Spike's Bitches 29: That sure as hell wasn't in the brochure.
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risque (and frisque), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
Is there a word stronger than doomed?
L is for the way you look at me
O is for the only one I see
V is very, very extraordinary
E is even more than anyone that you adore can
Love is all that I can give to you
Love is more than just a game for two
Two in love can make it
Take my heart and please don't break it
Love was made for me and you
t trumpet instrumental
L is for the way you look at me
O is for the only one I see
V is very, very extraordinary
E is even more than anyone that you adore can
Love is all that I can give to you
Love is more than just a game for two
Two in love can make it
Take my heart and please don't break it
Love was made for me and you
(Courtesy of Mr. Nat King Cole.)
Funnily enough, though I don't agree with the weighting in the EC that gives greater weight to the less populous (and thus generally less urban) states, I'm in favour of having something like it. The 2000 election involved an extremely contentious and IMO thoroughly botched dispute over the state of Florida. Without an EC, the popular vote was still close enough (i.e. well within the margin of error) to lead to a dispute over the entire country. Would've been highly impractical to have to investigate all the voting irregularities in every state and county of a nation the size of the US.
What prompted this from DH was that when we were discussing South Dakota, is that the entire state of SD has roughly the same population as the city of Columbus--but they get 3 electoral votes. I'm sure he could support his position with pie charts and graphs and stuff.
Turnout hasn't been less than 94% since the mid-50s, IIRC. The rate of invalid ballots is in the single digits. Donkey voting (e.g. just numbering in order straight down the page) is a potential issue, which the Australian system deals with by randomly ordering the candidates on each ballot slip.
Wow. That's just...wow.
Hey!(lifelong Dem...that's my "hey!")
Hee. I hadn't even thought that this would be an Australianism. I can see where it would come across differently in the US of A. Though I think maybe you should be more concerned with the continued existence of MTV's
Jackass.
Morning!
{{{{Cass & niecelet}}}}
bt is adorkably doomed. Yay!
Our Easter trip to Indiana turned out pretty well. The DVD player in the minivan has wireless headsets so that Owen can watch his Elmo DVD's while we listen to the radio or our CD's separately. I can't stress how fucking GREAT this is.
We had birthday cake at my sister's house for him.
Monkey Cake!
Death or Cake?
We don't need no stinkin' forks!
(Courtesy of Mr. Nat King Cole.)
Hee. Ok, is there a word stronger than doomed that doesn't involve terminal saccharin poisoning?
What prompted this from DH was that when we were discussing South Dakota, is that the entire state of SD has roughly the same population as the city of Columbus--but they get 3 electoral votes. I'm sure he could support his position with pie charts and graphs and stuff.
Yup. As noted, I don't support the biased weighting within the EC, which is what your DH is talking about there. I understand how it originated, but there isn't really much likelihood of discrimination in the US against states
qua
states anymore, such discrimination will play out from other factors. And on such factors, the current weighting discriminates against urban populations for no good reason.
In a nutshell, I don't understand the argument against it.
I think it is an issue of personal freedom.
I don't see how an electoral race which excludes the opinion of over half the electorate [...]
I don't understand how by-choice non-voters are excluded by anything except by self-exclusion.
an exclusion process which is known to be skewed against the poor, the young, immigrants and minority races (thus largely disenfranchising those in such groups who do bother to vote as well) gets to be treated as a legitimate mandate.
What is skewing it. I'm not arguing. I'm just not following, I guess.
CUTEHEAD OWEN!!!
(Courtesy of Mr. Nat King Cole.)
Hee. Ok, is there a word stronger than doomed that doesn't involve terminal saccharin poisoning?
Hey! That's not terminally saccharin! I think it's a sweet song.
That said, here are some options, according to Mssr. Roget:
beguiled, bewitched, captivated, enamored, enraptured, hooked.
I vote enraptured.
according to Mssr. Roget
I totally read this as "Mr Rogers." Very different vibe there.
Non-voters enjoy all of the benefits of a free and democratic society, while putting in none of the (really quite minimal) effort to contribute to it. The personal freedom to be a moocher isn't one I'm terribly invested in protecting.
I vote enraptured.
I dunno - my first reaction to this is to picture Christians getting Hoovered up into heaven....
