Worst President in History?

[Bridge of Clay]

shouldn't the candidate that gets the majority of popular votes win? Your system is kinda complicated, imo. To be quite honest, I don't understand it.

Now for anyone who cares about Economy and stuff, I strongly recomment you read 2 men that write articles for NYTimes: Thomas Friedman and Paul Krugman. (specially Feb 13th, The Real Man, by PK).

They are liberals, but I urge you to read because both of them have a deep knowledge of Economics.

Jango summed all up. Of course, although is healthy having this discussion, it's not taking us nowhere.

About strip searches, I doubt you'd say the same if that happened to you or your old nanna when visiting another country or even in US. It wasn't the strip search issue, but the respect. In order to be respected, you have to respect.

[Bridge of Clay]

Quote: (Originally Posted by BearFan)

Additionally, there is no need for your outrageous insults. I believe it was Marcos who pointed out a week or so ago that many of us Republicans appeared more inclined to bash Democrats than did Democrats against Republicans. Since then, I've been trying to control my Democrat-bashing, which I feel I've done a pretty good job of. I'm attempting to present my views on these matters, and while you did offer reasonable objections to those views, your incessant, immature name-calling has significantly lowered my regard for your opinion.

You're right.

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Tremonti_Fed)

shouldn't the candidate that gets the majority of popular votes win? Your system is kinda complicated, imo. To be quite honest, I don't understand it.

I'll agree our election system is quite messed up. As much as I'd like to say "so what? Bush won. life's good sans Gore", I can't. I'm trying to dig back into my American Government class I took last year in high school, and I can't quite put my finger on why it's in place. I'm thinking it's something to do w/ helping out the small states (similar to why we've got a bicameral legislature), but that doesn't quite seem to flow.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Tremonti_Fed)

Now for anyone who cares about Economy and stuff, I strongly recomment you read 2 men that write articles for NYTimes: Thomas Friedman and Paul Krugman. (specially Feb 13th, The Real Man, by PK).
They are liberals, but I urge you to read because both of them have a deep knowledge of Economics.

Will do. See? I listen to polite Democrats.

Quote: (Originally Posted by Tremonti_Fed)

About strip searches, I doubt you'd say the same if that happened to you or your old nanna when visiting another country or even in US. It wasn't the strip search issue, but the respect. In order to be respected, you have to respect.

I'm thinking the only reason they do that is because, if they were only to search the people they truly suspected (and with good reason), the screeners and all would be accused of racism, racial profiling, stereotyping, etc. In my opinion, when you're dealing w/ terrorism and stuff (really, w/ just about any kind of law enforcement), you need to follow these stereotypes. They're not accurate all the time, but they do exist because there's evidence that supports these views.

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Tremonti_Fed)

You're right.

Thanks.



btw, I'm really not sure why I chose that . random smilie, i suppose.

[Mulletman]

FYI: CalTech and MIT did research on the Florida election after the whole incident and Bush still got the minimal majority

On top of that liberal media thing, Clinton addressed congress not that long ago about some domestic issue... after that the press asked him questions about his speech and other things. One of those things was the about Iraq and the existance of WMD. His words were; Up until my very last minute in office, we knew he had weapons in his possession.

[Steve]

Here is a good document explaining the origins of the Electoral College and why it's used.

http://www.fec.gov/pdf/eleccoll.pdf (pdf file)

Actually if you think about it, the Electoral College was a good idea when it was devised. Basically it came about because the authors of the Constitution thought that an election by popular vote would always be dominated by the larger states. Since it was hard to gain knowledge of candidates back then, people would be more likely to simply vote for their hometown candidate instead of the "best man." Thus, by instituting the Electoral College, smaller states would have an opportunity to affect an election and have their voice heard.

This principle is basically outdated now, especially with the means of mass communication we have today. TV, radio, print, and the Internet all make it possible to obtain information on each candidate (whether your source of information is biased now is another issue).

[Mulletman]

dont read that unless you have the vicodin near by, that will give you one hell of a headache

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Mulletman)

dont read that unless you have the vicodin near by, that will give you one hell of a headache

[Bridge of Clay]

LOL!

Thanks, it's bit clearer now.

BearFan: I agree you should go with stereotypes. But how does an old man, turned 80+ years-old, caucasian, who uses a cane, fit to stereotypes? Don't you agree some of them are exagerating?

[RMadd]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Tremonti_Fed)

BearFan: I agree you should go with stereotypes. But how does an old man, turned 80+ years-old, caucasian, who uses a cane, fit to stereotypes? Don't you agree some of them are exagerating?

What I'm saying is, generally speaking, the American republic reacts negatively when stereotypes are followed pretty much for anything (that's why racial profiling within the police is considered by many to be a big problem). And so, to sort of show they're not adhering strictly to stereotypes, they randomly choose someone who, by no means, fits in to the stereotype, just to put the public at ease. I guess it's sort of a psychological issue. As much outrage as there is over strip searches for elderly (which is justified), living in America, I can tell you that people would be up in arms if they only singled out whom they suspected.

[Bridge of Clay]

ok, I got what you said now. I'm a bit slow today! :P

[RMadd]

lol

[american_bad_a$]

i agree with bearfan. people get all ticked off when the screeners only screen the arabs, blacks and other minorities. and when they finally screen someone ofther then that, it is usually an old person. then they people gety ticked off because that was unnecessary to screen an old person, wo walkes with a cane, because he is not a terroist. well, how the heck do they know??

it seems to me, no matter who the screeners screen, the people who complain, will never be happy. it is like they have to have something to complain about.

and i would care if i got strip searched, but it woun't last. it would be over, and not that big of a deal. again, if i have to suffer a little discomfort, for the good of the coutry, so be it.

[Lechium]

I camplain that screenes do not do shit.

You feel safier to fly with whole new screening system? You do? I once carried a big ass fork on the plane (it was in my backback my mistake). 9/11 happened when people used paper knifes, fork is just as good. I heard of people getting swiss army knifes on the plain by the accident... now think how hard would it be for someone to smuggle a knife on the plane if they really wanted?

We're not any safier, it's all an illusion.

[american_bad_a$]

Quote: (Originally Posted by Lechium)

I camplain that screenes do not do shit.

You feel safier to fly with whole new screening system? You do? I once carried a big ass fork on the plane (it was in my backback my mistake). 9/11 happened when people used paper knifes, fork is just as good. I heard of people getting swiss army knifes on the plain by the accident... now think how hard would it be for someone to smuggle a knife on the plane if they really wanted?

We're not any safier, it's all an illusion.

they didn't use paper knives, they used box cutter, you idiot.

we're not safer?? how many hijacks have there been since 9/11? that's right, NONE!!

you think that all the security measures taken before you get on the plain, that you can actually "smuggle" a knife on w/o anyone knowing about it? people know, and they don't care, becausw they know a 15 kid with a pocket knife isn't going to do anything, or the size of the swiss army knife it too small to do anything about it.

in the beginning, right after 9/11, peolle couln't takwe finger nail clippers on the plain. if people can see those, way down in people's bags, using all the metal detection equipment, i am sure thye know exactly who has a swiss army knife. it was just died down. people are more easy going about haveing a inch long swiss army knife on a plane.