HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Date: 15 Apr 1992 19:07:25 GMT
Organization: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc.
Distribution: ne
NNTP-Posting-Host: spcsun25.bbn.com

In article <GORDON.92Apr14201138@lugh.think.com>, gordon@lugh.think.com (gordon linoff) writes:

|> The choice between Clinton and Bush puts me personally in a
|> quandary.  I have in the past been a staunch defender of the
|> two party system.  George and Bill have forced me to
|> reconsider -- their corruption, their unwillingness to stand
|> up for individual rights, their suppression of opposition,
|> but especially the way they are foisted on us by their
|> respective party hacks. If someone could please explain why
|> I should support either Clinton or Bush, please do!


(Surprised to find himself agreeing more with Tarl Neustaetder
than with Gordon Linoff for once, Ron plunges in...)

Bill Clinton was not my favorite candidate.  My first preference
would have been Mario Cuomo; with him out of the race, my next
choice was Paul Tsongas.  Still, I don't see anything especially
odious about Clinton.   How has he "suppressed opposition" or
"been uwilling to stand up for individual rights"?  What is
"corrupt" about him?

If it's Clinton v Bush in November, or Clinton v Bush v Perot,
I'll gladly vote for Clinton in order to:
   
   - Get rid of a truly "do-nothing" president who seems to have
        no idea how to deal with a declining economy or the lack
        of a foriegn enemy
   - Move political discourse in this country back towards the center
   - Restore balance to the Supreme Court.  Harry Blackmun, author of
        Roe v Wade, is getting very old.  He's not likely to remain
        on the Court for five more years.  I want to see some justices
        appointed who respect civil liberties and privacy.
   - Break the 12-year-long stalemate between a Democratic Congress
        and a Republican President who constantly threatens to veto
        any initiaitves from the Congress
   - Return to a government that at least pays some lip service to
        the needs of the poor, the homeless, and the unemployed.
	This will raise their expectations, which will allow them
        to more effectively organize for the political changes that
        they really need, as they did in the 1960's.
   - Take some cautious steps towards a more rational health insurance
        system (though Kerrey would have been a lot better on this one)

I have some very real concerns about Clinton's views on labor 
and environmental issues, and his support of the death penalty.
But I have no doubt he's closer than Bush to my positions on most
of the things I care about.   This isn't my year for applying
Liberal Litmus Tests--ending the Bush Period of Stagnation if
more important to me.

-- 
Ron Newman		rnewman@bbn.com
From: yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Want Tsongas back in the race?  Call 422-0100
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:04:44 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <ku64c5INN37q@news.bbn.com> rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman) writes:
>Tired of mud-slinging?  Want the campaign to get back to
>a discussion of real issues?

sure, like "pander bears".

>Then call Paul Tsongas' headquarters, (617) 422-0100, and say that
>you'd like him to return to the race.  He says he's going to
>wait another day or two before making his decision.
-- 


yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu
From: jovanovic-nick@CS.YALE.EDU (Nick Jovanovic)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:58:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Apr7.195830.12877
Distribution: ne
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158

In article <ku3nscINN8up@news.bbn.com> rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman) writes:
>Could someone explain to me why anyone would ever consider
>voting for Ross Perot?  Does he have any platform other than,
>"I'm obscenely rich, and you're not" ?
>
>-- 
>Ron Newman		rnewman@bbn.com


Isn't that the ultimate proof of success in this culture?  What better
qualifications could someone have for ruler of the New World Order?
People still believe in the rags-to-riches crap, and they will vote
for him because they know that he knows the secret of the American Dream,
and they hope that he will let them in on it or at least be a part of it.

-Nick Jovanovic
From: kvk@questor.sw.stratus.com (Ken Koellner)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Date: 8 Apr 92 12:40:44 GMT
Distribution: ne
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <ku3nscINN8up@news.bbn.com> rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman) writes:
>Could someone explain to me why anyone would ever consider
>voting for Ross Perot?  Does he have any platform other than,
>"I'm obscenely rich, and you're not" ?
>

From what I've heard of him, he is extremely authoritarian.

Some examples include when he was running his company, EDS, he had all
coffee, coke, and other caffiene containing drinks removed from the
company premisis ie no coffee makers, no coke or pepsi machines.
Also, he supposedly cross-checked all the addresses of his employees
and then fired any employees that were cohabitating and weren't
married.  

He also advocated going into urban (read poor, minority)
neighborhoods, fencing them off and searching (without warrants) all
homes for drugs.

The general economic politics he talks sounds good but I think his
moral stand his really disgusting.  I don't believe any public figure
should try to inflict their morality on anyone else.  Also, the
constitution has already taken quite a beating from George.  This guy
Perot sounds like his worse.


-- 
Prohibition goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control
a man's appetite by legislation and makes crimes out of things that are not
crimes. A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our
government was founded. - Abraham Lincoln
From: tarl@sw.stratus.com (Tarl Neustaedter)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Date: 14 Apr 92 21:08:53 GMT
Distribution: ne
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Apr14.194451.27667@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, olsen@kailasa.LCS.MIT.EDU (James Olsen) writes:
> I'm disenchanted enough with Bush and Clinton to consider a that
> having a third viable candidate would be a good thing, even before
> seeing a clear platform.

Two things:

  1) Wanting someone on a ballot before seeing a clear platform, is,
     I contend, stupid. That person could always win. Think David Duke.

  2) A three way race is likely to result in three candidates who do
     not get a clear majority. As I recall, this goes to the house of
     representatives, with no further input from the voters.

Do you really want the House of Representatives, as currently constituted,
deciding who your next president will be? The result would undoubtedly be
either the candidate from the party which holds the majority of seats, or
the current speaker of the house.

The last poll I saw showed a Bush/Clinton/Perot race producing votes in
the range 40/30/20. This would mean that we would either get a president
who lost two thirds of the vote, or we would get a president who never
stood before the voters.
-- 
         Tarl Neustaedter	tarl@sw.stratus.com
         Marlboro, Mass.	Stratus Computer
Disclaimer: My employer is not responsible for my opinions.
From: drg@bubba.ma30.bull.com (Daniel R Guilderson)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: The Process of Choosing a President
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:52:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: bubba.DRG.92Apr15115238
	<kujlp2INNe6c@news.bbn.com>
	<1992Apr14.194451.27667@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>
	<2201@transfer.stratus.com> <11448@ksr.com>
Distribution: ne
Organization: Bull World Wide Information Systems, Billerica MA USA

In article <11448@ksr.com> clj@ksr.com (Chris Jones) writes:

   I predict the next time this process is used to choose a president
   will be the last time before it is supplanted by direct popular
   vote.

That would be a disaster.  The average American is too much of a moron
to make an intelligent, reasoned choice.  For instance, just look at
the current state of government.
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: tyg@HQ.Ileaf.COM (Thomas Galloway)
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Reply-To: tyg@HQ.Ileaf.COM (Thomas Galloway)
Organization: Interleaf, Inc.
Distribution: ne
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 15:04:53 GMT

In article <2201@transfer.stratus.com> tarl@sw.stratus.com (Tarl Neustaedter) writes:
> Do you really want the House of Representatives, as currently constituted,
> deciding who your next president will be? The result would undoubtedly be
> either the candidate from the party which holds the majority of seats, or
> the current speaker of the house.

Wrong on all counts. The speaker isn't eligible. It's decided among those
candidates who got electoral votes, so, for example, they can't decide to
draft Cuomo at that point.

Second, the way it works is that each *state*, not each representative,
gets one vote. So, assuming he's reelected (it's the new House which 
does the voting), Vermont's single Congresscritter (and the only Socialist
Party member in the House) gets to have as large an impact on the process
as the entire California delegation, which is normally around 10% of the
House.

So the candidate most likely to be elected is the one whose party holds
the most majorities of state delegations. Have to confess I don't know
which that'd be, although it is most likely the Democrats...but that could
change in November. Remember that the whole House stands for election.

Btw, I could have sworn I posted an account of Perot's positions as given in a
speech to the National Press Club as broadcast on WBUR a few weeks back to
either ne.politics or ne.general. Did it not get out?

tyg   tyg@hq.ileaf.com
From: jovanovic-nick@CS.YALE.EDU (Nick Jovanovic)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Date: 13 Apr 92 19:25:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1992Apr13.192516.14631
Distribution: ne
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158

In article <1992Apr13.155636.18909@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> olsen@masala.lcs.mit.edu (James Olsen) writes:
>>>(Ron Newman) Could someone explain to me why anyone would ever
>>>consider voting for Ross Perot?  Does he have any platform other
>>>than, "I'm obscenely rich, and you're not" ?
>
>>(Rich Braun) I don't get it either.  But they're active outside our
>>front door, Ron: this afternoon I was approached in front of the
>>Demoulas supermarket...  Ugh.
>
>You people seem unwilling to put Perot on the ballot unless and
>until he has persuaded you to vote for him.  While that is a valid
>approach, some of us are willing to put him on the ballot now, so
>that he'll have a chance to persuade us to vote for him later.
>--
>Jim Olsen     olsen@mit.edu


I don't conclude that at all from their comments.  It sounds to me
like they simply don't understand the attraction that so many people
are confessing.  I confess that I don't either.

-Nick Jovanovic
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Subject: Re: Tsongas in NY
Organization: insert anything here
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 18:14:11 GMT

In article <8APR92.15340155@vax.clarku.edu> cvarsa@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>It's time to band together behind Clinton and support the Democratic party.  
>More protest voting will only reinforce the image that Clinton is not the 
>right guy.  

	But (ahem) he's not.   IMHO, of course.

	That's why I'm hoping Tsongas *does* get back in the race.

BBC
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: olsen@kailasa.LCS.MIT.EDU (James Olsen)
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Organization: MIT Laboratory for Computer Science
Distribution: ne
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 19:44:51 GMT

>>(me) You people seem unwilling to put Perot on the ballot unless
>>and until he has persuaded you to vote for him.

>(Ron Newman) I didn't say that I want to prevent anyone from
>being on the ballot.

I didn't say you would.  But it seems that you won't do anything
(like sign a petition) to put him on the ballot.  And there's the
slight implication that anyone who does must be crazy.

You want something like a Perot position paper.  I do too.  But
Perot has said, basically, "get the signatures first".  I'm
disenchanted enough with Bush and Clinton to consider a that
having a third viable candidate would be a good thing, even before
seeing a clear platform.  I may or may not vote for him, but I at
least want to have the choice.
--
Jim Olsen     olsen@mit.edu
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: rlcarr@athena.mit.edu (Richard L. Carreiro)
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Organization: Digitopolitan Embassy to the US
Distribution: ne
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 19:37:22 GMT

In article <2212@transfer.stratus.com> tarl@sw.stratus.com (Tarl Neustaedter) writes:
>you wanted. You'll feel even stupider if the House of Representatives
>chooses someone yet else whom you like even less (Tom Foley? Jesse
>Jackson? Alan Cranston? Dan Quayle?).

Bzzzt!  Straw man.  Try reading the US Const.  The House would pick the pres
from the top 5 electoral vote-getters.

Also, the House would vote *by state*.  Each delegation would decide
amongst themselves who to vote for, and then the vote would be cast
as a state...each state would thus have equal representation.

--
Rich Carreiro                                    "My country, right or wrong,"
ARPA: rlcarr@athena.mit.edu                                is like
UUCP: ...!mit-eddie!mit-athena!rlcarr            "My driver, sober or drunk."
BITNET: rlcarr@athena.mit.edu      JITTLOV FOREVER!
From: rnewman@bbn.com (Ron Newman)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Date: 14 Apr 1992 20:54:48 GMT
Organization: Bolt, Beranek & Newman, Inc.
Distribution: ne
NNTP-Posting-Host: spcsun25.bbn.com

In article <1992Apr14.194451.27667@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu>, olsen@kailasa.LCS.MIT.EDU (James Olsen) writes:
|> >>(me) You people seem unwilling to put Perot on the ballot unless
|> >>and until he has persuaded you to vote for him.
|> 
|> >(Ron Newman) I didn't say that I want to prevent anyone from
|> >being on the ballot.
|> 
|> I didn't say you would.  But it seems that you won't do anything
|> (like sign a petition) to put him on the ballot.  And there's the
|> slight implication that anyone who does must be crazy.

Unlike you, I want to have SOME idea what a candidate stands
for before I'll help him or her get on the ballot. I don't have
to agree with everything the candidate says, or even with most
of it.   But indeed I won't lift a finger to help someone who
can't or won't tell me what he wants to do in office.

So if Mario Cuomo or Paul Tsongas or Ralph Nader, or for that matter
Warren Rudman or Jack Kemp, came to me with a third-party
petition tomorrow, I'd probably sign it.   They have
well-established records and positions that I can examine,
and I'm pretty sure any of them would make a positive contribution
to the debate this fall.

(On the other hand, I wouldn't sign petitions for David Duke
or Pat Buchanan or John Silber--I know enough about them, too.)

So far, I don't see Ross Perot as anything but a vehicle for 
undirected, generalized, inarticulate rage.  If he wants my
help, he'll have to prove himself worthy of it first.

-- 
Ron Newman		rnewman@bbn.com
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: eck@panix.com (Mark Eckenwiler)
Subject: Mass. redistricting, Barney Frank seat
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 00:31:03 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Witherspoon Excludables


We don't get much news here in NYC on the Commonwealth of Mass., and I
haven't been reading this group for a while; hence the following
query.

What's happening with the Mass. Cong'al seats?  My recollection is
that the census cost Mass. one seat.  At the time, there was talk that
the likely victim of redistricting would be the politically wounded
Barney Frank.  Is he running again, and if so, was his district
absorbed into others?

Apologies if this replicates recent traffic here.
-- 
When the Persians have an important decision to make, the leaders discuss it
when drunk. They revisit their decision when sober, and adopt it only if they
reach that same conclusion again.  Conversely, any decisions made in sobriety
are reconsidered in drink. {Herodotus, bk. 1}   eck@panix.com  Mark Eckenwiler
From: fitz@wang.com (Tom Fitzgerald)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Date: 16 Apr 92 02:04:06 GMT
Distribution: ne
Organization: Wang Labs, Lowell MA, USA

olsen@kailasa.LCS.MIT.EDU (James Olsen) writes:

> I would have signed a Duke nomination petition, even though I think
> he's disgusting.  To my mind, the only legitimate reason for excluding
> a candidate from the ballot is that his or her candidacy is frivolous.

There are other, better reasons to refuse to sign nomination petitions.
For one thing, elections have some real problems with measuring support.
If two candidates with popular platforms run against a candidate with a
less popular platform, the third candidate could win because the majority
vote is split between the first two.  I might refuse to sign a petition for
someone whom I thought was the second-best-qualified candidate, for this
reason (if the best-qualified was running, and electable).

And there's a real problem with getting fringe candidates like Duke, or
even Buchanan, into the debate: it poisons the atmosphere, it raises the
level of negative campaigning, it makes it harder to get the real issues
discussed, and it makes it harder to find out which of the non-extreme
candidates is really the best.  Yes, the whole electorate might rise up in
revulsion against an extremist, but then what do they do?  All they've
decided is who _not_ to vote for.

Finally, James, you seem to have a strong attitude of "if you're not with
me, you're against me".  I won't sign a petition for Perot, and won't vote
for him, because I don't think he should be president.  It has nothing to
do with "preventing other voters from being allowed to vote", as you imply.
If you can't get enough signatures from those other voters, who presumably
want to vote for him, then he just shouldn't be on the ballot.

Sigh.  If only Frank Zappa had run.....

---
Tom Fitzgerald   Wang Labs        fitz@wang.com
1-508-967-5278   Lowell MA, USA   ...!uunet!wang!fitz
From: richb@kronos.com (Rich Braun)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Date: 14 Apr 92 14:43:37 GMT
Distribution: ne
Organization: Kronos Inc. / Waltham, MA
Disclaimer: This posting is a personal opinion and not that of Kronos Inc.

olsen@masala.lcs.mit.edu (James Olsen) writes:
>|> You people seem unwilling to put Perot on the ballot unless and
>|> until he has persuaded you to vote for him.  While that is a valid
>|> approach, some of us are willing to put him on the ballot now, so
>|> that he'll have a chance to persuade us to vote for him later.

I wouldn't sign a petition for ANYONE whose views are antithetical
to my own.  On the other hand, I won't block his access to the ballot
either.  I just won't lift a finger to help him along; I already know
enough about Perot to know I'd never vote for him.

I didn't sign any nomination papers for David Duke either.  Is there
anything wrong with that?

-rich
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: mmorgan@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Michael Morgan)
Subject: What's wrong with this picture?   ;-)
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 02:27:25 GMT


Hmmm.... (headers truncated):

Article 1438 of biz.clarinet.sample:
From: clarinews@clarinet.com
Newsgroups: clari.news.politics,biz.clarinet.sample
Subject: Tsongas reassessing campaign
Date: 8 Apr 92 03:56:33 GMT


	LOWELL, MASS (UPI) -- Paul Tsongas, who suspended his campaign three
weeks ago, said Tuesday he is looking at his options following his
surprising second place showing in the New York Democratic primary.
	But the former Massachusetts governor said he would have no word on
whether he would resume active campaigning until late in the week.
	``We will have no decision until Thursday or Friday,'' Tsongas told
reporters gathered outside his Lowell home.
[....]

What's wrong with this picture??  (A minor diversion from more
serious pursuits...  ;-)   [Hint: Did Duke-Kick-Ass write this? ;=)]

Back to work...,

*-----------------------------------------------------------------*
| Michael Morgan    /\/\ /\/\    mmorgan@titan.ucc.umass.edu      |
|   Department of Communication, UMass/Amherst, MA 01003  USA     |
| Phone (413) 545-xxxx // Dept: 1311 // Office: 6345 // Fax: 6399 |
*-----------------------------------------------------------------*
Newsgroups: ne.politics
From: jovanovic-nick@CS.YALE.EDU (Nick Jovanovic)
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Organization: Yale University Computer Science Dept., New Haven, CT 06520-2158
Distribution: ne
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 18:21:08 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.132257.3952@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> olsen@kailasa.LCS.MIT.EDU (James Olsen) writes:
>richb@kronos.com (Rich Braun) writes:
>>I didn't sign any nomination papers for David Duke either.  Is there
>>anything wrong with that?
>
>I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this point.
>
>I would have signed a Duke nomination petition, even though I think
>he's disgusting.  To my mind, the only legitimate reason for excluding
>a candidate from the ballot is that his or her candidacy is frivolous.
>Any further ballot restrictions tend to subvert the democratic
>Jim Olsen     olsen@mit.edu


Why does not wanting to sign a petition for a potential candidate
equate to "excluding a candidate from the ballot" in your mind?
That distinction, and your unwillingness to accept it, is the basis
for this ongoing discussion.

While I am not going to lift a finger to get Perot onto the ballot,
neither will I lift a finger to stop others, like yourself, from
signing petitions, seeking signatures, etc. to get him there.

-Nick Jovanovic
From: dmiller@pop-tarts.ai.mit.edu (David P. Miller)
Newsgroups: ne.politics
Subject: Re: Ross Perot Petition Committee address
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:26:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: life.23364
Distribution: ne
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory


>>(On the other hand, I wouldn't sign petitions for David Duke
>>or Pat Buchanan or John Silber--I know enough about them, too.)

This is the wrong attitude. Getting David Duke onto the ballot in
Georgia and Louisiana was a great thing. It allowed everyone to see
That virtually no one wanted him for president, and kept him from
being able to cry "foul", or that certain forces were keeping his
meesage from being heard. In a all to rare show of rationality, the
electorate heard and rejected Duke's meesage. Remember, every racist,
facist, etc that gets on the ballot dillutes the voting power of those
(hopefully) fringe groups.

Now as far as Ross Perot goes: He's been very sucessful at business,
but has no well defined platform. Clinton and Bush have never been
sucessful at business, and change their platforms every time they talk
to a different interest group. Is Perot the best person for the
job--certainly not. Is he the best person out of the likely candidates--
Well...