The more things change?
Welcome.
As we move from the year of the Monkey(2004) to the year of the Rooster(2005) I thought it was a good time to start blogging.
I'm not a writer but you know a room with an infinite number of monkeys at typewriters will eventually bash out Hamlet. I'm sure the same can be said about Roosters and Bloggers so I'll throw my indiscriminate bashing into the sphere and see what happens.
2004 was a year that saw America go from being a divided nation to being a purple one. This great transition occurred in the minds of the media because a small percentage of voters pushed G.W. Bush over the top in a key state for the win.
Hey, that sounds a lot like the 2000 election though. So what changed? How did America go from divided between Democratic Blue and Republican Red, into a homogeneous purple?
Rural Americans gave Bush 51% of the of the popular vote. This single factor forced the media to abandon the stolen election, illegitimate president, nation divided tune, for a song of various shapes of purple.
Rednecks legitimize president, could have been the headline but the reluctance on the part of the media to call any state Red dismantled the illusion of division and shed light on the fairly homogeneous voting patterns in all states.
America is not any more or less divided than in 2000 and we have the rednecks who voted in greater numbers for Bush to thank for creating the new electoral map of various shades of purple. Thank-you.
The Canadian election of 2004 was really a wedding story.
No, not same sex weddings but the coming together of the Yin and Yang of the Canadian right.
The popular vote numbers look very similar to the 2000 election and yet we have gone from a majority to a minority in parliament. Despite what Warren Kinsella and Paul Wells might want us to believe, Paul Martin did nothing during the election that led to his ultimate fate. Yes he could have won by more, but not when your asking for a fourth mandate.
In this country, it is good enough to simply be from central Canada when your opposition is from western Canada. Since two thirds of your nation won't vote for your party because your address is the wrong side of the 100th meridian, you can be sure it won't change to 24 Sussex. It then becomes a question of how much you'll win by.
The Liberals had to overcome scandal and voter fatigue, the very same conditions Kim Campbell faced in 1993.
Paul Martin had the address advantage in 2004 and would have gained a majority if not for the merge of Conservatives. The Tory base of 24 rural seats in Ontario denied Paul Martin a majority.
Many said 1+1 wouldn't add up for the Conservatives but it did create a new glass ceiling for them .
In Canada, one might say the rednecks created the illusion of a more balkanized country, the opposite effect of the U.S. vote. In reality though, Canadians voted in a very similar pattern to the 2000 popular vote.
You know, the more things change...........
As we move from the year of the Monkey(2004) to the year of the Rooster(2005) I thought it was a good time to start blogging.
I'm not a writer but you know a room with an infinite number of monkeys at typewriters will eventually bash out Hamlet. I'm sure the same can be said about Roosters and Bloggers so I'll throw my indiscriminate bashing into the sphere and see what happens.
2004 was a year that saw America go from being a divided nation to being a purple one. This great transition occurred in the minds of the media because a small percentage of voters pushed G.W. Bush over the top in a key state for the win.
Hey, that sounds a lot like the 2000 election though. So what changed? How did America go from divided between Democratic Blue and Republican Red, into a homogeneous purple?
Rural Americans gave Bush 51% of the of the popular vote. This single factor forced the media to abandon the stolen election, illegitimate president, nation divided tune, for a song of various shapes of purple.
Rednecks legitimize president, could have been the headline but the reluctance on the part of the media to call any state Red dismantled the illusion of division and shed light on the fairly homogeneous voting patterns in all states.
America is not any more or less divided than in 2000 and we have the rednecks who voted in greater numbers for Bush to thank for creating the new electoral map of various shades of purple. Thank-you.
The Canadian election of 2004 was really a wedding story.
No, not same sex weddings but the coming together of the Yin and Yang of the Canadian right.
The popular vote numbers look very similar to the 2000 election and yet we have gone from a majority to a minority in parliament. Despite what Warren Kinsella and Paul Wells might want us to believe, Paul Martin did nothing during the election that led to his ultimate fate. Yes he could have won by more, but not when your asking for a fourth mandate.
In this country, it is good enough to simply be from central Canada when your opposition is from western Canada. Since two thirds of your nation won't vote for your party because your address is the wrong side of the 100th meridian, you can be sure it won't change to 24 Sussex. It then becomes a question of how much you'll win by.
The Liberals had to overcome scandal and voter fatigue, the very same conditions Kim Campbell faced in 1993.
Paul Martin had the address advantage in 2004 and would have gained a majority if not for the merge of Conservatives. The Tory base of 24 rural seats in Ontario denied Paul Martin a majority.
Many said 1+1 wouldn't add up for the Conservatives but it did create a new glass ceiling for them .
In Canada, one might say the rednecks created the illusion of a more balkanized country, the opposite effect of the U.S. vote. In reality though, Canadians voted in a very similar pattern to the 2000 popular vote.
You know, the more things change...........
posted by Derek Richards at 9:09:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home