Recent Political Change May Positively Affect GA

Martin Hotze wrote:

On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:31:12 GMT, Matt Whiting wrote:


So it is not possible to vote "white" (as it is called here)?
means: a valid vote, but without voting anybody?

What is the purpose of that?


Expressing your opinion. That's pretty much the point of the
whole voting thing.

You can express the "do nothing" opinion by staying home. I can see
this if they are just voting to maintain their registration to vote in
future elections. However, as a political statement, it is pretty much
a waste of time. Not voting at all sends nearly the same message.


at least here the percentage on how many seats go to which party is
determined on the quote of votes based on the total given votes.
If you don't vote you indirectly support the party with the most votes,
because then the percentage calculation is in their favour (and is bad for
the smaller parties). Voting without actually giving one party a vote
expresses that you are interested in the democratic process itself but that
you are generally disappointed in choices given to you. And you don't
indirectly support the party with the most votes (see above).

OK, I see how that makes sense in a system designed that way.

Matt

Stefan wrote:

Martin Hotze schrieb:

but here we have more than 2 or 3 parties to chose from and the election
system itself is more direct voting.


Actually, this doesn't matter. Here where I live, there was recently an
election with only *one* candidate. Everybody thought that this election
was pretty much a joke. But the majority of the voters didn't just stay
at home, but rather voted "blank", resulting in this only candidate not
being elected. Sometimes, democracy actually works.

So, does the previous office holder than just remain in office? Or do
you have a vacant office until the next election?

Matt

"Jim Macklin" wrote in message ...
: The whole Muslim terrorist world has declared war on the
: USA.
:
:
:

Then why didn't we go after Saudi Arabia, or Iran (they did attack our embassy, remember?). Iraq was pretty well
contained according to all the inspections, and that has proven to be true. Plain stupid invasion, could have spent our
resources better in other theatres...

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 12:56:14 +0000 (UTC), (Don
Poitras) wrote:

Their ultimate goal is to unify Islam under a restored Caliphate and
proceed on their god given mission of world domination. A bit
grandiose for a culture that represents 20% of the world's population
but couldn't produce a turbojet engine if their lives depended on it,
but none-the-less, that is where they eventually want to go.

Won't they have to share the world with the commies?

Their short term goal is to unify the Arabian Peninsula and Central
Asia by driving the West out and leaving the Western friendly regimes
like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia open to conquest and future use as
economic weapons of intimidation.

Did they publish a manifesto? I really only believe in conspiracies that
have a really rousing manifesto.


Actually, Osma Bin Laden has stated this plan quite clearly on many
occasions.

Iran's President Adbaashcan has said pretty much the same thing,
adding an apocalyptic 12th Iman to the finale.

It's not exactly a secret. They have been very clear about their
intent. Its one of those requirements in the Koran that you announce
your intentions to your enemy before attacking so they have the
opportunity to submit.

The clever ones say it is such an over-the-top manner that you don't
take them seriously and are caught by surprise even though in
retrospect you were clearly warned.

Don


Virginia - the only State with a flag rated
"R" for partial nudity and graphic violence.

It's not exactly a secret. They have been very clear about their
intent. Its one of those requirements in the Koran that you announce
your intentions to your enemy before attacking so they have the
opportunity to submit.

You're wasting your breath, Don. Those who don't actually read -- and
understand -- what the the enemy says can't possibly be expected to
understand how to beat them.

You're right, though. Within four years we will have pulled out of the
Middle East, tail between our legs, and our children and grand-children
will be left to face a much stronger, nuclear-armed enemy in the
future. Bush blew it, but in ways the Left truly can't appreciate.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Sylvain wrote in news:B_SdnQ9-
:

Matt Whiting wrote:

You can express the "do nothing" opinion by staying home. I can see
this if they are just voting to maintain their registration to vote in
future elections. However, as a political statement, it is pretty much
a waste of time. Not voting at all sends nearly the same message.

bow do you know the difference between someone who did stay home because
they thought about the issues, and reject all the choices put before them,
and the folks who did stay home out of apathy or laziness?

You are unfortunately right in saying that voting 'none of the above' is
a waste of time, since it is not counted differently but it certainly
ought to be.

--Sylvain

Perhaps there should be a selection for Monty Brewster in all elections.

He "knows" how I voted the same way that the election officials "know"
how I voted with the paper ballots. Or did you think they can't look
at those, too?

We use mechanical machines. But were we to use a paper ballot, I would
not hand it over face up. I would put it in the ballot box. The
operator does not have to see what's on it. The ballot box is locked.
Sure, the operator could sneak it open, but that would be a fairly
obvious action, and would require him to figure out which ballot was mine.

He didn't look at it in an attempt to see how I voted.

Probably not. Most people wouldn't even be interested. But in certain
election situations the prospect that one could could serve as
intimidation of certain people.

he has no idea who I am

That's not always the case, and wouldn't be the case if it mattered.

Until mandatory IDs are required to vote, the system is an
utter sham.

Mandatory IDs have their own problems. What about the voter signing on
a form (like a petition) in order to vote? If the losing party wants to
claim voter fraud, the signatures could be matched up. (Otherwise it
doesn't matter).

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Martin Hotze schrieb:

hmmm. With only one candidate thre would only be one vote required. Except
the voting system requires something like "more than 50% of all votes". But
IMHO this is a rather unusual voting system.

Incidently, your opinion, humble or not, doesn't matter. It's a pretty
usual voting system in many contries, at least in the first round.
(Hint: Just look westwards over the frontier.) The party involved in
this non-election was wise enough to understand the message and change
the candidate for the second round.

Stefan

Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"Super Dave" wrote in message
nk.net...

No, we got into the Afghanistan war due to the attacks on NY and DC. Iraq
was the result of stupidity on the part of our fearless leaders, and the
stupidity of the populace that supports those leaders.


Same war, different theaters.

You must know something that most of us don't on Iraqi's responsibility
for 9/11.

On Sat, 11 Nov 2006 17:13:05 +0100, Stefan wrote:

hmmm. With only one candidate thre would only be one vote required. Except
the voting system requires something like "more than 50% of all votes". But
IMHO this is a rather unusual voting system.

Incidently, your opinion, humble or not, doesn't matter. It's a pretty

my opinion doesn't matter, true, but I referred more to a AFAIK.

usual voting system in many contries, at least in the first round.

hmm. IBTD.

(Hint: Just look westwards over the frontier.) The party involved in

means: your country (Switzerland). well, sorry, I don't know much details
about your way of voting or how your system works in detail, sorry.

this non-election was wise enough to understand the message and change
the candidate for the second round.

*hehe*

Stefan

#m
--
Enemy Combatant http://itsnotallbad.com/