need help please--can somebody refute the numbers in this email?

[niyad]

I know this is a biased bunch of crap, but I need help in refuting it. this was sent by a friend this morning (who is NOT a repuke, by the way)

>
>
>
> Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St.
> Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the
> 2000 Presidential election:
>
>
>
> Population of counties won by: Gore: 127 million; Bush: 143 million;
>
>
>
> Square miles of land won by: Gore: 580,000; Bush: 2,427,000
>
>
>
> States won by: Gore: 19 Bush: 29
>
>
>
> Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore: 13.2 Bush: 2.1
>
>
>
> Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush
> won was mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of this
> country. Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living
> in government-owned projects and living off government welfare..."
> (Can you say New Orleans, New York City, New You-Owe-Me, etc.)
>
>
>
> Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the
> "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of
> democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already
> having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.
>
>
>
> The critical point is when people living on government entitlements
> passes 50% and can control future elections. From that point, the
> party that promises the most free entitlements wins. Unfortunately
> less than 50% of the population will be paying the taxes to support
> the majority. It won't be long after that the country will be
> bankrupt.

[madfloridian]

1. Just remind them Gore was ahead of Bush by half a million votes.

That just about says it all.

[Burma Jones]

2. Google and Snopes are your friends

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp

[texastoast]

3. Part of it is debunked here

http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp

And, just looking at the statements themselves, I think, "So fucking what?"

On edit: Just what do those statements have to do with the fact that the election was not democratic? That all in all, Gore beat him out on popular vote by about half a million?

[Tanuki]

4. Square miles of land don't vote!

"Square miles of land won by: Gore: 580,000; Bush: 2,427,000"
What a bogus excuse for an argument in the first place!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

16. Here in the UK,

In 1997, Tony Blair won the largest Labour majority ever, and the Conservatives still controlled more (or at least nearly as much) land than Labour.

People in cities are more liberal than people in the country, on average, and a first-past-the-post system massively accentuates that. If votes were counted per acre instead of per capita then leftwingers would never win another election.

[The Deacon]

5. As usual in such pieces...

...Snopes reports that 'Professor Olsen' (though in this case he actually exists) had nothing to do with the email. The author cited is named Tytler, not Tyler & the books cited don't exists & the sentiments expressed don't exist in the books he did publish. What an obscure 18th Century Scottish political philosopher has to do with a stolen modern American election is highly debateable anyway.
When I get garbage like this any more I don't even bother to respond: I just send them a link to Snopes.com

[Mz Pip]

6. Square miles of land?

Last time I checked, dirt did not vote.

And actually the tax stuff is incorrect. The Blue States pay more taxes than the Red States and the Red States get more Federal subsidies than the Blue States.

Here are the stats on it:
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2004/09/red_states_feed.html

It won't be the poor people in NYC who bankrupt this country, it will be this stupid, endless war.

Mz Pip
:dem:

[niyad]

7. thank you, everyone!! as usual, DU'ers come through like champs!!

[niyad]

8. yes, there is that hawaiian disease--lackanookie--anybody remember

the bette midler song from her "divine miss m" album?

[Skittles]

9. LAND MASS DOES NOT VOTE

jeez, what stupid stats

[Awsi Dooger]

10. Was that election in 1956?

Why only 48 states? Actually, I think it was Bush 30, Gore 21, counting D.C.

Of course, it should have been 29-22 and a different planet.

[Guaranteed]

12. LOL! nt

[Guaranteed]

11. Point by point:

>Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law, St.
> Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the
> 2000 Presidential election:

Who?

>
>
>
> Population of counties won by: Gore: 127 million; Bush: 143 million;

Totally meaningless. People voted in higher concentrations for Gore. So?

>
>
>
> Square miles of land won by: Gore: 580,000; Bush: 2,427,000

Again, totally meaningless.

>
>
>
> States won by: Gore: 19 Bush: 29

This should actually raise a red flag in people's minds concerning our electoral college system, considering that Gore had a half a million more votes than Bush did. Other than that, again, totally meaningless.

>
>
>
> Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Gore: 13.2 Bush: 2.1

So? Which candidate had a higher fucking-your-sister rate? Ad hominem garbage.

>
>
>
> Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Bush
> won was mostly the land owned by the tax-paying citizens of this
> country. Gore's territory mostly encompassed those citizens living
> in government-owned projects and living off government welfare..."
> (Can you say New Orleans, New York City, New You-Owe-Me, etc.)

Baseless and ad hominem.

>
>
>
> Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the
> "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of
> democracy, with some 40 percent of the nation's population already
> having reached the "governmental dependency" phase.

WOW! I totally agree here re complacency and apathy. Look at the popularity of Fox News and ignorant, informationless emails such as these, for example. I get the feeling old Olson didn't really have that kind of thing in mind, though.

>
>
>
> The critical point is when people living on government entitlements
> passes 50% and can control future elections. From that point, the
> party that promises the most free entitlements wins. Unfortunately
> less than 50% of the population will be paying the taxes to support
> the majority. It won't be long after that the country will be
> bankrupt.

Our country is nowhere near that. Pure idiocy, even in theory.

So, you wondered, I answered. ENJOY!

[Reckon]

13. With black box voting

how can you tell Bush won anything?

My guess the stats you posted match the state elections run by republicans.

[sandnsea]

14. Best-Worst Crime

Certainly cities vote Democratic and cities have higher crime rates, duh.

But where are the worst cities of all sizes in the US?? In red states.

http://www.bestplaces.net/docs/studies/crime1.aspx

And the south is known to have the highest murder rate in the US, consequently the highest in the world.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/region.htm

[Orangepeel]

15. how about average SAT score in states won by each?

or average housing prices?

I don't have the stats, but, although they are equally as meaningless, would probably favor Gore.