Subject:
|
Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 13 Jul 2004 23:27:15 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1397 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
| |
I am with Lincoln on this matter (from the article):
|
Lincoln was in a very different situation than what we have now. There was a
war being waged on US soil, but there probably wasn’t much concern about
terrorist attacks specifically aimed at disrupting the elections. The people
being “disenfranchised” in his situation were the ones who had effectively
volunteered away their opportunity to vote (it would have been really
interesting to see what would have happened if they’d submitted vote tallies
even while continuing to wage war against the Union army).
| |
But the whole thing stinks because Democrats are going to howl regardless.
|
Unless no terrorist attacks are successfully carried out, and Bush does nothing
that looks like an actual attempt to subvert the voting process. Or if he
loses.
| |
If Bush postpones, Lefties will go beserk for reasons outlined by Dave! If
he doesn’t postpone, outcries of “disenfranchisement!” will fill the
streets and airwaves, especially if the attack is in a major, Democratic city
in a “swing state” such as LA, Chicago, Cleveland, or Detroit.
|
And that could be exactly what terrorists might hope for if they are indeed
planning an attack during the election. The surge of pro-war sentiment that
would be pretty much guaranteed if that happens could clinch the vote for him
regardless of whether it’s delayed or not. Right now it looks like a dead heat.
| |
Either way it is a propaganda lose for Bush, but probably an election
victory for him if an attack occurs. Then, for the next 4 years we will be
hearing about how our president was selected this time by terrorists
instead of judges.
|
Great, so the terrorists will finally win this by getting us to exasperate
ourselves to death? Ugh.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) I am with Lincoln on this matter (from the article): == Abraham Lincoln was urged by some aides to suspend the election of 1864 - during the US Civil War - but despite the expectation that he would lose, he refused. "The election is a (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
218 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
