What is Digg?242 Comments
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -2/+212Man 1992 looks cool with all that "other." I remember other. Other was a good idea. Let's bring back other.
- Plasmatica, on 10/11/2007, -10/+153First time noticing how ridiculous the map of the US looks. It's like whoever designed the borders of the states started out in the east and then was like "man, ***** this *****" and then just drew some rectangles to define the western states.
- epyon180, on 10/11/2007, -10/+144Surprisingly, the American south wasn't always republican but the west was.
- unibomber999, on 10/11/2007, -16/+145Let's turn the map green in '08!
- chris9902, on 10/11/2007, -11/+1121992 was after Vietnam but before 9/11. It's almost as if people weren't scared and had a real voice. But that soon changed.
- picardo, on 10/11/2007, -8/+109@epyon180
When they weren't Republican, they were for the "other"--and if you wonder what that means, repeat to yourself this: "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." That's right: when they didn't vote Republican, they voted for George Wallace. - TekeeTakShak, on 10/11/2007, -7/+90I lol'd when I saw the 1992 image.
- CanceledCzech, on 10/11/2007, -54/+137Ugh, it was the damn bible belt that ***** us in 2000...
- Wamzlee, on 10/11/2007, -4/+75Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!
- PatrickHenry, on 10/11/2007, -11/+82Why hate? Why not love those and convince them to see a better way? Hate will eat your soul. Be a true Patriot! Give them Liberty and NOT DEATH!
PH
We are all born stupid! Most of us never progress past that stage! - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+72Yeah, well, that's pretty much what happened.
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -0/+55George Wallace (Governor of Alabama) ran for The American Independent Party in 1968. He was basically a pro-segregation Democrat.
- SteveRogers, on 10/11/2007, -6/+58Definitely. It's okay to hate your government, it's an American tradition! But you can't hate your country. You have to love your country; what it stands for, and your fellow countrymen. If you love your country, you can work to change it. If you hate it, then you've already given up on it.
I'm an American patriot. I don't agree with everything the government does, but I do hold the truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, and endowed with certain unalienable rights, among which are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. - ncairns, on 10/11/2007, -1/+53@obliviousfool
19,741,065 popular votes ... and 0 electoral votes.
Sorry - we've pretty much always been a two-party system. - Terr01, on 10/11/2007, -17/+67@thetaoofbill : "Nader is not to blame. The electorial college is. Nader did not win a single state and the votes he recieved were not really enough to push the balance in most if not all state electorial votes."
WTF? Here are the Florida votes from CNN:
Bush: 2,909,176
Gore: 2,907,451
Nader: 96,837
Now, guess what would have happened had Nader not split the liberal vote?
Gore: 3,004,288
Bush: 2,909,176
Result? Florida's electoral votes would have gone to Gore. Bush would not be President.
So uh... I think you're pretty clearly wrong, because I've just given you a very clear counterexample. The electoral votes Nader himself got is a meaningless statistic when charging him of being a spolier candidate. - evi1, on 10/11/2007, -4/+53Not surprisingly the county I lived in growing up was red the entire time.
- rabidjester, on 10/11/2007, -1/+47The visible spectrum has a well known liberal bias.
- obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -1/+45He got 18.9% of the vote! How about them apples?
- Aldhelm, on 10/11/2007, -1/+44Wow. I swear USA had 50 states.
- MrBabyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+42That must've been Ross Perot.
- Outdoordude01, on 10/11/2007, -1/+39The big blue area in the sea of red in South Dakota is an Indian Reservation
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+40Looks pretty evenly divided to me. In all seriousness, are you maybe a little bit colorblind?
- TheTaoOfBill, on 10/11/2007, -10/+45@unibomber
LOL
@huck
Nader is not to blame. The electorial college is. Nader did not win a single state and the votes he recieved were not really enough to push the balance in most if not all state electorial votes. If we need to 'EFF' anything I say we 'EFF' the electorial college - huckmank, on 10/11/2007, -3/+36"Surprisingly, the American south wasn't always republican but the west was."
Crack open a history book. Lincoln was a Republican, and a fair amount of Southerners weren't too happy with a couple of his policies. They called it the Solid South for a reason, and it wasn't because they all voted Republican. - quiksliver, on 10/11/2007, -3/+33@ heliox
you realize not everyone is American right? in Canada and Europe we have better things to study then the geography of your country - ncairns, on 10/11/2007, -5/+34@johnburk
The '68 election represented a major split in the Democratic Party - up until then, it existed primarily as an incongruous coalition between white, racist Southerners and Northern political machines.
Wallace represented the Southern bigots who despised The new Democrats' stance on civil rights. After 1968, that wing of the Democratic Party migrated en masse to the Republicans. - airwalkery2k, on 10/11/2007, -2/+30I like the one county in southwest South Dakota that seems to stay bright, bright blue in the middle of a vast sea of red from about 1968-present.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+30Those precincts voted for Al Sharpton.
- TheTaoOfBill, on 10/11/2007, -5/+33@Terr01
That is based on the assumption that if they didn't vote for nader they would have voted for gore. How do we know that? How do we know they wouldn't have picked another party. Fact is 3rd party votes are part of the equation and even with nader out of the picture there is no way to tell where those votes would go to. They could have gone to another green candidate for all we know.
And to blame a 3rd party candidate is just plain unamerican. We should be praising those with the guts to run as a third party in a 2 party system. That's what america is all about. Not scareing them away saying they spoil elections by taking away votes.
If we got rid of the electorial college 3rd party candidates would have a better chance in running because people would be actually willing to vote for who they want and not feel like their vote is wasted because the electorial college is just going to decide for them. - gb506, on 10/11/2007, -2/+29@huckmank said:
"EFF Nader. If he hadn't run in 2000, Gore would have won and we wouldn't be in Iraq."
Maybe. But if Perot would not have ran in '92 Gore never would have been VP, and therefore probably would not have won the nomination in 2000. - dobaman, on 10/11/2007, -6/+33Yeah....get any map of Canada and then colour it completely blue :)
- dippyskoodlez, on 10/11/2007, -2/+28Yep. it looks like a cycle. it'll go blue, they'll screw it up, it'll turn red. They screw it up, it'll turn blue.
- twertyto, on 10/11/2007, -3/+28I just made the same observation and going to leave the same comment. Anyone know what's up with that?
Edit: Just check wikipedia. It look like the Badlands State Park...so hippies. - justelite, on 10/11/2007, -2/+27green is good. help to photosynthesis
- Junkyarddawg, on 10/11/2007, -6/+29Irony/sarcasm detection FTW.
- TheTaoOfBill, on 10/11/2007, -9/+32@geoffg
Which is kinda funny because communism is basically the extreme end of the liberal side. If communism were closest to an american party it would be democrats before republicans. Not trying to downplay democrats or republicans here. Just downplaying the notion that republicans and communists can be compared simply because they share the same color to symbolize their ideals. - sanman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+24The youthful ignorance (STUPIDITY)of Diggers really advertises itself here. The South was always a Democratic bastion of opposition to a Republican North. It's only after Kennedy and civil rights groups scored a coup inside the Democratic party in the 1960s and 1970s that the Democrats became a party with a liberal agenda, and of course Nixon and Reagan completed that pole-switch by rallying conservatives under the Republican banner.
It's really laughable and pathetic to see all these punks on Digg who don't know history beyond the measly couple of decades that they've been alive. It's also very noteworthy to see how politically naive and slow-witted Southerners were, allowing their heads to be turned by Kennedy's anti-establishment rhetoric, only to later be shocked as he used the opportunity to turn the Democratic party into a spearhead for liberal upheaval, forcing them to flee to Republicanism.
Hispanic voting will likely help to tip the scales this time around, although it remains to be seen whether their near-term focus on the immigration plank will be able to surge past the cacophany of other special interest groups entrenched within the Democratic Party. - elnerdo, on 10/11/2007, -9/+29No, we need to completely eliminate both RED AND BLUE, because they're both doing their part to destroy out country.
In my dream-world, the whole map would be green. - pebble, on 10/11/2007, -0/+18It works in FireFox.
- c0ldevil, on 10/11/2007, -3/+21I hate to state the obvious, but he was *clearly* being sarcastic.
- ImYourRealDad, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18The east is of course, the oldest populated part of the US. It's borders were defined by the makeup of the land, and what was farmable, so they took whatever they could. The west was divvied up in nice proportional chunks when the government offered money to go farm the land back in the 1900's and early 20th century.
- krebcycle, on 10/11/2007, -1/+171992 was right after the fall of communism, there was a huge amount of optomism that we could be anything.
- macabaret, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17It looks like America threw up in 1992 - the country turns green.
- johnburk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16Who where the others in 1968?
- skyshock1, on 10/11/2007, -4/+19It's "WOULD HAVE"!!!! WOULD ***** HAVE!!!! NOT would "OF".
Gaaaaaahhhh.... pet peeve. Sorry, had to vent. - wmtrader, on 10/11/2007, -1/+16
It appears that Hawaiians and Alaskans have not been voting at all.....they don't even show up on the map. - thedez, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14It's like my state, Mississippi, started an actual virus.
- BarryMcCawqiner, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14Uh... because it does work in Firefox, genius. Your browser is ***** (technically speaking).
- Johann4u, on 10/11/2007, -38/+51I know, republicans are soo more of a dark-salmon color.
- ElectroBot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13Canada has a multi-party system.
We have 4 major ones:
2 main ones - Liberals (sort of like the US' Democrats but more liberal) and the Conservatives (more "conservative" and less pro-big-business than US' Republicans)
2 others - NDP (New Democratic Party - more liberal than liberals) and Bloc Québécois (pro-Quebec, used to be [and still are somewhat] pro-seperation [splitting Quebec from Canada])
We have a Green party which gets around 3-5% of the vote, but rarely gets any seats in parliment.
We also have other parties, but they usually get less than .05% of the votes.
As you can see from this image (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/53/Canada2006.PNG) Canadians aren't quite as "blue" as you think. True, for the last 12 years before 2006, we used to be a lot more liberal (red on the map).
Here's the previous 4 elections (1993-2004)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/de/Elec1993.PNG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cf/Elec1997.PNG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bc/Elec2000.PNG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Elec2004.PNG -
Show 51 - 100 of 240 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 
){kind=link}
