![[SeMissourian.com]](http://www.t-g.com/images/nameplate.png)
|
|
Fair ~ High: 59°F ~ Low: 41°F |
|
Your Duty
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008, at 4:03 PM<< Previous | Read comments | Respond | Email link | Next >>
Before I go on with my usual blogs, I just wanted to remind people that tomorrow is election day and probably the most important one in history.
If you don't vote then you have no reason to gripe because your voice could have made the difference. Don't vote party lines, vote you conscience and your moral beliefs. This election will have a long impact on the future of our children, I just hope and pray that since America has turned its back on God as a whole, that God won't totally turn his back on us. Go vote and may the best man win for if not, there is nowhere to go but down. A lot is riding on the outcome so have your voice heard. VOTE! Comments Showing comments in chronological order [Show most recent comments first] |
A man getting to the roots of his faith.
Hot topics A Little Something for Ever body.(79 ~ 10:13 PM, Nov 20)
Mercy and Grace
New Pharaoh?
Return To The Pulpit!
A Few Thoughts
|
![[Feed icon]](http://www.t-g.com/images/icons/feed-icon-14x14.png){kind=icon}
Come Wed. morning about 1/2 of the american people will be happy their guy won and about 1/2 will be mad because their guy lost, But God will still be in control and you will still have to be saved to get into Heaven.
Amen!
everyone needs to vote but god has not totally turned his back on america its judmental negative comments you make that turns people away from god
it takes faith, prayer and believing in God that gets us to heaven and hopefully we can save souls on this earth. there are good things that go on in this world but everyone can interpret the bible in his or her own way and the sad part is alot of christians are false prophets. there is always hope in this world, but when you hear so much negativity you began to be negative but a few positive outlooks could change a lot of people
Does Your Vote really count?
Is voting a right and privilege, or an Honor and Duty or just a Distraction for the Government to make the people think their votes really count? Read your U.S. Constitution or search the internet for "Electoral College".
In the 2000 Presidential Election Bush had 50,456,062 popular votes to Gore's 50,996,582 popular votes.
Gore had 540,520 more popular votes than Bush but lost to Bush. Why? Electoral Votes elect the President not popular votes. Your vote does NOT count in Presidential Elections.
# George W. Bush received 271 Electoral Votes
# Albert Gore, Jr. received 266 Electoral Votes
George Bush won the 2000 Presidential Election by Electoral Votes, not by the Popular Votes.
-> The Presidential Election Process
In short, we have primaries. That is where the parties chose their candidates. Then we have the general election. Each state has a number of electors, based on population.(number of senators, 2 plus number congresspeople)
Whatever candidate gets the most electoral college votes, wins. In most states, the winner takes all the electoral votes.
It has NOTHING to do with popular vote. In fact a few Presidents are elected without actually getting the most votes or not getting majority of votes-
John Quincy Adams who lost by 44,804 votes to Andrew Jackson in 1824
Rutherford B. Hayes who lost by 264,292 votes to Samuel J. Tilden in 1876
Benjamin Harrison who lost by 95,713 votes to Grover Cleveland in 1888
George W. Bush who lost by 540,520 votes to Al Gore in the 2000 election.
Elections without majority vote, but electoral college:
Year /// President / Electoral ///popular vote
1824 John Q. Adams 31.8% 29.8%
1844 James K. Polk (D) 61.8 49.3
1848 Zachary Taylor (W) 56.2 47.3
1856 James Buchanan (D) 58.7 45.3
1860 Abraham Lincoln (R) 59.4 39.9
1876 Rutherford B. Hayes (R) 50.1 47.9
1880 James A. Garfield (R) 57.9 48.3
1884 Grover Cleveland (D) 54.6 48.8
1888 Benjamin Harrison (R) 58.1 47.8
1892 Grover Cleveland (D) 62.4% 46.0%
1912 Woodrow Wilson (D) 81.9 41.8
1916 Woodrow Wilson (D) 52.1 49.3
1948 Harry S. Truman (D) 57.1 49.5
1960 John F. Kennedy (D) 56.4 49.7
1968 Richard M. Nixon (R) 56.1 43.4
1992 William J. Clinton (D) 68.8 43.0
1996 William J. Clinton (D) 70.4 49.0
2000 George W. Bush (R) 50.3 47.8
A candidate can actually get less votes than the other, yet win the presidency. It all depends on WHERE those votes are. That's why they want to win NY, FL, California so much... they have huge numbers of electoral votes. You can win them and lose the popular vote and still get elected.
So tell me... Did your vote count today?
Obama won, now lets see what history is made or prophecy is fulfilled
Unique-Lies, Does anyones vote ever really count? "If voting changed anything, it wouldn't be legal."
I personally thought it was vulgar the way the state took all the votes away from the people in TN who voted for McCain and gave all the electoral votes to Obama. All the electoral votes (11) were given to Obama in spite of how YOU and everyone else voted. Isn't that enough Proof that YOUR VOTE DOESN'T COUNT?
Your vote does count in local elections but not in the Presidential elections.
According to the U.S. Constitution, even the Vice President is suppose to be voted for by the electoral college also, but that doesn't happen either.
I think Obama being the President is a good move in the right direction!
I think Obama being the President is a good move in the right direction!
-- Posted by Unique-Lies on Wed, Nov 5, 2008, at 10:41 AM
Unique-Lies,
Now that does not come as a suprise to anyone who knows you.
Let's continue though to hope he is the right choice even though we know he is not.
How do you know that? It appears that must of the people thought he was.
The thing is no one really knows me.
I think "most of the people" is a severe overstatement. Barely more than half is more properly stated and there would not have even been half if it was not for his willingness to disregaurd and override God's viewpoints and standards with his own on issues such as abortion and gay(queer in the old school) rights.
It is a small wonder that since the vote was as close at it was he did not at the last minute declare that even robbery and theft was okay and he was going to support their right to their way of life. But wait...he did do that. He wants to redistribute what people have worked for to the ones that do not want to work. He did realize how close the race was becoming.
parkerbrothers,
I present the truth about the bad news in the bible. You on the other hand make up bad news to say about everyone! Where is the good news?
All I was saying was the majority of Tennessee voted for McCain and they got robbed of their votes.
Not even one electoral vote went for McCain. Everyone in Tennessee wasted their time standing in line at the polls to vote.
Tennessee may be one of the very few states that allows the electoral votes to go to the candidate with the most National Popular Votes.
That would mean that the State Legislature, which the people voted in, doesn't think the people in Tennessee is smart enough to vote for a presidential candidate and lets the rest of the people in the other states vote for you.
Hummmm! Sounds like he must have given what the people wanted him to give at the last minute! Sounds like he just might be flexable. I like that in a president.
As far as gay rights and abortion goes, they will be argued for years to come no matter who becomes President. The President doesn't have time to do much about those things. If the President made it a law against abortion or Gays or to participate in either, He would be hated by half the people and impeached. Wait a minute, I think those laws are already on the books.
Hummm! What should you do about that? Since your vote was cast by all the people in the other states, I guess you don't have a say in it.
"Tennessee may be one of the very few states that allows the electoral votes to go to the candidate with the most National Popular Votes."
Really, that is news to me. Could you show some factual basis for this assertion?
Everyone in Tennessee wasted their time standing in line at the polls to vote.
Posted by Unique-Lies on Thu, Nov 6, 2008, at 10:12 AM
Unique-Lies,
Waste of time?? Never. I am proud to be from Tennessee and let the rest of the world know that the majority of people in Tennessee are intelligent and not U.I.O. people.
devan,
Making National Popular Vote Work
The reason no Constitutional amendment is needed to create National Popular Vote is because the Constitution itself gives each state the right to allocate their votes as they choose. (For more details, see Every Vote Equal by the National Popular Vote organization.) States can allocate their Electoral College delegates proportionally to voting results in their states, by whoever wins a majority of a district, or, as would occur under National Popular Vote, to whoever wins a national majority.
The rise of the "winner-take-all" system of allocating Electoral College delegates came because each state feared fragmentation of its own political influence if it handed out delegates proportionately while other states gained campaign attention by being winner-take-all.
To avoid that problem, National Popular Vote is designed to go into effect only when states with a majority of Electoral College votes adopt the process-- whereupon enough Electoral College votes will go to the candidate getting a majority of the national vote to assure that they become the next President.
http://www.progressivestates.org/blog/76...
/national-popular-vote-a-voter-turnout-and-
civil-rights-issue#4
Althou this system may not be in TN yet, it appears to me that Tenn gave all the Electoral Votes to Obama when the state popular vote was for McCain. It was a close margin but the votes went for McCain over Obama.
parkerbrothers,
It has nothing to do with being proud to be in Tennessee. When you go to the polls to vote and find out the popular votes were for whoever, then see the State give your vote to the other party... well that just seems like a big Lie and a big waste of time to me. If the state gave it to the one the majority of the people wanted, then I would say yes. I think it is a slap in the face to vote for someone then have your state give it to the other party.
I didn't vote because I know it's a waste of time and personally I don't give a damn who wins.
If I was scared that one was more dangerous than the other, like most of you have admitted on these blogs, I might worry, but doubt it.
The bible says not to concern yourself with the world. Voting is a part of the worldly things so I don't concern myself. The Bible tells us who will be the main ruler to watch out for. It also tells us to obey the kings of the earth because God put them in power, yet tells us the kings of the earth are anti-christ and will come after Christ when he returns.
Our country is not the same as any other country, so was God talking about us and our country. He said we and not of the world and are not under the law but God's commandments. The U.S. Constitution says the very same thing, so did God exempt us from his words that tell us to obey our leaders? I won't answer that. Everything is answered in the bible.
devan,
Here is a Tennessee website as proof of what I said.
Reforming the Electoral College so that the electoral vote reflects the nationwide popular vote for President!
NASHVILLE, February 12, 2007 -- Representatives Joanne Favors, Ulysses Jones, Jr., Larry Turner, Sherry Jones, and Tommie F. Brown have introduced the National Popular Vote bill (HB 841) in the Tennessee House, and Senator Ward Crutchfield has introduced the bill (SB 811) in the Senate. In addition, Representative David Shepard has introduced the bill (HB246), and Senators Doug Jackson and Tommy Kilby have introduced the bill (SB159). Tennessean editorial
Under the current system of electing the President, a candidate may win a majority of the Electoral College without having a majority of the nationwide popular vote. The National Popular Vote bill would reform the Electoral College by guaranteeing the Presidency to the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia). The bill would enact the proposed interstate compact entitled the "Agreement Among the States to Elect the President by National Popular Vote." The compact would take effect only when enacted, in identical form, by states possessing a majority of the membership of the Electoral College (that is 270 of 538 electoral votes). Under the compact, all of the members of the Electoral College from all states belonging to the compact would be from the same political party as the winner of nationwide popular vote. Thus, the presidential candidate who receives the most popular votes in all 50 states (and the District of Columbia) will be guaranteed a majority of the Electoral College, and hence the Presidency. Because the compact guarantees a majority of the Electoral College to the winner of most popular votes nationwide, the compact has the additional benefit of eliminating the possibility that a presidential election might be thrown into the U.S. House of Representatives (with each state casting one vote).
You can read about it here:
http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages
/states.php?s=TN
Unique-Lies you are incorrect. All of Tennessee's electoral votes will go to McCain because he carried the state popular vote. One state, Nebraska I think, apportions its electoral votes according to the popular vote.
devan
I believe your right.
devan,
Now correct him on his un-needed tuning and misunderstandings of the Bible.
parkerbrothers,
When you can explain these events in the bible then you can talk about me.
Evidently You don't have the intellegence to explain them unless you change the words in the bible to mean something else, because you refuse to explain them at all. They don't exist in your bible or mind. Also, You came up with the word tune and tuning all on your own so you could change my words around and talk down to me. It don't work. If people can't see thru you then you can take them with you wheresoever you goeth.
Unique-Lies,
You are the one that in your own words said you "tune" the Bible. I am the one that said both Paul and John need no tuning, only a ready ear and heart to listen to them.
parkerbrothers,
you might want to go back and prove that I came up with that word in my post(s). I have never used the word tune to describe anything Paul or John said.
I did make the remark that Paul like everyone today believed that Jesus was meaning this "caught up in the clouds" would happen in his time, which I should inform you, never happened!
Also John saw visions that Jesus gave to him, just like he is going to give visions to his people in the end times. That does not mean these visions will be happening as the people see them. They will see these visions so they can Prophecy, just as John did.
In the last days the anti-christ will tell the people what they want to hear, so they will follow him to hell.
I don't have to worry about that because I don't say the things people want to hear. I teach just the opposite, so everyone should know I am not the anti-christ.
Unique-Lies,
You used the exact word "tune" in a moment of your overflowing pride to describe what you do with Paul's writings. I actually have better things to do than dig through all your repititous ramblings to find your claim of being a "tuner" and making a joke out of you. You do quite well without any help from me.
And when did you become a teacher?
In the last days the anti-christ will tell the people what they want to hear, so they will follow him to hell.
Posted by Unique-Lies on Sat, Nov 8, 2008, at 3:28 PM
Unique-Lies,
And just exactly where did you say numerous times you were going.