Why didn't GWB join the U.S. Air Force ?

Perfect? How old are you?

Have you ever- ever- even heard of anything in reality (outside of various
faith systems) ever even remotely considered "Perfect" anywhere, anytime?

What are you, nuts? Or just a kid?

Sorry for the sarcasm and "impoliteness."

But this feigned ignorance as a way to bait an unasked question is, well,
sophomoric. Therefore, I feel free to sink to your level without regret.

Steve Swartz

(Note: *You're* the one assuming a voting system can be made perfect. I'm
the one claiming all along that there is a measurable margin of error in
*all* voting systems- even hand-counting with a panel of unbiased judges,
you're going to have measurable error.)


"Ace" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 19:32:47 -0400, "Leslie Swartz"
wrote:

Oh By The Way- this fact of error rates in ballot counting apply to
all
countries using those systems . . . not just the U.S.

So the system is flawed?

Come back when you get a clue.

It was a question, not a statement.

Do you consider the US voting system to be perfect?

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:39:44 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Glenfiddich" wrote in message
.. .

Wrong analogy, Ed.
The POTUS is head of state - in Britain that would be the Queen.
You should have addressed how we elected our Queen. EG


His analogy is correct. The US president is both chief of state and the
head of government.


And we were talking about the selection of the Chief Executive. I
think the monarch relingquished most executive responsibilities in the
UK along with his head during the reign of Charles I.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Look, Ace, I'm a teacher, but I am not certified in Special Education.

Steve Swartz

(p.s it's a REPUBLIC; representative, yes; but NOT A DEMOCRACY)




"Ace" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 20:13:48 -0400, "sanjian"
wrote:

Ace wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jul 2004 20:02:24 -0400, "Leslie Swartz"
wrote:

So, by your own admission, in *The Great Democracy*, some people's
votes count, others don't?

When did this great Republic turn into a democracy???

Are you saying that the US isn't a democracy?

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 23:56:43 -0600, "Daryl"
wrote:

Now, start paying attention, because there is going to be a test.


Ed Rasimus

Dang Ed, where you been?

Not cross-posting under the mistaken assumption that our "Ace" would
be reading the responses in groups to which he delivers his inanities.
My mistake.



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

Yes, evidence suggests that it is more likely that the ballots thrown out
(primarily, but not exclusively, absentee ballots) would have trended
strongly republican or at least conservative.

However, since they weren't counted, we can never know for certain. Past
studies suggest that ~80% of absentee ballots tossed out would have gone for
Bush.

Steve Swartz



"sanjian" wrote in message
news:v%jJc.1221$8v2.1119@lakeread01...
Leslie Swartz wrote:
Ace:

Do your homework. Fact- not opinion, fact- is that eht so-called
"popular vote" was undecided. A statistical tie, more accurately.
We will *never* know who actually received the most votes, because:

1) Not all votes were counted. It's legal in most places to discard
votes if they won't tip the electoral scales. Therefore, in the
"Bush" states many Gore votes (and potential additional Bush votes)
were discarded, and vice versa.

The majority of which were military absentee ballots.

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 07:39:44 +0100, Ace wrote:

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 16:24:26 -0600, Ed Rasimus
wrote:

So who has the greater number of votes cast in their favour? Bush or
Gore?

Bush. He had the most electoral votes.

You change the question. Who had the greater number of votes cast in
their favour?

the popular vote is entertaining

I like being entertained. Who had the greater number of votes cast in
their favour. Bush or Gore?

You like being an asshole. I'm not sure about your desire for
entertainment. Let's start by once again reiterating that the popular
vote is meaningless in the US with regard to election of the
President. Constitutionally the process is handled by the Electoral
College.

But, since you continue to ask, I'll tell you. The analysis conducted
in great detail regarding the popular vote for President in 2000 seems
to indicate from a number of independent sources that George W. Bush
received the greater number of popular votes.


Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (USAF-Ret)
"When Thunder Rolled"
Smithsonian Institution Press
ISBN #1-58834-103-8

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You're real putz, Ace.

Still checking the calendar for that apology on your statement that "Gore
Won The Popular Vote."

Steve Swartz




"Ace" wrote in message
...
On 15 Jul 2004 03:23:38 GMT, Ian MacLure wrote:

Oh By The Way- this fact of error rates in ballot counting apply to all
countries using those systems . . . not just the U.S.

So the system is flawed?

All systens are flawed.

At last an admission that the US system is flawed! We can now bring
this section of the thread to a close.

You may have the last word in defeat.

Ian-

No, Algore did NOT "receive the most votes cast in the popular election."

That falsehood has definitely entered the popular folklore, apparently.

Full circle argument; back to the beginning.

Steve Swartz


"Ian MacLure" wrote in message
...
Ace wrote in
:

[snip]

You change the question. Who had the greater number of votes cast in
their favour?

Algore. Trouble is they weren't where he needed them to be.
And-uh there was no way the Daley brothers were able to work their
electoral magic after the polls closed so Gore lost.
Them was the rules. Same rules that got previous administrations
elected.

IBM


__________________________________________________ __________________________
___
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 -
http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source

No way to know, Ace.

Jeeze, you really need to pay attention.

Do I get two apologies now: One for the first time youj told this fib, and
a second one for the second time?

Steve Swartz



"Ace" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 16:24:26 -0600, Ed Rasimus
wrote:

So who has the greater number of votes cast in their favour? Bush or
Gore?

Bush. He had the most electoral votes.

You change the question. Who had the greater number of votes cast in
their favour?

the popular vote is entertaining

I like being entertained. Who had the greater number of votes cast in
their favour. Bush or Gore?

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 07:21:22 +0100, Ace wrote:

[snip]

Washington was a traitor to his King and to his country. Not that

Yeah, the Rebellion Against LAwful Authority is problematic
if viewed from that perspective but I dare say precious few
in These United States look at it that way.

different from Osama bin Laden - but Washington styled himself
*general*. However, after the King granted the lessor portion of the
North American continent, now known as the US, their independence, the

Vae Victis. A gentleman Brennus established that principle
in a fashion we still remember these two millenia and more
later. Winners usually get to dictate the terms.

peoples of the US had the right to afford the King's namesake status
of general.

It should be noted that this is shysterish hairsplitting.
Washington filled a billet that calls for a General in most
armies of the period if not a Field Marshal/Prince of the Blood.
If Congress or the several states never got around to instituting
a formal system of rank and promotions I think they can be forgiven
and one suspects that the attitude was probably George knows best
how to run that end of the business lets let him get on with
the job.

IBM

__________________________________________________ _____________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
The Worlds Uncensored News Source