|George Bush could learn a thing or two from Saddam Hussein.||Sintesi|
Oct 16, 2002 5:28 AM
|100%! Now that's an election. I don't care how you slice it that's pretty good. What did Bush get, 49%? Paltry.
I don't get it tho, isn't bush a fascist dictator like presence weiwentg, I mean czardonic? he should have done better. Next time will be greater because he will use the war to his own nefarious ends. I don't think he'll quite crack 100% (that is a little much to ask) but he should improve in the next election significantly.
Slaveringly awaiting your analysis master.
|you are so right||DougSloan|
Oct 16, 2002 6:03 AM
|Election results are vastly improved when you kill all of your opposition, even if they are family. When a vote of "no" means "kill me (and my family)," I'd consider voting for Saddam, too.
From the media accounts, I couldn't tell which had more effect, brainwashing or intimidation. I guess you go with whatever works.
Maybe we should turn their elections over to the U.S. Supreme Court?
|democrats are just the opposite||jromack|
Oct 16, 2002 6:45 AM
|In Iraq, vote wrong, you die
Democrats allow dead people to vote. (and to run, too)
Both achieve a corrupt election.
|But he has a better system and a smarter electorate.||Eager Beagle|
Oct 16, 2002 6:13 AM
|no "pregnant chads" etc to screw the clean sweep up...|
|If we could just get people vote with their own blood.||Sintesi|
Oct 16, 2002 6:31 AM
|This way we could be sure they voted the way they intended. Definitely clearer. Obviously, if one is cutting their own thumb first then one is going to make damn sure one hits the right ballot box. Bush's fascist brother, Jeb (who wishes he was a war criminal like his dad) could probably rig something up. I know they have election "issues" in that state.
Where are you master? Please help us.
PS: I think I saw the Pregnant Chads last year at CBGBs daown in the Bowery. My memory is a little fuzzy (vodka and roofies) but I'm pretty sure they were kinda lame.
|Blood voting, should be mandatory, true party allegience||rwbadley|
Oct 16, 2002 6:53 AM
|Think of it, any question just refer to DNA test results.
Yup that's me, I voted for Saddam. Wow! you too? I voted for Saddam. What a coincidence, so did I.
The news this morning was careful to highlight the administration disdain for the election. I would tend to agree, but... when was the last time GW had anyone vote for him using their own blood? Could it be ugly jealousy? heh heh....
I was also amazed the news reports quoted 100% voter turnout for the election.. If true this has to be a new record. 100%/100%. Quite impressive show of solidarity, agreed? (Never mind the fact that they could not possibly have counted 11+million paper ballots in one day)
I think what we need is a good old fashioned dictatorship. Then we wouldn't have to bother with all this election hoopla... :-)
(seriously tho') I think our political system encourages short term thinking.. This allows all kind of non sustainable gimmickry that won't hold up to the long term. The need to be re-elected drives decisions, these decisions may or may not be in the best interest of future generations.
We currently have a very successful (empire) In the grand scheme of things, I wonder if 200 years from now history will be kind to the legacy we may leave.
Congrats Saddam, your prize will be delivered by air ...
|You just don't get it...||Eager Beagle|
Oct 16, 2002 7:03 AM
|these people are smarter that you.
They just get everyone who didn't vote for Saddam to go to their booth and say so.
No need to count 11m anything anytime.