Northton

This country is suffering right now.  The economy is slow and things are tight for a lot of people, but I think things will improve soon if we all band together and make an effort.  What do Barack Obama and lay-away have in common?  They are both examples of how personal responsibility can make our lives better.  How?  Read on....

Lay-away, something a lot of kids might not know, allows a person to buy things they couldn't normally buy.  But unlike credit cards, you pay up front, just like your granddaddy said.  With lay-away a person can own something more expensive than they could usually afford by allowing the store to hold the money.   And having something that is paid for is far more rewarding than credit.

Barack Obama promised us change in government and international relations.  Like lay-away, we have to pay up front, not with cash, but with our vigilance.  Not only must we keep Obama to his promises by being informed and politically active, but we must also work hard to mend a broken system and broken relationships.  Obama asked us to elect him and support him.  This is our opportunity to meet the challenge of becoming a better nation, rather than spending all of our political dough fighting each other.

In a year like this one lay-away will allow people to buy Christmas presents without owing a bunch of money and interest.  Obama promises to do his very best to help improve our economy and security.  Both require self discipline and both depend on us to pay it forward.

If you're like me, Arizona, you went out and voted, and you got a sticker!  Mine says, "My vote counted!". 

But someone mentioned how much different the popular vote and the electoral votes were in the 2008 presidential election, so I thought I would check it out and see what effect this odd system has had on our country's highest office.  Here's what I found.

Samuel J. Tilden would have beaten Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876.

Grover Cleveland would have won against Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

Al Gore would have won against George W. Bush in 2000.

As you can see, it is interesting that the electoral system has taken away your right to vote for your candidate.  It doesn't seem fair to the people.

This info was found at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html
 

If you check it out you will see several elections in which the popular vote and the electoral vote do not match closely.  In 1880 James A. Garfield only won the popular vote by about 7,000 votes, out of over eight million tallied, yet he won the electoral vote by 50 votes!

The electoral system has destroyed the ability of anyone outside of the two major parties to win an election in America.  Just one example, in 1992 H. Ross Perot received  just under 20 million votes (19% of the total votes), a little over half of the votes received by George H. Bush, and almost half of the votes received by William J. Clinton.  How many electoral votes did H. Ross Perot receive after being voted for by 19,742,267 American citizens?  ZERO!  Those TWENTY MILLION VOTES were STOLEN from Perot and given to the other two candidates.  Redistribution of votes?

What do you think?

Is the electoral vote system fair to the American people?

Can any candidate that is not with the two controlling parties ever win a presidential election in this country?

Does your vote really count?

Should we change our current system to a popular vote system?

Why or why not?

If you're like me, Texans, you went out and voted, and you got a sticker!  Mine says, "My vote counted!". 

But someone mentioned how much different the popular vote and the electoral votes were in the 2008 presidential election, so I thought I would check it out and see what effect this odd system has had on our country's highest office.  Here's what I found.

Samuel J. Tilden would have beaten Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876.

Grover Cleveland would have won against Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

Al Gore would have won against George W. Bush in 2000.

As you can see, it is interesting that the electoral system has taken away your right to vote for your candidate.  It doesn't seem fair to the people.

This info was found at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html
 

If you check it out you will see several elections in which the popular vote and the electoral vote do not match closely.  In 1880 James A. Garfield only won the popular vote by about 7,000 votes, out of over eight million tallied, yet he won the electoral vote by 50 votes!

The electoral system has destroyed the ability of anyone outside of the two major parties to win an election in America.  Just one example, in 1992 H. Ross Perot received  just under 20 million votes (19% of the total votes), a little over half of the votes received by George H. Bush, and almost half of the votes received by William J. Clinton.  How many electoral votes did H. Ross Perot receive after being voted for by 19,742,267 American citizens?  ZERO!  Those TWENTY MILLION VOTES were STOLEN from Perot and given to the other two candidates.  Redistribution of votes?

What do you think?

Is the electoral vote system fair to the American people?

Can any candidate that is not with the two controlling parties ever win a presidential election in this country?

Does your vote really count?

Should we change our current system to a popular vote system?

Why or why not?

If you're like me, Georgia, you went out and voted, and you got a sticker!  Mine says, "My vote counted!". 

But someone mentioned how much different the popular vote and the electoral votes were in the 2008 presidential election, so I thought I would check it out and see what effect this odd system has had on our country's highest office.  Here's what I found.

Samuel J. Tilden would have beaten Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876.

Grover Cleveland would have won against Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

Al Gore would have won against George W. Bush in 2000.

As you can see, it is interesting that the electoral system has taken away your right to vote for your candidate.  It doesn't seem fair to the people.

This info was found at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html
 

If you check it out you will see several elections in which the popular vote and the electoral vote do not match closely.  In 1880 James A. Garfield only won the popular vote by about 7,000 votes, out of over eight million tallied, yet he won the electoral vote by 50 votes!

The electoral system has destroyed the ability of anyone outside of the two major parties to win an election in America.  Just one example, in 1992 H. Ross Perot received  just under 20 million votes (19% of the total votes), a little over half of the votes received by George H. Bush, and almost half of the votes received by William J. Clinton.  How many electoral votes did H. Ross Perot receive after being voted for by 19,742,267 American citizens?  ZERO!  Those TWENTY MILLION VOTES were STOLEN from Perot and given to the other two candidates.  Redistribution of votes?

What do you think?

Is the electoral vote system fair to the American people?

Can any candidate that is not with the two controlling parties ever win a presidential election in this country?

Does your vote really count?

Should we change our current system to a popular vote system?

Why or why not?

If you're like me, Floridians, you went out and voted, and you got a sticker!  Mine says, "My vote counted!". 

But someone mentioned how much different the popular vote and the electoral votes were in the 2008 presidential election, so I thought I would check it out and see what effect this odd system has had on our country's highest office.  Here's what I found.

Samuel J. Tilden would have beaten Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876.

Grover Cleveland would have won against Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

Al Gore would have won against George W. Bush in 2000.

As you can see, it is interesting that the electoral system has taken away your right to vote for your candidate.  It doesn't seem fair to the people.

This info was found at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html
 

If you check it out you will see several elections in which the popular vote and the electoral vote do not match closely.  In 1880 James A. Garfield only won the popular vote by about 7,000 votes, out of over eight million tallied, yet he won the electoral vote by 50 votes!

The electoral system has destroyed the ability of anyone outside of the two major parties to win an election in America.  Just one example, in 1992 H. Ross Perot received  just under 20 million votes (19% of the total votes), a little over half of the votes received by George H. Bush, and almost half of the votes received by William J. Clinton.  How many electoral votes did H. Ross Perot receive after being voted for by 19,742,267 American citizens?  ZERO!  Those TWENTY MILLION VOTES were STOLEN from Perot and given to the other two candidates.  Redistribution of votes?

What do you think?

Is the electoral vote system fair to the American people?

Can any candidate that is not with the two controlling parties ever win a presidential election in this country?

Does your vote really count?

Should we change our current system to a popular vote system?

Why or why not?

If you're like me, Pennsylvania, you went out and voted, and you got a sticker!  Mine says, "My vote counted!". 

But someone mentioned how much different the popular vote and the electoral votes were in the 2008 presidential election, so I thought I would check it out and see what effect this odd system has had on our country's highest office.  Here's what I found.

Samuel J. Tilden would have beaten Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876.

Grover Cleveland would have won against Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

Al Gore would have won against George W. Bush in 2000.

As you can see, it is interesting that the electoral system has taken away your right to vote for your candidate.  It doesn't seem fair to the people.

This info was found at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html
 

If you check it out you will see several elections in which the popular vote and the electoral vote do not match closely.  In 1880 James A. Garfield only won the popular vote by about 7,000 votes, out of over eight million tallied, yet he won the electoral vote by 50 votes!

The electoral system has destroyed the ability of anyone outside of the two major parties to win an election in America.  Just one example, in 1992 H. Ross Perot received  just under 20 million votes (19% of the total votes), a little over half of the votes received by George H. Bush, and almost half of the votes received by William J. Clinton.  How many electoral votes did H. Ross Perot receive after being voted for by 19,742,267 American citizens?  ZERO!  Those TWENTY MILLION VOTES were STOLEN from Perot and given to the other two candidates.  Redistribution of votes?

What do you think?

Is the electoral vote system fair to the American people?

Can any candidate that is not with the two controlling parties ever win a presidential election in this country?

Does your vote really count?

Should we change our current system to a popular vote system?

Why or why not?

If you're like me, Texas, you went out and voted, and you got a sticker!  Mine says, "My vote counted!". 

But someone mentioned how much different the popular vote and the electoral votes were in the 2008 presidential election, so I thought I would check it out and see what effect this odd system has had on our country's highest office.  Here's what I found.

Samuel J. Tilden would have beaten Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876.

Grover Cleveland would have won against Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

Al Gore would have won against George W. Bush in 2000.

As you can see, it is interesting that the electoral system has taken away your right to vote for your candidate.  It doesn't seem fair to the people.

This info was found at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html
 

If you check it out you will see several elections in which the popular vote and the electoral vote do not match closely.  In 1880 James A. Garfield only won the popular vote by about 7,000 votes, out of over eight million tallied, yet he won the electoral vote by 50 votes!

The electoral system has destroyed the ability of anyone outside of the two major parties to win an election in America.  Just one example, in 1992 H. Ross Perot received  just under 20 million votes (19% of the total votes), a little over half of the votes received by George H. Bush, and almost half of the votes received by William J. Clinton.  How many electoral votes did H. Ross Perot receive after being voted for by 19,742,267 American citizens?  ZERO!  Those TWENTY MILLION VOTES were STOLEN from Perot and given to the other two candidates.  Redistribution of votes?

What do you think?

Is the electoral vote system fair to the American people?

Can any candidate that is not with the two controlling parties ever win a presidential election in this country?

Does your vote really count?

Should we change our current system to a popular vote system?

Why or why not?

If you're like me you went out and voted, and you got a sticker!  Mine says, "My vote counted!". 

But someone mentioned how much different the popular vote and the electoral votes were in the 2008 presidential election, so I thought I would check it out and see what effect this odd system has had on our country's highest office.  Here's what I found.

Samuel J. Tilden (Dem) would have beaten Rutherford B. Hayes (Rep) in 1876.

Grover Cleveland (Dem) would have won against Benjamin Harrison (Rep) in 1888.

Al Gore (Dem) would have won against George W. Bush (Rep) in 2000.

As you can see, it is interesting that the electoral system has only worked against Democrats and not  against Republicans.  It doesn't seem fair to the people either.

This info was found at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html<
/p>

If you check it out you will see several elections in which the popular vote and the electoral vote do not match closely.  In 1880 James A. Garfield only won the popular vote by about 7,000 votes, out of over eight million tallied, yet he won the electoral vote by 50 votes!

The electoral system has destroyed the ability of anyone outside of the two major parties to win an election in America.  Just one example, in 1992 H. Ross Perot received  just under 20 million votes (19% of the total votes), a little over half of the votes received by George H. Bush, and almost half of the votes received by William J. Clinton.  How many electoral votes did H. Ross Perot receive after being voted for by 19,742,267 American citizens?  ZERO!  Those TWENTY MILLION VOTES were STOLEN from Perot and given to the other two candidates.  Redistribution of votes?

What do you think?

Is the electoral vote system fair to the American people?

Can any candidate that is not with the two controlling parties ever win a presidential election in this country?

Does your vote really count?

Should we change our current system to a popular vote system?

Why or why not?

Someone mentioned how much different the popular vote and the electoral votes were in the 2008 presidential election, so I thought I would check it out and see what effect this odd system has had on our country's highest office.  Here's what I found.

Samuel J. Tilden (Dem) would have beaten Rutherford B. Hayes (Rep) in 1876.

Grover Cleveland (Dem) would have won against Benjamin Harrison (Rep) in 1888.

Al Gore (Dem) would have won against George W. Bush (Rep) in 2000.

As you can see, it is interesting that the electoral system has only worked against Democrats and not  against Republicans.  It doesn't seem fair to the people either.

This info was found at http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781450.html<
/p>

If you check it out you will see several elections in which the popular vote and the electoral vote do not match closely.  In 1880 James A. Garfield only won the popular vote by about 7,000 votes, out of over eight million tallied, yet he won the electoral vote by 50 votes!

The electoral system has destroyed the ability of anyone outside of the two major parties to win an election in America.  In 1992 H. Ross Perot received  just under 20 million votes (19% of the total votes), a little over half of the votes received by George H. Bush, and almost half of the votes received by William J. Clinton.  How many electoral votes did H. Ross Perot receive after being voted for by 19,742,267 American citizens?  ZERO!

What do you think?

Is the electoral vote system fair to the American people?

Can any candidate that is not with the two controlling parties ever win a presidential election in this country?

Should we change our current system to a popular vote system?

Why or why not?

The results are in!!!

We asked five tough questions to Fox Bloggers nationwide. The answers have be tallied and the results are in! Let's find out what's on the minds of Fox Bloggers in this 2008 Presidential election!

1) How important is your vote on Nov 4th?
Fox bloggers, as we know, are opinionated people! 61% of our pollers said they will wait the entire day to vote and another 30% said they would not leave the polls until their vote is cast no matter how long they have to wait! I hope they brought snacks!

2) What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?
Fox bloggers appreciate experience in a candidate! 46% of our pollers said they prefer an experienced candidate and 30% said being tough is the number one character trait they look for in a candidate! Look for Popeye to run against Jimi Hendrix in 2012!

3) What do you like least about his opponent?
When asked what they don't like in a candidate, again experience was number one! 61% of our pollers said that they will not support an inexperienced candidate! An additional 30% are opposed to voting for an evil messiah enslaving the planet! Better luck next time, Evil Troll King!

4) Why do you want to vote?
When asked why they want to vote, 100% of our patriotic Fox Bloggers say they support the democratic process! 23% have already cast their votes, hopefully ensuring shorter lines for the rest of us procrastinators who waited until the last day to vote!

5) How effective do you think these two candidates would be if elected?

An overwhelming 76% of our pollers say John McCain will be more effective as a president than Barack Obama, 15% say Obama is their man, while less than 1% say neither will be an effective president! What does that mean for this election? I predict three quarters of Fox Bloggers will be unhappy about today's election results!

I hope you have enjoyed taking our

2008 Nationwide Fox Bloggers

Super Duper Presidential Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Good luck today!

Now get off of your computer and

get out and VOTE!!!!!

The results are in!!!

We asked five tough questions to Fox Bloggers nationwide. The answers have be tallied and the results are in! Let's find out what's on the minds of Fox Bloggers in this 2008 Presidential election!

1) How important is your vote on Nov 4th?
Fox bloggers, as we know, are opinionated people! 61% of our pollers said they will wait the entire day to vote and another 30% said they would not leave the polls until their vote is cast no matter how long they have to wait! I hope they brought snacks!

2) What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?
Fox bloggers appreciate experience in a candidate! 46% of our pollers said they prefer an experienced candidate and 30% said being tough is the number one character trait they look for in a candidate! Look for Popeye to run against Jimi Hendrix in 2012!

3) What do you like least about his opponent?
When asked what they don't like in a candidate, again experience was number one! 61% of our pollers said that they will not support an inexperienced candidate! An additional 30% are opposed to voting for an evil messiah enslaving the planet! Better luck next time, Evil Troll King!

4) Why do you want to vote?
When asked why they want to vote, 100% of our patriotic Fox Bloggers say they support the democratic process! 23% have already cast their votes, hopefully ensuring shorter lines for the rest of us procrastinators who waited until the last day to vote!

5) How effective do you think these two candidates would be if elected?

An overwhelming 76% of our pollers say John McCain will be more effective as a president than Barack Obama, 15% say Obama is their man, while less than 1% say neither will be an effective president! What does that mean for this election? I predict three quarters of Fox Bloggers will be unhappy about today's election results!

I hope you have enjoyed taking our

2008 Nationwide Fox Bloggers

Super Duper Presidential Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Good luck today!

Now get off of your computer and

get out and VOTE Pennsylvania!!!!!

The results are in!!!

We asked five tough questions to Fox Bloggers nationwide. The answers have be tallied and the results are in! Let's find out what's on the minds of Fox Bloggers in this 2008 Presidential election!

1) How important is your vote on Nov 4th?
Fox bloggers, as we know, are opinionated people! 61% of our pollers said they will wait the entire day to vote and another 30% said they would not leave the polls until their vote is cast no matter how long they have to wait! I hope they brought snacks!

2) What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?
Fox bloggers appreciate experience in a candidate! 46% of our pollers said they prefer an experienced candidate and 30% said being tough is the number one character trait they look for in a candidate! Look for Popeye to run against Jimi Hendrix in 2012!

3) What do you like least about his opponent?
When asked what they don't like in a candidate, again experience was number one! 61% of our pollers said that they will not support an inexperienced candidate! An additional 30% are opposed to voting for an evil messiah enslaving the planet! Better luck next time, Evil Troll King!

4) Why do you want to vote?
When asked why they want to vote, 100% of our patriotic Fox Bloggers say they support the democratic process! 23% have already cast their votes, hopefully ensuring shorter lines for the rest of us procrastinators who waited until the last day to vote!

5) How effective do you think these two candidates would be if elected?

An overwhelming 76% of our pollers say John McCain will be more effective as a president than Barack Obama, 15% say Obama is their man, while less than 1% say neither will be an effective president! What does that mean for this election? I predict three quarters of Fox Bloggers will be unhappy about today's election results!

I hope you have enjoyed taking our

2008 Nationwide Fox Bloggers

Super Duper Presidential Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Good luck today!

Now get off of your computer and

get out and VOTE New York!!!!!

The results are in!!!

We asked five tough questions to Fox Bloggers nationwide. The answers have be tallied and the results are in! Let's find out what's on the minds of Fox Bloggers in this 2008 Presidential election!

1) How important is your vote on Nov 4th?
Fox bloggers, as we know, are opinionated people! 61% of our pollers said they will wait the entire day to vote and another 30% said they would not leave the polls until their vote is cast no matter how long they have to wait! I hope they brought snacks!

2) What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?
Fox bloggers appreciate experience in a candidate! 46% of our pollers said they prefer an experienced candidate and 30% said being tough is the number one character trait they look for in a candidate! Look for Popeye to run against Jimi Hendrix in 2012!

3) What do you like least about his opponent?
When asked what they don't like in a candidate, again experience was number one! 61% of our pollers said that they will not support an inexperienced candidate! An additional 30% are opposed to voting for an evil messiah enslaving the planet! Better luck next time, Evil Troll King!

4) Why do you want to vote?
When asked why they want to vote, 100% of our patriotic Fox Bloggers say they support the democratic process! 23% have already cast their votes, hopefully ensuring shorter lines for the rest of us procrastinators who waited until the last day to vote!

5) How effective do you think these two candidates would be if elected?

An overwhelming 76% of our pollers say John McCain will be more effective as a president than Barack Obama, 15% say Obama is their man, while less than 1% say neither will be an effective president! What does that mean for this election? I predict three quarters of Fox Bloggers will be unhappy about today's election results!

I hope you have enjoyed taking our

2008 Nationwide Fox Bloggers

Super Duper Presidential Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Good luck today!

Now get off of your computer and

get out and VOTE Texans!!!!!

The results are in!!!

We asked five tough questions to Fox Bloggers nationwide. The answers have be tallied and the results are in! Let's find out what's on the minds of Fox Bloggers in this 2008 Presidential election!

1) How important is your vote on Nov 4th?
Fox bloggers, as we know, are opinionated people! 61% of our pollers said they will wait the entire day to vote and another 30% said they would not leave the polls until their vote is cast no matter how long they have to wait! I hope they brought snacks!

2) What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?
Fox bloggers appreciate experience in a candidate! 46% of our pollers said they prefer an experienced candidate and 30% said being tough is the number one character trait they look for in a candidate! Look for Popeye to run against Jimi Hendrix in 2012!

3) What do you like least about his opponent?
When asked what they don't like in a candidate, again experience was number one! 61% of our pollers said that they will not support an inexperienced candidate! An additional 30% are opposed to voting for an evil messiah enslaving the planet! Better luck next time, Evil Troll King!

4) Why do you want to vote?
When asked why they want to vote, 100% of our patriotic Fox Bloggers say they support the democratic process! 23% have already cast their votes, hopefully ensuring shorter lines for the rest of us procrastinators who waited until the last day to vote!

5) How effective do you think these two candidates would be if elected?

An overwhelming 76% of our pollers say John McCain will be more effective as a president than Barack Obama, 15% say Obama is their man, while less than 1% say neither will be an effective president! What does that mean for this election? I predict three quarters of Fox Bloggers will be unhappy about today's election results!

I hope you have enjoyed taking our

2008 Nationwide Fox Bloggers

Super Duper Presidential Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Good luck today!

Now get off of your computer and

get out and VOTE California!!!!!

The results are in!!!

We asked five tough questions to Fox Bloggers nationwide. The answers have be tallied and the results are in! Let's find out what's on the minds of Fox Bloggers in this 2008 Presidential election!

1) How important is your vote on Nov 4th?
Fox bloggers, as we know, are opinionated people! 61% of our pollers said they will wait the entire day to vote and another 30% said they would not leave the polls until their vote is cast no matter how long they have to wait! I hope they brought snacks!

2) What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?
Fox bloggers appreciate experience in a candidate! 46% of our pollers said they prefer an experienced candidate and 30% said being tough is the number one character trait they look for in a candidate! Look for Popeye to run against Jimi Hendrix in 2012!

3) What do you like least about his opponent?
When asked what they don't like in a candidate, again experience was number one! 61% of our pollers said that they will not support an inexperienced candidate! An additional 30% are opposed to voting for an evil messiah enslaving the planet! Better luck next time, Evil Troll King!

4) Why do you want to vote?
When asked why they want to vote, 100% of our patriotic Fox Bloggers say they support the democratic process! 23% have already cast their votes, hopefully ensuring shorter lines for the rest of us procrastinators who waited until the last day to vote!

5) How effective do you think these two candidates would be if elected?

An overwhelming 76% of our pollers say John McCain will be more effective as a president than Barack Obama, 15% say Obama is their man, while less than 1% say neither will be an effective president! What does that mean for this election? I predict three quarters of Fox Bloggers will be unhappy about today's election results!

I hope you have enjoyed taking our

2008 Nationwide Fox Bloggers

Super Duper Presidential Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Good luck today!

Now get off of your computer and

get out and VOTE Michigan!!!!!