HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: yamauchi@ces.cwru.edu (Brian Yamauchi)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: USA Today/CNN tracking poll 10/15
Date: 15 Oct 92 23:00:22
Organization: Case Western Reserve University
Distribution: world
	<1992Oct15.235918.29548@u.washington.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: sartre.caisr.cwru.edu
In-reply-to: sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu's message of Thu, 15 Oct 1992 23:59:18 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.235918.29548@u.washington.edu> sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>In article <1992Oct15.224329.5999@cbnews.cb.att.com> jmk@cbnews.cb.att.com (joseph.m.knapp) writes:
>>USA Today/CNN Tracking Poll:
>>
>>P = Perot,  B = Bush,  C = Clinton,  x = other or undecided
>>
>>                          % preference                          % plurality
>>      5   10   15   20   25   30   35   40   45   50   55    5   10   15   20
>>      |----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|----|    |----|----|----|
>> 9/30 |xP                           B                C       |           o  
>>10/01 |x P                          B               C        |          o   
>>10/02 | xP                           B            C          |       o      
>>10/03 |   xP                        B          C             |     o        
>>10/04 |   xP                        B          C             |     o        
>>10/05 |   xP                         B        C              |   o          
>>10/06 |   xP                        B          C             |     o        
>>10/07 | x P                        B               C         |          o   
>>10/08 | x  P                       B              C          |         o    
>>10/09 |x   P                       B               C         |          o   
>>10/10 |x   P                      B                 C        |            o 
>>10/11 |x    P                     B                C         |           o  
>>10/12 | x    P                    B              C           |         o    
>>10/13 |  x   P                    B             C            |        o     
>>10/14 | x     P                    B           C             |      o       
>>10/15 |x        P                B              C            |         o    

>I did a little mental curve fitting to these trends,
>and it looks like Perot will overtake Bush in about
>ten days.

Just curious -- if you used the same algorithm to fit a curve to
yesterday's data, when would Bush overtake Clinton?  My guess is right
about election time :-).

>Hee hee.  Lies, damn lies, statistics, geometry, ...

And opinion polls, the worst of the bunch :-).
--
_______________________________________________________________________________

Brian Yamauchi			Case Western Reserve University
yamauchi@alpha.ces.cwru.edu	Department of Computer Engineering and Science
_______________________________________________________________________________

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.mideast
From: bill@cognet.ucla.edu (William M. Eldridge)
Subject: Re: George Bush's New World Order
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1992 01:41:26 GMT

eggertj@moses.atc.ll.mit.edu (Jim Eggert x6127 g41) writes:
KKK

>You haven't convinced me that military intervention in Bosnia would
>accomplish anything.  First you have to argue that the present
>situation in Bosnia is deplorable (you have done that).  Then you have
>to argue that US intervention in Bosnia would necessarily improve the
>situation there more than it would hurt the situtation for US troops.
>This you have not done.

>You have to be careful not to confuse the desirable with the feasible.

>--

Everything has to cross the river between Serbia and Bosnia.
Bomb every bridge out, and bomb every boat of worthwhile size,
and
    hey!  where did all the supplies go?

Bomb from up high - I don't think the Serb air threat is too difficult
for us to counter.  If it is, good practice.
-- 
{{{{ bill eldridge                                       x                }}}}
{{{{ bill@cognet.ucla.edu    310-206-3960               xxx              }}}}
{{{{ ~more, ~better, ~faster [80's motto]                x              }}}}
{{{{ ~hot, ~toxic, and ~shallow [90's motto]                              }}}}
From: mcmanus@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Pat McManus)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Perot Mixed Line?
Date: 12 Oct 1992 02:26:29 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigwpi.wpi.edu

Hey I just voted in my first election! Pretty good feeling too, I must
admit. But I do have a thought/question on the ballot to share.

1] I thought Perot made a serious effor (and a successful one) to keep any
'hangers on' off his line on the ballot. While it said he ran with no
party affiliation (as opposed to independent) many others shared the same
line. (The New Alliance Party, the Common Sense Party, and another
Independent.) This is the only mixed party line on the ballot. The Dems,
Reps, LPers, Liberals, RTlers... etc all got their own lines. The ballot
was from Onondaga County NY if that helps at all.

Any relevant clarifying remarks would be appreciated. Thanks!


-- 
Pat McManus     | Internet: mcmanus@wpi.wpi.edu | Fido: Pat.McManus 1:2608/25
Marrou/Lord '92 |  Govern less, govern better.. | Worcester Polytech CS '96
<< Let me spend MY OWN tax dollars, I'm a better shopper than Uncle Sam. >> 
VOTE! If you don't vote vote you can't complain. 23 days until election!
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:15644 alt.politics.clinton:9092
From: mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov (Richard Mulac)
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center [Cleveland, Ohio]
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 1992 01:58:33 GMT

In article <H3XqsB1w164w@cellar.org> kml@cellar.org (Scott Tiger) writes:
>jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger) writes:
>
>> In article <1992Oct14.163501.4938@ornl.gov> de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill) writes:
>> >In article <1992Oct14.150845.10882@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>, Cessna@kn5f.jsc.nasa.g
>> 
>> >>Gore did vote for the Carribean Basin Initiative according to his own 
>> >>campaign manager.  To be fair, Quayle voted for it in 1983, but it was a 
>> >>somewhat different program back then and had wide Democratic support.  So 
>> >>Gore effectively lied.  (Quayle was never asked if he voted for it.)
>> 
>> >CNN reported this morning that Gore voted against final approval of the
>> >bill, or words to that effect.  So, although he might have at one time
>> >supported an earlier version of it (they didn't say), in the vote that
>> >counted he voted against it.  Gore was right.
>> 
>> When the bill was incorporated into a larger package he voted for it.
>> This was reported on ``Nightline''
>> 
>
>BZZZZZTTT!!!!  Gore voted against it when he was a congressman.  When
>it came a year or so ago, the continued funding for the project was
>bundled into an omnibus bill, which passed the Senate 92-0.  

BZZZZZTTT!!!! BZZZZZTTT!!!! So as I said before, Gore lacked the backbone
to stand up and amend the bill, swallowed his principles, and voted for a
bill which "funded the export of American jobs out of the country".  What a
patriot!  I wonder what special interest wanted that bill passed to get him
to stab those poor people in Decatur, Tennesee in the back. {:^)

-- 
Richard Mulac                                     mulac@daystrom.lerc.nasa.gov
NASA Lewis Research Center, 21000 Brookpark Road, MS 5-9, Cleveland, OH  44135
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        "There's a simple explanation for all           | These pontifications
              of this." - Bill Clinton                  |      are my own!
From: JCT3@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: VP debates
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:52:20 GMT
 <ISBELL.92Oct13210923@panther.ai.mit.edu> <1bhmacINN9ki@fido.asd.sgi.com>
Organization: Penn State University

RE:  Quayle's charge on Gore & Abortion

It's important to remember what the question was and Quayle and Gore
said.  Gore stated that he was pro-choice, period.  Quayle said that
Gore had voted against federal funding for abortion clinics.  Even
if I give Dan the benefit of the doubt and assume that he got the
facts correct (for a change :) ), the two issues are NOT synonymous.

There may have been something about the bill itslef that Gore objected
to, rather than the principle.  In any event, it was another example
of Quayle swinging blindly, praying for a hit.  I wish Gore had
responded to this one, though.


Jim Thomas
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr)
Subject: Agnew (was: Bush cowardice? I think not)
Organization: Northeastern Law, Class of '93
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 12:20:37 GMT


In article <1728300006@igc.apc.org>, 
Gordon O. Perkins <gperkins@igc.apc.org> said:

> Oh, and don;t forget the many men of peace, like Rev Billy Graham,
> who counseled Nixon to drop atomic weapons, and Agnew, a true
> patriot who left office "nolo contendre" (no contest) for taking
> bribes while sitting on his patriotic ass in the VP office!

Technical correction: the charges against Agnew regarded his conduct
in his pre-VP days as Governor of Maryland.  There were no charges or
allegations of law-breaking by Agnew while he was VP.

-- William December Starr <wdstarr@athena.mit.edu>
From: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the First Debate
Date: 12 Oct 1992 15:07:03 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: dxc4@po.CWRU.Edu (David Condon)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, matt@physics.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern) says:

>In article <1992Oct12.053058.14591@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@quads.uchicago.edu (Citecheck Hell) writes:
>
>> That was one good thing to come out of the debate.  Bush looked silly
>> attacking Clinton on the British Vietnam protest (especially when he
>> himself criticized Vietnam later in the debate).
>
>I noticed that too.  Clinton said in 1969 that the Vietnam War was
>wrong; Bush said in 1992 that the Vietnam War was wrong.  Bush
>attacked Clinton for making a "mistake" in 1969, but it's not clear
>just what that "mistake" was.  If the war was wrong, what was wrong
>with Clinton saying so?

I think the phrase "we learned the lessons of Vietnam" means something
completely different to Bush and his right wing buddies than it does to
the rest of us. To the antiwar left in the sixties (and I don't know if
this was Clinton's view) it means: "Don't align the US with a brutal,
corrupt, unpopular government against popular nationalists who also happen
to be communists, because of the _perceived_ geopolitical significance
of a remote region, or its possible future exploitation as a source of
cheap labor and/or resources; don't destroy the ecology of said region
with defoliants, simultaneously endangering US troops' health; don't
kill upwards of two million people to satisfy the greed of military
contractors and the wounded pride of politicians like Johnson and Nixon."

To Bush and crew, it's more like: "Finish the 'job' using whatever means
necessary, including muzzling the press so no one has any idea of how bad
it is."
-- 
"In universities, it is forbidden     |  "Personally, my politics are so far
to teach nonsense. But the _history_  |  to the right, I consider Paul Revere
of nonsense -- that's scholarship!"   |  to be a pinko."
               -- Saul Lieberman      |                 -- Tom Grundner
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: pat@news.gsfc.nasa.gov (patrick m. ryan)
Subject: Election '92 Drinking Game
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 13:02:18 GMT


I've started the bare bones of a drinking game for this
election season.  Seeing as how we have 2 presidential
debates left, this might prove useful.  Please append
your own rules.


One drink each for:


Clinton says anything about "change."

Bush says anything about "trust."

Perot talks about forming a committee.

Clinton swings his hand around like he's holding a pen.

Bush moves his hands around like he's describing a woman's figure.

Quayle does his karate-chop hand motion.

Gore looks like he's about to open up his shirt and reveal
	a Superman costume.

Someone interviews Mary Matalin after a debate.

Bush says "Tax and spend."

Bush says "Gridlock Congress."

Clinton says, "Investment tax credit."


--
"I have a cunning plan." -- Baldric
                                                             patrick m. ryan
     nasa / goddard space flight center / oceans and ice branch / hughes stx
                     pat@jaameri.gsfc.nasa.gov / zmpmr@charney.gsfc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: watanabe@milton.cs.uiuc.edu (Larry Watanabe)
Subject: Re: Presidential debates #2
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 21:36:42 GMT

anwar+@cs.cmu.edu (Anwar Mohammed) writes:

>but think of the actual questions.  The question didn't make sense:
>"How has the debt (or deficit?) affected you?".  It hasn't affected
>*anyone* yet.  Bush, somewhat astutely, pointed that out by saying that
>it will affect his grandchildren.  (So did Perot.)  Clinton modified the
>question to be "How has the recession affected you?".  Of course, it
>didn't affect him either.  But he managed to concoct some homey story 
>about some couple he met on his travels around the country.

The woman who asked the question said that it had affected her
because her friends were out of work etc.

So, I think it was quite correct of Clinton to assume that
she meant the recession, not the deficit (if we assume that
the deficit has not yet affected anyone, and it has been 
the recession that caused the unemployment of her friends).

This follow's standard conversational maxims about addressing
the goals and intentions of the speaker -- i.e. when someone
asks you 'would you pass the salt?', you don't answer "yes"
or "no", what you do is pass the salt.

Clinton pointed out that the recession
had affected him in a similar way, that he also knew and
was friends with people who were out of work etc. because 
of the recession.

-Larry Watanabe

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,sci.med,talk.bizarre
From: carl@aoa.aoa.utc.com (Carl Witthoft)
Subject: Re: Doctor Comments on Shrinking Bush Penis
Organization: Adaptive Optics Associates
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 11:32:46 GMT

In article <55.X666X@ramona.com> doug@ramona.com (Double Agent) writes:
>Washington, DC (AP) - Dr. James Gilroy, personal physician to President
>George Bush, denied today that there was anything unusual about Bush's
>apparently shrinking penis. Bush's penis was measured at 33 millimeters
x
(Too late to stop this boneheaded fool from posting.. sigh)
Look, will you please get the message?  There is nothing here
even remotely of interest to *.politics or sci.med.
Please THINK (I know it's hard) before flaunting yourself all
over the net.

And will everyone else please edt the followup-to line before
continuing this thread.
Thank you.


-- 
Carl Witthoft @ Adaptive Optics Associates
aoa!carl@bbn.com  carl@aoa.utc.com
54 CambridgePark Drive, Cambridge,MA 02140 617-864-0201
"My Karma just ran over my Dogma!"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: Bush cowardice? I think not (RE More Bush Cowardice)
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 13:00:13 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

vsg001@acad.drake.edu writes:

: > Here's one for you: how can we look up to a president that doesn't 
: >respect the freedom of religion that this country was born of?
: Find me one quote where Bush has condemned any other religion and I will. We
: should be a little more factual.

How about the oft-reported quote, picked up by AP, UPI, and the Big Four's
news reporters, where Bush says that the US is "One Nation Under God,"
and that atheists have no business being citizens?

He certainly wasn't supporting the atheists' freedom of [the lack of]
religion when he made that comment.

--
Michael Adams (aka StarOwl)	 		"Republicans understand the
Internet:  StarOwl@uiuc.edu			 importance of bondage between
Bitnet:    FREE1217@UIUCVMD			 parent and child."
Anonymous: wi.5467@n7kbt.rain.com			-- Dan Quayle
UUCP:      ...!uiucuxc!uiuc.edu!StarOwl                                    

Marrou/Lord in '92
From: turney@kenyon.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Perot Dies in VP Debate
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:01:20 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Kenyon College

In article <4er9n6W00iV0M6geBF@andrew.cmu.edu>, Thomas Oligino <to0b+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>> 
>>>Stockdale, a thoroughly likable and respect-worthy individual, would
>>>not be a credible candidate for county assessor, let alone VP.  He
>>>was, though, an invaluable contribution to the event, showing how
>>>plastic one has to become to succeed in national politics.
>> 
>>Since when does a gift for public speaking qualify one for VP?  I can 
>>think of about a thousand other qualities I'd rather have in a 
>>candidate.  The guy was in the spotlight before a couple hundred 
>>million people for the first time in his life.  Give him a break.
> 
> 
> Sorry, when your running for vice preseident you don't get any breaks.
> The man is not qualified to be president so he's not qualified to be VP
> either. I really would rather not have a tired old man unready to face
> the challenges of leadership one haert break away from being Commander
> and Chief. 
>  
>  
> 
Stockdale, throughout his life, has shown courage and leadership far beyond
what is required presidents or vice presidents.  That courage and leadership
does not go away with age.  It only gets stronger. 

The "tired old man" comment is a exibition of youthful ignorance and arrogance.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,tx.politics
From: shaffer@achilles.ctd.anl.gov (Michael A. Shaffer)
Subject: Re: The end of the Reagan Era
Organization: Argonne National Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 16:58:43 GMT

What does the tx in tx.politics stand for?

In article <1992Oct15.060138.887@europa.lonestar.org>, tom@europa.lonestar.org (Tom Kimball) writes:
|> 
|> The Reagan era will soon bite the dust.  Unfortunately, the debt left 
|> behind because of the Voodoo Economics practiced in the last 12 years 
|> will not.  It turns out that one thing even worse than the "tax and 
|> spend" policies we had in the 1970's is the "borrow and spend" 
|> policies of the 1980's and 1990's.  Frankly, it makes me mad to 
|> realize that I will be paying HIGHER TAXES FOR THE REST OF MY LIFE to 
|> make up for the debt run up in the years 1981-1992.  Also irritating 
|> is the realization that the quadrupleing of the national debt that 
|> occurred under Reagan and Bush's watch is now so massive it is has 
|> become the country's 2nd biggest threat to the national security. 
|> 
|> -- 
|> Tom Kimball  			tom@europa.lerctr.org    
|> tom@europa.lonestar.org		tom%europa@egsner.cirr.com

To be fair deficit spending goes all the way back at least to FDR. I think
that what we are seeing is a compounding effect. No matter which of the
officially sanctioned parties is in power we are bound to see larger and
larger deficits. The only hope I see is that angry tax payers will get
angry enough to vote libertarian. The Republicrats will start listening
when they start losing significant numbers of votes. Their jobs are too
lucrative to be motivated by any other factor.

Just my $2.63 - inflation you know.

				mike
From: strat@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Davis)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Dan Quayle Should Be President
Date: 14 Oct 1992 23:20:14 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

pjm@cshl.org (Pat Monardo) writes:

>it was not difficult to picture him
>locked in some room muttering:

>	you cant trust him
>	you just cant trust him
>	he pulled a Clinton, that's what he did
>	he hasn't leveled with the people
>	he has to come clean
>	he has to come clean

Oh, and don't forget:

	that sounds too much like an issue, I want to talk about ...
	personal liberty is irrelavant
	free wills will be assimilated
	resistance is futile
	exterminate
	Exterminate!
	EXTERMINATE!

	E-X-T-E-R-M-I-N-A-T-E-!-!-!

Stratocaster
-- 
	   Steve Davis (I'm a student, not a spokesperson!)
      strat@cis.ksu.edu - Kansas State University - Manhattan KS
				   
There are no monks in my band.  There are no saints in this land. - RHCP
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:15671 talk.politics.misc:50343 alt.conspiracy:11080 sci.skeptic:17680
From: spl@pitstop.ucsd.edu (Steve Lamont)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,alt.conspiracy,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: WHERE WAS BILL???
Date: 8 Oct 1992 21:04:05 GMT
Organization: University of Calif., San Diego/Microscopy and Imaging Resource
NNTP-Posting-Host: pitstop.ucsd.edu

In article <1992Oct8.203748.6703@u.washington.edu> sieferme@milton.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>In article <56.X666X@ramona.com> doug@ramona.com (Double Agent) writes:
>>Washington, DC (AP) - Mary Matalin, designated Bush campaign attack-bitch,
>>followed up recent charges related to Democratic presidential candidate Bill
>>Clinton's secret meetings in Moscow with high-ranking officers of the KGB by
>>demanding to know why Clinton has no alibi for November 22, 1963, the date
>>of President Kennedy's assassination. Asked Matalin, "why won't Bill Clinton
>>come clean with the American people?"
>
>Wow!  Good question!  Come to think of it:  Bill Clinton,
>where were you on July 30, 1976, the day my stereo 
>was stolen?  Come Clean!!

Yeah!  And my car was stolen the evening of December 10, 1987.  Where
was Bill?  Or George, for that matter?  Or Rush Limbaugh?  Or Dan
Quayle?  These people have something to answer for.  I'm beginning to
smell a conspiracy.

Or maybe I'm just beginning to smell.  Damned wimpy deodorant.

							spl
-- 
Steve Lamont, SciViGuy -- (619) 534-7968 -- spl@szechuan.ucsd.edu
UCSD Microscopy and Imaging Resource/UCSD Med School/La Jolla, CA 92093-0608
"Twit twit twit/Jug jug jug jug jug jug/So rudely forc'd./Tereu"
                - T. S. Eliot, "The Waste Land," III. The Fire Sermon
From: Gordon O. Perkins <gperkins@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Date: 12 Oct 92 17:47 PDT
Subject: Re: Bush cowardice? I think not (RE
Nf-ID: #R:1992Oct2.133512.1@acad.drake.edu:-136852790:cdp:1728300005:000:296
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!gperkins    Oct 12 17:47:00 1992


I I look at the insides of my computer, I see the panoply of the
market economy - Thailand, Malaysia, El Salvador, Mexico, Singapore.
Had "we" won Vietnam, we could be shipping jobs there too!
Regarding the WAR, some people had the guts to look for the switch to 
trun off the damn meat-grinder!