Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

GW's Election... help please?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • GW's Election... help please?

    I have to do a debate next week arguing that GW Bush doesn't have an electoral mandate to vote... not being an American... can anyone point me in the direction of some useful ammunition?

  • #2
    Just ask Che or some other nutbar. They'll give you all the "facts" you'll need.
    KH FOR OWNER!
    ASHER FOR CEO!!
    GUYNEMER FOR OT MOD!!!

    Comment


    • #3
      "electoral mandate."

      Figure out what this means in the US, and you'll find your arguments.
      Scouse Git (2) La Fayette Adam Smith Solomwi and Loinburger will not be forgotten.
      "Remember the night we broke the windows in this old house? This is what I wished for..."
      2015 APOLYTON FANTASY FOOTBALL CHAMPION!

      Comment


      • #4
        Trash the other debater by calling him/her names. Saves your time.
        In da butt.
        "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
        THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
        "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

        Comment


        • #5
          Remember to work Hitler in somehow. Extra points for an image of Bush with a small black rectangle drawn above his upper lip. Or above his small black rectum.
          "Spirit merges with matter to sanctify the universe. Matter transcends to return to spirit. The interchangeability of matter and spirit means the starlit magic of the outermost life of our universe becomes the soul-light magic of the innermost life of our self." - Dennis Kucinich, candidate for the U. S. presidency
          "That’s the future of the Democratic Party: providing Republicans with a number of cute (but not that bright) comfort women." - Adam Yoshida, Canada's gift to the world

          Comment


          • #6
            I'm not inviting a debate to begin in this thread.
            I don't have a personal stand on this issue (given my ignorance of the whole palm beach ordeal), and I don't care either way... I just need to argue that he doesn't have a mandate in my tutorial next week in order to achieve my goal of getting a distinction in Political Institutions... my dad needs to brag to his colleagues about something... and my academic record is all the poor guy has...

            Comment


            • #7
              You don't care about the coming debate? YOu have to be like boiling water my friend. You have to trash this fellow and bash him so hard he wish he never met you. Make physical threats to his personal safety too. Like FIRE. Go for the eyes.
              In da butt.
              "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
              THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
              "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

              Comment


              • #8
                one of my opponents is a good friend... is that a problem?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Not if you have some mud to sling.
                  Scouse Git (2) La Fayette Adam Smith Solomwi and Loinburger will not be forgotten.
                  "Remember the night we broke the windows in this old house? This is what I wished for..."
                  2015 APOLYTON FANTASY FOOTBALL CHAMPION!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Dracon II
                    one of my opponents is a good friend... is that a problem?
                    Not if you intend to stand for elected office at any time in the future. Think of it as good practice in that case.
                    Never give an AI an even break.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Sometimes you have to remove those you are close to you to get where you need to be. It's only business.. business is business.. just get ready to charge. FIRE in your eyes FIRE! FIRE!
                      In da butt.
                      "Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
                      THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
                      "God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: GW's Election... help please?

                        Originally posted by Dracon II
                        I have to do a debate next week arguing that GW Bush doesn't have an electoral mandate to vote... not being an American... can anyone point me in the direction of some useful ammunition?
                        The most obvious piece of info is that He lost the popular vote. IN the US vote count in each state are used to determine which candidate gets the state's electoral votes: whomever gets a majority above 270 is the winner. Now, the issue is that one can win the election without having being the choice of the larger part of the population, due to the fact that in some areas one vote is 'worth more' as it were. You can always say that legitimacy (and a mandate) stem from the support of the people: since Bush failed to win the popular vote, and won the electoral college vote by a tiny margin in the state of florida among questions about how voting proceded there, you can state that that means he failed in 2000 to get a mandate from the people (if yes from the system).
                        If you don't like reality, change it! me
                        "Oh no! I am bested!" Drake
                        "it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
                        "Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The obvious counterpoint to that would be that Bush got a larger percentage of the vote and number of votes than did Clinton in the '92 vote. Yet he seemed to have legitimacy.
                          I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by DanS
                            The obvious counterpoint to that would be that Bush got a larger percentage of the vote and number of votes than did Clinton in the '92 vote. Yet he seemed to have legitimacy.
                            *Blink* *Blink*

                            Took me two reads to realize that you meant Bush Jr, not Sr. I think Gepap is saying that within the 2000 election, Bush was not the candidate that recieved the most votes.

                            However, IMO, our system is designed not to give a mandate on popular vote, rather on electoral vote.

                            I think a better tactic is noting that within the Florida election, the margin of error far exceeded the margin that bush won by, making the results effectively a statistical tie. With the margin of error so much higher that the margin of winning, it would be impossible to be sure who truely got more votes in Florida (this is why I feel that neither Bush nor Gore "won" Florida).
                            "I read a book twice as fast as anybody else. First, I read the beginning, and then I read the ending, and then I start in the middle and read toward whatever end I like best." - Gracie Allen

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by DanS
                              The obvious counterpoint to that would be that Bush got a larger percentage of the vote and number of votes than did Clinton in the '92 vote. Yet he seemed to have legitimacy.
                              Also higher % than clinton got in 96. The last four elections has been pluralities in popular vote.
                              Gaius Mucius Scaevola Sinistra
                              Japher: "crap, did I just post in this thread?"
                              "Bloody hell, Lefty.....number one in my list of persons I have no intention of annoying, ever." Bugs ****ing Bunny
                              From a 6th grader who readily adpated to internet culture: "Pay attention now, because your opinions suck"

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X