Everybody

[alyks]

Kerry hasn't lost yet
Ohio is still counting, and probably won't be done for weeks.
And everybody knows(or thinks) that the election was tampered with.
Here's a secret
Just becuase he gave a speech, or whatever, it's not legally binding. He said this, to put it all in the background, and take the spotlight off of the election.

 

[Raziaar]

Kerry hasn't lost yet
Ohio is still counting, and probably won't be done for weeks.
And everybody knows(or thinks) that the election was tampered with.
Here's a secret
Just becuase he gave a speech, or whatever, it's not legally binding. He said this, to put it all in the background, and take the spotlight off of the election.

erm ok. Thanks.

 

[Death.Trap]

Come on Alyks, that was like soo five minutes ago.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

I wouldn't get my hopes up.
Sadly, it's probably not voter fraud, and will be determined as such.
I'd say we should quit focusing on that and look at the real problem: at least 50% of the US electorate actually chose Bush, even when presented with an alternative.

I mean, what's up with that?

Fraud, at this point, is a pie-in-the sky scenario, really. It's a big-ass problem, but one with a quick fix. Stop fraud, election okay!

Dealing with an under-informed electorate heavy on religion and light on much of everything else is the real problem though.
It's still a big-ass problem, probably bigger-ass, and it won't be fixed too easily. But it's what's got to be dealt with.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

What does religion have to do with a vote?

Oh I see your point:

Gay People would vote for Kerry, and Gay people would'nt vote for Bush. Its called interest--religious people dont take interest in liberal points anymore because people whine about what they believe in.

So they go vote for Bush.

Yea, its called interest, and I dont find it alarming people voted, and no matter what their interests were. Go ahead and have your alarm, theories, and conspiracies, but were moving on down here (80% of us, including Liberals) and were all looking forward to our next elections.

Maybe you should become a citizen and vote next time, if your that concerned. [PS, dont whine about the wait. I think it would be worth it]

 

[Mechagodzilla]

What does religion have to do with a vote?

Oh I see your point:

Gay People would vote for Kerry, and Gay people would'nt vote for Bush. Its called interest--religious people dont take interest in liberal points anymore because people whine about what they believe in.

So they go vote for Bush.

Yea, its called interest, and I dont find it alarming people voted, and no matter what their interests were. Go ahead and have your alarm, theories, and conspiracies, but were moving on down here (80% of us, including Liberals) and were all looking forward to our next elections.

Maybe you should become a citizen and vote next time, if your that concerned. [PS, dont whine about the wait. I think it would be worth it]

Well, what you're missing is that gay people weren't just voting Kerry for the hell of it. It's religious because Bush is bringing christianity into american secular government, and is actually attempting to pass laws against gays for not logical reason.

Around 25% of Bush voters said the laws against gay marriage were why they voted Bush.
Since there is no reason to pass laws against gays unless your religion says gays are bad, religion had all but everything to do with votes.
Arguably, it's a problem with the democratic process in general that religious intrest groups are being catered to so readily and so effectively for no reason other than to either merge church and state and/or grab votes.

I've got nothing against people voting for the candidate who most reflects thier religious teachings. However, in this case, the candidate didn't just reflect thier teachings. He was practically the christian will made manifest.

It's one thing to vote for someone because he represents you best.
It's an entirely different thing to vote for that person because he is actually imposing specific christian values on non-christian people for no secular reason.

What I'm saying is that the candidates in the north american system of government are supposed to both present a secular platform, and then you, the voter, gravitate to whichever best suits your christian ideals.
The minute a candidate starts playing favorites with a specific race or religion, it's no longer two different parties. It's religion versus secularity, and religion shouldn't be there in the first place.

It's a nation divided with a 50-50 split where one side will never abandon the idea that a decision of such broad magnitude must be logical, while the other will never do anything to defy thier god.

By bringing god into politics, the waters have been muddied. It's not longer which candidate is a better leader, or which has a more logical plan. it's "with us or against us" and I place the blame for it directly upon the Bush administration.

And I'm not staying in the past. I'm saying liberals should move on from this concern over alleged fraud and try and find a way to convince christians that government is secular for a reason, and should stay that way. That way, there won't be this huge divide between the parties, there won't be 'two americas', and the vote next time won't end up being decided by a few thousand people in swing states.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Oh yea, I know, and religious people were'nt just voting Bush for the hell of it.

People complain about the religious vote--I think they only complain because the religious vote was'nt for a liberal stance.