I just read an article from this writer that lacks of focus and manipulates information. When a contributor of a magazine/a writer will stop pushing his own agenda? ,when a writer will take distance of the reality of the moment and projet himslef into the future?, when in a country with no link or association to any church in particular will stop to use the name JESUS to increase the emotinal stage of a citizen and conquer pre-established subjects? when the churches with NO tradition in history will stop adressing and using the word SATAN to perturb the mind of many? when a writer will be able to stop manipulating the words and use them as a tool to let the reader take a decision on a subject, rather than give an answer camouflaged over prestine graduate words?
I ask this writer to instreuct himself on international matters. Compare the style of livign of MANY european countries that after decades of wars have learned that a socialized environment is much better way to push the middle class and create a more equal society.
A debate on many matters should take place with a write who uses the columns of a newspaper as a white canvas to publish nonsense or lack of sense realities.
THE LAST WORD
George F. Will
Farewell, Election Day
What kind of people will not vote if doing so requires them to get off their couches and visit neighborhood polling places?
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
The sentiment expressed by a sly bumper sticker this year (EVERY DISASTER IS A CHANGE) is a cousin of this axiom: Most improvements make matters worse. That axiom is pertinent to this election season because, for many years now, improvers have been toiling to perfect voting procedures.
One result is that by last week, five weeks before what is anachronistically called Election Day, and before any debates between the presidential and vice presidential candidates, and before Congress acts on the unprecedented legislative proposal for coping with the financial crisis—before all these events, Americans in 24 states and the District of Columbia, which have 50 percent of the nation's population, began casting their ballots.
Dislocation of the calendar is disorienting. Next year's World Series will end in November. This year, what the nation thinks of as the November elections actually began in September.
Seven presidential elections ago, in 1980, only 5 percent of the votes were cast before what really was Election Day. If this year, like 2004, produces an increase in early voting, close to 30 percent of the votes will have been cast before Nov. 4. In some states, more than 30 percent will have been. In at least five states, a majority of the votes will be cast early, including the swing states of New Mexico (51 percent early in 2004) and Nevada (53 percent). In Washington state, it will be more than 70 percent. In Oregon, which for a decade has voted entirely by mail, the figure will be virtually 100 percent.
In its rate of voter participation, Oregon ranks high among the states without same-day registration, and it spends 30 percent less on elections than it would were it still maintaining statewide voting sites and machines. Oregonians overwhelmingly adopted mail voting by a referendum, and overwhelmingly approve it.
So what is wrong with early voting? Even leaving aside the large matter of increased potential for fraud in voting by absentee ballots, there are two costs to early voting.
First, for tens of millions of early voters, the campaign process of informing and persuading is effectively truncated. Now, there is evidence that early voters are more partisan and informed than other voters and hence are less likely than the rest of the electorate to be swayed by events late in an election season. Nevertheless, early voting increasingly affects the rhythms of campaigns, forcing the front-loading of arguments.
- 1
- 2
- Next Page »
Discuss