Bush's approval rating drops To 34 % in California

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


You mean the capitalist who thought Canada had enough drugs to supply everyone in the US who wants cheap prescriptions?



What a moron.

Hey, if they're willing to ship us drugs only so they can buy them back from us at a higher price that's their business.

[Ben Kenobi]

Clinton still would have won the electoral college vote by 281 to 257. But such a result obviously would have made the race a good deal closer.

Also you have to take into account that a third of Ross Perot's support came from people who would not otherwise have voted.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Hey, if they're willing to ship us drugs only so they can buy them back from us at a higher price that's their business.

The only fly in that oinment being the willingness of patent holders to ship drugs to Canada to have them shipped back at prices undercutting their home market...

No doubt it was a good deal for Canadian internet pharmacists, for a time.

[notyoueither]

Now, I really want to know how a serious candidate for the presidency thought Canada was a viable solution to the cost of medicine in the US.

Short answer. He wasn't serious. He was a moron.

[KrazyHorse]

If they stopped shipping to us then we'd simply break their patents, and the Americans wouldn't do **** about it, if they were the ones doing the buying...

[Agathon]

Ben. That avatar is awful

Go back to your roots, Master Kenobi.

[Agathon]

or...

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
If they stopped shipping to us then we'd simply break their patents, and the Americans wouldn't do **** about it, if they were the ones doing the buying...

Heh. In your dreams. There's this thing called NAFTA, and there are these things called courts. You think Pfisser would blink at millions to sue the GoC into oblivion in Toronto?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Now, I really want to know how a serious candidate for the presidency thought Canada was a viable solution to the cost of medicine in the US.

Short answer. He wasn't serious. He was a moron.

Both were.

The political theatre in the US is sucking the brains out of the presidency.

[KrazyHorse]

They spend so much time doing he said she said that they never get around to seriously discussing policy. The more of the US system I watch on CSPAN the worse my opinion gets of it.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Both were.

The political theatre in the US is sucking the brains out of the presidency.

Point.

[notyoueither]

But then you have to consider our own political culture.

Glass houses are not good launch platforms for stones.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm trying to do the math to see if they actually take into account that 1/3 of his support does not come into play,

Exit polls showed that PerotÃs voters apparently split their preferences between Clinton and Bush nearly equally, although approximately a third of them likely would not have voted without him on the ballot. Yet the very fact of the Perot candidacy might have changed the nature of which major party candidate Perot supporters were likely to support. Furthermore, the Perot vote didn't split equally in every state.

Nearly equally is a big difference than precisely equal. Where's the percentage Boris? In this sort of thing, the percentages make a significant factor, as does the assumption that the Perot vote splits equally in every state. We don't know whether a significant amount of the dem support for Perot was concentrated in urban areas, (a reasonable assumption), while the republican support for Perot was spread out in rural areas across the country.

So saying half of the total Perot democratic vote ends up in NY and in California, means that Perot's republican support cost Bush the election.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Considering that Bush beat out Kerry who got a higher percentage of the vote than Bill Clinton ever got, yes I do believe he wins in a two party race.

Wrong again. Of course, anyone who knows a thing about politics knows that would be irrelevent even if it were true, since Kerry and Clinton are very different candidates.

Clinton in 1996: 49.2%
Kerry in 2004: 48%

How convenient that you've forgotten the Perot factor this time, after I showed that he drew evenly from each candidate.

Had it been a two-party race, Clinton's popular vote percentage in both of his elections would have outstripped Bush (52-53%)

Also, Clinton won 379 Electoral votes in 1996, and 370 electoral votes in 1992. Bush's biggest total was 286.

Did I mention he's still quite popular in the U.S., while Bush isn't?

[Kuciwalker]

Bush I?