[olug] OT: evil poll

[Eric Penne]

I was actually surfing that site when your email came in.  Very funny.

Main parties no vote from me even though I lean Republican. I voted
Bush in 2000. Badnarik in 2004.
I want to vote libertarian to help get their number up and get them on
the ballot next round but I think Bob Barr is an idiot.
Constitutionalist Chuck Baldwin is all NWO conspiracy theory and I
mostly agree with him but I'm not ready to call myself a conspiracy
theorist yet.
Green Cynthia McKinney seems like a very sound choice if not a little
inexperienced (green, hahaha).

Not sure yet.

Eric

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 7:59 PM, Craig Wolf <cjwolf at mpsomaha.org> wrote:
> Ok, found this on my college's site...perfect timing for this thread I
> think:
>
> Election day is only a week away, and if you're trying to find out more
> about the candidates, it can be hard to find sources of information on
> the US presidential election that don't have a hidden (or not very
> hidden!) bias for or against a particular party or candidate. Here are a
> few that rise to the top as neutral sources of information on the
> candidates, their voting records, positions, platforms, and more.
>
> Project VoteSmart
>
> Project VoteSmart is a nonprofit group that calls itself the "voter
> defense system." No one can join the Project's board without a political
> opposite: for every liberal working for VoteSmart there is a
> conservative, etc. The Project refuses financial assistance from all
> organizations and special interest groups that lobby or support or
> oppose any candidate or issue, and their volunteer staff updates and
> tracks daily candidates voting records, issue positions, public
> statements, interest group ratings and campaign finances.
>
> http://www.votesmart.org/election_president.php
>
> Politifact
>
> The St. Petersburg Times and the Congressional Quarterly created the
> site to help voters separate fact from falsehood in the 2008
> presidential campaign. Journalists and researchers from the Times and CQ
> fact-check the accuracy of speeches, TV ads, debate claims, interviews
> and other campaign communications. They decide whether a claim is True,
> Mostly True, Half True, Barely True or False and have a special category
> for claims called "Pants on Fire." The site includes video of speeches,
> a database of voting records, and an "attack file" in which they track
> the attacks each candidate makes on the other and then verify accuracy
> of the attack.
>
> http://www.politifact.org/truth-o-meter/
>
> Campaign 2008: The Presidential Field.
>
> The Washington Post mains this website with links to information on each
> candidate. What makes this site different from the others is the
> detailed information on the official endorsements of each candidate by
> whom and why, and on campaign finances, including a database of
> supporters, state by state information and spending records.
>
> http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/
>
> American Rhetoric Online Speech Bank
>
> University of Texas professor Michael E. Eidenmuller has amassed a huge
> online database of speeches in audio and text forms. You can take a
> listen to your favorites at:
>
> http://americanrhetoric.com/speechbank.htm
> _______________________________________________
> OLUG mailing list
> OLUG at olug.org
> https://lists.olug.org/mailman/listinfo/olug
>



-- 
http://jillanderic.net
Free and Open Source Software
Firefox 3 http://getfirefox.com
Ubuntu 8.04 http://ubuntu.com