HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bis@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Bis)
Subject: Re: Email Copy of REPUBLICAN PLATFORM to me
Originator: bis@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu
Organization: Bis Information Services
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 13:15:33 GMT

In article <exuptr.443.716051820@exu.ericsson.se> exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se) writes:
>In article <1992Sep6.153239.18298@spdcc.com> rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:
>
>>BBC, hoping to see GHWB crash and
>>burn in November.
>
>Probably will.  Just hope the democrats don't crash and burn our economy :-)

Too late.  Ronnie already did that.  Yes, any clueless people who
might be reading this, RONNIE destroyed the economy, NOT George Bush!
Does this mean Bush is free of fault?  Of course not.  What did he do?
Well...nothing.  :)

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: n8443916@henson.cc.wwu.edu (John Gossman)
Subject: Re: A guess at the electoral votes (Idaho poll)
Keywords: electoral college, electoral votes, poll, polls, states
Organization: Western Washington University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 18:50:40 GMT


	I like your idea for having everybody try and post state polls they
see (I suggested the same thing a while back, and have been doing what I
can.)
	On the other hand, I haven't seen a poll done in Washington State
since right after the demo conv.  Something ought to be coming along soon,
and when it does, I'll post it.

	-JG
From: bks@s27w007.pswfs.gov (Bradley K. Sherman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Field Poll Electoral College Tally
Date: 10 Sep 1992 14:29:01 GMT
Organization: Read my Lips
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: s27w007.pswfs.gov



The _San Francisco Chronicle_, p.A4, 10 Sep 92, gives the following tally
for Electoral College votes (Poll conducted by Field Institute):

Clinton Leading: WA, OR, CA, MT, CO, MINN, WI, MO, ARK, MICH, NY, PA, VT
                 MASS, DEL, DC, HI, WVA

Clinton Leaning: NV, ARIZ, ALAS, IA, ILL, LA, MISS, TN, KY, OH, SC, MD,
                 NJ, ME, RI

Bush Leaning...: UTAH, NEB, IND, GA

Toss-up........: IDA, WY, ND, SD, KA, OK, TX, NM, ALA, FLA, NC, VA, CONN,
                 NH
Leading > 10%
Leaning 5-10%

	If Election Held Today: Clinton 366; Bush 35; Toss-up 137
	Needed for election: 270

"We couldn't find a state where Bush is winning by more than 10 points."
    --Melvyn Field
----
    --Brad Sherman
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Educational Spending
Date: 12 Sep 92 18:10:14 GMT
Organization: Northeastern Law, Class of '93


In article <BuA2tI.9sA@encore.com>, 
rcollins@encore.com (Roger Collins) said:

> > Don't private schools generally have a lot more leeway than public
> > schools in deciding which prospective students to admit and in
> > disciplining/expelling troublemakers and poor students?  If so, it
> > isn't too surprising that, all other things being equal, the
> > private schools turn out a better "product."  [wdstarr]

> [You say] this as if it were bad.  If some kids can't behave, why
> should any school let them stay and disrupt the rest.  I just
> watched "Lean On Me" last night about the "baseball bat principal"
> that cleaned up East Side High and the first thing he did was expel
> the most uncontrollable students.  BTW, I recommend the flick.

Mmm hmm, Joe Clark.  Whatever happened to him, anyway?  (Last time I
heard of him, a few years ago, he was engaged in a blood feud with his
local school board over some of his heavy-handed tactics, such as
locking emergency-exit fire-escape doors to keep trespassers from
sneaking into the school building through them.)

Anyway, I wasn't making any value judgment about the practice; I was
merely responding to Michael Edelman's statement:

> Do you believe that the trouble with schools is simply that we don't
> pay enough to teachers and administrators? Perhaps you'd be very
> surprised learn that private schools pay far less than public
> schools- and turn out far better educated and better prepared
> students.

by pointing out one natural advantage that most private schools have
over most public schools, regardless of the quantity, quality, or
salary level of their staffs.

(By the way, I especially wasn't making a _negative_ value judgment
about the practice -- as a former Socially Inept High School Geek (tm)
of the first magnitude, I suspect that my memories of public school
would be a lot happier if our own high school principal had had the
right three percent or so of the student body taken out an shot...)

-- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: adamsr@netcom.com (Rick Adams)
Subject: Re: Yet another wager for the cowardly
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 92 18:38:23 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

Thus spake MEDELMA@cms.cc.wayne.edu (Michael Edelman): 

>Since no one had the courage of their purported convictions to take me up
>on my first bet, I'll withdraw it and make a simpler one.
> 
>Clinton's ads promise three things:
> 
>1. 20 Million new jobs
>2. People making over $200,000/year pay more
>3. Everyone else pays less.
> 
>Who'll bet their hard earned cash on these promises? My $20 says he's lying.
>Give me 5:1 odds and I'll bet that we have a higher unemployment rate in four
>years than today, that Clinton will have raised taxes on people making
>less than $200,000 dollars *twice*, and that the federal debt will be
>higher in four years than it is today, both nominally and as %GNP.
> 
>Now, if you believe Clinton, sounds like the risk of losing $100 is
>nil, and you can make an easy $20, right?

	Since you're demanding 5:1 odds, it doesn't sound like you're
terribly sure of your position, does it?

	Interesting that you are saying that you'll bet that we'll have
higher unemployment in four years and that the federal debt will be higher -
doesn't sound like you give your candidate, Bush, much chance of winning. .
unless, of course, that's WHY you're willing to bet on those increases!


-- 
    rick.adams on GEnie   /|\  Reliable and affordable public access to 
     adamsr@netcom.com  /  |  \  telecommunications services is the 
    adamsr@irie.ais.org \ /|\ /  first step toward a global community.
   adamsr@norwich.bitnet  \|/  Send Email for files on GEnie and Netcom.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: joec@fid.morgan.com (Joe Collins)
Subject: Why we should blame Democrats...
Organization: Morgan Stanley & Co., New York, NY
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:45:58 GMT

While I am not sure if I will vote for Bush/Quayle, I will certainly
NOT VOTE FOR CLINTON/GORE. I happen to like Bill Clinton as a person
but the Democrats have wreaked financial havoc with our lives and those
of our children.

Its really simple:

For 50 of the last 60 years, the Democrats have controlled the Senate.
For 56 of the last 60 years, the Democrats have controlled the House
 of Representatives.

[The above was said by Ronald Reagan - perhaps the numbers are off but 
 the spirit is certainly true...]

Excerpts from the Constitution of the United States:

Article 7, section 7.1:
 "1. All bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of 
  Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with amendments
  as on other bills."
Article 8:
 "The Congress shall have the power 1. to lay and collect taxes, duties,
  imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common
  defence and general welfare of the United States"

Nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the President has the authority
to spend money, borrow money or raise taxes.

So we cannot fully blame the President for the deficit (except perhaps for his
lack of powers of persuasion on the tax/spend Congress). 

But we can blame Congress for pork barrel legislation that the President
can't stop since Congress will not give him the line-item veto, even though
the vast majority of the Governors have it.

How often do we hear of a Congressman/woman tacking on amendments to important
votes. Thus they send to the President important legislation that he wants
and they add on all sorts of pet projects for themselves. He is forced
to accept all that pork-barrel nonsense and sign the bill or veto it
and lose his legislation.

Why don't we have term limits for Congressmen/women?
Why don't we have Initiative, Referundum and Recall for Congressman/woman?

To be fair, the same mess could easily have happened if Republicans were 
in charge of the money machine all these years instead of the Democrats.

But we KNOW what the Democratic-controlled Congress has done, a HUGE deficit
and a scandal-ridden embrassement (Post Office, Kiting Checks, etc)

How many people know that Congress has exempted ITSELF from much of the
regulations that impose on us? They are EXEMPT from OSHA, the Civil Rights
Act and many other important pieces of legislation. (Ref: Wall Street Journal)

I like what Thomas Jefferson once said, best of all:
    "That government is best which governs least"

I may very well vote Libertarian since that appears to be their motto.

Just my opinion....

Joe
joec@morgan.com
Usual Disclaimers...



Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: rcollins@encore.com (Roger Collins)
Subject: Re: Educational Spending
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:10:29 GMT

>William December Starr writes
>> Don't private schools generally have a lot more leeway than public
>> schools in deciding which prospective students to admit and in
>> disciplining/expelling troublemakers and poor students?  If so, it
>> isn't too surprising that, all other things being equal, the private
>> schools turn out a better "product."

You guys say this as if it were bad.  If some kids can't behave, why
should any school let them stay and disrupt the rest.  I just watched
"Lean On Me" last night about the "baseball bat principal" that cleaned
up East Side High and the first thing he did was expel the most
uncontrollable students.  BTW, I recommend the flick.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:12907 alt.activism:16181 talk.politics.misc:44987
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu)
Subject: Re: Whatever happened to ...
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:39:36 GMT

In article <T3FwqB5w165w@mintir.new-orleans.la.us> elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley) writes:
>anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed) writes:
>
>> In article <0FPuqB4w165w@mintir.new-orleans.la.us> elendil@mintir.new-orleans
>> >
>> >Besides, Bush is spending so much time bashing Hillary that his campaign 
>> >for First Lady wouldn't be complete without a face-to-face showdown.
>> 
>> One prime time speaker during the Republican convention mentions Hillary,
>> and the press calls the whole convention a week of Hillary bashing.  
>> 
>> Well, now, it seems you don't have to say a thing about Hillary, and you're
>> still bashing her.  Has Bush even uttered Hillary's name?
>> 
>> 
>> >
>> >
>> >>Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us<
>> >>Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087<
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Anwar Mohammed                FREE       Graduate Student
>> anwar+@cs.cmu.edu              THE       School of Computer Science
>> Voice: +1 412 268 3043     KUWAITI       Carnegie-Mellon University
>> Fax:   +1 412 681 5739        POWS       Pittsburgh, PA  15213-3890
>
>One primetime speaker?  How about Bond, Buchanan, and indirectly, Barbara 
>Bush and Marilyn Quayle.  You've got Bush surrogates going around the 
>country completely distorting her published works.  
>
>As to whether Bush has uttered her name, you're using the classic 
>deniability game.  Bush must accept the responsibility for his 
>surrogates.  If he doesn't fire them, he agrees with them.  Their words 
>are geared to keeping him in the White House, so the buck stops with him.
>
>
>
>>Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us<
>>Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087<

Look, all the republicans out there, you guys really should stopping
bashing Hillary Clinton, or is that the legacy of Nancy Reagan is so
short lived?  Think about it, how bad can it be if the first lady
of USA happened to be a top notch lawyer, instead of someone would   
ay to the president, "honey, according to my astrologist,
you cannot schedule the meeting with the Soviet president at 3pm,
in a room facing east, failure to do so will cause a nuclear war
and we will be out of office, and I will gain weight(which probably
is a good thing for nancy reagan  ;-> ) ."  

Organization: Freshman, Design, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Date: Mon,  7 Sep 1992 01:15:46 -0400 
From: "Christopher W. Graefe" <cg2u+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Can you afford not to?

Dear general public,

     Vote.

                                            Sincerely,
                                                Concerned Minor

P.S. please...


Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.flame
Subject: Re: Email Copy of REPUBLICAN PLATFORM to me
Date: 13 Sep 92 22:12:53 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Sep13.094045.9226@news.cs.brandeis.edu> bis@chaos.cs.
brandeis.edu (Bis) belches:

>In article <exuptr.491.716163335@exu.ericsson.se
> exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exuptr@exu.ericsson.se) writes:
>>Congress.  Congress.

>That's how you party-line Republicans answer everything these day.
>Rather defensive, and you sound kind of like a broken record.

Truth.  

>>                      The president doesn't make bills

>If you know so little about American government, please refrain from
>discussing it with such smug conviction.

Well, I guess that's why I'll continue the discussion.  Get a job.  Find
out how bills are introduced.  Realize that the President doesn't do this.
Then sit down and shut up until you are called on.

>>                                                        or write checks

>If you know so little about finances and economics, please refrain
>from discussing them with such smug conviction.

Broken record?  Me?  

Look, it's a broken record with an ego problem!

Seriously, it seems you are hiding behind your own flaws here.  The President
just doesn't do these things.  Do yourself a favor and enlighten yourself 
before you start looking *really stupid*.

>>thank-you-very-much.

>You're welcome.

Well he's polite.  Sometimes.
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "This must be Thursday.  I never could get the hang of Thursdays"
                                                       - Douglas Adams
  - Patrick Taylor                                       (Arthur Dent)
    Ericsson Network Systems
    exuptr@exu.ericsson.se                       "Don't let the .se fool you"
    or exuptr@ZGNews.Lonestar.Org, exu.exuptr@memo.ericsson.se
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: bjmccall@cco.caltech.edu (Benjamin John McCall)
Subject: **STUDENTS FOR CLINTON MAILING LIST**
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:15:45 GMT

                   *****ATTENTION STUDENTS!!!!!*****


The Clinton/Gore Email Volunteer Team has started a new mailing list
exclusively for STUDENT groups supporting the Clinton/Gore ticket.

All students are invited to join, whether they belong to a student
group supporting Clinton/Gore are are thinking of starting one.

The list will start out as a vehicle for sharing ideas about student
groups, but should eventually link with national campaign headquarters
so that student groups can receive official campaign materials via
email.

**********************************************************************
To subscribe, send mail to clinton-students@cco.caltech.edu with
the Subject: subscribe

To be mailed more information and a list of commands, send mail to
the same address with the Subject: help
**********************************************************************

If you know of any other student organizations supporting Clinton/Gore,
or have friends who are politically active, PLEASE forward this message
to them.  This is a grass-roots campaign, and you CAN make a difference!

--

Ben McCall (bjmccall@cco.caltech.edu)
Clinton/Gore Email Volunteer

For more info about the Volunteer Email effort, send mail to 
Clinton-Wins@mail.Clinton-Gore.org with Subject: help

-- 
Ben McCall, Caltech - bjmccall@cco.caltech.edu
Clinton/Gore in '92.
Clinton FTP site: ftp.cco.caltech.edu, /pub/bjmccall/Clinton

Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:12761 alt.flame:12701
From: elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us (Edward J. Branley)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.flame
Subject: Re: Email Copy of REPUBLICAN PLATFORM to me
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 11:12:58 CDT
Organization: Minas Tirith BBS (Public Access Usenet for New Orleans)

bis@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Bis) writes:

> In article <exuptr.443.716051820@exu.ericsson.se> exuptr@exu.ericsson.se (exu
> >In article <1992Sep6.153239.18298@spdcc.com> rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue
> >
> >>BBC, hoping to see GHWB crash and
> >>burn in November.
> >
> >Probably will.  Just hope the democrats don't crash and burn our economy :-)
> 
> Too late.  Ronnie already did that.  Yes, any clueless people who
> might be reading this, RONNIE destroyed the economy, NOT George Bush?
> Does this mean Bush is free of fault?  Of course not.  What did he do?
> Well...nothing.  :)

Sure George did something.  He told us in '88 that he was proud of the 
Reagan record and was hell bent on continuing those policies.


>Edward J. Branley         elendil@mintir.new-orleans.la.us<
>Seashell Software, Metairie, LA            +1-504-455-5087<
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
From: hulsey@dbsun.uucp (hulsey)
Subject: Re: Bush Announces Sale of F-15E's to Iraq
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 21:27:43 GMT

In article <pgf.715630578@srl07.cacs.usl.edu>
   pgf@srl07.cacs.usl.edu (Phil G. Fraering) writes:
>htilney@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>
>>I saw part of Bush's speech to a similar crowd about sales of fighter 
>>planes to Taiwan (I think). 
>
>>As we know, nobody in this election has a monopoly on pandering...
>
>Yah, god forbid we should sell fighters to a country which will
>use them to maintain their national security and identity separate
>from such a paragon of virtue like Communist China.

That's not the problem.  The problem is timing.

>Let's not forget that this is the first time Bush has risked
>[upsetting] the Communist Chinese. And what happens but all
>the retarded liberals start attacking him for it...

He is being criticized because he has gone to great pains not to
upset the Chinese, up to and including the Tianimen (sp?) Square
massacre.  Approving sales of F-16's to Taiwan then would have 
been a good way of showing our displeasure.

What it seems like now is the Bush is willing to forsake 20 years
of negotiations with the Chinese in order to gain the votes of
Texans.

The Chinese are now theatening to withdraw from negotiations to
reduce foreign arms sales.  After all, if we can sell weapons to
other countries, why can't they?

What have the Chinese done recently to deserve this change in 
policy?  I guess they shouldn't have sent those swimmers on
steroids to the Olympics.

The Bush gift list (so far this week)

1. For Florida -- Rebuild Homestead Air Force Base.
2. For Louisiana -- Sugar Cane import quotas and tariffs
3. For the Midwest -- More subsidies for wheat
4. For Texas -- F-16's to Taiwan
5. (expected soon) For Missouri -- F-15E's to Saudi Arabia

>Phil Fraering pgf@srl0x.cacs.usl.edu where the x is a number from 1-5.

Will pi work?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
hulsey%dbsun.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Jim Hulsey)   TBDBITL '84 ('85 Rose Bowl)
An Ohioan living in Misery (Missouri, same difference)

Watch what you say!                Won't you sign up your name
They'll be calling you a radical   So you can be their dependable
A liberal, fanatical criminal      Respectable, presentable vegetable
--  Supertramp "The Logical Song"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: sdavis@laforge.ksc.nasa.gov (Steve Davis)
Subject: Re: Clinton/Gore on foreign policy
Organization: NASA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:45:57 GMT

Michael Edelman writes
> There are still a great many communists- whom the media in this country
> refer to, in their puzzling way, as "conservatives"- in the ex-USSR states,
> who are capable of a coup attempt. They might be tempted to try localized
> coups in some states under a Clinton presidency.

  Well, the coup attempt of 1991 was carried out under a Bush presidency; I  
don't think the perpetrators stopped to think, "Gee, maybe we'd better think  
twice with that hawk Bush in power."  Are you implying that a Bush presidency  
holds the threat of military action to maintain the status quo?  Do you think  
Bush would actually pose a threat to another coup?  I don't think so... unless  
there is oil involved, of course.  :-)

>						    Iraq, still a military
> power, could well try to reassert itself under a Clinton presidency, given
> his wishy-washy statements about the gulf war. Syria would probably move
> further into Lebanon and surrounding countries.

  Yes, thanks to Bush's decision at the high point of Desert Storm, Iraq is  
still a military power.  I can't fault him for that decision, but he should  
take responsibility for its consequences.  (Carter, for all his faults, at  
least did that.)  And let's not forget Bush's wishy-washy weekly changes in his  
justification for Desert Shield while it was in progress.

  Just my $.02.

Regards,

Steve
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Steve Davis                      | sdavis@laforge.ksc.nasa.gov |
| NASA, DL-DSD-32                  | (NeXT Mail preferred)       |
| Kennedy Space Center, FL  32899  |                             |
| (407)867-7582  fax:(407)867-2173 | #include <disclaimer.h>     |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: rcollins@encore.com (Roger Collins)
Subject: Re: Why we should blame Democrats...
Reply-To: rcollins@encore.com
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 21:12:28 GMT

joec@fid.morgan.com (Joe Collins) writes:
|> But we can blame Congress for pork barrel legislation that the President
|> can't stop since Congress will not give him the line-item veto, even though
|> the vast majority of the Governors have it.

Why doesn't Bush just veto the whole thing and say remove the pork
before I sign it?  And do it publicly so that all the congress-critters
that voted "yes" can be shamed.  I don't know the details of
line item veto but it sounds dangerous.  Imagine Clinton vetoing
the main provision of a bill and signing on the pork!
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Subject: Your Government Costs You TWICE What You Paid This Year!!!
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 23:38:11 GMT
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting

According to Ross Perot in "We The People", covering just the deficit
this year would require that each person's income taxes be DOUBLED.

Do you think you're getting your money's worth?


-- 
Dave Feustel N9MYI <feustel@netcom.com>
 
RE Drug Warriors who enjoy making a "good" bust: I'm sure the Salem
Witch Hunters enjoyed their law enforcement achievements too.
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:13050 talk.politics.misc:45271 ca.politics:7743 alt.politics.correct:5326