the big book on the election! Unfortunately, though, Drudge highlited this--and we know his stance--and the Washington Times writer wrote it. Well, the Times is owned by the Rev Moon organization, and as Consortium News reports, Moon has many money ties to the Bush family, including big money speaking tours by Daddy Bush. Go figure the objectivity of this one.
posted by Postroad
on May 2, 2001 -
15 comments
There ARE
2,856 people who WOULD and DID vote for Buchanan once before.
(for people who are whining about there not being 3000 people in Palm Beach who would vote for Buchanan)
posted by jamescblack
on Nov 9, 2000 -
41 comments
Poor user interface elects George W. The second hole on the right does not correspond to the second candidate on the left (Gore), but rather to the first candidate on the right (Buchanan). While many people will notice this, many others, especially those with poor vision, will not. About 20% of Buchanan's votes in FL came from the county that used this ballot.
posted by tranquileye
on Nov 9, 2000 -
32 comments
Missing him already? His fellow Americans will miss him - more, perhaps, than they realise. They'll miss the two terms of peace and record prosperity, of course, but they might even miss the psychodrama: an eight-year roller-coaster ride so turbulent that those who followed it become queasy at the recollection. They'll miss the daily triumphs and disasters of a character of Shakespearean complexity, a President who stirred in Americans passions of love and hatred unseen since the days of John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon - and almost never aroused by a single man. Above all, they will miss his signature feature, one that may well have redefined the presidency itself: an almost eerie gift for empathy.
posted by murray_kester
on Nov 9, 2000 -
2 comments
The House: Encumbered by Incumbents While the big prize is still up for grabs, plenty of pols will stroll into another four years of fun in DC. With a 97% rate of incumbent re-election, in spite of
Michael Moore's best efforts, is it time to separate the presidential and congressional polls, so that there's a decent debate over the direction of the legislative branch?
posted by holgate
on Nov 3, 2000 -
15 comments
Chernomyrdin to sue George W. Bush to clear his name and business reputation. While we're on this, Monica Lewinsky, too, plans to sue Bill Clinton, because she too, wants 'to clear her name and business reputation.'
posted by tiaka
on Oct 27, 2000 -
0 comments
Are Undecided Voters Stupid?
Undecided voters "don't come across as terribly swift..."
"If you're undecided at this point, you're an idiot."
"These soft voters do not have a coherent set of beliefs."
More inside...
posted by Tubes
on Oct 18, 2000 -
27 comments
This from the no-graphics page of the Progressive Review: "DAVID LETTERMAN has recently expressed interest in hosting a presidential debate and has not decided whether or not to include Ralph Nader. To express your view on this matter call the short at (212) 975-5300 and ask for Art."
Sounds like fun to watch if it's true, if it even plays out.
posted by dcehr
on Aug 3, 2000 -
2 comments
Today I saw
an ad on TV
complaining that American health care is being “Canadianized.” All I can say is
that I wish these Americans would stop
lying about the Canadian health care
system. While most Canadians seem to agree that our health system is
a bit of a mess,
we also seem to agree that
we
don’t want the American system, thank you very much.
The US market-driven
medical system spends about 14% of its economy on health care, while Canada's
cost is about 9% of GDP. Both countries' health care costs stood at about 7% in
1971, when the Canadian system converted to the public system and the US decided
to stick with a market-driven private system. Yet the Canadian system covers
everyone; the American system doesn’t. Private delivery of health care means
money is lost to the profits investors demand (as much as 15%), higher executive
salaries, higher marketing/advertising costs, and lost economies of scale.
Why
attack the Canadian system? Part of the answer lies in the fact that to the
American health care industry, Canada is just one huge, untapped market that
they would love to have access to.
posted by tranquileye
on Jun 16, 2000 -
24 comments
