Who Will Become President?

[Marye]

RichC.... I am reading that Wisconsin is a hot spot for this election. All eyes will be there...

What do you think?

[mpreston]

That's interesting - it's the same here in DC. 'Skins fans are fairly hardcore, but a lot of them were glad the team lost.

I don't know how much merit I can put into the Redskins prediction - it's a hard pill to swallow considering that Bush has been slightly ahead (but within the margin of error) of Kerry in most polls 80% of this campain.

[OperaTenor]

ABBA

[NudewigVonB]

I'm thinking that over the past four years in the battleground states, after identifying a need to bring new blood to the voting booths, the Democratic party has made substantial gains in voter registrations, while the Republicans focused on solidifying their base. If that is true, then I believe enough electoral votes can be obtained by Kerry to prevail. Admittedly, this could be wishful thinking......but in 24 hours we should know.

In the meantime, I urge ALL Beethoven.com readers not only to VOTE THE MORON OUT!! but to volunteer to give rides to others who will do the the same. The country needs you, people, because the direction taken by this administration, chosen solely for its "bottom line" (i.e. profit making potential) has put us at great risk from a diverse set of threats, perhaps the greatest being our own government (e.g. Asscroft's "Justice" Department and the "Patriot" Act), but also including terrorists (more emboldened than ever before by the opportunities we have given them in the Iraq disaster---we are NOT Safer); environmental degradation (polluters given green light to keep on poisoning the air and water around us; economic (tax cuts for the rich and less jobs for the working class)... all to satisfy the unlimited egos and to line the pockets of a bunch of draft dodging, arrogant old white men.

I repeat: Vote the Moron (and his Texas Mafia) OUT OUT OUT and help make the US and the world a safer, cleaner, and more affordable habitat for all of humanity.

As ever, I remain,
Nude Nudewig

[OperaTenor]

I looked at the PNAC website for the first time tonight. What a frightening concept!

And here is the list of warmongers who've signed on to this diatribe:

Elliott Abrams
Gary Bauer
William J. Bennett
Jeb Bush
Dick Cheney
Eliot A. Cohen
Midge Decter
Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes
Aaron Friedberg
Francis Fukuyama
Frank Gaffney
Fred C. Ikle
Donald Kagan
Zalmay Khalilzad
I. Lewis Libby
Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle
Peter W. Rodman
Stephen P. Rosen
Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld
Vin Weber
George Weigel
Paul Wolfowitz

Hmmm... three high level Bush administration members, plus the shrub's brother. All signitories to a thinly veiled agenda of forcing American "values" on the rest of the world. I can't believe any thinking human would tolerate this crap.


VTBO!

[lliam]

Originally posted by The Great Carouser:
Lliam, a Kerry victory was assured yesterday when the Washington Redskins lost their final home game [b]prior to the election meaning the incumbent will lose. This has proven to be an accurate predictor of every election since Redskin football began back in the early '30's. [/b]

==================================================

Come on, G.W, sorry Shos, just kidding.

[barfle]

Badnarick by a landslide, followed by Nader, Kerry, Larouche, and Bush.

Write in Jesse Ventura! It's important.

[rwcrooks]

Wisconsin should be close, but there's some interesting things going on here.

In Milwaukee you can register at the polls on election day. Don't have ID? That's OK, just bring a friend who can vouch for you. No Kidding.

The city of Milwaukee has requested ballots for 3 times the number of registered voters, just in case they need them. They say people tend to make a lot of mistakes when they vote. No Kidding.

When I voted this morning, all I gave them was my name and address. I didn't have to show them ID or anything. I could have given them my neighbor's name (who is going to vote for a different candidate, based on his yard sign) since I was at the polls early, but didn't.

I got to the polls at 6:45 and it took an hour for me to get through. When I left the building, the line was just as long as when I went in.

[piqaboo]

http://217.160.163.211/globalvote2004/

This site shows the results of "world" voting for our presidential election today.

While its interesting, I dont think I want Germany choosing our leader - they dont have a very good track-record. "Global" Vote 2004

[rwcrooks]

Piq,

That's about the stupidest thing I've ever seen. Who are these people, what was their methodology, how did they ensure accuracy?

Sort of reminds me of a call-in show on Public Radio about a month ago. The host was taking a straw poll and for the first 15 minutes, it was dead even between Bush and Kerry (maybe 20 votes each). Then, I guess word got out and there were maybe 3 or 4 Bush votes in the final 45 minutes of the show. And the host never mentioned that the results seem slanted, unscientific, stacked.

[analog]

Thanks Ms Boo- fun site. I read all their feedback, too.

Is my screen just blurry or did Bush do 3 to 5 times better in mideast (37%) than in rest of world (7-10%)???? What gives?

[Serenity]

In the Mideast, Bush is the candidate they love to hate.

[lliam]

Originally posted by The Great Carouser:
Lliam, a Kerry victory was assured yesterday when the Washington Redskins lost their final home game [b]prior to the election meaning the incumbent will lose. This has proven to be an accurate predictor of every election since Redskin football began back in the early '30's. [/b]

Sorry, it didn't work out for you Kerry guys.

[OperaTenor]

That's all right, Lliam, I'm pretty sure the next four years will sow enough regret for the entire world.

[RC]

Should be interesting to see if the US will share their new agenda with the UK especially with their EU involvement and all.

The PNAC nor the Defense Planning Guidance draft says/said "everyone except the UK"...

From PBS Frontline
Excerpt From the actual 1992 Draft "Defense Planning Guidance"

Paul Wolfowitz, then-under secretary of defense for policy, supervised the drafting of a 1992 policy statement on America's mission in the post-Cold War era. Called the "Defense Planning Guidance," it is an internal set of military guidelines that typically is prepared every few years by the Defense Department. This policy guidance is distributed to military leaders and civilian Defense Department heads to provide them with a geopolitical framework for assessing their force level and bugetary needs.
The 46-page classified document circulated for several weeks at senior levels in the Pentagon. But controversy erupted after it was leaked to The New York Times and The Washington Post and the White House ordered then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney to rewrite it.

Key Points/Excerpts:
· The number one objective of U.S. post-Cold War political and military strategy should be preventing the emergence of a rival superpower. "Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. These regions include Western Europe, East Asia, the territory of the former Soviet Union, and Southwest Asia.
"There are three additional aspects to this objective: First the U.S must show the leadership necessary to establish and protect a new order that holds the promise of convincing potential competitors that they need not aspire to a greater role or pursue a more aggressive posture to protect their legitimate interests. Second, in the non-defense areas, we must account sufficiently for the interests of the advanced industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership or seeking to overturn the established political and economic order. Finally, we must maintain the mechanisms for deterring potential competitors from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role."
· Another major U.S. objective should be to safeguard U.S. interests and promote American values.
According to the draft document, the U.S. should aim "to address sources of regional conflict and instability in such a way as to promote increasing respect for international law, limit international violence, and encourage the spread of democratic forms of government and open economic systems."
The draft outlines several scenarios in which U.S. interests could be threatened by regional conflict: "access to vital raw materials, primarily Persian Gulf oil; proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, threats to U.S. citizens from terrorism or regional or local conflict, and threats to U.S. society from narcotics trafficking."
The draft relies on seven scenarios in potential trouble spots to make its argument -- with the primary case studies being Iraq and North Korea.

· If necessary, the United States must be prepared to take unilateral action.
There is no mention in the draft document of taking collective action through the United Nations.
The document states that coalitions "hold considerable promise for promoting collective action," but it also states the U.S. "should expect future coalitions to be ad hoc assemblies" formed to deal with a particular crisis and which may not outlive the resolution of the crisis.
The document states that what is most important is "the sense that the world order is ultimately backed by the U.S." and that "the United States should be postured to act independently when collective action cannot be orchestrated" or in a crisis that calls for quick response.