Demosophia

I agree with Sailer's conclusion but it doesn't flow from the comparative test scores. So what's the basis?

The difference between the two is that Bush does have common sense and Kerry has only ambition and will do anything to get what he wants reguardless what it cost other people or our country.

A now former Democrat.

That's a lame attempt to turn the tables on who has more common sense. You should read the recent NY Times Sunday magazine article about Bush uses faith instead of facts to make his decisions. Bush uses his religion to justify and avoid answering for his mistakes in judgement. It's foolish to let him and his cronies get away with this wreckless behavior for another 4 years. See PBS Frontline's "The Choice 2004" for a good contrast between Kerry and Bush. Bush had common sense in avoiding the draft, when Kerry volunteered for service and wound up in a more dangerous environment than he probably expected. But give Kerry huge credit for being a good commander and having the sense to exit from the theater of war in one piece. Bush is the only felon elected to our highest office, which is pretty stupid on the part of all concerned - Bush and those who elected him. Without the support of religious zealots, Bush would not have been elected. GW realized the power of religion in American politics while he worked for his dad (who had enough sense not to oust Saddam). How much do you think that influenced his becoming "born again"? Use your own common sense, keep overt religion out of mainstream politics and vote KERRY.

John Kerry and wife are fear mongering screamers who are going to lose on Nov 2nd. Look at how scared these loser democrats are. They break into the Republican HQ and loot the place. Kerry never says stop. They LIE about Bush stealing the election with Al Gore when in fact, Bush won the first count, the second count AND the third count. The dumb dems pay people in crack to vote 100 times (yes, see the news in Colorado!) and they continously threaten to have lawyers at the polls. They complain because they have to vote in their precinct. Are these democrats IDIOTS or what???

Whoever thinks Bush is going to win nov. 2nd is fooling themselves. Bush won the first, second, and third counts?? Is Reb a bleeping idiot or what? That is the real question he/she should ask themselves. This person does not have a CLUE of what's going on. A felon can be president but they can't vote democrat in florida? Why were democrats sent to the wrong polls in Philly last election? Someone is brainwashed and it's pitiful.

I have to agree with the Doc. Reb you are obviously not aware of the scare tactics that republicans are planning to use to deter the vote of many democrats on Tuesday. many claim that these scare tactics are attempts at comtrolling voting fraud at polling places. But why are people needed to check for voting fraud when there are allready poll workers that have been specifically chosen and trained. And Reb, before you go on about the democrats and their legal actions I think you need to see that the legal actions are being taken by members of both parties. I don't suppose that you will change your blind ignorance and take some time to learn the real matter behind the baseless accusations that you throw around. I am quite ashamed to be sharing this public forum with a person like you who lacks the social decorum to think before you throw out insults as general a those that you have made. It is obvious to me and anyone else who stumbles upan this site that you are just an uneducated extremely partisan, ignorant, typical uncaring American who refuses to look into the real manner of things, but instead chooses to resort to petty mud-slinging as a way to mask your own insufferable lack of wit. You can retort all you want but that will only prove what I have said to be true. And Doc don't let this uninformed person chase you away from speaking the truth. Tommorow they will see who the country supports and I hope that they will be extremely suprised to find it is John Kerry, ushering in a new era of hope and foreign relations that will bring the United States back into the light of respect among our fellow humans, instead of cowering amongst the shadows of isolation. Let us pray that the American people make the right choice, the only choice, and vote for John Kerry tommorrow. God Bless the United States amd help us in these troubling times and guide us out unscathed and with a more resolute and united front.

So Moseltoff:

Where'd you get the idea that poll watching was invented and used exclusively by Republicans? I worked for a number of years as a Democratic Party campaign organizer, and it was always pretty standard practice on election day, to do a stint as poll watcher. As soon as you finished there, you went to the "after" party. The idea was simply that you challenge anyone who looks suspicious (wrong address, name change, etc.) and they mark it on the list, so if the election is close the challenged voters get double checked.

Poll watching has been practiced by both Democrats and Republicans since Adam was a pup. When I was poll watching there was always a Republican counterpart.

I get a kick out of the way the Dems have now turned this into a nefarious "practice of intimidation." If you aren't legally registered to vote, your vote shouldn't count. It's that simple. Fraudulent voters can harm Democrats as well as Republicans. It seems to me that by objecting to poll watchers now the Dems are tacitly acknowledging that they intend to use voter fraud as an election strategy (or at least to use the allegations of intimidation as a GOTV incentive). And they're counting on the ignorance of the voting public not to recognize it.

Anyone who has worked on a campaign knows that poll watching is pretty standard practice for both parties.

I see that you have taken to implying things that I did notsay in my posting. You IMPLY that I say that republicans are only people using poll watching. I, however, did not make such an absurd claim. The people that the government trains and chooses to be the official poll watchers are supposed to be neutral. This the reason that they are chosen to monitor elections. I also question you when you talk about people who look suspicious. Does this mean that minorities and young voters are going to be checked because they do not meet the standards for looking normal. This is blatant bigotry. I fear that most new voters will not stand for being scrutinized and will in turn not vote today. If this is the case a horrible mistake will be made and Bush will be elected president for four more years. I look forward to your response and seeing if you decide to read more into my posting then I have said outright.

Moseltoff:

You IMPLY that I say that republicans are only people using poll watching. I, however, did not make such an absurd claim. The people that the government trains and chooses to be the official poll watchers are supposed to be neutral.

Well, spoken like a true statist. In fact the designation applied to persons you're talking about are "poll workers." "Poll watchers" are people designated by parties to challenge voters of the other party that they believe might be fraudulent, and the practice is conducted in just about every state in the union, by both parties. The notion is advocacy rather than intimidation, and the practice is done precisely because workers hired and trained by the state cannot be presumed to be neutral, as anyone who had ever lived in an autocracy or dictatorship would know. Indeed, one would presume that something close to 80% of such "poll workers" are Democrats.

I also question you when you talk about people who look suspicious. Does this mean that minorities and young voters are going to be checked because they do not meet the standards for looking normal.

No. The criterion used would be something like an ID with an address or name that doesn't precisely match the name or address on the voter rolls, someone who is recognized to have voted once but who may have registered under different names... stuff like that.

As regards intimidation itself, I live next to a military base, and the voting place is on the base. Because my car battery had gone dead this morning as a result of some mechanic's error, I had to bicycle 15 miles to to get to my voting place and had to pass through a concrete barricaded checkpoint manned by marines armed with M-16s, who checked my identification and my voter card to verify that I had reason to be on the base.

The notion that someone would be intimidated by a mere "poll watcher" of one or the other party strikes me as just a tad whiney, especially considering that ten million Afghan voters recently braved life threats and passible kidnap and brutal execution in order to cast their vote in a brand new democracy.

Referencing Team America's brilliant explanation of the War on Terror, one has to wonder whether we've become a nation of pussies. Sorry, but I'm just slightly outraged at your suggestions, and the thinking behind it. Nothing personal.

How foolish do some of the leftist comments look in the light of November 3rd having witnessed the largest popular vote in the history of the United States going to George Bush and with George Bush achieving what their darling clinton never did...garnering a majority of the popular vote cast in the election?

The billionaire backers/handlers/controllers of the democrat party have to be asking serious questions about the relevence of their coalition of the weirdo, disenfranchised, government dependent, undereducated, single interest, man-hating, and anti-Christian voter in national elections.

BTW, since the average democrat voter would be more likely to be hired to clean one of carrie's wifes mansions rather than even afford to rent one for the night, shouldn't the average democrat voter be questioning the relevence of a party, and its leadership, that picks a phony elitist (its not even his money) pantywaste like horseface as "their candidate"?

I just happened to be browsing these comments and I doubt any of you will see this, but I just want to throw my opinion in. In response to "dondrysdale" post, i find many of his assumptions ironic. For one, him trying to portray others as foolish a joke in itself, I guess he didn't read the voting ballot, Kerry is not spelled "carrie". I guess he only read the republican portion. His exxagerated stereotyping only shows how ignorant and partisan some people can be.

liberator affirmations misused strands.additives bellyfull kilohm lesson