Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 28 Oct 2004 04:17:43 GMT, Steveo
wrote in :

Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 28 Oct 2004 03:34:35 GMT, Steveo
wrote in :

snip
www.votenader.org

He may not crack the loudest whip in the lion's cage, but he's the
only one that can give a direct answer to a direct question.

True enough but he has as much chance as you or I getting elected.

I don't vote for someone based on their chances to win. What good is
that? What message are you sending? That you are content with the
lesser of two evils? You should vote for whoever you think will do the
best job.

We could write in people too. Maybe Ross Perot or Captain Kangaroo, that
won't change reality much tho, now will it?

You bet it will! Wouldn't it be great to see more podiums during the
presidential debates?

Hey, at least you and I vote, I wish more people would.

I hate to see people voting just for the sake of voting. As we've
learned with GWB, we need to make our decisions very carefully. Not
everyone does. Maybe voting should be left to those that are willing
to take responsibility for their decisions......

Maybe in a vacuum, but in reality less than half of our eligible population
actually exercise their right. They do restrict felons and such from
voting, but I doubt they'd make a difference.

Everyone should vote or stfu if you didn't.

On 28 Oct 2004 04:17:43 GMT, Steveo
wrote:

Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 28 Oct 2004 03:34:35 GMT, Steveo
wrote in :

snip
www.votenader.org

He may not crack the loudest whip in the lion's cage, but he's the
only one that can give a direct answer to a direct question.

True enough but he has as much chance as you or I getting elected.

I don't vote for someone based on their chances to win. What good is
that? What message are you sending? That you are content with the
lesser of two evils? You should vote for whoever you think will do the
best job.

We could write in people too. Maybe Ross Perot or Captain Kangaroo, that
won't change reality much tho, now will it?

Hey, at least you and I vote, I wish more people would.


I disagree. There are way too many people in this country, who can't
even name their congresspeople, or even the name of the vice
president. People who have no idea how government works, or that have
little to no depth of knowledge of the issues at hand, should refrain
from voting. It's way too much responsibility for someone who is
clueless.

I don't want another president (or vice president) who is elected
because they have "nice hair"......

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

Dave Hall wrote:
I don't want another president (or vice president) who is elected
because they have "nice hair"......

How about a botox face? Save the hair for the VP?

"Steveo" wrote in message
...
FreakOut wrote:
Answer him freak, we have seen your posts regarding such things on the
net.

Hi George, how'z the new handle working out for you? Did your hero send
in his back child support check this week?

LMAO!! Talk about obsession. He's been harping about
Randy responding to Doug, I haven't posted anything in a
few days, week maybe. I make one post LOL over something
that Frank said, he goes on with his harassment of CB'ers.

Landshark

just wait till he figures out who i actually am...
harv
"Landshark" wrote in message
...
|
| "Steveo" wrote in message
| ...
| FreakOut wrote:
| Answer him freak, we have seen your posts regarding such things on the
| net.
|
| Hi George, how'z the new handle working out for you? Did your hero send
| in his back child support check this week?
|
| LMAO!! Talk about obsession. He's been harping about
| Randy responding to Doug, I haven't posted anything in a
| few days, week maybe. I make one post LOL over something
| that Frank said, he goes on with his harassment of CB'ers.
|
| Landshark
|
|
|

That's easy to do when you only answer to 3% of the population. If you
depended on pleasing over 50%(to get re-elected), his answers would be VERY
different.

Don

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On 27 Oct 2004 23:50:37 GMT, Steveo
wrote in :

Frank Gilliland wrote:
On 27 Oct 2004 15:48:49 -0700, (Stephen) wrote
in :

He will anyway. Wouldn't you if you had the wife he has??????

Aw, come on, she's pretty hot for her age. But his daughter -- now
that's a different story. Mighty tasty AND she has some brains. In
fact, I think she did a better job in the spin room than her dad did
in the debate!

The choices suck canal water. This is the best we have!!??


www.votenader.org

He may not crack the loudest whip in the lion's cage, but he's the
only one that can give a direct answer to a direct question.






----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000
Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:09:21 -0400, "M-Tech"
wrote in :

That's easy to do when you only answer to 3% of the population. If you
depended on pleasing over 50%(to get re-elected), his answers would be VERY
different.


If over 50% of the voters made their choices based on facts and logic
instead of picking the candidate that makes them "feel good", his
answers wouldn't need to be ANY different.






----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:09:21 -0400, "M-Tech"
wrote in :

That's easy to do when you only answer to 3% of the population. If you
depended on pleasing over 50%(to get re-elected), his answers would be
VERY
different.


If over 50% of the voters made their choices based on facts and logic
instead of picking the candidate that makes them "feel good", his
answers wouldn't need to be ANY different.


And what happened to the revolt against the electoral college after the last
election?

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:09:21 -0400, "M-Tech"
wrote in :

That's easy to do when you only answer to 3% of the population. If you
depended on pleasing over 50%(to get re-elected), his answers would be
VERY
different.


If over 50% of the voters made their choices based on facts and logic
instead of picking the candidate that makes them "feel good", his
answers wouldn't need to be ANY different.

I can't add anything to that except...NO KIDDING!!!

Don