| Revision as of 22:59, 31 May 2004 editHerschelkrustofsky (talk | contribs)2,877 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:02, 27 July 2004 edit undoHolden27 (talk | contribs)3 edits Get rid of the little BushNext edit → | ||
| Line 421: | Line 421: | ||
| :For what its worth, several online gaming sites are offering ] on the election. The one I just checked gives Bush 13/20 odds, Kerry 1/1 odds, and Nader 1000/1 odds. ] 00:17, 26 May 2004 (UTC) | :For what its worth, several online gaming sites are offering ] on the election. The one I just checked gives Bush 13/20 odds, Kerry 1/1 odds, and Nader 1000/1 odds. ] 00:17, 26 May 2004 (UTC) | ||
| == Get rid of the little Bush == | |||
| I would like to say that George W.Bush is the most divisive President since Andrew Johnson. | |||
| He "won" the election on the back of an unconstitutional law in breach of Section 1 of the fifteenth amendment in the State of Florida denying the vote to thousands of citizens. | |||
| He has managed to throw away the World's goodwill towards America after 9/11 due to his "bite me" foreign policy. | |||
| He has staged an illegal war against Iraq for purely economic and personal reasons that has resulted in hundreds of American dead. | |||
| He has taken his eye off the ball in the war on terror by his idiotic adventure in Iraq allowing al-qaeda to regroup and plan new attacks on the west. | |||
| Bush has been a disaster for the United States and its image overseas. I would ask all Americans to vote against Bush in November. | |||
| ] | |||
Revision as of 23:02, 27 July 2004
Covering future events
Why don't we stop talking about the future? Future release album, future election, future etc... -- Taku 08:13 Jan 5, 2003 (UTC)
- This is actually the present. The U.S. "election season" for presidential elections is beginning in earnest now, with several announcements about who is (and isn't) running. Election day is the end of a long public process that has already begun. - RobLa 08:33 Jan 5, 2003 (UTC)
-Hehe, getting ready are we. :)--Sv
"Self-centered" pages
There is no room for a waste of time with self-centered crap like this in an encyclopedia. Things like this are what make Misplaced Pages an unreliable joke by idiots with nothing more to do than create something of no real value.....DW
- Yay, me for President! Hmmm...have to add my announcement to the timeline... :) -- RobLa
What ever happened to the fine art of procrastination? :) --mav --Xinoph 20:07, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)
- whaddya mean...working on Misplaced Pages is how I procrastinate. :) Seriously though, I'm hoping that by getting an early start and tracking this election early, we'll have a really complete record of what transpired.
DW: What do you mean by self-centered? And you really think its things like this that are troubling? Read the nonsense under Fifth World and Micronation. -- Zoe
gotta go with Zoe on this. rofl.-Sv
---
Listing potential election issues
Although it's not possible to list potential issues in say the 2008 election, it is certainly possible to list potential issues cited by the candidates that motivate them to run in the next election. For instance Cynthia McKinney will certainly make an issue of the Iraq crisis, 2003 and oil imperialism. Gary Johnson will certainly make an issue of the War on Drugs. Ralph Nader will make an issue of the War on Terrorism and its civil rights impact. Issues mentioned by lots of potential candidates ought to be in an 'issues' section or separate article on "likely issues in the 2004 U.S. presidential election" just so people can bone up on them in one place.
This could get a *lot* of people reading Misplaced Pages, if the articles established a high reputation for quality and impartiality. It's worth doing for that reason if no other.
"Considering" vs. "Announced"
Our distinction between "considering" and "announced" is problematic. What exactly do we mean by "announced"? There are two formal actions taken with the FEC: statement of organization of an exploratory committee and statement of candidacy. Perhaps we should have "considering," "formed exporatory committee," and "declared"? M Carling (03 March 2003 14:18 UTC)
- No objection, though I'm not volunteering to fix this up :-) -- RobLa 07:53 Mar 4, 2003 (UTC)
- Yes the formal FEC actions are the ones that count, it's the only neutral/objective basis for any such classification. Go for it.
Great idea
The 2004 election timeline is a terrific idea. I am glad to see people working on it already. As a high school history teacher, I intend to use this as a resource. The more well-informed I can stay on the election, the better I can teach my students. keep up the good work! and i'll probably be helping here too! Kingturtle 02:30 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)
- Glad you like it. However, it's six months later, and there are still gaping holes, like no biography of Michael Badnarik, former State House candidate from Texas, a stub for Gary Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico, none for Carol Miller, New Mexico Green, David Cobb, Green legal advisor to the party and former candidate for Texas attorney, nor even Cynthia McKinney, former Congresswoman from Georgia or Paul Glover, creator of Ithaca Hours. It took some time before even all Democrats were covered, which is kind of surprising.
- Perhaps your students can chip in and help by digging up biographies of the above, and filling them in?
Parenthetical notes
Is there a reason for parenthetical italicized notes (this note is unnecessary)? Wouldn't it be better to put them in