You are viewing page 10 of 16.

Election Night Part II

By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 9:52 PM

Election Night Part I

By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 8:41 PM

This Is It

By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 4:22 PM

An Election Eve Request for Serious Pre-Voting Consideration

By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 5:29 PM

TNGALLOP Poll

By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 5:14 PM

ASISAID/TNGALLOP Presidential Election Poll 2004

#1: If the election was held today, with Senators John Kerry and John Edwards as the Democratic nominees and President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney as the Republican nominees, would you vote for:
  • George W. Bush for President and Richard Cheney for Vice President.
  • John Kerry for President and John Edwards for Vice President.
  • Undecided (select this only if you are truly undecided, not because you support another candidate).
#2: If the election was held today, with President George W. Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney as the Republican nominees, Senators John Kerry and John Edwards as the Democratic nominees, Michael Badnarik and Richard Campagna as the Libertarian nominees, Ralph Nader and Peter Camejo as the Reform Party/Independent nominees, Michael Peroutka and Dr. Chuck Baldwin as the Constitution Party nominees, David Cobb and Pat LaMarche as the Green Party nominees and Walt Brown and Mary A. Herbert as the Socialist Party USA nominees, would you vote for:
  • John Kerry for President and John Edwards for Vice President (D).
  • George W. Bush for President and Richard Cheney for Vice President ®.
  • Ralph Nader for President and Peter Camejo for Vice President (RE/I).
  • Michael Peroutka for President and Chuck Baldwin for Vice President ©.
  • David Cobb for President and Pat LaMarche for Vice President (G).
  • Michael Badnarik for President and Richard Campagna for Vice President (L)
  • Walt Brown for President and Mary A. Herbert for Vice President (S).
  • Undecided (select this only if you are truly undecided, not because you support another candidate).
  • Other (Write In Appropriate Name).
#3 Rate your view of each presidential ticket with 5 being “Very Favorable” and 1 being “Very Unfavorable.”
  • 1. George W. Bush for President and Richard Cheney for Vice President ®.
  • 2. John Kerry for President and John Edwards for Vice President (D).
  • 3. Michael Badnarik for President and Richard Campagna for Vice President (L)
  • 4. Ralph Nader for President and Peter Camejo for Vice President (RE/I).
  • 5. Michael Peroutka for President and Chuck Baldwin for Vice President ©.
  • 6. Walt Brown for President and Mary A. Herbert for Vice President (S).
  • 7. David Cobb for President and Pat LaMarche for Vice President (G). #4 Rate your view of the previous job performance of the following candidates with 5 being “Very Favorable” and 1 being “Very Unfavorable.”
    • 1. President George W. Bush (President of the United States of America).
    • 2. Senator John Kerry (Jr. Senator from MA).
    • 3. Ralph Nader (Consumer Advocate).
    #5 Rate your familiarity with the following candidates with 5 being “Very Familiar” and 1 being “Very Unfamiliar.”
    • 1. Senator John Kerry (D).
    • 2. President George W. Bush ®.
    • 3. Ralph Nader (I/RE).
    #6 Rate how the following issues factor in to your selection of a preferred presidential ticket, with 5 being “Very Important” and 1 being “Very Unimportant.” (Note: your answers should be only how importantly they factor into your choice for president and vice president, not how favorably or unfavorably you view them.)
    • 1. War in Iraq.
    • 2. Adding New Jobs to the Economy.
    • 3. Global War on Terror.
    • 4. NASA Mars Mission.
    • 5. Homeland Security.
    • 6. Regulation of the Environment.
    • 7. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.
    • 8. The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001.
    • 9. Abortion.
    • 10. Same Sex Unions.
    • 11. School Prayer.
    • 12. Free Trade.

    #7 Please rate how sure you are that you will vote in this election with 5 being “Very Sure” and 1 being “Very Unsure.”

    #8 Are you registered to vote in your presently residing precinct? (Yes/No [If no, please skip questions #9 and #10])

    #9 Likely voters are voters who either (1) voted in the last presidential election or (2) will be eligible to vote for the first time this election based one of the following factors: first presidential election over the age of 18 or first presidential election as a U.S. citizen. Based on this standard, are you a likely voter? (Yes/No)

    #10 What method of voting will you be using?
    • 1. Nov. 2 Voting (Punch Card)
    • 2. Nov. 2 Voting (Other non-electronic method)
    • 3. Nov. 2 Voting (Electronic)
    • 4. Early Voting (Punch Card)
    • 5. Early Voting (Other non-electronic method)
    • 6. Early Voting (Electronic)
    • 7. Absentee Voting (Non-Electronic)
    • 8. Absentee Voting (Department of Defense Electronic)
    • 9. Absentee Voting (Other Electronic)

    Thank-you for participating in the first quadrennial asisaid/TNGALLOP poll, please place your responses in the format of the first response below.

    POLLSTER BIAS: Republican/Libertarian (Economic and Social Conservative).
    COPYRIGHT INFORMATION: © 2004 Timothy R. Butler, All Rights Reserved. Polling questions may not be redistributed. Final results will be released under a Creative Commons license.

  • Bin Laden's Choice?

    By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 1:39 AM

    Make a Difference

    By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 1:10 AM

    Just Exactly What Happened

    By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 12:50 AM

    My Domestic Spending Agenda

    By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 1:28 AM

    NASA — many people on both sides of the fence simply do not understand the critical importance of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. I guess liberals find it too close to the military and conservatives can't necessarily justify it as a necessary part of the military. Yet, in my opinion, NASA is one of the most important parts of the Federal government. Let's face it — yes, NASA is inefficient, bloated and has been thoroughly shamed by the St. Louis's own Ansari X-Prize, but private companies will never be able to accomplish what NASA can under proper direction.

    Take Mars, for example. To reach Mars will require new technologies and massive projects beyond anything the agency has ever done before. While Scaled Composites was able to reach space for a relatively meager sum, they were doing so with the benefit of thousands of technologies that were driven ahead through NASA's early, innovative days. The technology to reach Mars with humans does not exist yet, meaning that only an entity with the funding power of the world's lone superpower can likely reach the goal of the first interplanetary human mission.

    NASA has probably done more to advance technology than any other government agency and our world is better for it. President Bush's 2030 goal for a Mars mission deserves respect as a plan to re-ignite our imaginations and our common goals so that the stodgy modern NASA can again become the lean, mean organization that can revolutionize technology for us. We should take technologies that come out of NASA and pass them out through an effective technology licensing program that would encourage private sector companies to use and improve what the government created. This would pay back the costs of R&D and drive the push into the final frontier to new heights.

    United States Postal Service — Many conservatives I know loathe a public entity dedicated to mail delivery. The privatization call has come for a long time and sounds good on the surface. The idea of privatization of USPS, in my opinion, is a flawed and dangerous plan. USPS does not turn a profit, like it would be required to do if it were in the private sector, but personally I care much more about seeing my mail come and go without a hitch than if USPS is bringing in cash (so long as it is not a complete money black hole). UPS, FedEx, DHL and others can and do accomplish amazing logistical service feats with a profit for a reason: it costs more to use them.

    Take, for example, a 6 oz envelope to Paraguay. The cheapest way to get it there using any of the major private sector delivery companies will set you back nearly fifty bucks. For just seven bucks, I can upgrade to service that should get that letter there in less than a week via USPS. Now, I hear you screaming over there: “raise the rates! raise the rates!” Hold on a second. Is not the main goal here to facilitate communication? If USPS charged the same rate as UPS, it would be very impractical to send that envelope even though I would hate not to send it. Could it perhaps be that it is worth a few of my tax dollars each year to facilitate affordable, fast, reliable postal service for the dozens of letters, bills, rebates, CD's and other things I mail out? E-mail must become far more secure, reliable and just plain better before I would consider cutting loose our core way of distributing documents and packages.

    There are lots of issues that come up if USPS was privatized. Daily deliveries to rural areas would become likely targets of cuts. Even first class letters would likely skyrocket in price to achieve pricing parity with UPS, et. al. I betcha the amount of money you would spend sending out your bills each month would go up enough that the meager tax savings would soon seem less than attractive.

    I would add that I believe with a relatively meager investment in more efficient delivery solutions, including some of those used by UPS and FedEx, we could dramatically improve USPS's performance. We ought to look into solutions such as outsourcing certain extra deliveries to other carriers and promoting and improving high tech solutions (which USPS already offers) such as e-mail to mail gateways.

    Amtrak — This is, by far, the most controversial of my three pet government projects. I believe it is in this nation's interest to not only keep Amtrak going, but also to start a one-time revitalization program that would upgrade the tracks across the nation to support bullet train capabilities. Amtrak, in its current state, could not survive as a private company. If Amtrak shutdown, the rails that made this country great would grow rusty and disappear into the murky fog of the past.

    In a time of heightened security, we should have a strong transportation infrastructure beyond just air traffic. A healthy, revitalized Amtrak could, I believe, turn a profit eventually and would allow us to have a redundant high-speed transportation network. Think about the days after 9/11 when we were forced to shut down air traffic — such a high speed train system would have allowed for far more efficient traveling. We have no reason to believe 9/11 was the last time this could happen, and next time we could be ready (and that is just one of the many advantages to having more than one long distance mass transit system).

    Moreover, if we implemented the improved Amtrak using electric trains, we would insure that no matter what future fuel technology eventually allows us to eliminate dependence on the Middle East, we would be able to convert it to work with trains. I don't think you can necessarily say that about our existing planes.

    Each of these agencies needs major reform, I agree. I do not agree however that they should be ended or privatized. In the long run, I think everyone would benefit from improving these agencies and it is reasonable to expect that a serious upfront investment could yield a rosy financial situation for these agencies in the future.

    A Sign of the Times?

    By Timothy R Butler | Posted at 1:02 AM

    You are viewing page 10 of 16.