home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!rutgers!noao!amethyst!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!galileo.physics.arizona.edu!krueger
- From: krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger)
- Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh
- Subject: Re: The Popular Vote - Mandate or No Mandate?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov12.161515.1548@galileo.physics.arizona.edu>
- Date: 12 Nov 92 16:15:15 GMT
- Distribution: usa
- Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson AZ
- Lines: 31
-
- In article writes:
- >v!cfa203!borden
- >From: borden@head-cfa.harvard.edu (Dave Borden)
- >Newsgroups: alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.rush-limbaugh
- >Subject: The Popular Vote - Mandate or No Mandate?
- >Message-ID: <1992Nov10.172113.2964@m5.harvard.edu>
- >Date: 10 Nov 92 17:21:13 GMT
- >Reply-To: borden@m5.harvard.edu
- >Organization: Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Cambridge, MA, USA
- >Lines: 9
- >
- >I'm not going to argue this largely semantic question; I would just like to
- >point something out to all you people who are having fun pointing out that
- >almost sixty percent of voters voted for someone other than Bill Clinton:
- >_more_ than sixty percent of voters voted for someone other than George Bush,
- >and _eighty_ percent of voters voted for someone other than Ross Perot.
- >So there. What's the big deal?
- >
- > - Dave Borden
- > borden@m5.harvard.edu
-
- The big deal is twofold: 1) Bush and Perot lost! If Clinton had lost with
- 60% not voting for him, then no big deal. 2) Liberals (esp. the liberal
- media) are claiming a mandate. Not with 60% voting against!
-
- Ted
-
- --
-
-
- krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu
-