HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dlo@druwa.ATT.COM (OlsonDL)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: VP debates
Date: 14 Oct 92 15:28:55 GMT

In article <ISBELL.92Oct13210923@panther.ai.mit.edu>, isbell@ai.mit.edu (Charles L Isbell) writes:
} Same note to apl as before.  Note followups.
} 
} Well, these debates are much harder to grade.
} 
} Adm Stockdale:
} 	hit a few populist lines
} 	seemed a bit out of there--kept walking away from his podium
} 	utterly in the backdrop  between Gore and Quayle
} 
} Quayle:
} 	didn't fumble overmuch or misspell any words
} 	hammered away at Clinton's character & tax/spend
} 	ignored economy, really
} 	seemed belligerent, but that may be good considering that most
} 		of country thinks of him as a buffoon--this may be
} 		seen as forceful and commanding
} 
} Gore:
} 	tried to neutralize character issue, didn't really succeed
} 	hammered away at economic record, scored a few points
} 	seemed overrehearsed?
} 
} Who wins?  Well, it depends.  Will the character issue resonate more
} than the economic issue?  If so, Quayle & Bush won.  If the economy
} beats the character issues and/or Gore's attacks on Bush's character
} resonate enough to stalemate, Gore & Clinton win.

I sorta had the same impressions.

Stockdale got in some good one-liners, and I liked his honesty when
he said, "I'm out of ammunition!" and "I feel I'm watching a ping-pong
match!".  I liked his coming right to the point when he said, "I think
America is seeing why this nation is in gridlock!" and "I think a woman
has a right to do with her own body what she wants.  PERIOD!".  But
overall he looked overwhelmed.

Quayle and Gore both got in some jabs.  Both tried to avoid answering
some tough questions.  Both were defensive at times.  Both used misleading
statements.  For some people, Quayle was agressive; for others he was
shrill and desparate.  Some said that Gore was cool; others called him
wooden and smarmy.  So in absolute terms, I thought the debate was pretty
much of a wash between them.

But I think Quayle beat the point spread.  Gore was expected to mop the
floor with him, and that just did not happen.

It was certainly a lot more fun to watch than the one on Sunday.
--
David Olson            dlo@drutx.att.com
"The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they
can bribe the people with their own money."  Alexis de Tocqueville
From: strat@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Davis)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: At this very moment ...
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:16:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao) writes:

>  And I bet most voters will have the ability to see through the real matter
>at issue here. 

Don't count on it.  I've seen plenty of people at this college fall
for the "Gray Dot Ad" hook-line-and-sinker.  It's amazing how little
information it takes for people to think they know something. 

Stratocaster
-- 
	   Steve Davis (I'm a student, not a spokesperson!)
      strat@cis.ksu.edu - Kansas State University - Manhattan KS
				   
The "War on Pot" makes Cocain look like an economical high.  Brilliant.
From: shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: Bob Dornan on Bill Clinton - Important
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:48:35 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

detrolio@andromeda.rutgers.edu (David De Trolio) writes:


>     Your can either ask for Rep. Dornan's office or staff, or attempt
>to reach your own.  This information must be presented to the American
>public, and the events which occurred there must be researched and
>addressed by Bill Clinton.

By now you must know that Bill Clinton addressed this on Larry King
on Monday night.  When asked about both items, he cracked up laughing.
He said that he doesn't know where those ideas came from an he doesn't
know anything about it.  He said he took a 40 day trip into
Eastern Europe and if he did meet any of the KGB, he wasn't aware of
it.  Clinton and King were joking that it is possible to meet KGB
and not be aware that that is who they are.  He said he never attempted
to change his citizenship or even thought about it. 

I don't see why Clinton has to waste his time chasing every bone that
every jackass throws.  Someone makes up a story about him and he's
expected to bend over backwards to proove that it isn't true.
What a crock.  I think he has more important things to do with his time.

-- 
Susan R. Hagan (shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu) 
Publications Coordinator - User Services
Rutgers University Computing Services
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:16008 alt.politics.clinton:9607
From: ehorne@zeus.calpoly.edu (Eric T Horne)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: 1992 REPUBLICAN PLATFORM (1/5)
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content
Date: 9 Oct 92 02:15:44 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

I was wondering if someone would be willing to either email me or tell
me where I can get a copy of each party's platforms. 

Appriciate any help!

-Eric
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton
From: aws@iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer)
Subject: Re: WHAT GORE REALLY SAYS in his book
Organization: Evil Geniuses for a Better Tomorrow
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 19:23:58 GMT

In article <92289.142108JFL4@psuvm.psu.edu> <JFL4@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>Dunno.  Guess I'd rather it went to that than right-wing death squads.

FYI, in 1980 the Carter Administration was supplying foreign aid and
weapons to El Salvador. At that time the death squads where killing
several thousand per month. Under the Reagan Administration that
number dropped by over an order of magnigude. Under the Bush Administration,
the civil war ended.

  Allen

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Allen W. Sherzer | "A great man is one who does nothing but leaves        |
|  aws@iti.org     |  nothing undone"                                       |
+----------------------192 DAYS TO FIRST FLIGHT OF DCX----------------------+
From: atfurman@cup.portal.com (A T Furman)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
Subject: Re: DAN QUAYLE DRUG SCANDAL COVER-UP?
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 13:24:14 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

>Fri. night, 10/09/92, 7pm, on CNN news, 20 min. Lead Story:
>
>DAN QUAYLE DRUG SCANDAL COVER-UP
>
>Complete story w/ tapes, transcripts, and witness;
>Tapes and evidence pointed straight up to the Justice Dept. and James Baker;
>Tapes were gotten by CNN thru the Freedom of Information Act.

Gad.  Maybe there really is a Tooth Fairy after all.


    Alan T. Furman         | VOTE LIBERTARIAN!!  Marrou/Lord in 92!!
---------------------------+----------------------------------------
  atfurman@cup.portal.com  |   (800)682-1776 for more information
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: rdetweil@boi.hp.com (Richard Detweiler)
Subject: New Idaho Poll: Canary sings "God Bless America"; retorts "The rumors of my demise were greatly exaggerated."
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 14:50:30 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard - Boise Printer Division


The latest Idaho statewide poll shows some backsliding toward the
GOP.  604 voters were polled (sorry, don't know about likely voters or
registered, etc.) between Sept. 30 and Oct. 3.

	Bush:		38%
	Clinton:	33%
	Perot:		17%
	Und/Other:	12%

	Margin of Error: 4%


Another poll is scheduled for two weeks from now after the debates.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc,alt.fan.dan-quayle,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.drugs,alt.fan.dave_barry,alt.fan.howard-stern,alt.fan.monty-python,talk.politics.guns
From: tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: SPRINGTIME FOR THE BUSHMAN
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 22:22:15 GMT

In article <60.X666X@ramona.com> doug@ramona.com (Double Agent) writes:
>Atlanta, TN (AP) - The strenuous 1992 campaign for President appears to
              ^^
>be taking a toll on some of its participants. Challenger Bill Clinton is
>struggling to keep his overworked voice intact; President George Bush
>suffers from occasional mild hallucinations that his doctors report as a
>side-effect of the self-administered heart medicine, Righteouscil (tm).
>Others appear to be under the influence of nothing worse than a garden
>variety case of jittery nerves. For example, witness this testy exchange
>between reporters and designated Republican attack-bitch, Mary Matalin:
                                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^

Did the AP story actually say "attack-bitch" or are you misquoting them?

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot
From: korman@seas.gwu.edu (John Korman)
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 16:53:45 GMT

In article <14OCT199214233787@mars.lerc.nasa.gov> fssue@mars.lerc.nasa.gov (Sue Simonyi) writes:
>
>Anyway... I have a hard time seeing anything genuine in Bill Clinton.
>

I agree with you. He is somewhat like the younger version of Bush.

>I like the phrase Dan Q. used last night "You are pulling a Clinton".

Another phrase that I like is:

CAUTION: SLIPPERY WHEN CLINTON.


John
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections
From: bill@cognet.ucla.edu (William M. Eldridge)
Subject: Re: Lemmings and Sheep
Organization: UCLA Cognitive Science Research Program
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 20:38:46 GMT

Forgot to mention that Truman was a traitor who
cost countless lives by sucking up to Stalin, and
then later be playing into Mao's hands, condemning
East Europe to fifty years of bacwardness and suffering
and North Korea to its present condition.

Just in case anyone thought that Truman (or JFK)
deserved respect, as the load of references this
campaign season seem to imply).

-- 
{{{{ 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]                              }}}}
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:16232 talk.politics.misc:51095
From: niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: RHETORIC VS. REALITY -- THE FIRST DEBATE
Date: 12 Oct 92 17:23:32 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@nimaster

In article <1992Oct12.151015.6902@athena.mit.edu> wdstarr@athena.mit.edu (William December Starr) writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.113013.21469@midway.uchicago.edu> sug6@amber.uchicago.edu (Patrick Sugent) said:

>> 300.3115@compuserve.com (Clinton for President) writes:

>> [ * * * ]

>> I didn't read any farther than this first statement.  Of course, one
>> wonders why I read this far. :-)

>> Citizens for Tax Justice is an arm of the Clinton campaign.  Don't
>> let its name fool you.  Remember Brown's complaints about the same thing?

>Using a neutral organization name to hide behind is an ancient
>political practice which, imho, sucks big hairy rocks.  Assuming
>Patrick's reporting is accurate, shame on Clinton's people for doing
>this... but at least I have to give credit to whoever manages the
>300.3115@compuserve.com account for putting an honest identifier/
>disclaimer in the "username" field.

Well, his reporting isn't accurate.  At least not in the sense you're
talking about.  It's not one of those "organizations" that are run by
campaign staff out of the same office as the campaign with the same
phone number and just a different PO Box.

CTJ seems to have been very pro-Clinton to start with, and there were some
people who used to work for CTJ who now work for Clinton, but it IS an
independent organization.  It's just that the people running it come
from the same centrist wing of the Democratic party as Clinton, so they
tend to have the same general ideology as he does.  This makes them
naturally sympathetic to Clinton, but they aren't an "arm of the Clinton
campaign."

[Bush supporters are getting really desperate when they have to start
quoting Jerry Brown for support.  :)]


-- 
David M. Nieporent   | Orioles 1993 World Series Champions
niepornt@phoenix.    | Mike Mussina 1992 AL Cy Young Winner
   princeton.edu     | Roland Hemond: SIGN BARRY BONDS!!!!!!!!
Vote Clinton/Gore '92.   Four more weeks!!!   		"Bloody urine"
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot
From: prabhak@giga.cs.umn.edu (Satya Prabhakar)
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 22:02:43 GMT

> Hah.  The Bush administration has gutted the Clean Air act, I'm surprised
> Gore didn't take advantage of Quayle's head being put squarely on the block
> on this issue.  Bush is being sued by Rep. Waxman, whose subcommittee

Either I am talented enough to become a debate coacher or speech writer, or
Gore did not prepare well enough for the debate with enough put-him-on-the-
spotters for Quayle:

Gore to Quayle: If a bill that bans abortions in all cases is hung 50-50
                in the Senate, which way would you vote to break the tie?

Gore to Quayle: If you think the Council on Competitiveness is fair, will you
                release all the minutes of its meetings?

Gore to Quayle: If you are elected and a Democratic congresss still is staring
                in your face, what would you do differently to break the
  		gridlock?

Gore to Quayle: You speak about family values. What have you done for family
		values in the last four years as vice-president?

Satya Prabhakar

Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
From: de5@ORNL.GOV (Dave Sill)
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won (NOT!)
Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab, Oak Ridge, TN
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 13:59:40 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.032910.17107@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>
>I disagree.  If nothing else, Quayle shed his caught-in-the-headlights
>aura when he came out with guns blazing.  Yes, he made an ass out of
>himself at times,

Oh, I get it.  Quayle didn't thoroughly blow it, so he won?  I'm sorry, but I
don't think performance relative to expectations is what counts--it's
absolute performance.  By that measure, Quayle lost big.  He lied frequently.
He was immature.  He spent 90%+ of his time attacking Clinton/Gore (probably
because he had little positive to say about Bush/Quayle).

>As you noted, Gore was too rehearsed.

I disagree.  He was well-prepared and maintained his composure.  He didn't
feign spontaneity (unsuccessfully) like Quayle did.  In my opinion it's not
possible to be over-prepared for a debate (or presidency/vice presidency).

>Quayle left openings that should have been exploited.  They weren't. 
>Falling back on pre-planned speeches was not a way for Gore to win.

Gore could perhaps have exploited some openings he missed, but the same goes
for Quayle and Stockton.  So he's not perfect.  Big deal.  Listen to what the
candidates said, not their presentation, and evaluate the truth of their
claims, and Gore clearly is the winner.

And, no, I'm not a Clinton supporter.  I'm voting for Marrou.  Too bad Nancy
Lord wasn't there.

Some people are suprised Marrou/Lord weren't invited to the debates.  To me,
it's obvious why they weren't: they'd steal the show and threaten the
Dem/Rep strangelhold.  It's a bit more of a mystery that Perot was invited,
though--perhaps he's not considered a serious threat.

-- 
Dave Sill (de5@ornl.gov)           For every Bill Joy there is a Kirk McKusick.
Martin Marietta Energy Systems     For every Bill Gates there is a Richard
Workstation Support                Stallman.                     --Paul Graham
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,talk.politics.misc
From: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Subject: Re: THE CLINTON DOCTRINE
Reply-To: egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:14:44 GMT

In article <1992Oct8.042301.22431@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
>In article <1992Oct7.205400.27531@news.columbia.edu>, egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
>|> 
>|> Just putting up Mr. Rosenthal's opinions, laddie.
>
>And the "Bullshit" was directed at his opinions, old timer. :-)

I'm relieved :-)

>
>|> Anyway, I've seen the "democracies don't go to war with each other" claim
>|> made a number of times, and I haven't seen a refutation yet.
>
>I can't think of any two communist nations which warred with each other
>either....

China and the Soviet Union.  China and Vietnam.  Mostly border
skirmishes, but they don't (or didn't, rather) like each other a whole
lot.  (Actually, I've seen an old wargame from around the early '70s
simulating a hot war in Manchuria between the USSR and PRC.)

--
"Moors."  "Moops."  "Moors."  "Moops."
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:15660 alt.politics.clinton:9106 alt.politics.bush:8209
From: pdchapin@unix.amherst.edu (PAUL D CHAPIN)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush
Subject: Re: Bush cowardice? I think not (RE More Bush Cowardice)
Date: 8 Oct 92 17:32:17 GMT
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

I'm always fascinated how discussions of Vietnam end up as arguements about
who holds the moral high ground; who was a coward; who supported the "good".
Let's get this straight.  I didn't want to go to Vietnam for one obvious
reason.

THERE WAS NOTHING THERE WORTH DYING FOR.

My country was not threatened.  My family was not threatened.  My way of life
was not threatened.  If they were, they would have been in trouble when
Vietnam fell, but they all carried on just fine.

Which group of Vietnamese were the good guys?  It looked to me mostly like
two bunch of thugs fighting over the right to rape the peasants.  But what
about the Vietnamese dying while trying to stop communist aggression, you ask.
Better them than me.

What I really resent in Dan Quayle's father's newspaper supporting sending
Americans to die in southeast asia while Danny boy is busy protecting
Indiana.  I assume the paper must be castigating the VP for cowardice.
Personally, I don't blame him for joining the guard.  Most of the people
I knew in the service would have loved to have found that out. I give Bill
Clinton credit for being smart enough to find a legal, if complex, way of
avoiding getting shot at.



Another Vietnam-era veteran for Clinton
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.perot,alt.politics.marrou
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: THE CLINTON DOCTRINE
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 00:20:08 GMT
Keywords: significant words from a document used as an index to content

niepornt@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Marc Nieporent) writes:
: helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
: >egl1@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Elizabeth G. Levy) writes:
: 
: >|> Democracies do not go to war with one another.
: 
: >Bullshit.
: 
: Really?  Name two democracies that went to war with one another.  *Real*
: democracies, not places where people could vote for the winner like the 
: ex-Soviet Union.

Are there two *real* democracies in the world?

--
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



Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:16804 alt.politics.bush:9165 alt.politics.clinton:10428 alt.politics.perot:2151
From: jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.perot
Subject: Re: Vice Shrub won
Date: 14 Oct 92 19:07:46 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.elections
Organization: Boston University Physics Department

In article <14OCT199214233787@mars.lerc.nasa.gov> fssue@mars.lerc.nasa.gov (Sue Simonyi) writes:

>... I am trying 
>hard to see something genuine about Clinton...  The man is a puppet, being
>manipulated by many strings.  He could not stand on an issue on his own, he'd
>fall just like that puppet does once the strings are let go.  Personally it
>scares me that the two men Clinton and Gore might get into the whitehouse.  You
>think we got problems now ..... wait till they get in... You won't know if
>youre coming or going... if Willy keeps on with his wishy-washy stands he takes
>on issues. 


I agree, and I'd die to see exactly how much each of the special-interest
groups contributed to his campaign. Anyone have these figures?



Gregg


-- 
Gregg Jaeger    (jaeger@buphy.bu.edu)          VOTE PEROT  VOTE PEROT       
If you think the Republicans screwed up the country, can you afford to
see what the Democrats will do?!   ->BEWARE OF SLICK-WILLY CLINTON!!<-
Xref: sparky alt.politics.elections:17308 talk.politics.misc:52456
From: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Stockdale NAILED it!
Date: 16 Oct 92 16:32:45 GMT
Reply-To: mpolen@suntory.mti.sgi.com (Mike Polen)
Organization: Mips Technologies, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: suntory.mti.sgi.com

Stephen Tice) writes:
|> John Locke) writes...
|> >mpye@netcom.com (Michael Pye) writes:
|> > 
|> >>   If Stockdale can find the resources to survive and lead for seven 
|> >> years in a POW camp in North Vietnam, he can surely find the 
|> >> resources to be vice president, or even president for that matter.
|> > 
|> >What makes you think he wants to be vice president, or even president?
|> 
|> To quote Admiral Stockdale from one of his writings, "Education for
|> Leadership and Survival" from _The Ethics of Citizenship_:
|> 
|> 	At its best, citizenship finds an equilibrium between
|> 	two essential ingredients -- that of rights and that
|> 	of duties.
|> 
|> and later in the piece he quotes Job:
|> 
|> 	Why me... Why *not* me?   [His italics]
|> 
|> Note very similar to his opening the other night,
|> 
|> 	Who am I? And why am I here?
|> 
|> No simple break-the-ice comment coming from 
|> one so well versed in philosophy and blessed with
|> a full experience of life.
|> 
|> This man will rise to meet any challenge.
|> 
|> So once again for James Stockdale -- duty calls.	           
|> 
Wishful thinking, at best.  The only call Stockdale has received
is to try to give Perot's candidacy some credibility.  At that he
has failed.
-- 
These opinions are usually my own, sometimes my dog's,
occasionaly my (grown) children's, never my employer's.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.elections