Even more disturbing

[PsyOps]

Not Maryland, just about 1/5 of its counties.:shrug:

Ummm... I hope you're not saying the elections in Md were stolen by the democrats? Or are you saying only 1/5 of the counties voted?

The GOP lost the election because people were swayed by the war. Any connection a candidate made there or with Bush and they doomed themselves.

I'm not sure about your 1/5 of the counties determining the outcome, but this is going to be based on 2 things: demographic makeup and/or voter turnout. I get the impression folks that would have vited GOP just decided not to vote out of some sort of protest. This made it easier for those that were more motivated to make the decision.

Either way you add it up, MDers could have kept the liberals out of their lives, but they didn't. So you get what you asked for.

 

[aps45819]

I'm not sure about your 1/5 of the counties determining the outcome, .

Baltimore, Montgomery and P.G. counties determine state elections. Take those 3 and you've won.

 

[PsyOps]

Baltimore, Montgomery and P.G. counties determine state elections. Take those 3 and you've won.

I don't think the equation is that simple. You can pin it on demographics or population density, but when you take into account that Ehrlich was the first GOPer to be elected in MD in the last 40 years (under the same population and demographic make up), he kept taxes low, left MD with a surplus and made improvements on nearly every level, THEN you take into account O'Malley's record of plummeting Baltimore into criminal and economic despair, the only explanation that can be derived from this last election is a protest vote of Ehrlich’s support of Bush and the war. Many that would have voted for him decided not to vote out of protest and the others swung the other way out of protest. The state of MD will reap what is sows.

 

[forestal]

Most pro-death penalty folks change their mind after spending time on Death Row for a crime they did not commit.



The Exonerations

<img src="http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/iheader.jpg"\>

 

[BuddyLee]

Ummm... I hope you're not saying the elections in Md were stolen by the democrats?

No, I actually said, "Not Maryland, just about 1/5 of its counties.:shrug:" in clear reference to...

Now you folks just aren't getting it. This is what MD voter for and this is what they get. Cry all you want.

I never insinuated that anything was stolen.

The Maryland voter did not vote for this because the Maryland voter is not one single entity that votes one way. If the Maryland voter voted for this then there would be no variation, everyone in Maryland would vote one way. There is a failure of Democracy to a certain extent when pertinent government officials are elected by this supposed single entity. It is far more complex than that.

Or are you saying only 1/5 of the counties voted?

You misunderstood again. Read the election returns in Maryland's history and get back to me. I am saying that approximately 1/5 of the counties went to a Democratic candidate and the other 4/5 went to a Republican candidate. However, the Democratic candidate won the election. Is that fair, or not? What is true democracy?

The GOP lost the election because people were swayed by the war. Any connection a candidate made there or with Bush and they doomed themselves.

I'm not sure about your 1/5 of the counties determining the outcome, but this is going to be based on 2 things: demographic makeup and/or voter turnout. I get the impression folks that would have vited GOP just decided not to vote out of some sort of protest. This made it easier for those that were more motivated to make the decision.

Either way you add it up, MDers could have kept the liberals out of their lives, but they didn't. So you get what you asked for

One could base Ehrlich's loss on the war and all that goes with it. However, you also must use your memory function. Who ran against Ehrlich in 2002? Kathleen Kennedy Townson, a lame duck candidate. To put it another way, she was the Tommy McKay candidate. Ehrlich won in 2002 because of this and subsequently lost in 2006 because he ran against at least an okay Democratic candidate. A Republican will never have a shot to win the governor position in Maryland unless 1) the politics drastically change within the state (Ha!) or 2) they run against a lame duck candidate.

I don't think the equation is that simple. You can pin it on demographics or population density, but when you take into account that Ehrlich was the first GOPer to be elected in MD in the last 40 years (under the same population and demographic make up), he kept taxes low, left MD with a surplus and made improvements on nearly every level, THEN you take into account O'Malley's record of plummeting Baltimore into criminal and economic despair, the only explanation that can be derived from this last election is a protest vote of Ehrlich’s support of Bush and the war. Many that would have voted for him decided not to vote out of protest and the others swung the other way out of protest. The state of MD will reap what is sows.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

People don't vote much on the issues as they do party ID. This is one function of why a political party is what it is; they take public stands on issues and simplify them for the masses. This simplification boils into a party ID, which is what most individuals base their vote on. I doubt many base their vote solely on a singular issue; these are the fanatics.

 

[hvp05]

Most pro-death penalty folks change their mind after spending time on Death Row for a crime they did not commit.

So all those people were pro-DP before their conviction? I'm glad their cases were overturned.

Did you know that in the same time span 1,057 people were executed? (Data.)

Notice how many people were executed in the 1930s and '40s: 2.5x as many as we have seen in the past few years. I take that as a sign that forensic science is continually improving and working as it should. (Also liberal judges letting people off, no doubt...)

I take the exoneration numbers for what they are: people justifiably released per sufficient evidence. And I am still all for the DP.

 

[forestal]

You should be upset that it's the State that is at fault for putting these poor folks away, and a group of pro-bono lawyers who have to undo the dirty work. Depending on a pro-bono lawyer to find out what's right isn't the way our system should be working...

If you get thrown in jail for something you didn't commit, you had better pray to Jesus that some private sector justice can fix it before you get your lethal injection.

<big><big><big>DNA lawsuit instigates an outside inquiry</big></big></big><!--/head--> <small> </small> <!--deck-->Special prosecutor to investigate police and prosecutor in Macomb rape case as part of federal suit.<!--/deck-->

<!--byline--><small> <storytext> </storytext></small><small>By Tony Manolatos / The Detroit News</small>
<small> </small> <small> </small><small> </small><small> </small><small> </small><small> </small><small> </small> <small> </small> <small> </small><small> A special prosecutor is being appointed to probe the conduct of police and the prosecutor in the case of a man wrongfully convicted of rape, a spokesman with the Michigan Attorney General's Office confirmed Wednesday.

The probe is the latest development stemming from Ken Wyniemko's year-old federal lawsuit, which lays out evidence that suggests witnesses were coached, evidence was buried, conflicting leads were ignored and justice was forsaken for a conviction.

Wyniemko, a former Clinton Township resident and night manager at a bowling alley, was released from prison after DNA evidence cleared him in June 2003. He spent nearly nine years behind bars.

"What was done to me should never happen to anyone," said Wyniemko, 53, who lives with friends in Auburn Hills and drives an SUV a friend gave him with a personalized license plate that says "INOCNT."​

</small>

So all those people were pro-DP before their conviction? I'm glad their cases were overturned.

Did you know that in the same time span 1,057 people were executed? (Data.)

Notice how many people were executed in the 1930s and '40s: 2.5x as many as we have seen in the past few years. I take that as a sign that forensic science is continually improving and working as it should. (Also liberal judges letting people off, no doubt...)

I take the exoneration numbers for what they are: people justifiably released per sufficient evidence. And I am still all for the DP.