Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ujeni] trying again

Expand Messages
  • Kristof Nordin
    ... From: Christine Chumbler To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:59 AM Subject: Re:
    Message 1 of 13 , Nov 11, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      -----Original Message-----
      From: Christine Chumbler <cchumble@...>
      To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com <ujeni@yahoogroups.com>
      Date: Friday, November 08, 2002 8:59 AM
      Subject: Re: [ujeni] trying again

      Also, I think I remember hearing that
      >Malawi's traffic deaths have increased in recent years as the roads
      >continue to deteriorate.>

      Hey all, I'm finally back from a long trip to the USA and I'm slowly wading
      through e-mail backlogs in no particular order. I would have to disagree
      with this comment about roads continuing to deteriorate, the roads have
      improved tremendously over the past 5 years - and maybe that is the true
      problem? Better roads, faster speeds? Definitely more and more cars. Who
      knows the real causes.

      Stacia
    • Vyrle Owens
      20 November 2002 Dear all, Mark tried to get a response to foreign aid and traffic fatality rates. Sorry I am not up to date on foreign aid. My opinion is
      Message 2 of 13 , Nov 20, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        20 November 2002

        Dear all,

        Mark tried to get a response to foreign aid and traffic fatality rates.
        Sorry I am not up to date on foreign aid. My opinion is there is little
        relationship between money aid and either economic, social, or
        "democratic" development.

        As to traffic fatality rates, I was aware of the extremely high fatality
        rates in Malawi (and other places in Southern Africa) when I was in
        Malawi. Not that anyone actually paid much attention to the statistics,
        but you can understand a little more about why I was so reluctant to
        have PCVs traveling around the country. I thought we were all safer at
        home (in Malawi).

        Now to a new set of numbers:

        Perhaps we could call this "Republican Presidential Mandate???"

        According to the census there were 281,421,906 people in the United
        States in the year 2000. http://factfinder.census.gov

        Of these people about 220 million are younger than the president and 60
        million are older (give or take a few million)

        Of these people 205,815,000 are of voting age.
        http://www.fec.gov/pages/2000turnout/reg&to00.htm
        Basically everyone over the age of 18.

        Of the voting age population approximately 15 million are not eligible
        to vote. Non citizens and others, including 1.2 -1.5 million felons.

        Of the voting age population 156,421,311 were registered to vote in the
        2000 general election. Of the registered voters 105,586,274 cast a
        ballot. Some 2% did not vote for president

        Now, of interest to note, there were 16 candidates for the office of
        President on the ballot someplace. This varied by state. There were
        also miscellaneous write-in votes.

        According to http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm there were
        105,405,100 votes cast for the office of president.

        George Bush received 50,456,002 votes (47.87%).

        Al Gore received 50,999,897 votes (48.38%).

        All other candidates received the balance. (3.75%)

        "Miscellaneous write-in", "none of these candidates", blank, and void
        votes, numbering 138,216 were not included in some totals.


        Now to the question (maybe this is a riddle).

        In our "democratic" government of the people, by the people, for the
        people, who won the presidency?

        And

        Who in the executive branch, legislative branch, or the judicial branch
        of our representative republic really represents the people?

        Thanks for your thoughtful replies,

        Vyrle

        PS. By the way, feel free to ask and answer any other question that
        comes to mind.

        I also have some traffic fatality numbers to stimulate conversation at a
        near future date.


        -----Original Message-----
        From: holland@... [mailto:holland@...]
        Sent: Wednesday, 06 November, 2002 19:58
        To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [ujeni] trying again

        Ok, that one seems to have failed to spark much interest. How about
        this one. Can it be true as printed?

        Number of people killed in traffic accidents of all types, per 100m
        vehicle-km

        Malawi 1117
        India 65
        Egypt 44
        Kenya 41
        Latvia 25

        Malawi has 15 times the vehicle death rate of any other country in the
        world?

        Mark




        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
        http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      • Vyrle Owens
        20 November 2002 Dear Rand, Dolly finally has her own email address and would like to subscribe to the ujeni. Would you be kind enough to instruct her?
        Message 3 of 13 , Nov 20, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          20 November 2002

          Dear Rand,

          Dolly finally has her own email address and would like to subscribe to
          the ujeni. Would you be kind enough to instruct her?


          dollyowens@...

          Thanks,

          Vyrle
        • Paul DEVER
          That one is easy: Bush won, for the plain reason that we use the electoral college, and do not have the popular vote. Some wish to return to the popular vote,
          Message 4 of 13 , Nov 21, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            That one is easy: Bush won, for the plain reason that we use the electoral
            college, and do not have the popular vote.

            Some wish to return to the popular vote, but they too are missing the point.
            Barely half of the eligible people voted, so neither candidate had a
            "majority" per se, but a majority of the votes cast. There is quite a
            difference. Once could argue that the eal winner wa "no one", in the NO ONE
            received the largest vote of "present <in the country>, but not voting"



            _________________________________________________________________
            Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
            http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
          • Holland, Mark
            I think the question of mandate has been largely obviated: Bush was elected without any mandate whatsoever, he proceeded to ignore that fact completely and
            Message 5 of 13 , Nov 21, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              I think the question of mandate has been largely obviated: Bush was elected without any mandate whatsoever, he proceeded to ignore that fact completely and govern as if he had the undivided support of the nation, and in the midterm elections the American people granted him exactly the authority he sought. So clearly Bush won the election: it just took him 2 extra years to do it. My dislike for the outcome and also for the mechanisms he's used since 9/11 to solidify his domestic support does not change their reality.

              Mark

              -----Original Message-----
              From: Paul DEVER [mailto:pcpaul@...]
              Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2002 5:47 AM
              To: ujeni@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: RE: [ujeni] trying again, and again


              That one is easy: Bush won, for the plain reason that we use the electoral
              college, and do not have the popular vote.

              Some wish to return to the popular vote, but they too are missing the point.
              Barely half of the eligible people voted, so neither candidate had a
              "majority" per se, but a majority of the votes cast. There is quite a
              difference. Once could argue that the eal winner wa "no one", in the NO ONE
              received the largest vote of "present <in the country>, but not voting"



              _________________________________________________________________
              Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
              http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail




              Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            • Vyrle Owens
              5 December 2002 Dear Mark and also Paul, Thanks for the response to my election numbers. Mark you were able to very succinctly summarize several of my
              Message 6 of 13 , Dec 5, 2002
              • 0 Attachment
                5 December 2002

                Dear Mark and also Paul,

                Thanks for the response to my election numbers. Mark you were able to
                very succinctly summarize several of my thoughts regarding the
                situation. And Paul, thanks for the electoral college reminder. If we
                as an electorate had not been so evenly divided, the electoral college
                input would have been mostly perfunctory.

                I am, of course, disappointed at the manner the president and those who
                closely support him are manipulating the situation. But I have been
                around long enough to know that the world is mostly run by well
                organized minority groups, be they dictators with a small army, or
                republicans with apparent support of 20-40 percent of the electorate.

                Later,

                Vyrle
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.