More Bushisms

**adrianxw** · 02-20-2003

>>> because i thought it was like 48% of you are responsible

You are assuming a 100% voter turnout.

***ClownPimp*** · 02-20-2003

No, its the fault of the 75% or so that didnt vote. Can't really blame republicans for voting for who they liked better, but we sure can blame those who would have voted for Gore if they had bothered to vote.

**dP munky** · 02-20-2003

what are you supposed to do when the 2 major candidates are a lil strange, and the indipendent guy is a lil wacko?

**minesweeper** · 02-20-2003

I have actually maintained for a long time that if there was a 'no confidence' option or a tick box that said 'I think all the candidates are a waste of space', loads of people would choose that option. We have exactly the same problem in England, and quite frankly I believe that it's not apathy that deters people from voting, it's just that they don't want to vote for any of the candidates. The only way to voice their disapproval is to stay at home on polling day.

**Govtcheez** · 02-20-2003

I wonder if, in the next election (since the candidates are likely to be just as exciting as the last one), there could be some sort of grassroots movement to write-in one specific candidate (like all the people that wrote in "Jedi" as their religion in the last UK census). I'm thinking Alfred E Neumann.

**RoD** · 02-20-2003

bill gates!

wait, what am i saying??

**minesweeper** · 02-20-2003

>>like all the people that wrote in "Jedi" as their religion in the last UK census<<

Ha ha, yeah. One of the guys in my uni project group is officially a Jedi!! It's funny, though it does somewhat make a mockery of the whole thing.

**Govtcheez** · 02-20-2003

Maybe if a mockery were made of it, politicians would offer better options. I'm sick of voting in elections where the candidates are clones of the same person, just a little different on a few issues.

**golfinguy4** · 02-20-2003

Do you understand why that is happening govt?

To get the support of a major political party, you have to be very bland. If you take a major stand on a major issue, you lose support. Hence, the party won't nominate you. Without a party nomination, you'd have to be rich, or your name wouldn't really get out.

**Govtcheez** · 02-20-2003

Of course I understand it - it doesn't mean I have to like it, though.

**novacain** · 02-20-2003

>>I have actually maintained for a long time that if there was a 'no confidence' option or a tick box that said 'I think all the candidates are a waste of space', loads of people would choose that option.<<

In the US you can 'write in' another name.

Mike Moore organised a protest using Ficcus trees as candidates in seats where there was only one candidate and he did not bother to return from Washington to campaign.

The ficcus as senator took of. Soon they were being nominated all over the country as a 'write in'. They could not be registered as a candidate as they do not have US citizenship papers.

**dP munky** · 02-20-2003

bowling for columbine Mike Moore ?

**novacain** · 02-21-2003

>>bowling for columbine Mike Moore ?

I think so.

Did not see that. Saw Mike Moore's Sniper School for Kids after Columbine and the other one with the very young kids.

Was it 'The Awful Truth' TV show?

In the show the Ficcus was winning in one district. Then they stopped counting the votes for the Ficcus.

Realy liked MM taking a sick guy who needed a organ transplant to see the PR guy from his health insurance. His insurance had disallowed his claim on a very minor technicality and he was going to die without the operation.

They asked the PR guy to help pick out a coffin and gave him invitations to the funeral. The PR guy was very unimpressed.

Thread: More Bushisms

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display