For August poll lovers - Gore leads in Maryland & Illinois, dead heat in NH.
Harry Hope
From The Associated Press, 8/30/00:
http://www.newsday.com/ap/national/ap170.htm
WASHINGTON --
Al Gore has reclaimed a double-digit lead in Maryland, has an edge in
Illinois, and has closed to a dead heat with George W. Bush in New
Hampshire, according to new state polls of the presidential race.
-- In Maryland, with 10 electoral votes, Democrat Gore led Republican
Bush 51 percent to 36 percent in a Gonzales-Arscott poll of 649
registered voters taken Wednesday through Sunday.
-- In Illinois, with 22 electoral votes, Gore had a 46 percent to 41
percent edge over Bush in a Mason-Dixon poll of 629 voters taken
Thursday through Sunday.
-- In New Hampshire, with 4 electoral votes, Bush had 48 percent and
Gore 44 percent in the poll of 540 registered voters taken Thursday
through Saturday.
The error margin in all three surveys was 4 percentage points.
Bush had been about even in Maryland and Illinois and ahead by 10
points in New Hampshire in polls taken before the party conventions.
Gore has closed the gap in national polls, leaving the two virtually
tied.
His improvement from an 18-point deficit in national polls after the
GOP convention has been showing up in state polls conducted in recent
weeks.
In other post-convention polls,
Gore also had reclaimed a double-digit lead in California, with 54
electoral votes;
closed to a dead heat in Michigan, which has 18 electoral votes;
and had an edge in Minnesota, with 10 electoral votes.
Bush had an edge or a lead in many states before the conventions.
A candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win the election.
___________________________________________
Harry
idleeric
Harry Hope wrote in message <39ad713b....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
>
>From The Associated Press, 8/30/00:
>http://www.newsday.com/ap/national/ap170.htm
>
>WASHINGTON --
>
>Al Gore has reclaimed a double-digit lead in Maryland, has an edge in
>Illinois, and has closed to a dead heat with George W. Bush in New
>Hampshire, according to new state polls of the presidential race.
>
>-- In Maryland, with 10 electoral votes, Democrat Gore led Republican
>Bush 51 percent to 36 percent in a Gonzales-Arscott poll of 649
>registered voters taken Wednesday through Sunday.
Any less and i'd be surprised ... Maryland's a lock.
>-- In Illinois, with 22 electoral votes, Gore had a 46 percent to 41
>percent edge over Bush in a Mason-Dixon poll of 629 voters taken
>Thursday through Sunday.
Mason-Dixon = Republicanslanted poll ... Looks like Illinois's a lock, too
... no surprise, except it happened earlier than i expected!
>-- In New Hampshire, with 4 electoral votes, Bush had 48 percent and
>Gore 44 percent in the poll of 540 registered voters taken Thursday
>through Saturday.
New Hampshire may be Otterboy's last hope in the Northeast ... ironic since
that's where he first was exposed as a fraud.
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>Harry Hope wrote in message <39ad713b....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
>>
>>From The Associated Press, 8/30/00:
>>http://www.newsday.com/ap/national/ap170.htm
>>
>>WASHINGTON --
>>
>>Al Gore has reclaimed a double-digit lead in Maryland, has an edge in
>>Illinois, and has closed to a dead heat with George W. Bush in New
>>Hampshire, according to new state polls of the presidential race.
>>
>>-- In Maryland, with 10 electoral votes, Democrat Gore led Republican
>>Bush 51 percent to 36 percent in a Gonzales-Arscott poll of 649
>>registered voters taken Wednesday through Sunday.
>
>
>Any less and i'd be surprised ... Maryland's a lock.
>
>>-- In Illinois, with 22 electoral votes, Gore had a 46 percent to 41
>>percent edge over Bush in a Mason-Dixon poll of 629 voters taken
>>Thursday through Sunday.
>
>Mason-Dixon = Republicanslanted poll ... Looks like Illinois's a lock, too
>... no surprise, except it happened earlier than i expected!
>
>>-- In New Hampshire, with 4 electoral votes, Bush had 48 percent and
>>Gore 44 percent in the poll of 540 registered voters taken Thursday
>>through Saturday.
>
>New Hampshire may be Otterboy's last hope in the Northeast ... ironic since
>that's where he first was exposed as a fraud.
I hear that Gore has a sizeable lead in Florida.
Let's see: California, 54; New York, 33; New England (except Maine),
31; Florida, 25; Illinois, 22; Maryland 10; that's 175 right there.
And Gore will probably take Michigan (18), Tennessee (11), Ohio (21),
Pennsylvania (23), Minnesota (10), Oregon (7), Arkansas (6), and
Hawaii (4)
And of course, there's a least a half dozen other states that Gore is
likely to pull out.
>
>>The error margin in all three surveys was 4 percentage points.
>>
>>Bush had been about even in Maryland and Illinois and ahead by 10
>>points in New Hampshire in polls taken before the party conventions.
>>
>>Gore has closed the gap in national polls, leaving the two virtually
>>tied.
>>
>>His improvement from an 18-point deficit in national polls after the
>>GOP convention has been showing up in state polls conducted in recent
>>weeks.
>>
>>In other post-convention polls,
>>
>>Gore also had reclaimed a double-digit lead in California, with 54
>>electoral votes;
>>
>>closed to a dead heat in Michigan, which has 18 electoral votes;
>>
>>and had an edge in Minnesota, with 10 electoral votes.
>>
>>Bush had an edge or a lead in many states before the conventions.
>>
>>A candidate needs 270 electoral votes to win the election.
>>
>>___________________________________________
>>
>>Harry
>>
>
**********************************
"I’m running because our country must be prosperous. But prosperity
must have a purpose. The purpose of prosperity is to make sure
prosperity has a purpose, and my purpose is to make sure it does."
--GW Bush, putting to rest once and for all the charge that he speaks in
empty platitudes.
For commentary on all things liberal/leftist: http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/zeppol.htm
Links to hundreds of left wing areas: http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/lynx.htm
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
****************************************
idleeric
--
* * * * * * * *
Evil is even, truth is an odd number, and death is a full stop
- Flann O'Brien, At Swim-Two-Birds
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender wrote in message
<53frqsoscsjbcr1mr...@4ax.com>...
>On Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:49:44 -0400, "idleeric" <std...@mich.com>
>wrote:
<snip to>
>>New Hampshire may be Otterboy's last hope in the Northeast ... ironic
since
>>that's where he first was exposed as a fraud.
>
>I hear that Gore has a sizeable lead in Florida.
>
>Let's see: California, 54; New York, 33; New England (except Maine),
>31; Florida, 25; Illinois, 22; Maryland 10; that's 175 right there.
>And Gore will probably take Michigan (18), Tennessee (11), Ohio (21),
>Pennsylvania (23), Minnesota (10), Oregon (7), Arkansas (6), and
>Hawaii (4)
>
>And of course, there's a least a half dozen other states that Gore is
>likely to pull out.
My assessment: CA, NY: 89, New England (except New Hampshire) 31, Maryland,
New Jersey (doubledigit leads), 25 ... I've held Pennsylvania out (no recent
polls) but w/ a doubledigit lead in NJ, which votes like the Philly area, &
a dead heat tie in Ohio, which means the Cleveland-Akron-Youngstown area,
which votes like the Pittsburgh area, is Gore country ... give Gore
Pennsylvania until further notice: 23 .... toss in Delaware & DC (6) based
on Maryland & NJ polls:
Subtotal: 174
Likewise with substantial Gore leads in both Illinois (22) & Minnesota
(10), give Gore Wisconsin & Iowa (18) .... add another 50.
Subtotal: 224
add Hawaii (3), Tennessee (11), & New Mexico (5) ...
Subtotal: 243.
Gore needs to work Washington (11) & Oregon (7) , where Nader is still a
factor ... it's hard to envision Otterboy winning either, though (Dukakis
states) ...
Gore was behind in West Virginia (5) in earlier polls, but, once again, this
is usually an overwhelmingly D state in Presidential elections.
Subtotal: 265
Gore is still short a handful.
Conclusion - if he doesn't win in Missouri (11), Ohio (21), or Florida (25),
Michigan (18) can put him over the top.
He needs only one out of four .... Bush now needs *all* four!
IT'S GORE'S RACE TO LOSE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
wrote:
>My assessment: CA, NY: 89, New England (except New Hampshire) 31, Maryland,
>New Jersey (doubledigit leads), 25 ... I've held Pennsylvania out (no recent
>polls) but w/ a doubledigit lead in NJ, which votes like the Philly area, &
>a dead heat tie in Ohio, which means the Cleveland-Akron-Youngstown area,
>which votes like the Pittsburgh area, is Gore country ... give Gore
>Pennsylvania until further notice: 23 .... toss in Delaware & DC (6) based
>on Maryland & NJ polls:
>
>Subtotal: 174
>
>Likewise with substantial Gore leads in both Illinois (22) & Minnesota
>(10), give Gore Wisconsin & Iowa (18) .... add another 50.
>
>Subtotal: 224
>
>add Hawaii (3), Tennessee (11), & New Mexico (5) ...
>
>Subtotal: 243.
>
>Gore needs to work Washington (11) & Oregon (7) , where Nader is still a
>factor ... it's hard to envision Otterboy winning either, though (Dukakis
>states) ...
>
>Gore was behind in West Virginia (5) in earlier polls, but, once again, this
>is usually an overwhelmingly D state in Presidential elections.
>
>Subtotal: 265
>
>Gore is still short a handful.
>
>Conclusion - if he doesn't win in Missouri (11), Ohio (21), or Florida (25),
>Michigan (18) can put him over the top.
>
>He needs only one out of four .... Bush now needs *all* four!
>
>IT'S GORE'S RACE TO LOSE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Not a bad analysis. You know that Gore is leading by eight in Florida
now, correct?
idleeric
--
* * * * * * * *
Evil is even, truth is an odd number, and death is a full stop
- Flann O'Brien, At Swim-Two-Birds
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender wrote in message ...
If that holds up, it's all over for Otterboy:
He's way ahead in a slew of Biblethumper states that look big on a map but
don't add up to much in electoral votes:
As an exercise, I took *14* of them &, guess what?
Their electoral total - 89 was offset by NY & CA .... 89!!!
He's got Texas, but he's way short on other big electoral vote states other
than a handful in the South (Virginia, N. Carolina & Georgia) .... and Gore
could give him a race (pun intended) in NC & GA ... not likely Gore can win
GA or NC, but Bush has got to spend some time & $$$ there to hold them white
cracker/racists in his column.
Virginia could prove shaky for Bush, too. Much of the state is in the
Northeast orbit (DC metro area).
Meanwhile, all the Big Hitters outside the South are falling for Gore like
bowling pins ..... NY, CA, Illinois, NJ, narrow lead in MI, tie in Ohio,
probably a lead in PA.
FL no longer is a biblethumping Southern state ... too many seniors from
the Midwest (lean R) & the Northeast (lean D) ... too big, too metropolitan
.... the Reps better come up w/ a prescription drug/ Medicare plan FAST!
Scott Erb
idleeric wrote:
>
> Harry Hope wrote in message <39ad713b....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> >
> >From The Associated Press, 8/30/00:
> >-- In Illinois, with 22 electoral votes, Gore had a 46 percent to 41
> >percent edge over Bush in a Mason-Dixon poll of 629 voters taken
> >Thursday through Sunday.
>
> Mason-Dixon = Republicanslanted poll ... Looks like Illinois's a lock, too
> ... no surprise, except it happened earlier than i expected!
(rest on Gore's state leads deleted)
Does anyone know anything about the "Research 2000" poll that just came
out and showed that Gore has a four point national lead among likely
voters?
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
wrote:
>>Not a bad analysis. You know that Gore is leading by eight in Florida
>>now, correct?
>
>
>If that holds up, it's all over for Otterboy:
>
>He's way ahead in a slew of Biblethumper states that look big on a map but
>don't add up to much in electoral votes:
>
>As an exercise, I took *14* of them &, guess what?
>
>Their electoral total - 89 was offset by NY & CA .... 89!!!
>
>He's got Texas, but he's way short on other big electoral vote states other
>than a handful in the South (Virginia, N. Carolina & Georgia) .... and Gore
>could give him a race (pun intended) in NC & GA ... not likely Gore can win
>GA or NC, but Bush has got to spend some time & $$$ there to hold them white
>cracker/racists in his column.
>
>Virginia could prove shaky for Bush, too. Much of the state is in the
>Northeast orbit (DC metro area).
>
>Meanwhile, all the Big Hitters outside the South are falling for Gore like
>bowling pins ..... NY, CA, Illinois, NJ, narrow lead in MI, tie in Ohio,
>probably a lead in PA.
>
> FL no longer is a biblethumping Southern state ... too many seniors from
>the Midwest (lean R) & the Northeast (lean D) ... too big, too metropolitan
>.... the Reps better come up w/ a prescription drug/ Medicare plan FAST!
NC is in flux, too. It's worked do hard to attract industry and
high-tech workers from the north, with the result that the state has
been slowly swinging away from the far right, politically and
culturally. This might be the year we see it move from Jesse Helms
and toward mainstream America.
The South is the reason Bush only trails by four, much the same way
that the home field is the reason Colorado has all those 30+ home run
hitters.
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
wrote:
details at http://www.pollingreport.com
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
<anm...@mixmaster.shinn.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Not a bad analysis. You know that Gore is leading by eight in Florida
>>>now, correct?
>>
>
>I put in a post about that a few days ago. Remember though,
>that was a POA poll, I tend to think it's MUCH closer.
POA polls have been consistantly overreporting Bush support. It was
only the day before yesterday that they dropped the claim that Bush
had 351 electoral votes.
idleeric
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender wrote in message ...
good point ... Evidence: Edwards -v- Looncloth in 1998; Jim Hunt ... Clinton
narrowly lost NC in 92 & 96; Gore might do better.
GA is similar.
>The South is the reason Bush only trails by four, much the same way
>that the home field is the reason Colorado has all those 30+ home run
>hitters.
There are 3 elements in Bush's Electoral College coalition:
A. The Racist Biblethumping South (Mississippi, Alabama, SC etc)
B. The RRR 6step LOONLADDER: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, the Dakotas;
C. The Loon Fanatic Bunker-Bastions: Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Alaska
Where all the scum who can't cut it in civilized places live.
Scott Erb
is in trouble. But, of course, if it were Bush having the momentum,
Gore would be doing the same thing. It's going to be a nasty campaign,
but I think the Gore camp is happy that they can play up the GOP going
negative first.
cheers, scott
cracked_...@my-deja.com
eldorad...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
> Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
> > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
> > election is in trouble.
The RepukeliKans are a party DESPERATE and on the ropes, losing on
virtually all the issues, so what else CAN they do with their
100-million dollar GOLDEN CALF ?
What a bunch of hysterical imbeciles ! :o)
TOO FUNNY.
C_S
=================================================================
"You can hear the klaxons all the way into the heartland.
The GOP has entered full battle-stations mode, as the
realization sinks in that they have just entrusted the
fate of their party to an un-electable twit."
=================================================================
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Eric da Red
Rudy T <anm...@mixmaster.shinn.net> wrote:
>
>HOLLAND, Ohio (AP) - Making an issue of Al Gore's credibility, Republicans
>plan to air an ad reminding voters of his fund-raising visit to a Buddhist
>temple and his suggestion that he invented the Internet.
>
>"There's Al Gore reinventing himself,'' a woman says in the Republican
>National Committee ad that will air as soon as Friday night.
I told ya that the GOP would go negative around Labor Day.
They just can't help themselves.
...
>Meantime, the Democratic National Committee planned to unveil an ad
>Thursday attacking Bush's record in Texas and specifically the state's
>treatment of low-income children on Medicaid.
In this case, the Democrat's mud-tossing has something to do with serious
issues.
--
ShrubJoke Of The Week: "Do you realize that if, God forbid, anything
should happen to Dick Cheney, George W. Bush would be President?" --
Mark Russell.
eldorad...@my-deja.com
Yeah, it's all over CNN today. Bush goes negative first and it starts
tomorrow. No big surprise really. Bush lied about quitting drinking,
and now it appears he lied when he said his campaign would not engage
in negative tactics. Anybody here surprised? I didn't think so.
R. Decker
(Eric da Red) wrote:
> In article <d5a75b2a51baab5a...@mixmaster.shinn.net>,
> Rudy T <anm...@mixmaster.shinn.net> wrote:
> >
> >HOLLAND, Ohio (AP) - Making an issue of Al Gore's credibility,
> >Republicans
> >plan to air an ad reminding voters of his fund-raising visit to a
> >Buddhist
> >temple and his suggestion that he invented the Internet.
> >
> >"There's Al Gore reinventing himself,'' a woman says in the Republican
> >National Committee ad that will air as soon as Friday night.
>
> I told ya that the GOP would go negative around Labor Day.
Why not. You've got to fight back against negative ads sometime.
R. Decker
> In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
> Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
> > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
> election
> > is in trouble. But, of course, if it were Bush having the momentum,
> > Gore would be doing the same thing. It's going to be a nasty
> campaign,
> > but I think the Gore camp is happy that they can play up the GOP going
> > negative first.
>
> Yeah, it's all over CNN today. Bush goes negative first and it starts
FIRST?!?!?! Gore's been attacking Bush in ads way back before Bush even
got the nomination! They took the unprecidented action of running
negative attack ads during the Republican convention, for cripes sakes!
> tomorrow. No big surprise really. Bush lied about quitting drinking,
The only liar is you.
> and now it appears he lied when he said his campaign would not engage
> in negative tactics. Anybody here surprised? I didn't think so.
He's always said that if engaged in negative attacks, he'd fight back.
It's only fair. Gore drew first blood.
Scott Erb
"R. Decker" wrote:
> > I told ya that the GOP would go negative around Labor Day.
>
> Why not. You've got to fight back against negative ads sometime.
What negative ads are they fighting back against? Remember, negative
ads are PERSONAL adds, criticism of the individual's character, not
criticism of a record or issues.
Still, I think Bush is probably smart to go negative, I think he has to
in order to have a real chance at this election. This puts pressure on
Gore who will have to respond (he can't be like Dukakis and trust that
the American people will reject negativism), but to do so in a way that
doesn't make him look slimey. This is a test of the Gore campaign
machine.
And now as the gloves come off, this election will be a humdinger to
watch!
David C Patrick
And that same poll shows the Dub is leading in only one section -- the
South, of course!
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender <ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote in message
news:crmsqscl8t5v1nali...@4ax.com...
Zepp: Weasel, Weasel Rock You!
What negative ads are those, ding-dong?
>
>Why not. You've got to fight back against negative ads sometime.
**********************************************************
Cheney also told senators he obtained student and marriage deferments because
"I had other priorities in the '60s than military service.''
And of course, we already have GW Bush's glamorous AWOL adventure.
Now: any other right wingers want to whine about Clinton and the draft?
For political commentary by Zepp, visit
http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/zeppol.htm
For links to all things Liberal/Leftist, go to
http:/www.snowcrest.net/zepp/lynx.htm
Warning: Contains ideas
************************************************************
R. Decker
<scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
> "R. Decker" wrote:
> > > I told ya that the GOP would go negative around Labor Day.
> >
> > Why not. You've got to fight back against negative ads sometime.
>
> What negative ads are they fighting back against? Remember, negative
> ads are PERSONAL adds, criticism of the individual's character, not
> criticism of a record or issues.
Who says "negative" adds have to include character issues? I guess
people with poor character.
> Still, I think Bush is probably smart to go negative, I think he has
> to in order to have a real chance at this election. This puts
Not really. Gore has to explain why for the past 8 years, none of the
things he believes are so important, got taken care of, and why the
American people should accept Hillarycare (which they've already made
clear they don't want) in increments.
> pressure on Gore who will have to respond (he can't be like Dukakis
> and trust that the American people will reject negativism), but to do
> so in a way that doesn't make him look slimey. This is a test of the
> Gore campaign machine.
Gore doesn't have any real answers for the credible character issues
that face him. He can't morph into someone he's not.
frank...@my-deja.com
Maryland is a gun banning liberal state. 4 out of 10 people in
Baltimore are on crack according to one survey. Nice state.
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
wrote:
Exactly.
>
>GA is similar.
And with Newt gone, the GOP doesn't have the punch it did there
>
>>The South is the reason Bush only trails by four, much the same way
>>that the home field is the reason Colorado has all those 30+ home run
>>hitters.
>
>There are 3 elements in Bush's Electoral College coalition:
>
>A. The Racist Biblethumping South (Mississippi, Alabama, SC etc)
>
>B. The RRR 6step LOONLADDER: Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, the Dakotas;
Neither of the Dakotas is a lock for Bush.
>
>C. The Loon Fanatic Bunker-Bastions: Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, Montana, Alaska
150 more states like those, and Bush will WIN it!
>
>
>Where all the scum who can't cut it in civilized places live.
>
>
**********************************
pengu...@my-deja.com
cracked_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <8omf6e$ct8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> eldorad...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
> > Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
> > > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
> > > election is in trouble.
>
> The RepukeliKans are a party DESPERATE and on the ropes,
[yadda yadda yadda....]
In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of you
gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
Be specific, please.
/P
R. Decker
Volt...@mindspring.com wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 19:43:26 -0400, "R. Decker"
> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <8omf6e$ct8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, eldorad...@my-deja.com
> >wrote:
> >
> >> In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
> >> Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
> >> > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
> >> election
> >> > is in trouble. But, of course, if it were Bush having the momentum,
> >> > Gore would be doing the same thing. It's going to be a nasty
> >> campaign,
> >> > but I think the Gore camp is happy that they can play up the GOP
> >> > going
> >> > negative first.
> >>
> >> Yeah, it's all over CNN today. Bush goes negative first and it starts
> >
> >FIRST?!?!?! Gore's been attacking Bush in ads way back before Bush even
> >got the nomination! They took the unprecidented action of running
> >negative attack ads during the Republican convention, for cripes sakes!
>
> For example, Dicker?
They've attacked Texas for months.
> >> tomorrow. No big surprise really. Bush lied about quitting drinking,
> >
> >The only liar is you.
>
> For example, Dicker?
That he "lied about quitting drinking". There's no credible evidence
that this is true. Hallucinations by BushHaters(C) don't count.
> >> and now it appears he lied when he said his campaign would not engage
> >> in negative tactics. Anybody here surprised? I didn't think so.
> >
> >He's always said that if engaged in negative attacks, he'd fight back.
> >It's only fair. Gore drew first blood.
>
> And he has opened an artery on your drunken, coke snorting, frat boy!
Why's he hitting his buddy Bill?
idleeric
R. Decker wrote in message ...
>In article <39d02a37...@news.mindspring.com>,
>Volt...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 19:43:26 -0400, "R. Decker"
>> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <8omf6e$ct8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, eldorad...@my-deja.com
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
>> >> Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
>> >> > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
>> >> election
>> >> > is in trouble. But, of course, if it were Bush having the momentum,
>> >> > Gore would be doing the same thing. It's going to be a nasty
>> >> campaign,
>> >> > but I think the Gore camp is happy that they can play up the GOP
>> >> > going
>> >> > negative first.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah, it's all over CNN today. Bush goes negative first and it starts
>> >
>> >FIRST?!?!?! Gore's been attacking Bush in ads way back before Bush even
>> >got the nomination! They took the unprecidented action of running
>> >negative attack ads during the Republican convention, for cripes sakes!
>>
>> For example, Dicker?
>
>They've attacked Texas for months.
so maybe the State of Texas should start a series of negative ads against
the States of California & New York?
since when is the Governor of a State immune from criticism over his record?
R. Decker
<std...@mich.com> wrote:
Being purposely obtuse doesn't help your case.
> since when is the Governor of a State immune from criticism over his
> record?
Since when is the Vice President of the United States immune from
criticism over his record of lying to the American people?
Harold
As I understand it, no one is allowed to mention the Clinton campaign
scandals, or bring up any quotes from Gore, because that is "mean" and
"negative".
Regards, Harold (Certified Meanie)
-----
"Why should we believe that you [AlGore] will tell the truth if
you are president when you don't when you are a candidate?"
-----Bill Bradley
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
Well, where to begin?
First, there's the false claim that Gore broke any law at the Buddhist
Temple. Despite your best efforts to claim he did, he didn't.
He wasn't lying about taking the iniative in creating the internet.
He did.
He wasn't lying about his role in "Love Story". He was.
And he never claimed to have discovered Love Canal.
All Republican lies.
It's all you have to work with these days.
>
>/P
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
**********************************
idleeric
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender wrote in message ...
>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 02:34:43 GMT, pengu...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>>In article <8omh0d$f4n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>> cracked_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>> In article <8omf6e$ct8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>>> eldorad...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>> > In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
>>> > Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
>>> > > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
>>> > > election is in trouble.
>>>
>>> The RepukeliKans are a party DESPERATE and on the ropes,
>>
>>[yadda yadda yadda....]
>>
>>In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of you
>>gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
>>
>>Be specific, please.
>
>Well, where to begin?
>First, there's the false claim that Gore broke any law at the Buddhist
>Temple. Despite your best efforts to claim he did, he didn't.
>
>He wasn't lying about taking the iniative in creating the internet.
>He did.
>
>He wasn't lying about his role in "Love Story". He was.
>
>And he never claimed to have discovered Love Canal.
>
>All Republican lies.
The same folks that tell you not to believe your own eyes: the Otterboy was
"pretending" to be drunk & that the clear liquid in his glass wasn't gin or
vodka!
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
<ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:23:08 -0400, "idleeric" <std...@mich.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
Hi Zepp!
Pittsburgh paper has Gore up by double digits.
You asked about Research 2000 - they poll for National Journal. I
tried to go, but you have to subscribe.
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr
idleeric
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr. wrote in message
<7gevqskddi4l7m8c7...@4ax.com>...
>On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 19:05:46 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 11:23:08 -0400, "idleeric" <std...@mich.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>
>Hi Zepp!
>
>Pittsburgh paper has Gore up by double digits.
With the recent Ohio & NJ states polls, it was only a matter of time before
PA fell into place ....
I wonder if Karl Rove is having second thoughts about Tom Ridge?
Otterboy must have flunked Calculus in prep school (no math courses appear
on his Yale transcript).
Wyoming = 3
Pennsylvania = 23
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
wrote:
>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 02:34:43 GMT, pengu...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
>>In article <8omh0d$f4n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>> cracked_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>> In article <8omf6e$ct8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>>> eldorad...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>> > In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
>>> > Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
>>> > > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
>>> > > election is in trouble.
>>>
>>> The RepukeliKans are a party DESPERATE and on the ropes,
>>
>>[yadda yadda yadda....]
>>
>>In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of you
>>gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
>>
>>Be specific, please.
>
>As I understand it, no one is allowed to mention the Clinton campaign
>scandals, or bring up any quotes from Gore, because that is "mean" and
>"negative".
What Clinton campaign scandals, Harry?
And you can quote Gore all you want. Just don't misquote him.
>
>Regards, Harold (Certified Meanie)
>-----
>"Why should we believe that you [AlGore] will tell the truth if
>you are president when you don't when you are a candidate?"
> -----Bill Bradley
**********************************
Scott Erb
idleeric wrote:
> >Pittsburgh paper has Gore up by double digits.
>
> With the recent Ohio & NJ states polls, it was only a matter of time before
> PA fell into place ....
>
> I wonder if Karl Rove is having second thoughts about Tom Ridge?
These state polls I think explain more why Bush is going negative so
early than the national polls. He lost the "big mo'" and hopes this
will get it back. Its a risky strategy.
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
wrote:
Yeah, but Cheney is such an exciting campaigner he got the nod over
the dour Ridge.
>
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
wrote:
>
>
>idleeric wrote:
>>
>> Harry Hope wrote in message <39ad713b....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
>> >
>> >From The Associated Press, 8/30/00:
>
>> >-- In Illinois, with 22 electoral votes, Gore had a 46 percent to 41
>> >percent edge over Bush in a Mason-Dixon poll of 629 voters taken
>> >Thursday through Sunday.
>>
>> Mason-Dixon = Republicanslanted poll ... Looks like Illinois's a lock, too
>> ... no surprise, except it happened earlier than i expected!
>
>(rest on Gore's state leads deleted)
>
>Does anyone know anything about the "Research 2000" poll that just came
>out and showed that Gore has a four point national lead among likely
>voters?
They poll for National Journal.
Newsweek has Gore up ten. 49 39 in four way. Two way 51 41.
Registered voters.
Pennsylvania poll has Gore up in double digits, per a Pittsburgh paper
this AM.
No wonder Bush went negative personal.
If Gore has regained a lead in Oregon, then all will be well.
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr
R. Decker
ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 02:34:43 GMT, pengu...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >In article <8omh0d$f4n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > cracked_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >> In article <8omf6e$ct8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> >> eldorad...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >> > In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
> >> > Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
> >> > > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
> >> > > election is in trouble.
> >>
> >> The RepukeliKans are a party DESPERATE and on the ropes,
> >
> >[yadda yadda yadda....]
> >
> >In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of you
> >gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
> >
> >Be specific, please.
>
> Well, where to begin?
> First, there's the false claim that Gore broke any law at the Buddhist
I don't remember that claim being stated.
> Temple. Despite your best efforts to claim he did, he didn't.
>
> He wasn't lying about taking the iniative in creating the internet.
> He did.
Then Gore should be proud, and this isn't a "negative". Of course, most
Americans now it's NOT true, and it makes Gore look stupid.
> He wasn't lying about his role in "Love Story". He was.
Debateable. Segal says that the only thing even remotely close was that
the distant relationship between the main character and his wealthy
father was reminiscent of Gore and his father.
> And he never claimed to have discovered Love Canal.
Sure he did.
> All Republican lies.
Nope. Good try. Though, when you have to talk about Al Gore, it's
awfully hard to work around the sleeze...there's just so much of it
surrounding him.
sal...@my-deja.com
since they stopped attacking John McCain.
Continuous, non-stop, 24x7 negative campaigning of the most vicious,
mindless, moronic nature. Or haven't you listened to Rush, anyone on
the local Mother Ship who broadcasts with him, Fox News (which OPENLY
announces itself as a Republican TV station!!), etc.
In fact, they've never stopped "going negative." What do you call the
failed impeachment movement? It's negative campaigning, personal,
mindless, vicious, moronic, in the absence of a campaign.
Zepp: Weasel, Weasel Rock You!
<mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>In article <q6evqskad8ib1i1d3...@4ax.com>,
>ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 02:34:43 GMT, pengu...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>> >In article <8omh0d$f4n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>> > cracked_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> >> In article <8omf6e$ct8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>> >> eldorad...@my-deja.com wrote:
>> >> > In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
>> >> > Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
>> >> > > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
>> >> > > election is in trouble.
>> >>
>> >> The RepukeliKans are a party DESPERATE and on the ropes,
>> >
>> >[yadda yadda yadda....]
>> >
>> >In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of you
>> >gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
>> >
>> >Be specific, please.
>>
>> Well, where to begin?
>> First, there's the false claim that Gore broke any law at the Buddhist
>
>I don't remember that claim being stated.
Really? Better pay some attention to your own attack ads, then.
>
>> Temple. Despite your best efforts to claim he did, he didn't.
>>
>> He wasn't lying about taking the iniative in creating the internet.
>> He did.
>
>Then Gore should be proud, and this isn't a "negative". Of course, most
>Americans now it's NOT true, and it makes Gore look stupid.
>
Gore is proud, and extending his lead. Unhappily for you, Americans
figured out what lying sacks of shit the GOP have become.
>> He wasn't lying about his role in "Love Story". He was.
>
>Debateable. Segal says that the only thing even remotely close was that
>the distant relationship between the main character and his wealthy
>father was reminiscent of Gore and his father.
>
And yet he says that Oliver was modelled on Al. Imagine that.
>> And he never claimed to have discovered Love Canal.
>
>Sure he did.
No, he didn't.
>
>> All Republican lies.
>
>Nope. Good try. Though, when you have to talk about Al Gore, it's
>awfully hard to work around the sleeze...there's just so much of it
>surrounding him.
I see that the latest Newsweek poll is out. Your boy is falling like
a stone.
**********************************************************
Cheney also told senators he obtained student and marriage deferments because
"I had other priorities in the '60s than military service.''
And of course, we already have GW Bush's glamorous AWOL adventure.
Now: any other right wingers want to whine about Clinton and the draft?
For political commentary by Zepp, visit
http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/zeppol.htm
For links to all things Liberal/Leftist, go to
http:/www.snowcrest.net/zepp/lynx.htm
Warning: Contains ideas
************************************************************
Eric da Red
What negative ads?
--
ShrubJoke Of The Week: "Do you realize that if, God forbid, anything
should happen to Dick Cheney, George W. Bush would be President?" --
Mark Russell.
Eric da Red
>In article <39ad713b....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
> riv...@ix.netcom.com (Harry Hope) wrote:
>>
>> From The Associated Press, 8/30/00:
>
>Maryland is a gun banning liberal state. 4 out of 10 people in
>Baltimore are on crack according to one survey. Nice state.
And yet, all these crackhead kids do better on SAT tests than kids in the
Shrub's Texas.
hkr...@capu.net
>
> In article <8on017$jg$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, <frank...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >In article <39ad713b....@nntp.ix.netcom.com>,
> > riv...@ix.netcom.com (Harry Hope) wrote:
> >>
> >> From The Associated Press, 8/30/00:
> >
> >Maryland is a gun banning liberal state. 4 out of 10 people in
> >Baltimore are on crack according to one survey. Nice state.
>
> And yet, all these crackhead kids do better on SAT tests than kids in the
> Shrub's Texas.
Not only that, but Baltimore is a wonderful city.
--
Harry Krause
------------
"I drank what?" - Socrates
Harold
<ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:16:55 GMT, Harold <haroldb...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 02:34:43 GMT, pengu...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>>>In article <8omh0d$f4n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>>> cracked_...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>>> In article <8omf6e$ct8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
>>>> eldorad...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>>> > In article <39AEB631...@maine.edu>,
>>>> > Scott Erb <scot...@maine.edu> wrote:
>>>> > > It shows the GOP doesn't believe its bluster, and realizes this
>>>> > > election is in trouble.
>>>>
>>>> The RepukeliKans are a party DESPERATE and on the ropes,
>>>
>>>[yadda yadda yadda....]
>>>
>>>In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of you
>>>gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
>>>
>>>Be specific, please.
>>
>>As I understand it, no one is allowed to mention the Clinton campaign
>>scandals, or bring up any quotes from Gore, because that is "mean" and
>>"negative".
>
>What Clinton campaign scandals, Harry?
How about the CHinese Army support, or the union money laundering, or
the "teas" in the WHite House. There are literally dozens of
convictions, you simply *must keep up Zeppy.
>
>And you can quote Gore all you want. Just don't misquote him.
Are you absolutely "certain" about this again, Zeppy?
Regards, Harold
------
"The Pacific yew can be cut down and processed to produce a potent
chemical, taxol, which offers some promise of curing certain forms
of lung, breast, and ovarian cancer in patients who would otherwise
quickly die. It seems an easy choice -- sacrifice the tree for a
human life -- until one learns that three trees must be destroyed
for each patient treated, that only specimens more than a hundred
years old contain the potent chemical in their bark, and that there
are very few of these yews remaining on earth."
- Albert Gore in his book Earth in the Balance, 1992
R. Decker
ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:56:02 -0400, "R. Decker"
> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <q6evqskad8ib1i1d3...@4ax.com>,
> >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
<SNIP>
> >> >In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of you
> >> >gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
> >> >
> >> >Be specific, please.
> >>
> >> Well, where to begin?
> >> First, there's the false claim that Gore broke any law at the Buddhist
> >
> >I don't remember that claim being stated.
>
> Really? Better pay some attention to your own attack ads, then.
Another instance of Zepp pulling falsehoods out of his ass. The ad in
question never claims Gore broke any laws. Sorry Bevis! If you claim
that it does, QUOTE IT!
> >> Temple. Despite your best efforts to claim he did, he didn't.
> >>
> >> He wasn't lying about taking the iniative in creating the internet.
> >> He did.
> >
> >Then Gore should be proud, and this isn't a "negative". Of course, most
> >Americans now it's NOT true, and it makes Gore look stupid.
> >
> Gore is proud, and extending his lead. Unhappily for you, Americans
> figured out what lying sacks of shit the GOP have become.
No lie in bringing out Gore's gross exagerations.
> >> He wasn't lying about his role in "Love Story". He was.
> >
> >Debateable. Segal says that the only thing even remotely close was that
> >the distant relationship between the main character and his wealthy
> >father was reminiscent of Gore and his father.
> >
> And yet he says that Oliver was modelled on Al. Imagine that.
Quote him. I've never seen a single instance where he claimed that.
> >> And he never claimed to have discovered Love Canal.
> >
> >Sure he did.
>
> No, he didn't.
It was Al who claimed that HE found a little place called Love
Canal...quite awhile after it had been "found" by others.
> >> All Republican lies.
> >
> >Nope. Good try. Though, when you have to talk about Al Gore, it's
> >awfully hard to work around the sleeze...there's just so much of it
> >surrounding him.
>
> I see that the latest Newsweek poll is out. Your boy is falling like
> a stone.
Whoopee...a poll of registered voters (what happened to all the likely
voter polls?). Get back to us when likley voters give Gore a 10 point
margin for more then a week.
R. Decker
(Eric da Red) wrote:
> In article
> <E298E4BFCE36BEC0.05976A7B...@lp.airnews.net>,
> R. Decker <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
> >In article <sqtibk9...@corp.supernews.com>, berg...@drizzle.com
> >(Eric da Red) wrote:
> >
> >> In article <d5a75b2a51baab5a...@mixmaster.shinn.net>,
> >> Rudy T <anm...@mixmaster.shinn.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >HOLLAND, Ohio (AP) - Making an issue of Al Gore's credibility,
> >> >Republicans
> >> >plan to air an ad reminding voters of his fund-raising visit to a
> >> >Buddhist
> >> >temple and his suggestion that he invented the Internet.
> >> >
> >> >"There's Al Gore reinventing himself,'' a woman says in the
> >> >Republican
> >> >National Committee ad that will air as soon as Friday night.
>
> >> I told ya that the GOP would go negative around Labor Day.
>
> >Why not. You've got to fight back against negative ads sometime.
>
> What negative ads?
The deceptive negative ads that used votes made by Dick Cheney to
confuse voters into thinking that Cheney was for or against things he
wasn't. For instance, they claimed he suggested raising oil prices,
without explaining that this was before the current situation with high
prices, where the oil companies in some cases were losing money. It's
the kind of thing that Bush refused to do with Gore's "lying" claims of
94, but which Al Gore doesn't have a single problem with, which goes
back to the credibility issue that the new RNC ad deals with.
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
<mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>In article <l350rsk6pl35nk3kq...@4ax.com>,
>ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:56:02 -0400, "R. Decker"
>> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <q6evqskad8ib1i1d3...@4ax.com>,
>> >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
>
><SNIP>
>
>> >> >In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of you
>> >> >gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
>> >> >
>> >> >Be specific, please.
>> >>
>> >> Well, where to begin?
>> >> First, there's the false claim that Gore broke any law at the Buddhist
>> >
>> >I don't remember that claim being stated.
>>
>> Really? Better pay some attention to your own attack ads, then.
>
>Another instance of Zepp pulling falsehoods out of his ass. The ad in
>question never claims Gore broke any laws. Sorry Bevis! If you claim
>that it does, QUOTE IT!
If Gore did nothing wrong, then why bring it up? Hmmmm?
Fluttering your eyelashes at us and saying "who, ME?" in disingenuous
tones doesn't work. Ask Newt.
>
>> >> Temple. Despite your best efforts to claim he did, he didn't.
>> >>
>> >> He wasn't lying about taking the iniative in creating the internet.
>> >> He did.
>> >
>> >Then Gore should be proud, and this isn't a "negative". Of course, most
>> >Americans now it's NOT true, and it makes Gore look stupid.
>> >
>> Gore is proud, and extending his lead. Unhappily for you, Americans
>> figured out what lying sacks of shit the GOP have become.
>
>No lie in bringing out Gore's gross exagerations.
Except you lie about what Gore said, or you lie about the truth of
what he said.
>
>> >> He wasn't lying about his role in "Love Story". He was.
>> >
>> >Debateable. Segal says that the only thing even remotely close was that
>> >the distant relationship between the main character and his wealthy
>> >father was reminiscent of Gore and his father.
>> >
>> And yet he says that Oliver was modelled on Al. Imagine that.
>
>Quote him. I've never seen a single instance where he claimed that.
>
I have, and I'll dig it out. Needless to say, he got asked about it a
fair bit.
>> >> And he never claimed to have discovered Love Canal.
>> >
>> >Sure he did.
>>
>> No, he didn't.
>
>It was Al who claimed that HE found a little place called Love
>Canal...quite awhile after it had been "found" by others.
>
Al never said any such thing. Provide the quote, liar.
>> >> All Republican lies.
>> >
>> >Nope. Good try. Though, when you have to talk about Al Gore, it's
>> >awfully hard to work around the sleeze...there's just so much of it
>> >surrounding him.
>>
>> I see that the latest Newsweek poll is out. Your boy is falling like
>> a stone.
>
>Whoopee...a poll of registered voters (what happened to all the likely
>voter polls?). Get back to us when likley voters give Gore a 10 point
>margin for more then a week.
Bush is only trailing by six among likely voters. But he's still
sinking like a stone.
**********************************
"I’m running because our country must be prosperous. But prosperity
must have a purpose. The purpose of prosperity is to make sure
prosperity has a purpose, and my purpose is to make sure it does."
--GW Bush, putting to rest once and for all the charge that he speaks in
empty platitudes.
For commentary on all things liberal/leftist: http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/zeppol.htm
Links to hundreds of left wing areas: http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/lynx.htm
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
****************************************
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
wrote:
Oh. You mean the right-wing fantasies that are now a major
embarrassment to the GOP, who wish they had never heard of you
nuthatches?
>>
>>And you can quote Gore all you want. Just don't misquote him.
>
>Are you absolutely "certain" about this again, Zeppy?
>
Absolutely, Harold. Of course, you won't be able to manage that, will
you?
>Regards, Harold
>------
>"The Pacific yew can be cut down and processed to produce a potent
>chemical, taxol, which offers some promise of curing certain forms
>of lung, breast, and ovarian cancer in patients who would otherwise
>quickly die. It seems an easy choice -- sacrifice the tree for a
>human life -- until one learns that three trees must be destroyed
>for each patient treated, that only specimens more than a hundred
>years old contain the potent chemical in their bark, and that there
>are very few of these yews remaining on earth."
> - Albert Gore in his book Earth in the Balance, 1992
**********************************
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
<mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
Odd, but I don't remember hearing about anything like that.
I -do- remember hearing about how that vicious little corporate
asswipe sucked up to the aparteid racists and betrayed Nelson Mandela,
though.
Perhaps the next empty slogan of the Bush campaign ought to be
"Principles at a profit".
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
<mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>In article <sqtibk9...@corp.supernews.com>, berg...@drizzle.com
>(Eric da Red) wrote:
>
>> In article <d5a75b2a51baab5a...@mixmaster.shinn.net>,
>> Rudy T <anm...@mixmaster.shinn.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >HOLLAND, Ohio (AP) - Making an issue of Al Gore's credibility,
>> >Republicans
>> >plan to air an ad reminding voters of his fund-raising visit to a
>> >Buddhist
>> >temple and his suggestion that he invented the Internet.
>> >
>> >"There's Al Gore reinventing himself,'' a woman says in the Republican
>> >National Committee ad that will air as soon as Friday night.
>>
>> I told ya that the GOP would go negative around Labor Day.
>
>Why not. You've got to fight back against negative ads sometime.
Yes, yes, we've heard it all before, Ding Dong.
And they only went in to protect those peace-loving German citizens of
the Reich against those murderous and aggressive Czechs, right?
R. Decker
ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 00:29:57 -0400, "R. Decker"
> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <l350rsk6pl35nk3kq...@4ax.com>,
> >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:56:02 -0400, "R. Decker"
> >> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <q6evqskad8ib1i1d3...@4ax.com>,
> >> >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> >
> ><SNIP>
> >
> >> >> >In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of
> >> >> >you
> >> >> >gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Be specific, please.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, where to begin?
> >> >> First, there's the false claim that Gore broke any law at the
> >> >> Buddhist
> >> >
> >> >I don't remember that claim being stated.
> >>
> >> Really? Better pay some attention to your own attack ads, then.
> >
> >Another instance of Zepp pulling falsehoods out of his ass. The ad in
> >question never claims Gore broke any laws. Sorry Bevis! If you claim
> >that it does, QUOTE IT!
>
> If Gore did nothing wrong, then why bring it up? Hmmmm?
I see you're backing away from your false claim that the RNC made a
false claim itself. Good. If Gore didn't do anything wrong in fund
raising, then why on earth would at least 3 independent investigators
tell Janet Reno that there needed to be an idepenedent investigation of
Mr. Gore and the FBI suggest that he lied to them? I say let's let the
American people decide for themselves if attending a fund raiser in a
buddhist temple is appropriate behavior. That's what the RNC is doing,
unlike YOUR false claims that they said he did something illegal.
> Fluttering your eyelashes at us and saying "who, ME?" in disingenuous
> tones doesn't work. Ask Newt.
> >
> >> >> Temple. Despite your best efforts to claim he did, he didn't.
> >> >>
> >> >> He wasn't lying about taking the iniative in creating the internet.
> >> >> He did.
> >> >
> >> >Then Gore should be proud, and this isn't a "negative". Of course,
> >> >most
> >> >Americans now it's NOT true, and it makes Gore look stupid.
> >> >
> >> Gore is proud, and extending his lead. Unhappily for you, Americans
> >> figured out what lying sacks of shit the GOP have become.
> >
> >No lie in bringing out Gore's gross exagerations.
>
> Except you lie about what Gore said, or you lie about the truth of
> what he said.
Again, POINT OUT THE LIE. It's a gross exageration to say that HIS
iniative created the Internet. Not the entity that's existed for over
20 years, or it's current evolved state as a publically available
resource (Gore had imagined ARPA for use of Gov. and Edu. only when he
offered to sponsor legislation which allowed other more capable people
to help evolve, not invent, the internet). Again, let's let the
American people decide if it's bogus or not. I certainly hope that Al
get's up in the debates and repeats his claims EXACTLY has he did in the
interview.
> >> >> He wasn't lying about his role in "Love Story". He was.
> >> >
> >> >Debateable. Segal says that the only thing even remotely close was
> >> >that
> >> >the distant relationship between the main character and his wealthy
> >> >father was reminiscent of Gore and his father.
> >> >
> >> And yet he says that Oliver was modelled on Al. Imagine that.
> >
> >Quote him. I've never seen a single instance where he claimed that.
> >
> I have, and I'll dig it out. Needless to say, he got asked about it a
> fair bit.
"The author, Erich Segal, told The New York Times he was 'befuddled' by
the comments in the first place. He said he called Gore, and the vice
president said it was a misunderstanding." (Sources: The Des Moines
Register, 12/15/97; Gore concedes 'miscommunication' about 'Love Story'
role)
> >> >> And he never claimed to have discovered Love Canal.
> >> >
> >> >Sure he did.
> >>
> >> No, he didn't.
> >
> >It was Al who claimed that HE found a little place called Love
> >Canal...quite awhile after it had been "found" by others.
> >
> Al never said any such thing. Provide the quote, liar.
Gore, on a visit to a New Hampshire high school, said that he "found a
little place in upstate New York called Love Canal" and that a hearing
he had in Tennessee in October 1978 "started it all." (Forget about
Jimmy Carter, who declared the area a national state of emergency
months earlier.)
(Source: http://www.junkscience.com/dec99/lovegore.htm)
> >> >> All Republican lies.
> >> >
> >> >Nope. Good try. Though, when you have to talk about Al Gore, it's
> >> >awfully hard to work around the sleeze...there's just so much of it
> >> >surrounding him.
> >>
> >> I see that the latest Newsweek poll is out. Your boy is falling like
> >> a stone.
> >
> >Whoopee...a poll of registered voters (what happened to all the likely
> >voter polls?). Get back to us when likley voters give Gore a 10 point
> >margin for more then a week.
>
> Bush is only trailing by six among likely voters. But he's still
> sinking like a stone.
*yawn*
R. Decker
ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2000 19:41:30 -0400, "R. Decker"
> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <sqtibk9...@corp.supernews.com>, berg...@drizzle.com
> >(Eric da Red) wrote:
> >
> >> In article <d5a75b2a51baab5a...@mixmaster.shinn.net>,
> >> Rudy T <anm...@mixmaster.shinn.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >HOLLAND, Ohio (AP) - Making an issue of Al Gore's credibility,
> >> >Republicans
> >> >plan to air an ad reminding voters of his fund-raising visit to a
> >> >Buddhist
> >> >temple and his suggestion that he invented the Internet.
> >> >
> >> >"There's Al Gore reinventing himself,'' a woman says in the
> >> >Republican
> >> >National Committee ad that will air as soon as Friday night.
> >>
> >> I told ya that the GOP would go negative around Labor Day.
> >
> >Why not. You've got to fight back against negative ads sometime.
>
> Yes, yes, we've heard it all before, Ding Dong.
Wow...name calling...how adult of you. Next thing you know I'll be a
"poopee head".
> And they only went in to protect those peace-loving German citizens of
> the Reich against those murderous and aggressive Czechs, right?
Godwin's law. You lose.
Johann von Tebbes
--
When the second amendment goes down
the others will soon follow. The second
puts teeth into the others.
When guns are outlawed, only street
criminals and other liberals will have
guns!
JOIN THE NRA! Secure your
rights and protect yourself and family!
For membership Dial: 1-877-672-2000
Hearing impaired Dial 1-877-672-8331
Your children's future may depend on it!.
R. Decker <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:AD36211A2E7C8C4A.AEE0E1B2...@lp.airnews.net...
la...@rightwingers.net
>
>--
>When the second amendment goes down
>the others will soon follow. The second
>puts teeth into the others.
Wrong
The 2nd amendment put "teeth" in STATE government to protect citizens WITHIN
their borders from attack absent a CENTRAL government army.
The Protections against ALL the enumerated grievances contained in the
Declaration of Independence were addressed years later by the constitution.
That NEGATES any reason to conclude that "guns" provide protection of
constitional protections.
We PROTECT, by "RULE OF LAW"
And for you who can't understand that intellectual rationale, I feel sorry for
you.
robxr4ti
Selective hearing perhaps?
>
>I -do- remember hearing about how that vicious little corporate
>asswipe sucked up to the aparteid racists and betrayed Nelson Mandela,
>though.
A fine example of it.
Michael Ejercito
<ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:56:02 -0400, "R. Decker"
><mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Nope. Good try. Though, when you have to talk about Al Gore, it's
>>awfully hard to work around the sleeze...there's just so much of it
>>surrounding him.
>
>I see that the latest Newsweek poll is out. Your boy is falling like
>a stone.
How long will he continue falling, Zeppo? It was like this in
March, and Bush got back up again.
Michael
Bush/Cheney 2000
Johann von Tebbes
<la...@rightwingers.net> wrote in message
news:39b12961...@169.132.11.12...
> a"Johann von Tebbes" <jti...@tcainternet.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >--
> >When the second amendment goes down
> >the others will soon follow. The second
> >puts teeth into the others.
>
> Wrong
>
> The 2nd amendment put "teeth" in STATE government to protect citizens
WITHIN
> their borders from attack absent a CENTRAL government army.
OK if by 'central' you mean the federal government. But otherwise you're
wrong.
>
> The Protections against ALL the enumerated grievances contained in the
> Declaration of Independence were addressed years later by the
constitution.
> That NEGATES any reason to conclude that "guns" provide protection of
> constitional protections.
>
> We PROTECT, by "RULE OF LAW"
>
> And for you who can't understand that intellectual rationale, I feel sorry
for
> you.
And You who don't understand that tyranny cannot grasp control if the people
are armed. Hit knew this. Stalin knew this.....capiche?
--
When the second amendment goes down
the others will soon follow. The second
puts teeth into the others.
Johann von Tebbes
--
When the second amendment goes down
the others will soon follow. The second
puts teeth into the others.
When guns are outlawed, only street
criminals and other liberals will have
guns!
JOIN THE NRA! Secure your
rights and protect yourself and family!
For membership Dial: 1-877-672-2000
Hearing impaired Dial 1-877-672-8331
Your children's future may depend on it!.
Michael Ejercito <meje...@csulb.edu> wrote in message
news:39b16101...@tabloid.csulb.edu...
Johann von Tebbes
--
When the second amendment goes down
the others will soon follow. The second
puts teeth into the others.
When guns are outlawed, only street
criminals and other liberals will have
guns!
JOIN THE NRA! Secure your
rights and protect yourself and family!
For membership Dial: 1-877-672-2000
Hearing impaired Dial 1-877-672-8331
Your children's future may depend on it!.
Michael Ejercito <meje...@csulb.edu> wrote in message
news:39b16101...@tabloid.csulb.edu...
hkr...@capu.net
>
> --
> When the second amendment goes down
> the others will soon follow. The second
> puts teeth into the others.
> When guns are outlawed, only street
> criminals and other liberals will have
> guns!
> JOIN THE NRA! Secure your
> rights and protect yourself and family!
> For membership Dial: 1-877-672-xxxx
> Hearing impaired Dial 1-877-672-xxxx
> Mentally deranged Dial 1-877-LaP-ierre
--
Harry Krause
------------
Did you know that they took the word Gullible out of the dictionary?
R. Decker
Volt...@mindspring.com wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 11:13:21 -0400, "R. Decker"
> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <vk31rscm10ccsh0r2...@4ax.com>,
> >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Well, where to begin?
> >> >> >> First, there's the false claim that Gore broke any law at the
> >> >> >> Buddhist
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I don't remember that claim being stated.
> >> >>
> >> >> Really? Better pay some attention to your own attack ads, then.
> >> >
> >> >Another instance of Zepp pulling falsehoods out of his ass. The ad
> >> >in
> >> >question never claims Gore broke any laws. Sorry Bevis! If you
> >> >claim
> >> >that it does, QUOTE IT!
> >>
> >> If Gore did nothing wrong, then why bring it up? Hmmmm?
> >
> >I see you're backing away from your false claim that the RNC made a
> >false claim itself. Good.
>
> Another Dicker strawman catches afire!
Another Dolt inability to read english comes to the fore front. Zepp
claimed that the RNC made a "false claim" in that Gore broke some law.
I explained to Zepp that they did no such thing (he ASSumed they did)
and then he started backing away from the claim by using the phrase "if
Gore did nothing wrong". Doing something wrong, and doing something
illegal are two different things. I and the RNC didn't claim the
latter. Zepp originally did, thus his use of a lesser description was a
backing away, and I made an observation. That isn't even close to being
a strawman, so I take back my former overestimation of your ability to
comprehend the term.
> > If Gore didn't do anything wrong in fund raising, then why on earth
> > would at least 3 independent investigators
> >tell Janet Reno that there needed to be an idepenedent investigation of
> >Mr. Gore and the FBI suggest that he
> >lied to them?
>
> Let's see that citation, Dicker.
> 7) Wednesday night FNC reported a development on the temple
fundraising front and disclosed how there was also a memo from FBI
Director Louis Freeh urging an independent counsel, "this time
because Vice President Gore was suspected of lying."
On Special Report with Brit Hume on April 5 Hume announced:
"Two Buddhist nuns have been indicted in connection with Vice
President Gore's campaign fundraising woes. A federal grand jury
has charged the women with contempt of court. They were given
immunity in exchange for their testimony against Gore pal Maria
Hsia, but the nuns failed to appear in court. Hsia was convicted
last month in connection with her fundraising. She arranged Gore's
visit to that Buddhist temple in 1996. And there has been another
revelation about the Justice Department's long investigation into
the campaign finance abuses of the 1996 Democratic presidential
campaign, and our Jim Angle is standing by with details. Jim,
what's up?"
a second and previously undisclosed memo from FBI Director Louis Freeh
again urging the Attorney General to appoint an independent counsel --
this time because Vice President Gore was suspected of lying to FBI
investigators. And congressional sources tell Fox that the, that
recommendation was joined by two high ranking Justice Department
lawyers, one of whom had previously argued against an independent
counsel.
"Now the Justice Department's former chief campaign
investigator Charles LaBella had recommended an independent
counsel twice, the second time saying that Vice President Gore may
have provided false testimony when he was questioned by the FBI.
Fox has now learned that Director Freeh later joined that
argument, saying there was enough evidence to investigate the Vice
President for lying. Now the sources emphasize that no one is
suggesting there is anything approaching a smoking gun, but more
than enough to appoint an independent counsel to make sure that
the administration is not investigating itself."
FoxNews 4/15/00
> You have yet to back up a single accusation you have made.
You lose more and more credibility among thinking people every time you
make a false accusations such as this.
> >I say let's let the American people decide for themselves if attending a
> >fund raiser in a
> >buddhist temple is appropriate behavior. That's what the RNC is doing,
> >unlike YOUR false claims that they said he did something illegal.
>
> I say you assume the position now in preparation for November 7th.
Quit thinking gay thoughts about me. I'm not interested.
R. Decker
Volt...@mindspring.com wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 00:29:57 -0400, "R. Decker"
> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <l350rsk6pl35nk3kq...@4ax.com>,
> >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 14:56:02 -0400, "R. Decker"
> >> <mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <q6evqskad8ib1i1d3...@4ax.com>,
> >> >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> >
> ><SNIP>
> >
> >> >> >In the midst of all this artificial back-slapping, would one of
> >> >> >you
> >> >> >gents tell us what is supposedly negative about these ads?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Be specific, please.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, where to begin?
> >> >> First, there's the false claim that Gore broke any law at the
> >> >> Buddhist
> >> >
> >> >I don't remember that claim being stated.
> >>
> >> Really? Better pay some attention to your own attack ads, then.
> >
> >Another instance of Zepp pulling falsehoods out of his ass. The ad in
> >question never claims Gore broke any laws. Sorry Bevis! If you claim
> >that it does, QUOTE IT!
>
> So Gore is lying in the GOP's ad?
What does that have to do with the price of rice in China? The debate
was over what the RNC said in their ad, not what Gore said.
Are you really that stupid?
> Dicker is seeing why that negative ad is the third major mistake of
> DubYa's piss poor campaign!
*yawyn* My first major mistake was assuming that you could debate like
an adult. Take your 3rd grade reading level and go play with your
matchbox cars....
Harold
<ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:47:02 GMT, haroldb...@yahoo.com (Harold)
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 08:05:26 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
>><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
[edited]
>>>What Clinton campaign scandals, Harry?
>>
>>How about the CHinese Army support, or the union money laundering, or
>>the "teas" in the WHite House. There are literally dozens of
>>convictions, you simply *must keep up Zeppy.
>
>Oh. You mean the right-wing fantasies that are now a major
>embarrassment to the GOP
Let me see, you are now going to deny that the Chinese Army gave money
to elect Clinton, and that the unions did not launder contributions,
the teas were not for contribution?
Gee Brian, I really thought you paid more attention. They even had
that in the NY Times and Wash. Post.
[deleted]
Regards, Harold
----
Chinese military protect Clinton:
"After Thompson announced... he was suspending his public hearings,
officials said, the FBI obtained intelligence showing that the
Ministry of State Security in Beijing -- the Chinese equivalent
of the CIA -- boasted it had been successful in 'thwarting' the
congressional inquiry."
---Washington Post, Nov 14, 1997
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
He bounced back because people stopped paying attention.
So you can hope that people will stop paying attention over the next 9
1/2 weeks.
>
>
> Michael
>
>
> Bush/Cheney 2000
>
>
> http://www.georgewbush.com
**********************************
"I’m running because our country must be prosperous. But prosperity
must have a purpose. The purpose of prosperity is to make sure
prosperity has a purpose, and my purpose is to make sure it does."
--GW Bush, putting to rest once and for all the charge that he speaks in
empty platitudes.
For commentary on all things liberal/leftist: http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/zeppol.htm
Links to hundreds of left wing areas: http://www.snowcrest.net/zepp/lynx.htm
Pay your taxes so the rich don't have to.
Not dead, in jail, or a slave? Thank a liberal!
****************************************
"
<ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 02:55:28 GMT, haroldb...@yahoo.com (Harold)
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 22:59:02 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
>><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:47:02 GMT, haroldb...@yahoo.com (Harold)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 08:05:26 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
>>>><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>>
>>[edited]
>>
>>>>>What Clinton campaign scandals, Harry?
>>>>
>>>>How about the CHinese Army support, or the union money laundering, or
>>>>the "teas" in the WHite House. There are literally dozens of
>>>>convictions, you simply *must keep up Zeppy.
>>>
>>>Oh. You mean the right-wing fantasies that are now a major
>>>embarrassment to the GOP
>>
>>Let me see, you are now going to deny that the Chinese Army gave money
>>to elect Clinton, and that the unions did not launder contributions,
>>the teas were not for contribution?
>
>The Chinese army gave money to elect Dole. Ask Haley about that.
Strawman alert!!!!!!!!
The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a
person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or
misrepresented version of that position.
A Straw Man Argument is a statement you make if you want to more
easily attack an opposing position. You intentionally make a silly
caricature of that position, one that no one would believe,
knock down that silly, unrealistic caricature, and then proclaim that
the original version of the argument has been demolished. This tactic
fools a lot of people.
This is one of the most unethical and cowardly of debating tactics,
since you have so little confidence in your own position that you
cannot even address the real position of your opponent. At the heart
of the Straw Man Argument is deception.
>
>Let's see: many types of tea are from China, so I see a possible link
>to criminality there, at least, as filtered through your fevered
>little brain. And let me guess: you think unions all report to
>Peking, right?
>>
>>Gee Brian, I really thought you paid more attention. They even had
>>that in the NY Times and Wash. Post.
>>
>>[deleted]
>>
>>Regards, Harold
>>----
>>Chinese military protect Clinton:
>>"After Thompson announced... he was suspending his public hearings,
>>officials said, the FBI obtained intelligence showing that the
>>Ministry of State Security in Beijing -- the Chinese equivalent
>>of the CIA -- boasted it had been successful in 'thwarting' the
>>congressional inquiry."
>> ---Washington Post, Nov 14, 1997
>
Harold
<ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>On Mon, 04 Sep 2000 14:49:32 GMT, haroldb...@yahoo.com (Harold)
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 08:41:41 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
>><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 02:55:28 GMT, haroldb...@yahoo.com (Harold)
>>>wrote:
>>
>>Did you get a new newsreader Brian? One post is enough bandwidth to
>>consume.
>>>
>>[edited]
>>>>
>>>>Let me see, you are now going to deny that the Chinese Army gave money
>>>>to elect Clinton, and that the unions did not launder contributions,
>>>>the teas were not for contribution?
>>>
>>>The Chinese army gave money to elect Dole. Ask Haley about that.
>>
>>So, if Dole does it, that makes it OK in your book? You are a strange
>>person, Brian.
>
>Harry, you really do have trouble thinking, don't you?
>
You are the one who justified Clitnon's behavior by reference to Dole,
not I.
Is Doe going to join Nixon as your reference of behavior?
Regards, Harold
-------
"Our tenet ever was . . . that Congress had not unlimited powers to
provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those
specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant that they
should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated
powers, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for
purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action."
--- Jefferson, 1816
Gore_In_Conte...@no-spam.com
>In article <d5a75b2a51baab5a...@mixmaster.shinn.net>,
>Rudy T <anm...@mixmaster.shinn.net> wrote:
>>
>>HOLLAND, Ohio (AP) - Making an issue of Al Gore's credibility, Republicans
>>plan to air an ad reminding voters of his fund-raising visit to a Buddhist
>>temple and his suggestion that he invented the Internet.
>>
>>"There's Al Gore reinventing himself,'' a woman says in the Republican
>>National Committee ad that will air as soon as Friday night.
>
>I told ya that the GOP would go negative around Labor Day.
>
>They just can't help themselves.
>
>...
>
>>Meantime, the Democratic National Committee planned to unveil an ad
>>Thursday attacking Bush's record in Texas and specifically the state's
>>treatment of low-income children on Medicaid.
>
>In this case, the Democrat's mud-tossing has something to do with serious
>issues.
Do you know those ads re Texas childrens' health care are "muddy"? Bush really does
have a terrible record on that issue. (Including claiming credit for a bill which he
said at the time the Democrats had "forced down our throats."
The plain facts might sound like mud, but they're on record. See Molly Ivins and
excerpts from other sources at
http://Gore_In_Context.tripod.com/b-CHIPS.html
Diogenes
*************************************************
http://Gore_In_Context.tripod.com -- my new site
Pew/PEJ report: media coverage favors Bush:
http://www.journalism.org/publ_research/character1.html
Re campaign finance see
http://www.salonmagazine.com/news/col/cona/2000/06/07/china/index.html
At my site see link direct to "Temple in a Teapot", a very well-written
article at americanlawyer.com debunking Gore campaign
finance charges.
Other good sites debunking anti-Clinton/Gore stories:
http://www.dailyhowler.com/
http://www.americandispatches.com/index.html
http://www.consortiumnews.com/
http://www.prospect.org/
Vote out the Impeachers! moveon.org & pfaw.org
*************************************************
qwerty
> In article <f5g6rso793a3n6ecr...@4ax.com>,
> ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 16:27:32 -0700, meje...@csulb.edu (Michael
> > Ejercito) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <qno3rs0fqg4barmh7...@4ax.com>,
> > >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 20:21:26 GMT, meje...@csulb.edu (Michael
> > >> Ejercito) wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > How long will he continue falling, Zeppo? It was like this in
> > >> >March, and Bush got back up again.
> > >>
> > >> He bounced back because people stopped paying attention.
> > >>
> > >> So you can hope that people will stop paying attention over the next
9
> > >> 1/2 weeks.
> >
> > Cough. Portrait of America. The one that's still trying to claim
> > Bush has a 2-to-1 lead in the electoral college.
> it is continuing the process of polling the fifty states. They already
> have some new additions. We can expect more updates later in the week.
> > Well, you have fun reading Portrait of American and clinging to your
> > fantasies.
> They have been around since 1992, at least. Their polls were found to
> be more accurate than Gallup and Zogby.
Cite please!
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
<mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>In article <39cdd47a...@news.mindspring.com>,
>Volt...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 19:24:05 -0400, "R. Decker"
>> So the ad was not about what Al Gore said?????
>
>Yes, the ad was. Reading comprehension obviously isn't what you're
>about, is it? Zepp said that the ad made a false claim. There was
>none. I pointed it out.
So you admit that Gore broke no law at the Buddhist Temple?
>
>> What exactly is the point of the RNC airing it, Dicker?
>
>To point out that Al Gore will say anything. A man with that little
>credibility does not deserve to hold the highest office in the land.
He said he broke no law. You can't have it both ways, Dickweed.
>
>> >Are you really that stupid?
>>
>> Tell us again about the ad, Dicker.
>>
>> You are all over the place here trying to untangle yourself!
Tell us why the Republicans are saying that Gore did something wrong
by saying he broke no laws at that Temple without saying he broke some
laws.
>
>You're confusing yourself again. I suggest you go back to
>alt.news.barbiedolls where you can deal with people
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
Ejercito) wrote:
>In article <f5g6rso793a3n6ecr...@4ax.com>,
>ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 16:27:32 -0700, meje...@csulb.edu (Michael
>> Ejercito) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <qno3rs0fqg4barmh7...@4ax.com>,
>> >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 20:21:26 GMT, meje...@csulb.edu (Michael
>> >> Ejercito) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > How long will he continue falling, Zeppo? It was like this in
>> >> >March, and Bush got back up again.
>> >>
>> >> He bounced back because people stopped paying attention.
>> >>
>> >> So you can hope that people will stop paying attention over the next 9
>> >> 1/2 weeks.
>> > See the poll at http://205.252.89.107/html/poll-804.html
>>
>> Cough. Portrait of America. The one that's still trying to claim
>> Bush has a 2-to-1 lead in the electoral college.
> it is continuing the process of polling the fifty states. They already
>have some new additions. We can expect more updates later in the week.
>> Well, you have fun reading Portrait of American and clinging to your
>> fantasies.
> They have been around since 1992, at least. Their polls were found to
>be more accurate than Gallup and Zogby.
Really. Well, why don't you whip out some election eve results from
them so we can judge for ourselves?
Michael ejercito
If you MUST know.
March 14, 2000
Rasmussen Research Named Most Accurate in Primary Polling
TownPages Subsidiary Ranked First Followed by Gallup and Zogby
TownPagesNet.com (AMEX: TPN - news), today announced that an
independent analysis of pre-election polls and actual primary results
found that its subsidiary Rasmussen Research most accurately predicted
the outcomes of the Presidential Primary elections this year. Gallup
and Zogby finished a close second and third.
The Washington, DC-based Progressive Review, (http://www.prorev.com)
which conducted the "Primary Pollster Run-Off", ranked Rasmussen
Research number one in accuracy. Sam Smith, the magazine's publisher,
commented, "the results suggest that, contrary to popular myth, polls
do work, but that some work considerably better than others."
Rasmussen Research President, Scott Rasmussen commented, "We're
obviously pleased with this independent validation of our work.
Primary elections are the most difficult of all to project, so our
number one ranking through the primary season is particularly
satisfying. The leader in every Rasmussen Research pre-election poll
emerged victorious on election day."
Rasmussen Research conducts independent public opinion research using
a proprietary automated telephone survey system. Results of this
research are distributed on-line and through traditional media
outlets. The firm's Portrait of America web site is the Number One
Source for Public Opinion Polling Data On the Internet.
Rasmussen Research is one of a group of companies owned by UK-based
TownPagesNet.com plc. Other group companies include BuyersGuide Ltd.,
(formerly Bowden Publishing) a well-known Internet-based Local
Authority and Public Service Guide, and Town Pages UK Ltd., which
operates an interactive service providing comprehensive up-to-date
locally focused information about specific towns and cities in the
United Kingdom in a graphically pleasing format. TownPagesNet.com plc
has announced its intention to take BuyersGuide public in the UK and
seek a listing for it on the London stock market. TownPages®' website
can be found at http://www.TownPages.co.uk
``Safe Harbor'' statement under the Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995: This release contains forward-looking statements
that are subject to risks and uncertainties including, but not limited
to, the impact of competitive products and pricing, product demand and
market acceptance, reliance on key strategic alliances, fluctuations
in operating results and other risks detailed from time to time in the
Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Michael ejercito
Michael ejercito
Read this news release.
On Tue, 5 Sep 2000 14:44:56 -0700, "qwerty" <nos...@all.com> wrote:
>
>"Michael Ejercito" <meje...@csulb.edu> wrote in message
>news:mejercit-040...@dhcp202-116.csulb.edu...
>> In article <f5g6rso793a3n6ecr...@4ax.com>,
>> ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 16:27:32 -0700, meje...@csulb.edu (Michael
>> > Ejercito) wrote:
>> >
>> > >In article <qno3rs0fqg4barmh7...@4ax.com>,
>> > >ze...@snowcrest.net wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 20:21:26 GMT, meje...@csulb.edu (Michael
>> > >> Ejercito) wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> > How long will he continue falling, Zeppo? It was like this in
>> > >> >March, and Bush got back up again.
>> > >>
>> > >> He bounced back because people stopped paying attention.
>> > >>
>> > >> So you can hope that people will stop paying attention over the next
>9
>> > >> 1/2 weeks.
>> > > See the poll at http://205.252.89.107/html/poll-804.html
>> >
>> > Cough. Portrait of America. The one that's still trying to claim
>> > Bush has a 2-to-1 lead in the electoral college.
>> it is continuing the process of polling the fifty states. They already
>> have some new additions. We can expect more updates later in the week.
>> > Well, you have fun reading Portrait of American and clinging to your
>> > fantasies.
>> They have been around since 1992, at least. Their polls were found to
>> be more accurate than Gallup and Zogby.
>
seek a listing for it on the London stock market. TownPagesŽ' website
can be found at http://www.TownPages.co.uk
``Safe Harbor'' statement under the Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995: This release contains forward-looking statements
that are subject to risks and uncertainties including, but not limited
to, the impact of competitive products and pricing, product demand and
market acceptance, reliance on key strategic alliances, fluctuations
in operating results and other risks detailed from time to time in the
Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
_
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
By an odd website, where I can't find this comment any more.
In primaries.
Once.
THey use robot calling machines to poll. Press one if you are 12 years
old pretending to be a grown up, and so on.
Not a track record to know if this works.
>seek a listing for it on the London stock market. TownPagesŽ' website
>can be found at http://www.TownPages.co.uk
>
>``Safe Harbor'' statement under the Private Securities Litigation
>Reform Act of 1995: This release contains forward-looking statements
>that are subject to risks and uncertainties including, but not limited
>to, the impact of competitive products and pricing, product demand and
>market acceptance, reliance on key strategic alliances, fluctuations
>in operating results and other risks detailed from time to time in the
>Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
>
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr
silverback
<mrno...@yahoo.nospam.com> wrote:
>In article <39cdd47a...@news.mindspring.com>,
>Volt...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 19:24:05 -0400, "R. Decker"
>> So the ad was not about what Al Gore said?????
>
>Yes, the ad was. Reading comprehension obviously isn't what you're
>about, is it? Zepp said that the ad made a false claim. There was
>none. I pointed it out.
>
>> What exactly is the point of the RNC airing it, Dicker?
>
>To point out that Al Gore will say anything. A man with that little
>credibility does not deserve to hold the highest office in the land.
Telling more lies ddecker?
Now let the reader try this link to see what other lies you and
georgie have been telling folks.
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/lies.htm
And for the other readers feel free to print and distribute this flyer
or email it to friends or better yet copy it to your site so you can
distribute it also.
>
>> >Are you really that stupid?
>>
>> Tell us again about the ad, Dicker.
>>
>> You are all over the place here trying to untangle yourself!
>
>You're confusing yourself again. I suggest you go back to
>alt.news.barbiedolls where you can deal with people
***********************************************
GDY Weasel
emailers remove the spam buster
For those seeking enlightenment visit the White Rose at
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/whiterose.htm
Get your free election flyer to hand out or email at
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/lies.htm
*********************************************
Not For Smoking!
wrote:
>How about the CHinese Army support, or the union money laundering, or
>the "teas" in the WHite House. There are literally dozens of
>convictions, you simply *must keep up Zeppy.
"Dozens" of convictions? Please list!
Not For Smoking!
<ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 02:55:28 GMT, haroldb...@yahoo.com (Harold)
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 22:59:02 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
>><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:47:02 GMT, haroldb...@yahoo.com (Harold)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 08:05:26 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
>>>><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>>
>>[edited]
>>
>>>>>What Clinton campaign scandals, Harry?
>>>>
>>>>How about the CHinese Army support, or the union money laundering, or
>>>>the "teas" in the WHite House. There are literally dozens of
>>>>convictions, you simply *must keep up Zeppy.
>>>
>>>Oh. You mean the right-wing fantasies that are now a major
>>>embarrassment to the GOP
>>
>>Let me see, you are now going to deny that the Chinese Army gave money
>>to elect Clinton, and that the unions did not launder contributions,
>>the teas were not for contribution?
>
>The Chinese army gave money to elect Dole. Ask Haley about that.
>
>Let's see: many types of tea are from China, so I see a possible link
>to criminality there, at least, as filtered through your fevered
>little brain. And let me guess: you think unions all report to
>Peking, right?
It's the laundry connection! Everyone knows those chinky chinky
chinamen run all the laundries!
Not For Smoking!
>On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 08:41:41 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 03 Sep 2000 02:55:28 GMT, haroldb...@yahoo.com (Harold)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 22:59:02 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
>>><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 02 Sep 2000 01:47:02 GMT, haroldb...@yahoo.com (Harold)
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Fri, 01 Sep 2000 08:05:26 -0700, "Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender"
>>>>><ze...@snowcrest.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>[edited]
>>>
>>>>>>What Clinton campaign scandals, Harry?
>>>>>
>>>>>How about the CHinese Army support, or the union money laundering, or
>>>>>the "teas" in the WHite House. There are literally dozens of
>>>>>convictions, you simply *must keep up Zeppy.
>>>>
>>>>Oh. You mean the right-wing fantasies that are now a major
>>>>embarrassment to the GOP
>>>
>>>Let me see, you are now going to deny that the Chinese Army gave money
>>>to elect Clinton, and that the unions did not launder contributions,
>>>the teas were not for contribution?
>>
>>The Chinese army gave money to elect Dole. Ask Haley about that.
>
>Strawman alert!!!!!!!!
BZZZT! Sorry, wrong answer!
>
>The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a
>person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or
>misrepresented version of that position.
Yes, very good. But neither of our contenders is attributing a false
position to the other.
>A Straw Man Argument is a statement you make if you want to more
>easily attack an opposing position. You intentionally make a silly
>caricature of that position, one that no one would believe,
>knock down that silly, unrealistic caricature, and then proclaim that
>the original version of the argument has been demolished. This tactic
>fools a lot of people.
Oh, you mean like claiming that someone is making a straw man when
they are not?
>
>This is one of the most unethical and cowardly of debating tactics,
>since you have so little confidence in your own position that you
>cannot even address the real position of your opponent. At the heart
>of the Straw Man Argument is deception.
Harold is an expert at that move, but he's not using it here. He's
just trying to attack by changing the subject.
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
ejercito) wrote:
Of course, what Portrait of America's little puff piece (you forgot to
mention you cribbed this directly from their site) fails to mention is
that they were within 1% of the other major polls in the primaries,
and predicting the winners was hardly a major feat, since the average
primary result was about 75-25 after the second week in March.
Now, PoA seems well outside the margin of error of all the other
polls, which is why we're having this little discussion. Further,
they don't seem to have changed any of their results in a week, just
the dates over the results, which is nothing more than a clock,
designed to give the results a false sense of immediacy.
**********************************
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
Another sign that they may be a bit squirrely is that when you figure
out the dailies in their three day rolling average, the jumps seem
wild, day to day, at times, yet the averages do not.
I actually wonder if Mr Rasmussen is cooking the numbers a bit,
smoothing them out to make em look more rational.
He has a "proprietary" method of weighting the sample, which is a
no-no in the books of the professional polling associations. They say
you gotta publish how you treat the data or no one can tell if you're
cheating.
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr
Michael Ejercito
<tyre...@workOMITmail.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:19:26 GMT, meje...@csulb.edu (Michael
>ejercito) wrote:
>By an odd website, where I can't find this comment any more.
>
>In primaries.
>
>Once.
>
>THey use robot calling machines to poll. Press one if you are 12 years
>old pretending to be a grown up, and so on.
>
>Not a track record to know if this works.
Comparing its performance to Gallup and Zogby shows a lcearer
picture, George.
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr.
I toss a coin, it comes up heads. Rasmussen.
I toss a coin since 1936 and it continually comes up heads. Gallup.
Comprende?
A track record is not a single event.
>
>
> Michael
>
>
> Bush/Cheney 2000
>
>
> http://www.georgewbush.com
George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender
<tyre...@workOMITmail.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 07 Sep 2000 05:10:43 GMT, meje...@csulb.edu (Michael
>Ejercito) wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 05 Sep 2000 22:53:44 -0700, "George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr."
>><tyre...@workOMITmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 06 Sep 2000 04:19:26 GMT, meje...@csulb.edu (Michael
>>>ejercito) wrote:
>>>By an odd website, where I can't find this comment any more.
>>>
>>>In primaries.
>>>
>>>Once.
>>>
>>>THey use robot calling machines to poll. Press one if you are 12 years
>>>old pretending to be a grown up, and so on.
>>>
>>>Not a track record to know if this works.
>> Comparing its performance to Gallup and Zogby shows a lcearer
>>picture, George.
>
>I toss a coin, it comes up heads. Rasmussen.
>
>I toss a coin since 1936 and it continually comes up heads. Gallup.
>
>Comprende?
>
>A track record is not a single event.
It's funny watching Jerky lump Zogby in with "all those other polls".
Zogby, of course, was the one polls that hit dead on in the 1996
presidential race, which as you recall, tightened dramatically in the
last three days. Of course, only one poll--ABC--was outside the MoE,
but these wingnuts want PRECISION in their fake science.
But Zogby is now reporting things they don't want to hear--they lost
considerable cachet among right wingers when they predicted that the
GOP would be lucky if they gained five seats in 1994 (that put them a
lot closer to what happened then GOP polls, which showed gains up to
60 seats). Zogby is no longer the champion on the white horse.
Roboto-Rassmussan is. Until they start reporting Bush's death spiral
as well.
>
>>
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Bush/Cheney 2000
>>
>>
>> http://www.georgewbush.com
>
>George Leroy Tyrebiter, Jr
**********************************
idleeric
--
* * * * * * * *
Evil is even, truth is an odd number, and death is a full stop
- Flann O'Brien, At Swim-Two-Birds
Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender wrote in message ...
Another Loon fav, the Mason-Dixon Poll, which specialises in state-by-state
polling, has been reporting some spectacularly bad news for Otterboy in
Iowa, Missouri, & I believe Minnesota last week.
Strange silence ... no screeching about dark conspiracies, liberal media
take-overs/kidnappings, or other nonsense.
And we have a Scaife paper in Pittsburgh reporting their PA poll: Gore w/ a
13 point lead.
And Rasmussen, no less, reporting Gore up 8 in Florida! ... ha ha, that's
one even *I* don't believe!
... and the GrandDuke of Loondom himself John LeBout repeats all this bad
news ... and more (a confidential GOP poll in MI showing Gore up 3, erasing
a doubledeficit in less than a month) .... and is hollaring: MAN THE
LIFEBOATS!
Next thing we know, Rush will be advising all the Dittoheads to re-register
as Democrats because the GOP is a Lost Cause ... ha ha.
(fwiw, I talked w/ several top Ds in MI yesterday .... their more recent
confidential polls show the Otterboy bleeding is far from over ... they
hammered him in March & are hoping he desperately needs MI again come
November, like Daddy did in 1992 ... any one remember Daddy's pathetic
"Bozo/ spotted owl" Election Eve speech in Macomb County? .... Fatboy
Engler by his side, nodding like a narcoleptic zombie?)
silverback
wrote:
I think you mean Illinios and not Minn. which is even better more
electoral votes.
>
>Strange silence ... no screeching about dark conspiracies, liberal media
>take-overs/kidnappings, or other nonsense.
>
>And we have a Scaife paper in Pittsburgh reporting their PA poll: Gore w/ a
>13 point lead.
>
>And Rasmussen, no less, reporting Gore up 8 in Florida! ... ha ha, that's
>one even *I* don't believe!
>
I expect Fa to go to Gore. The reason is with the demographics. Lot of
retire people and they don't want any drunken frat boy like Dubya
messing with their SS. The other reason many of these retired people
are displaced from the snow belt.
>... and the GrandDuke of Loondom himself John LeBout repeats all this bad
>news ... and more (a confidential GOP poll in MI showing Gore up 3, erasing
>a doubledeficit in less than a month) .... and is hollaring: MAN THE
>LIFEBOATS!
>
>Next thing we know, Rush will be advising all the Dittoheads to re-register
>as Democrats because the GOP is a Lost Cause ... ha ha.
>
>
>(fwiw, I talked w/ several top Ds in MI yesterday .... their more recent
>confidential polls show the Otterboy bleeding is far from over ... they
>hammered him in March & are hoping he desperately needs MI again come
>November, like Daddy did in 1992 ... any one remember Daddy's pathetic
>"Bozo/ spotted owl" Election Eve speech in Macomb County? .... Fatboy
>Engler by his side, nodding like a narcoleptic zombie?)
>
whats the poll results for Oh and mich? i can't remember seeing any
results from those states. If Gore is leading in both little georgie
might as well stay home and talk to the cows.
qwerty
"Michael ejercito" <meje...@csulb.edu> wrote in message
news:39b5c5c1...@tabloid.csulb.edu...
The Progressive Review may be "independent" but is hardly an unbiased source
for opinions & analysis. This cite has extensive articles bashing Hillary,
Clinton, a NWO watch, Arkansas Sudden Death Syndrome section, etc.. Yea,
this is a really unbiased source for analysis! NOT!
> seek a listing for it on the London stock market. TownPagesŽ' website
qwerty
"Michael ejercito" <meje...@csulb.edu> wrote in message
news:39b5c5ad...@tabloid.csulb.edu...
The Progressive Review may be "independent" but is hardly an unbiased source
for opinions & analysis. This cite has extensive articles bashing Hillary,
Clinton, a NWO watch, Arkansas Sudden Death Syndrome section, etc.. Yea,
this is a really unbiased source for analysis! NOT!
> seek a listing for it on the London stock market. TownPagesŽ' website
Michael Ejercito
(silverback) wrote:
>On Thu, 7 Sep 2000 09:39:08 -0400, "idleeric" <std...@mich.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>--
>> * * * * * * * *
>>Evil is even, truth is an odd number, and death is a full stop
>> - Flann O'Brien, At Swim-Two-Birds
>>
>>Zepp, Weasel Never Surrender wrote in message ...
>>>Roboto-Rassmussan is. Until they start reporting Bush's death spiral
>>>as well.
>>
>>
>>Another Loon fav, the Mason-Dixon Poll, which specialises in state-by-state
>>polling, has been reporting some spectacularly bad news for Otterboy in
>>Iowa, Missouri, & I believe Minnesota last week.
>
>I think you mean Illinios and not Minn. which is even better more
>electoral votes.
Well, Bush has never had the lead in Illinois since the primaries,
but it is not a solid lead for Gore.
Michael Ejercito
Gore's lead dropped to 4% in Illinois, making the race much more
fierce.