Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[AlohaDawg]

edit-
here's a neat link.
someone tookt he red vs blue EV map and "blurred" it apparently based on percentage etc.
apparently red plus blue equals purple.

I've been currently doing a lot of reading/schoolwork on information design, and what a huge difference it actually makes (the Challenger actually exploded because the chart which showed that the part would wear out was set up in an insanely confusing way). Thus, I've been really interested in how  all of these electoral maps. That's an interesting 2000 map broken down by counties.

Did they actually get a mandate? No.

Will they ACT like they got a mandate? I'm sure.

Define mandate. The legislative gains and the constitutional questions seem to indicate a strong lean to the right which will last at least until the rest of the senate and another third of the house go to elections. I think this election was a plebiscite on values and the conduct of the war; the turnout proves that a lot of people care about the issues, and they went to the right with some authority, generally speaking. I'd say that, looking at it nationally over those three voting issues, yes, a clear message exists. Breaking it down to counties or census tracts or street addresses tells you how the votes may have been distributed but doesn't address the question of a national mandate.

[Limmo]

Define mandate. The legislative gains and the constitutional questions seem to indicate a strong lean to the right which will last at least until the rest of the senate and another third of the house go to elections. I think this election was a plebiscite on values and the conduct of the war; the turnout proves that a lot of people care about the issues, and they went to the right with some authority, generally speaking. I'd say that, looking at it nationally over those three voting issues, yes, a clear message exists.

If you scroll up eight posts, I defined "mandate" twice.

For half the population, this was a plebiscite on values, and for the other half, it was about the conduct of the war and other real-world issues. The only "clear message" I'm getting from this election is that there's a gigantic disconnect between the two groups.

And no, 3% of the vote does not constitute going "to the right with some authority."

ETA: And in case you were wondering whether chimp-boy would go by my second definition, wonder no more.

[arkabee]

wouldn't congressional representatives have state mandates while presidents have national mandates?

[AlohaDawg]

I see that you created a definition and an alternate. I take your use of 'if' to indicate that I have a choice, so I'll disagree.

There's only a couple of ways to go here. I've been struggling a few threads over to be somewhat moderate on the gay marriage issue and here I'm kind of hoping people don't waste a lot of energy chanting 'not my president' and work, with people who think like you do, to bring about local and national change.

I do see a mandate. I see a nation that has obviously been impassioned and empowered. The majority spoke but a strong and vocal minority remains. I've always been willing to work with someone I generally disagree with on something we both can agree on. Those kinds of issues are the ones that have the most chance of seeing real change, so I hope those issues are identified and people learn that there's more to national politics than disagreement. Although I said above what I saw as a mandate, I think that working as Americans to make America a better place in a bi-partisan way is also something of a mandate.

[Limmo]

Except I don't think like you do.  You're a Christian conservative Republican, I'm an agnostic liberal Democrat.  While it's heartening in a minor way to hear you're in favor of working with those you disagree with, I'm not under the impression that most of your brethren feel the same way.  And the individual you just helped re-elect certainly doesn't.  I agree with you that working in a bi-partisan way for the future of America would be wonderful thing.  But that's not going to happen, is it?

Though I will say this in Bush's defense: in his little speech today, he let it slip that if you don't choose to worship, you're still patriotic.  I knew that already, but it's nice to see he does, too.

[AlohaDawg]

Except I don't think like you do.  You're a Christian conservative Republican, I'm an agnostic liberal Democrat.  While it's heartening in a minor way to hear you're in favor of working with those you disagree with, I'm not under the impression that most of your brethren feel the same way.  And the individual you just helped re-elect certainly doesn't.  I agree with you that working in a bi-partisan way for the future of America would be wonderful thing.  But that's not going to happen, is it?

Though I will say this in Bush's defense: in his little speech today, he let it slip that if you don't choose to worship, you're still patriotic.  I knew that already, but it's nice to see he does, too.

I would totally work with you on something we both believe in. I would build a habitat house with a coalition of radical Islamists if they can concentrate on the house; and I bet if we talked long enough we could find an issue, particuarly a local issue, that we could work together on.  One big difference between myself and a lot of other Christian Conservative Republicans is that I don't see the need to sell you Christianity as a prerequisite to working with your or hanging out with you. That's what causes a lot of problems - I don't wear my faith on my sleeve even though it's important to me.

[Limmo]

 I don't see the need to sell you Christianity as a prerequisite to working with your or hanging out with you. That's what causes a lot of problems - I don't wear my faith on my sleeve even though it's important to me.

Well, I wish there were more people like you.

[CortJstr]

I think the problem is that many people associate conservative Christians with Evangelical Christians. Which, as I understand it, are supposed to try to convert people and preach their faith. I was talking to our mail guy at work who is a born-again Evangelical and his argument was that it doesn't matter that the Constitution is secular because once we all see the light and accept Jesus &c we'll just re-write it.

[Carlos del Vaca]

This guy gets it wrong.  In Acts of the Apostles, there was a big fight over whether or not gentiles -- who were allowed into Christianity by Jesus and by the story in the above essay -- should be circumcised.  A whole bunch of Christians said, you have to follow Jewish law to be a Christian.  Others said Christs fulfillment of the law made certain portions of it redundant.  Eventually, Peter got everyone to agree that gentiles could keep their willies uncut (as my son's going to be).  Basically, they crammed all of Jewish law into a quick set of rules.

Got a citation for this?  I'd like to offer it to the guy at Slacktivist and see what he has to say about it.

[Bozack]

Pedro, I've largely blocked out my early years of religious training, but I do remember that part. It's time to see if someone can CJ the Bible.
And I wanted to mention that every time I see this thread, I think, MORE BUSH! LESS FILLING!

[CortJstr]

Pedro, I've largely blocked out my early years of religious training, but I do remember that part. It's time to see if someone can CJ the Bible.
And I wanted to mention that every time I see this thread, I think, MORE BUSH! LESS FILLING!

That's not my thing (Catholics don't really read the Bible. We're funny that way) but there are several Bible searches, many of which can be added to Firefox's search bar.

Go here and click Religion in the category list.

[miles]

That's not my thing (Catholics don't really read the Bible. We're funny that way) but there are several Bible searches, many of which can be added to Firefox's search bar.

Go here and click Religion in the category list.

I know Catholics and mainstream Christians hate mormons, right, but www.lds.org has a great search function, and the OT and NT online, KJV, full text.  Just ignore the notes and the mormon scriptures.  When you go to Search at the top, make sure you use the field under "Search the Scriptures."  You don't search by topic, well you can kind of, but it's especially useful if you have a quote in mind and just can't remember the citation.  Anyway.

[wombat]

As to why people fight harder against homosexuality than promiscuity, I've got a partial answer.  A lot of people think they're both wrong, but can at least understand one.  It's hard for straight people to understand why you'd WANT to have homosexual relations.  Because it's both wrong and incomrehensible to people, it's easy to hate.

I think this is very insightful.  And I'm very impressed by these pages and pages of well-reasoned, thoughtful, non-flaming discussion. Which however just give me the irresistable urge to be a wiseass:

As the great Jeff Rowland said about the gay marriage issue-

I always hear that the part of being married where you "do it" a lot fades after you get married, so what's the big deal? It's still gonna amount to two human beings sitting on a couch watching "The Apprentice," being secretly resentful of each other.

So shouldn't people who can't stand the idea of homosexual relations occurring, be in favor of as many gay marriages as possible?

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thoughtful well-reasoned discussion.

[AlohaDawg]

Any two people can experience the beauty of that relationship. They don't need to be married for that to happen. It only takes passage of time.

[slink]

Any two people can experience the beauty of that relationship. They don't need to be married for that to happen. It only takes passage of time.

Very true, and I appreciate that, but it's nice to think that when one of them dies, the other one isn't just left without any rights, despite having spent their lives together.
I don't care if it's called marriage or not, but there needs to be some sort of recognised civil union for gays and lesbians, as there is no comprehensible reason why they shouldn't be allowed the exact same rights as any other human being.



edit: Man I so cannot spell tonight!!