My head is spinning. I actually agree with the "New Republic" on something. : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

I've been using the New Republic for a while now, because their electoral college votes actually show background information. I hadn't noticed before, however, the following article wherein they endorse Gore over Bush for President.

There goes another stereotype.

-- Anita (, October 20, 2000


Very scary! Their editorial staff must've had liquid lunches.

I must admit, though, I'm burned out on American politics right now. I think it was Will Continue on another board who said something like, "I want adults in the White House, again."

File that statement under things that I wish I'd written.

not too long ago, the candidate's family was on the scene just long enough for a few photo opts, a few "aw, gee" shots of the kids, and then the concentration was back on the candidates. Today, I saw the senior Mrs. Bush AND Shrub's wife prattling on about how great little Shrub was and what a good job he'd do. Then I turned the channel and there was Tipper doing the same thing!

How many more days of this race?

-- (, October 20, 2000.

I assume that is satire: at least if you are talking about the Will Continue on the ol'board. Otherwise, wellllll!

Best wishes,,,,


-- Z1X4Y7 (, October 20, 2000.


Yeah, the only Will Continue I know has an IQ that probably doesn't exceed her circumference. If she said anything inspired, it was yet another mental stutter, misinterpreted.

The New Republic endorsing Gore is about as surprising as National Review endorsing Bush. Dog bites man.

-- Flint (, October 20, 2000.

Gore said this during the last debate...

"If you make less than $60,000 a year and you decide to invest $1,000 in a savings account, you'll get a tax credit which means in essence that the federal government will match your $1,000 with another $1,000. If you make less than $30,000 a year and you put $500 in a savings account, the federal government will match it with $1,500.

If you make more than $60,000, up to a $100,000, you'll still get a match, but not as generous.

You will get access to lifelong learning and education, help with tuition, if you want to get a new skill or training. If you want to purchase health insurance, you will get help with that. If you want to participate in some of the dynamic changes that are going on in our country, you will get specific help in doing that.

If you are part of the bottom 20 percent or so of wage earners, then you will get an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit.

Now, the tax relief that I propose is directed specifically at middle income individuals and families. And if you have an elderly parent or grandparent, who needs long-term care, then you will get help with that -- a $3,000 tax credit to help your expenses in taking care of a loved one who needs long-term care."

This sounds pretty damn good to me, in essence getting double your money for everything you save. This should be very helpful for the majority of people in America too. I trust him more than I do Bush, I think Bush would really only try to help those who are already wealthy.

-- (, October 21, 2000.

Anita, Flint is right. The New Republic has been simply nuts for Gore for years.

-- Peter Errington (, October 21, 2000.

That's a good article and pretty much sums up how I feel about things at this point in the campaign.

My sense of how things are going in my district and my state allows me the freedom of voting for a third party candidate, while being fairly certain that Algore will win this district, and the state. (Unfortunately, my state will probably also elect Hillary to the Senate. Yuck!) I'll vote for Harry Browne as a signal to these jokers that I'm onto them, yet I also feel that it won't be a "vote for Bush" by default. If I lived in, say, Pennsylvania, I wouldn't feel like I had the same luxury. I won't vote for Lazio.

-- (two@cents.worth), October 21, 2000.

"two@cents.worth", if you live outside NYC, Gore is probably not going to carry the district. The NYC area is pretty much the only non-Republican area left in the state these days. As of a couple of days ago, I think (but not 100% sure) that NY State is still a toss-up (I think Anita has a link to a good electoral vote chart that's updated frequently).

And I wouldn't be too sure about that Hillary-getting-elected thing, either, for the same reason. (She certainly will not be getting the votes of Mets' fans.)

-- Patricia (, October 21, 2000.


I keep hearing about NY getting closer, but I haven't seen any indication in any of the electoral college vote coverages. As of October 18, 2000 [afternoon] Research 2000 had Hillary at 50% and Lazio 43%. On October 17, 2000, Eagleton-Rutgers had Gore at 60% and Bush 31% in NY, with Clinton at 51% and Lazio at 45%. Going back further, on Oct 13, Clinton had 48%, with Lazio at 44%. Oct. 9 had Clinton at 45% and Lazio at 40%.

I'd have to dig into another bag of tricks to see exactly how the two are doing district by district, but I see NY and NYC much like I saw IL and Chicago. The largest city in the state has far more electoral college votes than the surrounding areas. Chicago was/is resoundingly Democratic, as is NYC. Southern Illinois, OTOH, is resoundingly Republican.

-- Anita (, October 21, 2000.

Thanks Anita. I know you posted (somewhere) the link to the electoral college vote tracker you found (the one with info as back- up), but I can't find it. Would you mind posting again if you get a minute?

I hadn't realized Hillary had ANY kind of a lead at ANY point in time really. Interesting.

-- Patricia (, October 21, 2000.

Before I forget, thanks, Flint [and Peter]. Based on the information I'd seen from the New Republic on TBI last year, I'd assumed it was a right-wing publication that has a really neat electoral college map.


I have several electoral college trackers. I seem to grow one every week.

Here's Orvetti. Orvetti does more than simply change colors twice/day from blue to pink and back. If you click on "State-by-State Polls Updated Regularly", you'll receive the figures used for the day. The archives have information that goes back further. They give Senate poll results each day under this sub-link also, and have their own thoughts on who will win Senate races in each state. They also give information on endorsements and campaigns under that sublink.

Another one I enjoy is this one. Like Orvetti's pink/blue map, they cover the Presidential Electoral College and give information on dates of polls, which polls, and error of margin. Both this one and Orvetti change colors on their maps based on ONE electoral college vote, while other trackers leave states in the "toss-up" area until one side or the other reflects results outside the margins of errors. The exact numbers in one place are what I like about this one. I also like to see the dates the polls were taken. It gives me a better feel for old/new data.

New Republic's electoral college tracker keeps candidates in the "toss-up" area until the difference is beyond the margin of error. They give more details about each state below the map, but they're only updated about once/week. I read a pretty interesting article under the NY frame, wherein they discussed Hillary courting Dov Hikind.

-- Anita (, October 21, 2000.

I'm glad that I'm not on the stats team for either Gore or Bush. There are simply too many variables in the equation for an accurate estimate of the outcome.

I also question the accuracy of the sampling technique of calling voters at home around dinnertime: if I bothered to answer such a call and happened to be preoccupied, I might say the first thing that came into my mind just to be rid of the caller. I wonder how many others would do the same.

-- (, October 22, 2000.

Let me also add that I believe that the exit polls will be a better indicator of the outcome than the current polls.

-- (, October 22, 2000.


I read something this morning that stated that 31,000 homes are called to get a sampling of 2,000 people. The others either hang up or don't answer.

-- Anita (, October 22, 2000.


You surprise me. TNR is not as Left as it once was but it certainly is not Republican or Conservative. New-Democrat maybe?

-- Lars (, October 22, 2000.


I may have been thinking of the Free Republic. Ya know these neurons just aren't firing as fast as they once did.

-- Anita (, October 22, 2000.


I don't quite follow---did the Free Republic endorse Gore? Now that would spin my head too.

-- Lars (, October 22, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ