Northton

I was talking to a nice young lady today, a good kid, and she told me she was on a sports team at her college.  "It's a hispanic team, she said, "But they let me in 'cause I'm 1/2 hispanic."  I smiled and asked, "Do you play the white kids' teams?"  "No", said the young woman, "We just play against each other."  ( I'm still snickering 'cause I'm sure there ain't a "white" team. ;  ) 

While I got a kick out of her response, and she's a nice girl, I was saddened that she did not recognize her own racist behavior.  She felt lucky to be on the team even though membership is based on ethnicity.  So did the other kids, and at a school no less.

Before we accept or join in race based activities, clubs, groups, TV shows, etc, we should think about it first.  Think about the racism that we as Americans have fought so hard to end.  It may seem harmless to have a club or team that's race based but do we really want to be a part of the racist mindset?

What do you think?

Would it seem fair for someone to start a "white" club?  A "white" TV station?  A "white" congressional caucus?  A "white" football team?

Would you feel offended if you or your child were turned away from a sports team or club or a job because of race?

Would you join a race baced club or team?

Are you in one now?

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?

Welcome to the

2008 Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Here are five easy questions with multiple answers.

Join thousands of Bloggers in telling us what you think of the 2008 Election!

Try to pick the answer that is most closely aligned with your views.  Results will be tallied* and posted here tomorrow before the election! 

Answers may be presented completely or representatively, i.e., 1)a 2) b 3) c 4).....

.

1)  How important is your vote on Nov 4th?

a.  It doesn't matter.  I won't even bother voting.

b.  I will wait in line for a few hours then give up waiting.

c.  I will stand in line the whole day if I have to!

d.  I would staple my feet to the ground and refuse to leave until I got my vote!

2)  What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?

a.  He's tough!

b.  He's smart!

c.  He's experienced!

d.  He's not George W Bush!

3)  What do you like least about his opponent?

a.  He is inexperienced.

b.  He is weak.

c.  He is stupid.

d.  He is an evil messiah that has come to take over the earth and enslave America.

4)  Why do you want to vote?

a.  It's my patriotic duty and my opinion should count!

b.  I already voted!

c.  I just love standing in lines.

d.  I don't want to vote because I'm an idiot.

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

a.  It doesn't matter.  They are both chumps.

b.  It doesn't matter.  Either of them will make a fine president.

c.  Obama is my man!

d. McCain is my man!

Happy Polling Arizona!

When you're done polling, check out the latest polls HERE!

*Unintellegible or smart aleck answers will be interperated sans bias and tallied or discarded according to the wise and incorruptable discression of the Poll Master.  All hail the Poll Master

Welcome to the

2008 Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Here are five easy questions with multiple answers.

Join thousands of Bloggers in telling us what you think of the 2008 Election!

Try to pick the answer that is most closely aligned with your views.  Results will be tallied* and posted here tomorrow before the election! 

Answers may be presented completely or representatively, i.e., 1)a 2) b 3) c 4).....

.

1)  How important is your vote on Nov 4th?

a.  It doesn't matter.  I won't even bother voting.

b.  I will wait in line for a few hours then give up waiting.

c.  I will stand in line the whole day if I have to!

d.  I would staple my feet to the ground and refuse to leave until I got my vote!

2)  What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?

a.  He's tough!

b.  He's smart!

c.  He's experienced!

d.  He's not George W Bush!

3)  What do you like least about his opponent?

a.  He is inexperienced.

b.  He is weak.

c.  He is stupid.

d.  He is an evil messiah that has come to take over the earth and enslave America.

4)  Why do you want to vote?

a.  It's my patriotic duty and my opinion should count!

b.  I already voted!

c.  I just love standing in lines.

d.  I don't want to vote because I'm an idiot.

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

a.  It doesn't matter.  They are both chumps.

b.  It doesn't matter.  Either of them will make a fine president.

c.  Obama is my man!

d. McCain is my man!

Happy Polling Floridians!

When you're done polling, check out the latest polls HERE!

*Unintellegible or smart aleck answers will be interperated sans bias and tallied or discarded according to the wise and incorruptable discression of the Poll Master.  All hail the Poll Master

Welcome to the

2008 Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Here are five easy questions with multiple answers.

Join thousands of Bloggers in telling us what you think of the 2008 Election!

Try to pick the answer that is most closely aligned with your views.  Results will be tallied* and posted here tomorrow before the election! 

Answers may be presented completely or representatively, i.e., 1)a 2) b 3) c 4).....

.

1)  How important is your vote on Nov 4th?

a.  It doesn't matter.  I won't even bother voting.

b.  I will wait in line for a few hours then give up waiting.

c.  I will stand in line the whole day if I have to!

d.  I would staple my feet to the ground and refuse to leave until I got my vote!

2)  What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?

a.  He's tough!

b.  He's smart!

c.  He's experienced!

d.  He's not George W Bush!

3)  What do you like least about his opponent?

a.  He is inexperienced.

b.  He is weak.

c.  He is stupid.

d.  He is an evil messiah that has come to take over the earth and enslave America.

4)  Why do you want to vote?

a.  It's my patriotic duty and my opinion should count!

b.  I already voted!

c.  I just love standing in lines.

d.  I don't want to vote because I'm an idiot.

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

a.  It doesn't matter.  They are both chumps.

b.  It doesn't matter.  Either of them will make a fine president.

c.  Obama is my man!

d. McCain is my man!

Happy Polling Pennsylvania!

When you're done polling, check out the latest polls HERE!

*Unintellegible or smart aleck answers will be interperated sans bias and tallied or discarded according to the wise and incorruptable discression of the Poll Master.  All hail the Poll Master

Welcome to the

2008 Election Edition of

NORTH'S POLL!

Here are five easy questions with multiple answers.

Join thousands of Bloggers in telling us what you think of the 2008 Election!

Try to pick the answer that is most closely aligned with your views.  Results will be tallied* and posted here tomorrow before the election! 

Answers may be presented completely or representatively, i.e., 1)a 2) b 3) c 4).....

.

1)  How important is your vote on Nov 4th?

a.  It doesn't matter.  I won't even bother voting.

b.  I will wait in line for a few hours then give up waiting.

c.  I will stand in line the whole day if I have to!

d.  I would staple my feet to the ground and refuse to leave until I got my vote!

2)  What do you like most about your favorite Presidential candidate?

a.  He's tough!

b.  He's smart!

c.  He's experienced!

d.  He's not George W Bush!

3)  What do you like least about his opponent?

a.  He is inexperienced.

b.  He is weak.

c.  He is stupid.

d.  He is an evil messiah that has come to take over the earth and enslave America.

4)  Why do you want to vote?

a.  It's my patriotic duty and my opinion should count!

b.  I already voted!

c.  I just love standing in lines.

d.  I don't want to vote because I'm an idiot.

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

a.  It doesn't matter.  They are both chumps.

b.  It doesn't matter.  Either of them will make a fine president.

c.  Obama is my man!

d. McCain is my man!

Happy Polling New York!

When you're done polling, check out the latest polls HERE!

*Unintellegible or smart aleck answers will be interperated sans bias and tallied or discarded according to the wise and incorruptable discression of the Poll Master.  All hail the Poll Master