care that we were misled - lied to, if you will. And then, only a few. Most are more convinced that ordinary Iraqis are our enemies and most of them want to kill any of us that they can. They really only want a new plan because we seem to have stirred the hornet's nest.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Exit Polls vs E-Machines
Posted by: NoPCZone on Oct 19, 2006 9:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On election night if there is the kind of disparity that existed in prior contests, they have stolen another one. Let's get out our passports, it's time to leave...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: xit Polls vs E-Machines Posted by: Lauren
» RE: xit Polls vs E-Machines Posted by: Ellie1
Repugs build their careers on the ignorance of the masses
Posted by: may261989 on Oct 19, 2006 10:23 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Your average gun toting, pill popping, coke snorting 3 in a bed hooker romp Republican banks on the ignorance of the populace. Why not? its worked for the last 12 years. They have the cash and will snare the votes of the hapless fools who get taken for a ride every time.
The fact that Repugs even have a chance of winning demonstrates how corrupt and hopeless the American political system is.
The rest of the world will watch as America implodes , you will be left with the super mega rich and a miniscule middle class. The rest will be begging the Bush's of this world for mercy and charity. That's how they want it.
Mind you, if y'all are stupid and ignorant enough to vote for these bastards then I guess you deserve them. Its just a shame for us in the rest of the world that we are so influenced by American politics. If we were'nt it would be so much easier to sit back and laugh at the American morons playing Democracy. Its beyond a joke now though, and it certainly aint funny.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It was Nikita Khruschchev who said Posted by: mkeeling@jam.rr.com
» Dems guilty too.... Posted by: CatDad
Red State
Posted by: bookie on Oct 19, 2006 10:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well I'm living in a red state right now. Our current Senate race is in a dead heat between Jim Talent and Claire McCaskell. Talent is a rubber stamp Rep. If W wants it, Talent votes for it. I've been following their debates and my feeling is that McCaskell is kicking Talent's ass. She smart, funny, and just has a lot of sense.
But I read an interesting thing today. It seems that the people who follow the debates already know who they are voting for. The undecided voters get their "information" from the political attack ads.
Now Talent has received a LOT of money from various right wing groups including the GOP. They don't want to lose this seat. He has about 4 million dollars left to blast those commercials out there for the last two weeks.
McCaskell has about 150,000 left in her war chest.

So, sadly chances are this will remain a red state. Because there are more people ready to follow the ads than to actually do the work of thinking for themselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ed State Posted by: Rod
» RE: ed State Posted by: bookie
» RE: ed State Posted by: Lauren
» RE: ed State Posted by: bookie
» RE: ed State Posted by: audreyvest
» RE: ed State Posted by: bookie
» RE: ed State...Purple State Posted by: mendomama
» RE: ed State...Purple State Posted by: funnyfarm12
» RE: ed State..sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
another "election"
Posted by: rsaxto on Oct 20, 2006 12:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are coming into another "election" where the Democrats would win if it is a free and fair election. If the Republicans win we will know that they really cheated a hell of a lot and we should boycott the results. How about a free and fair strike against the results if we know the results were fixed? Then some wonderful lawyers can prove that the results were fixed and we can impeach the top Republican crooks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: another "election" Posted by: ggma
» RE: another "election"..sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
segregation?
Posted by: edith on Oct 20, 2006 7:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ivins' point about concentration of African American voters in a few districts shows the advantages and disadvantages of the Voting Rights Act and our geographic based representatio. (In some other nations the party nominates a parliamentary list nationally).

It's fine to have a more diverse group of congressmen than 40 years ago. but in the end, it allows the Republicans to focus their programs on the white middle class, and to the event non-white middle or upper income voters don't like high taxes, on those voters too.

Ivins is right. No one knows what will happen. The "natonal" polls are not that helpful. The House races are local.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: segregation?..sickofsleze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
wacoguyagain
Posted by: wacoguy on Oct 20, 2006 7:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am somewhat reluctant to be so redundant, but, this article of Ms. Molly re-ignited my previous thought. Since it is a quiet "call to action", I decided with myself that it would be OK to send again relative to this article.

As a side note: just think what you could do if you only got ONE PERSON who otherwise wouldn't vote on election day to vote against the current office holders. Even dunderheaded politicians can count, so, there will be an effect, one way or the other.
----
I had a small epiphany the other day. Such an obvious one, I almost missed--or dismissed--it.

Ms. Molly's article reminds me of it (in the indirect way of such things), so I will pass it along. Maybe epiphanies are transferable!

I will admit that most of the time, for most of my voting life (pre-W running for Pres.), and on the whole, I have voted for more Republicans than Democrats. This was true at the state and local level, as well as in national voting scenarios.

As a native Texan (5th generation), and not some Connecticut carpet-bagger, all hat and no cattle macho-prancing dilletante, like some currently mincing around in DC, I grew up amidst the one-party-rule-by-Democrats excesses that plagued the South for over a hundred years (although, if the truth were told, Texas was always a bit better in its recognition of the political spectrum than most other Southern states, because of the indigenous and healthy populist streak that resides in the core of traditional Texans.)

But, the one-party excesses affected me, and the effects led, in a large part, to my willingness to vote cross-party lines.

For the same reasons, I was always completely turned off by the idea that anyone should vote a straight ticket, or, in other words, that anyone could possibly imagine that it was a good and proper idea to merely vote on the basis of a party membership.

I thought, and still think, that such a mindset is fundamentally un-American, and, more importantly, represents an abdication of responsibility on the part of individual voters.

But---I had an epiphany.

The Republicans in office at the Federal level--collectively and individually--in Congress and in the Senate--have shown a complete inability to reign in those who are excessive, to counter those who would commit unconstitutional acts, or to stop those who are corrupt or immoral.

It is now clear to me that voters have a moral responsibility to deny those individuals the ability to continue in their positions.

The failure of voters to go to the polls in November and cast votes in opposition of Republican office holders and candidates would represent a passive condoning of immoral, corrupt and un-Constitutional behavior.

So, for the first time im my life, I am going to literally attempt to "get out the vote" against candidates and office holders of a particular party. I am going to plead and cajole. I am going to try to get voters to the polls on election day and I will attempt to influence them towards voting against anyone running as a Republican.

Simply put, my epiphany was: at this critical moment in our country's existence, we are obligated to do no less.

Please think about this, and please recognize the need for the same direct action.

And, then--act.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: wacoguyagain Posted by: hellkat
Prespinning the November Surprise
Posted by: Roadyoda on Oct 20, 2006 9:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As an excellent article by Mark Crispin Miller entitled "Our Rigged Elections" points out - the Republicans are ringing the "terrorism" bell not because they expect it to actually swing the vote their way - more and more of the general public are refusing to swallow the lies that the war in Iraq and all the other facets of Bushco's "war on terror" are doing anything but worsening the situation. No, what this regime is counting on (and after all, why shouldn't they? it has worked two times before) is pointing to their "strength" in the terror war to EXPLAIN ahead of time the perplexing victory they expect to achieve. A victory which has its roots embedded in fraud and which so very few will think to question by asking what miracle at the polls could accomplish such a thing in the face of the growing unrest and disapproval of the way things are being handled.
That's why I'm withholding my celebration despite what all the pundits say and the tentatively hopeful stories that tell me they may be done for this time. Never count a liar or a thief out. What he cannot win or earn by honest competition and work he will steal. So hold tight to your wallets - and your ballots - they can make all kinds of things disappear.

Roadyoda

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» October-November surprise(s) Posted by: LDavistrueblue
» RE: Prespinning the November Surprise sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
It's not how many votes you get,
Posted by: badkitty on Oct 20, 2006 10:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it's who counts the votes. Presidents Gore and Kerry may not want to admit this, but Bush can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he won in either 2000 or 2004, just that his supporters controlled who counted the votes that were counted and who rigged the voting machines... Let's ask some international voting observation group to look at the Nov. 7 election and see what they say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's not how many votes you get, Posted by: Edward George
It's The War
Posted by: Richard Dudgeon on Oct 20, 2006 12:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Iraq is the issue. It will decide the election, and people have already made up their minds about it. There is a very small number of people who might be influenced by the scandals, but in the main , it’s Iraq.
The astounding part about this is just how bloody well obvious it was, or should have been, to anyone with half a brain. How could we possibly be paying billions of dollars to support an army of intelligence analysts, and none of them appear to have ever read a history book?
Part of that is cultural; we don’t really believe in history. We bucked the historical trend by over throwing a monarch and establishing a long standing democracy, so we think we’re an exception to all the rules. But the rest of it is pure self delusion. All terrorism is a bluff; it’s the strategy of the weak: if you have power, revolution is your strategy. All terrorism is an attempt to goad the opposition into over reacting and by doing so, provide disparate, loosely aligned groups with a coherent enemy against which to band together in opposition. Dubya was the perfect foil for Bin Laden. A religious fundamentalist with an apocalyptic, clash of cultures view of the world; he took the bait, hook, line, and sinker and invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.
Other presidents might not have done so; not viewing the world as a clash of deities, they might have seen this more clearly, as a law enforcement problem. But Dubya gave the order; he’s responsible. He would have been there to take the credit had it failed, he must accept the blame for failure. Spare me the excuses about bad intelligence or anything else; he, as he reminded us, is the deciderer, and he’s ultimately responsible.
If we really wanted the stability he claims is our ultimate goal, we’d have left Hussein in place. What makes anybody think a democracy can’t be a haven for terrorists, or did no one notice that Hezbollah was elected? History, what everyone invokes, but no one seems to understand, has notable precedents.
Marshall Tito was a nasty ass Communist dictator. Moscow didn’t trust him, so he went his own way. Unfortunately, he died a little before the whole Communist world fell apart, or he might have been replaced. During his life, he ruled Yugoslavia; but after him, with no one to bitch slap them into submission, Serbia and Croatia became separate countries again, and, in his absence, went back to doing the things they enjoyed the most and missed so much when he was around—slaughtering each other with gleeful abandonment.
Everything is a trade off. Had we left Hussein in place, would the Iraqis have been any worse off? We sure as hell wouldn’t.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Um, Hezbollah Posted by: vangogh69
Cheney as relates to Reagan
Posted by: LDavistrueblue on Oct 20, 2006 1:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cheney is not man enough to admit he's made a mistake of epic proportions. It's that simple. When it comes to his ongoing devastation of the Iraqi people, this weasel's arguments hold less water than Reagan's dead dick. Democrat candidates need to come down like a ton of bricks on these Administration clowns.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

She Needs DEM Support!
Posted by: keenekarl on Oct 20, 2006 6:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The DSCC, etc. has suggested taking out loans to help DEM candidates put on that extra advertising blitz that will be needed to overcome the Rovian shitz in the final week of the campaign. I hope they send some money to Claire!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: She Needs DEM Support! Posted by: keenekarl
November 7th = Democrats Last Stand
Posted by: LeftWright on Oct 21, 2006 2:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If the Democrats win the House and or Senate then they will have to start investigations, if they don't then the American people will need to take to the streets to peacefully force the changes we so obviously need.

If the Democrats win neither then the American people will need to take to the streets to peacefully force the changes we so obviously need.

Either way, the real fun starts November 8th.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: November 7th = Democrats Last Stand Posted by: curious George
» RE: November 7th = Democrats Last Stand Posted by: curious George
» RE: November 7th = Democrats Last Stand Posted by: curious George
» Sick puppy Posted by: HeroesAll
» I think you missed my point(s) Posted by: LeftWright
» RE: November 7th = Democrats Last Stand Posted by: curious George
» Hear, hear, Krotos! Posted by: LeftWright
» Sorry fools! Posted by: vangogh69
So You Want To Know About The Surprise?
Posted by: mite on Oct 21, 2006 5:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With the Patriot Act's 1&2, Military Commisions Act 2006, and hundreds of Executive Orders and NSA Directives this Dictator can declare Martial Law and Cancel All Elections in a National Emergency.
Examine the Elite control of the Media (6 Corporations Control all media sources) and the Conditioning of the MAsses by TV Shows- Jerico, (FOX) N. Korea, Iraq, Iran, War on Terror, and all the other Lies by this administration, Newspapers, etc.
They are preparing us for Martial Law and National Emergency. Do we not remember the last two elections? Do you think these Evil Nazi's after 14 years of distroying our Constitution and Bill of Rights are going to give up their Rule of us. The Goal of terrorism is create terror and FEAR. Terrorism is a political weapon. Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars- www.lawfulpath.com
If we read history or for some of us lived it, Hitler's Gestpo did the same thing to the Germany People.
I know this is unbelievable in this Country (U.S.) but this country is not about the people for the people its about control of the people by the Bank Cartels of Europe. The Congress and the people gave up control of this U.S. with the passage of the Federal Reserve Act and Internal Revenue Service. Just enter into any search engine or even better go to a library and do the research. Look at the Constitution where it says only Congress can create coin for the U.S. Look at any bill ($) it says Federal Reserve Note, not U.S. Currency, Coin.
Wake up citizens of the U.S., did you know that the Countries of Mexico, Canada, and United States are to be one Union governed like the European Union? NAFTA Highway- www.spp.gov

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Now and later
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Oct 21, 2006 8:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The most important thing is to see the Republicans removed from power, period. It's just as important to pressure the Democrats into doing the right thing - introducing resolutions aimed at removing troops from Iraq and getting rid of the 'bilateral free trade agreements' which vacuum jobs out of the United States.

In the long run, money in politics is the problem. There need to be limits on the use of wealth to influence elections, or you'll never have real democracy.

Currently, from city councils to state legislatures to the Congress, politicians primarily serve the interests of the wealthiest people in the world - who've grown quite a bit wealthier over the past decades. If you keep your money in Cayman and Swiss accounts, and own factories in China and Mexico, you're not really American - you're 'international elite' - but those are the people who run the Republicans and some of the Democrats.

One excellent solution is instant runoff voting - it removes the whole 'lesser of two evils' issue. You can vote Green or Libertarian or whatever as your first choice, and your vote will still count towards (in my case) a Democratic victory.

Another is to adopt the Australian legal responsibility - you're a citizen, you're forced to pay taxes - and you should have to vote. If that seems wrong, why not pay people to vote? Everyone who votes gets $50 - why not?

In any case, we need serious changes in this country if we want to preserve American democracy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Short term memory loss by pot-smoking Privilege-Dems
Posted by: eddie torres on Oct 21, 2006 9:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Democrats won't win at the federal level in November because they consistently fail to champion electoral reform inbetween poor election results. Talk of 'rigged elections' starts in October of an election year and ends by December.

Democrats are funded by the same supporters as Republicans, and they have a myopic stake in playing the game the way the Republicans play it. All politics is local, and no individual Democratic politician is strong enough to challenge a system that they are invited to play in by more powerful interests.

There are only a few things that will break the Privilege Party state:

- federal election day is a national holiday
- number of seats in House increased to 1300
- all existing house districts divided into 3 smaller districts by impartial national committee
- single nationalised budget and standards for voting machinery

Stop practicing ingnorance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Every time I bring up these ideas... Posted by: eddie torres
» Job Creation Posted by: edith
SECURITY ALERT: Iran and North Korea are DEMOCRATS !!
Posted by: BillDouglas on Oct 21, 2006 11:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
SECURITY ALERT: Iran and North Korea are DEMOCRATS !!

"This week" Whitehouse spokesman Tony Snow, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and the other Republican mouthpieces informed us that because the war in Iraq is intensifying, and because North Korea has tested a nuclear weapon . . . they are secretly supporting the Democratic aspirations to gain control of Congress.

"Next week" the Republican Party will be unveiling a new set of ads that show Al Qaeda members threatening America. Which logic would tell us means that Al Qaeda supports Republicans.

Of course we've known that for a long time. Bush's approval ratings went from about where they are now, following his stolen election in Florida 2000, to the high 90's following the attacks of 9/11.

Who is "Al Qaeda" anyway? During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan the CIA began to train and support fundamentalist nationalists in Afghanistan then called the Mujahideen. The CIA taught them how to more effectively conduct terrorist actions against the Soviet backed government in Kabul. Among them was Osama Bin Laden.

Where did the name "Al Qaeda" actually come from? The answer may surprise you. It certainly surprised me. The CIA had a "database" of the names of the thousands of Mujahideen fighters the CIA had supported, trained, and financed in the 1980s. The words "al qaeda" actually means "the database."

There is a fascinating documentary entitled "Al Qaeda Doesn't Exist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBVVs9hcmRY and it's title sums it up. It explains how the concept of Al Qaeda was an American fabrication. There is no large terrorist organization run by Bin Laden. It is a fiction.

For those shouting, "That's not true, we know there is one!" I ask, "What do you know and how do you know it?" Fact is, that we only know what the media has told us. Is the media part of a huge conspiracy? Not necessarily, because the next question is how does the media know there is a large terrorist network called Al Qaeda? They know because the CIA has told them there is one. There is no investigative journalism that has verified this. How could they?

Why would a terrorist organization be fabricated? What purpose could it serve? The answer to that is found in George Orwell's 1984, when "the book" is read which explains how the government maintains it's power structure, a structure that doesn't help their people, but only ensures their domination thru deception. Here is an excerpt from "the book" from 1984:
--------------------------------

"The social atmosphere is that of a besieged city.. And at the same time the consciousness of being at war, and therefore in danger, makes the handing-over of all power to a small caste seem the natural, unavoidable condition of survival."

"It does not matter whether the war is actually happening, and, since no decisive victory is possible, it does not matter whether the war is going badly. All that is needed is that a state of war should exist."

"War prisoners apart, the average citizen of Oceania never sets eyes on a citizen of either Eurasia or Eastasia. If he were allowed contact with foreigners he would discover that they are creatures similar to himself and that most of what he has been told about them is lies." [When have you seen Iraqis opposed to the US occupation on the television? Why was the head of the US office of Al Jazeera arrested in New York?] . . . Read the rest of this article at:
http://www.opednews.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Orwell's vision Posted by: LDavistrueblue
» Are you for real? Posted by: stoicnag
» RE: Are you for real? Posted by: QOTU
Before we have an impartial outside group look at voting results,
Posted by: Ellie1 on Oct 21, 2006 12:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the Dems have to have some power. This has been suggested in the past two elections, and of course the Repukes would NOT let it happen. They have too much power, too much money, and too much to hide. And there are too many stupid a-holes in this country to make it happen. God Damn America. No wait, we are damning ourselves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My Two Cents
Posted by: robmikejas on Oct 21, 2006 10:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am no stranger to AlterNet. I occasionally offer up my own humble opinion on matters being discussed here. Conspiracy theories are often so bizzare that I tend to overlook them. I do believe however that the Republican takeover of this country through the lies and deception of the Bush/Saudi connection has rendered America a twisted, vile entity in the world. As far as what the founding fathers envisioned for the future generations, we are lost and beyond salvation. George Orwell was a true visionary. 1984 is upon us to a tangible degree of certainty. I grew up in a more innocent time, in the state of Iowa. Picnics in the park, bicycling to the swimming pool, baseball and cowboys and indians with the neighborhood kids. A childhood of peace and promise. What can the children of today hope to experience? A life of compromised freedoms, a lousy education, and perpetual war on terrorism. I wouldn't bring a child into this world today for any amount of money. The self righteous, religiously addicted, power mad bastards who have made our country the cesspool of shame that it is, should be taken out and hung like the vile traitors that they are.

Sorry for ranting like this, but I am sick to my soul for being forced to live under this dictatorship, and I fear for the republic and the people who inhabit it's bounderies.

Dick Wagner
Scottsdale

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: My Two Cents..sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» RE: My Two Cents Posted by: turbocrusher
» RE: My Two Cents Posted by: Roadyoda
Republicans will GAIN seats (it won't be that bad but...)
Posted by: Reader11722 on Oct 21, 2006 10:47 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why does everyone think this year will be different? They already stole 2 presidential elections (wide scale fraud). You really think they cannot steal House/Senate elections (small scale fraud). This is the same group that managed to legalize warrantless wiretaps, suspend habeas corpus, ban books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, detain demonstrators and start 2 illegal wars based on lies. The Republicans will probably lose a few seats to make it look good but maintain a majority (with LIEberman). Then they'll invade Iran on behalf of Israel.
Last link (before Google Books bends to gov't will and drops the title):
America Deceived (book)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We will get the government we deserve.
Posted by: Krotos on Oct 22, 2006 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My take on this is simple. If the American people are truly still worthy of living in a free, democratic, constitutional republic, then they will banish the Republicans to the political wilderness next month. And if the Republicans retain power through obvious electoral fraud, then the American people will take to the streets. And if the American people fail to do either of these things, then they do not deserve freedom and democracy.

It's the same principle many opponents of the Iraq war applied to the people of that country. Democracy and liberty cannot take root or survive unless the people as a whole have these concepts deeply embedded in their psychology, in their fundamental value systems. And this requires centuries and centuries of indigenous historical development. The struggles of Jefferson, Franklin, Washington, Adams, et al. would have come to naught if they hadn't been living in a country where ordinary people, shaped by ancient English political traditions like the Magna Carta and belonging to dissenting, anti-authoritarian religious factions, were already predisposed to their message. And that's why our attempt to impose Western-style democracy in Iraq has failed so miserably: the cultural and political traditions and individual habits of mind necessary for it are simply not present among the common Iraqi people nearly to the extent that they were among eighteenth-century Americans.

The big question for our time, IMO, is whether the democratic, liberty-loving mindset is still present among the common American people. I'm sure it is among most of the readers and writers of Alternet, but the coming election may force us to realize that we are a shrinking minority. And if so, there will be damned little we can do about it, at least in our lifetimes. If America winds up as an authoritarian Christian-fascist regime with a small superrich elite ruling over an impoverished, poorly educated majority, it will be because that majority tacitly accepted this state of affairs.

In other words, if the GOP holds onto power next month, true Americans may want to start researching EU immigration law.

-K.Ai.-

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GO VOTE DAMMIT !
Posted by: ShoShenQ on Oct 22, 2006 10:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
democrats partisans NEED TO GO VOTE, en masse , if they think the election is already won, many will stay at home and not vote.

Although as Molly said, every election month seems to be in favor of democrats until the money, gerrymandering and Diebold machines swing it the other way.

Even tho I'm canadian, I'm very very anxious about this election and hope we wont be disappointed...yet another time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One Word:
Posted by: Age of Reason on Oct 22, 2006 11:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Diebold.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: One Word:.......yup..nuf said Posted by: Captainmagic
Okay Irvins, the rest of you...
Posted by: vangogh69 on Oct 22, 2006 2:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Granted, I'm going to turn out to vote against a few bigots just for kicks for myself but I'm not under any illusions that this voting thing counts for shit. Sorry Irvins, people, but we've gotta wake up! These democrats who become all but patron saints during election season, don't do shit year round except support the policies which we all bitch about and which are destroying the world by the day. As far as Iraq goes, well, check the votes on that one: the dems walk the line right behind the republicans on that one! Do you people really believe we're "investing" (*spit*) so much loot in Iraq just to leave when the GOP changes? Perhaps you've not read the PNAC, nor for the matter, payed much attention to those in power: they like things as they are and intend for them to stay that way. And incidentally, this whole fracturing of Iraq is quite intentional for then, when the country is firmly split into 3 camps and engaged in civil war then the US can say, "Oh, but were here to restore the peace, just as we did 50 years ago in Korea...we're here to help the people." Right.

I like Irvins and appreciate her wit and spunk. However, her belief in the dems and the november vote insults my intelligence and calls to question her possession of the facts. Perhaps this is why nothing really improves in this damn country: people believe they can turn off the tv for a few hours, go press a few buttons, and that's the end of their civic duty. Sorry folks, but true engagement is a daily event and frankly the problems we face in this country (and globally) are systemic are require more than a facelift.

For fuck's sake, a report has just come out showing that the hole in the ozone layer is bigger than Antartica! We're still talking about voting?! What???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Connecticut Ned Lamont campaign in disarray?
Posted by: LDavistrueblue on Oct 22, 2006 5:14 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Molly's note about uncertainty certainly rings true here in CT. A friend of mine volunteered to work with the Lamont for Sente Campaign weeks ago but no one has even bothered to give her a reply. As much as I'd like to see Joe Lieberman sweeping a prison parking lot, Mr. Lamont appears to be making novice mistakes which may end up causing retention of the war-criminal Lieberman.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Umm...
Posted by: QOTU on Oct 23, 2006 5:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually, al qaeda means "the foundation".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Umm... Posted by: QOTU