Submitted by Travis Crayton on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 2:54pm.
There's no question about it: Elaine Marshall is the best candidate not just for Democrats, but for North Carolina. Her extensive electoral and professional experience, down-to-earth political style, and progressive values make it clear she should be the nominee, and that she will beat Richard Burr in November. Polls consistently show she has the momentum, Richard Burr is the weakest Republican incumbent, and Democrats have a perfect chance to knock of a GOP incumbent in 2010 here in North Carolina if Elaine is the nominee.
Elaine has 2nd highest vote total in NC history, plus she's on the right side of important issues. A good Dem with great chance to win in Nov -- what more could we ask for?
Submitted by hmrichmond54 on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 10:02pm.
While Cal is an attractive candidate for the future, there is no question in my mind that Elaine Marshall with her extensive experience as Secretary of State and in the NC Senate is the right candidate for this year. Numerous mayors and council persons from Wake County, including the mayors of Raleigh and Cary, and current and former Wake County commisoners have all endorsed Elaine. Elaine has taken actions to protect consumers and she hasn't been afraid to take on special interests including Wall Street. She has spent more than 20 years serving the public interest and she deserves our support in this race.
Submitted by HallStyle on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 4:15pm.
I know that's an Old Highlander reference but it is fitting! We have a Great List of Candidates. Burr doesn't stand a Chance. But the Candidate that has the BEST Chance of Beating Burr is Cal!
But this why we have primaries for We the people to decide! I hope once Cal wins that everyone will unite around this Wonderful candidate and get to the business of beating Burr! Cal For Senate! Cal For Senate!
Anthony D. Hall,
Fighting for Truth, Justice, Freedom and the American Way!
Submitted by Mike Nellis on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 5:05pm.
I won't speak for Cal of course, but Elaine is a strong supporter of the public option and has been consistent in her support since she launched her campaign. This week Elaine became the first candidate in the country -- and the only candidate in this race -- to call for the Senate to pass a public option using reconciliation by signing the Bennett letter.
Elaine also launched a petition in October calling on the Senate to pass a public option.
Submitted by Blue South on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 5:25pm.
From a recent questionnaire filled out for Durham for Obama:
Reforming health care requires that we bend the cost curve and extend the blanket of coverage. My key principles are laid out at www.calfornc.com. Containing costs can be achieved in part by creating state based exchanges, early Medicare buy-in, a public option, ending the anti-trust exemptions for health insurers, or by some combination of these policies. The federal government also must take serious action to expand access to health care. That means encouraging more building of hospitals, expanded recruitment of teachers, nurses and doctors and allowing Medicare to negotiate for lower drug prices.
Submitted by Corndogg on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 5:42pm.
That sure sounds like a candidate who is prepared to deal with out health care crisis in a fundamental, compelling way. I'm glad we have a candidate who is intently focused on offering extensive, progressive solutions to this substantive problem and not just focusing on incremental, single policy proposals that may only make minimal changes to our health care infrastructure.
Yet another smart, comprehensive, yet defined position by Cunningham. North Carolinians have come to expect this from him -- and I, for one, believe they are very pleased.
-- A liberal originally from Yadkin County. Did I just blow your mind?
Submitted by Foxtrot (not verified) on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 5:43pm.
Containing costs can be achieved in part by creating state based exchanges, early Medicare buy-in, a public option, ending the anti-trust exemptions for health insurers
__ Cal Cunningham
Please, folks. When we start presenting false statements and false presentations, we just start driving a divide in our cause.
Cunningham is being advised by Morgan Jackson and Scott Falmlen. These are the same 2 cronies that advised John Edwards, Mike Easley and Ruffin Poole. Any candidate they touch seems to end up being investigated by either the board of elections or the US attorney's office. For the kind of tricks they pull, I would not be surprised if one of both eventually end up paying stiff fines or serving jailtime.
Stick with the straight shooters, Marshall and Lewis.
Submitted by MadameJusticeWatch on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 6:04pm.
Cunningham is being advised by Morgan Jackson and "Scott Falmlen"* Johnboy
The executive director of Fairjudges.net is Scott Falmlen, former Executive Director of the North Carolina and Florida Democrat Parties. In 1995, the St. Petersburg Times called Falmlen "an admitted liar" for his role in a campaign scam to deceive senior citizens during Florida's 1994 gubernatorial election.
The largest contributor on record to fairjudges.net is the North Carolina Academy Trial Lawyers Political Action Committee which has been a supporter of primarily Democrat candidates. All of the contributors on record are trial lawyers; however the complete list of contributors is unavailable. 527 political groups will not have to file their current list of contributors until January 31, 2007, well after the election.
Note: Mr Falmlen is the only Democrat consultant or advisor who funded a Neo-Con Republican Judical Candiate in the history of this State. To this day, Unfair Judges has never revealed their donors or ever file the paper work to renew it's 527 status....No doubt Mr Cunningham is either not aware of Mr Slezy past or either he is one of the Trial Lawyers that gave heavy to Mr. Falmlen phony front judical group.
Submitted by Foxtrot (not verified) on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 5:32pm.
This "poll" does not say anything of importance. I can vote time and time again on it. So can anyone that wants to do so. No, I did not do that, but, hey...who has?
This says nothing. This proves nothing. I am amazed this was presented on BlueNC.
I understand the limitations of this kind of poll better than anyone. But as I wrote the last time we did this poll (30 days ago), it does give us a glimpse into the online communications capabilities of candidates.
You can argue that it's not worth the time it would take to even vote ... but I could also argue that it helps campaigns upgrade their communications activities to drive traffic and respond to developments in the marketplace.
Activating voters and responding to opportunities activities will be the name of the game in the weeks leading up to the May primaries. The campaigns would do well to get their skills sharpened sooner than later.
Submitted by Foxtrot (not verified) on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 6:11pm.
Sorry James, but this kind of poll (regardless what kind of spin you put on it) means squat. If you give participants unlimited ability to vote, it is skewed BIG TIME.
I'm sorry I disagree with it and what you've said...Hope you understand.
Submitted by Swiftsbee on Fri, 03/12/2010 - 6:07pm.
Before I decide, I want to know for whom/what each candidate really wants to fight. I wish I had known what Hagan's interests (Hagan's stock holdings in drug maker) actually were before I voted for her! No wonder she is refusing to support the Public Option.
PS Feel free to make whatever post you want any time you want. Seriously. I welcome any and all contributions. BlueNC is something I do in my spare time, and it is definitely a money-losing proposition. Any help you're willing to offer would be much appreciated.
Submitted by Foxtrot (not verified) on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 1:51pm.
I am surprised I did not get a tongue lashing from James for my "Vote now and often" remark, He's a prince for avoiding that after taking it across the bow, isn't he? :)
i voted once and each time I come back to read the thread all it says is "cancel vote". I haven't been able to vote more than once. Is it a browser thing?
Submitted by Daniel Austin on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 3:38pm.
It looks like you can only vote once (or change you're vote). I tried to clear my history, use different browsers, etc... Not saying this poll means anything but no one was complaining the last two times when Cunningham was winning. Now Marshall has the lead and the peanut gallery folks are upset.
Again, not that this poll means anything in the real world.
Submitted by Daniel Austin on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 4:53pm.
I just tested the other polls on the blog and they all work the same as this one. One vote for everyone. I can't reset anything to let me vote again. (not that I would.)
Submitted by scharrison on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 6:12pm.
but I am an adminstrator, so I can see and do things others can't. That being said, I voted in this poll shortly after it was posted, and as soon as my vote was cast, my only option to vote again was to change my previous vote. That may be because I was (and am) logged in, but I don't see that any changes have been made.
Submitted by scharrison on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 6:36pm.
Foxy, have you lost your mind? Understand this: I don't know what you're used to, but I'm not used to people questioning my integrity based on some half-baked conspiracy theory. To say I don't appreciate your inferences is a huge understatement.
If (as is very possible) the poll will allow those not logged in to vote multiple times, then it's sauce for the goose: no advantage given to any one candidate.
Submitted by Foxtrot (not verified) on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 6:57pm.
Just say what I am presenting is right or "possibly right", Steve.
Look, you and I are like minded on just about everything on BlueNC. But, when I say something happened and it is true....or at least can't be proven not true, best thing is to admit that.
I do not know why James is not responding to this but I do know he would be the deciding factor here. I am not ignorant nor am I unaware of what can be done on blogs or sites.
I do not want to be a person that questions everything here and anything here. I do know what I am talking about with this poll and to be honest, it is ME that is being made out to be someone with questionable integrity here.
I want James to tell me that in this poll...initially...posters were not able to post multiple times signed on or not signed on and that it was not changed after I questioned it.
You and I? We're fine, scharrison. I do not want to get into a pissing match with ya. I just want to get to the truth in this so that I am not made out to be someone that is ignorant or am in this thing for alterior motives.
Submitted by Daniel Austin on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 6:42pm.
Look, you're obviously upset because your horse in the race is losing a meaningless online poll but you shouldn't be questioning people's integrity over it. You are the only person who claims they can vote multiple times -- I don't see it and nobody else (including the admins) see it.
Granted, I'm new here, but yeesh -- this is silly.
Submitted by scharrison on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 7:24pm.
If you (re)read my comments, you'll see I mentioned "maybe it was because I was logged in" and that it was "possible people could vote multiple times". If there's any other question you have, I'll be glad to entertain it.
Now, I have a question for you. Do you see the glaring contradiction between your comment from yesterday:
This "poll" does not say anything of importance. I can vote time and time again on it. So can anyone that wants to do so. No, I did not do that, but, hey...who has?
and your comment from today?:
I voted in it without ever even signing on and then when I signed on, I voted again.
Submitted by Foxtrot (not verified) on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 7:37pm.
That is why I knew there was a problem with the poll. I forgot to sign in and just voted...then signed in and voted.
Now, you are trying your level best to trash me and to find me somehow complicit in something. Again, I hate you are trying to do that.
I see that James is not responding to my request and I see that you are doing your best to make me into something I am not and doing something that makes me look wrong in some way.
I hate it that you are doing this to me. I really do. I am right here...now I know it and now I know you know it but are trying to turn away that focus.
Is it truly that important to you to come up with things to look correct?
You are trying hard and you are doing your best to make my point about the fact that this poll was presented so that people could post on it multiple times by making me out to be the villian. You're good...but not that good, Steve. I see it...and those here that want to be favored by you by agreeing with you see it but want to be "accepted" by an "administrator".
I wait patiently for James' response.
Hopefully he is not reading this banter and trying to come up with something that gives me a token agreement but banks up your statements.
That would be just WAY too political.
Again, Steve, we're okay but if this continues in the same vain, we probably will have a falling out.
Submitted by scharrison on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 8:35pm.
the hand in front of your face. I posted an innocent comment about what I had observed when I voted, and you immediately responded by accusing me of being part of some dark plot. And instead of apologizing for questioning my integrity in such a fashion, which could have put an end to this, you continued to insinuate that something was afoot.
And now you want to play the "injured party", and claim that if anybody supports me, it's because I'm an administrator. Okay, tell you what: I'm issuing a blanket waiver to anybody that wants to say I'm wrong on this. Have at it. No arguments from me, no grudges held, no black list being developed for future use.
Submitted by Foxtrot (not verified) on Sat, 03/13/2010 - 5:17pm.
When this poll was put on BlueNC, you could vote as many times as you wish and you did not even have to be a member here.
Now, if that's not true, I would like for James to say that this is not true.
It is changed now for being able to do that.
If you did not originally get involved in it you cannot see the difference in what is on here now vs. what was on then.
Hey, I have been wrong many times in my life...might be wrong here. I would like for James to say one way or the other. If he does not respond or is out of town and not on here, then we just have to go with our own beliefs on it.
Truth is, though, regardless...it is not a big deal. :)
Over the years I've learned that any post with a frenzy of comments in a few hours can't be good news. Sorry I haven't been around to help resolve things, but I'm dealing with serious life and death issues in my family.
Regarding the poll, I have basically replicated the post I put up exactly one month ago. The settings are identical ... anonymous visitors can vote and registered visitors can vote without signing in.
I personally tried to vote more than once after reading Foxy's first comment and was not able to do that. I then signed out and was able to vote one more time, but not more than once. I'm guessing that it may have something to do with cookies. People who don't allow cookies may have free rein to vote as often as they want ... I'm not sure. And honestly, it doesn't really matter to me. If someone wants to try to scam the system, so be it.
In the spirit of "do good, be nice, have fun," I encourage anyone reading this to take a deep breath and relax. This poll means nothing more than I originally suggested ... an exercise in seeing how campaigns respond to online opportunities. I certainly didn't mean for it to become a wedge between people who I know to be on the same side of the great divide.
I appreciate the sentiments. I'm face to face with the old "circle of life" on three separate fronts these days. Hard stuff ... and it definitely puts things in perspective.
I'll be driving all day tomorrow, eight long hours in the car. We do what we have to do.
BlueNC is dedicated to making North Carolina a more progressive and prosperous state. If your intention is to disrupt this effort, please find somewhere else to express your opinions.
Comments
There's no question about it:
There's no question about it: Elaine Marshall is the best candidate not just for Democrats, but for North Carolina. Her extensive electoral and professional experience, down-to-earth political style, and progressive values make it clear she should be the nominee, and that she will beat Richard Burr in November. Polls consistently show she has the momentum, Richard Burr is the weakest Republican incumbent, and Democrats have a perfect chance to knock of a GOP incumbent in 2010 here in North Carolina if Elaine is the nominee.
You Bet !
Could not have said it better myself !!
agreed!
Elaine has 2nd highest vote total in NC history, plus she's on the right side of important issues. A good Dem with great chance to win in Nov -- what more could we ask for?
Strongly agree
While Cal is an attractive candidate for the future, there is no question in my mind that Elaine Marshall with her extensive experience as Secretary of State and in the NC Senate is the right candidate for this year. Numerous mayors and council persons from Wake County, including the mayors of Raleigh and Cary, and current and former Wake County commisoners have all endorsed Elaine. Elaine has taken actions to protect consumers and she hasn't been afraid to take on special interests including Wall Street. She has spent more than 20 years serving the public interest and she deserves our support in this race.
Cal is the man!
I trust Cal's intellect on trade and policy. As a hispanic voter looking for the best...
There Can Be Only One!
I know that's an Old Highlander reference but it is fitting! We have a Great List of Candidates. Burr doesn't stand a Chance. But the Candidate that has the BEST Chance of Beating Burr is Cal!
But this why we have primaries for We the people to decide! I hope once Cal wins that everyone will unite around this Wonderful candidate and get to the business of beating Burr! Cal For Senate! Cal For Senate!
Anthony D. Hall,
Fighting for Truth, Justice, Freedom and the American Way!
How do they stand on Public Option/Single Payer idea?
I know Marshall is for the public option, but I can't find that info for Cunningham. Does anyone know his take on that?
Syd
Public Option
I won't speak for Cal of course, but Elaine is a strong supporter of the public option and has been consistent in her support since she launched her campaign. This week Elaine became the first candidate in the country -- and the only candidate in this race -- to call for the Senate to pass a public option using reconciliation by signing the Bennett letter.
Elaine also launched a petition in October calling on the Senate to pass a public option.
Again...Cal's position on the Public Option:
"Containing costs can be achieved in part by creating state based exchanges, early Medicare buy-in,
ending the anti-trust exemptions for health insurers"
__Ref: Cal Cunningham
Yes
From a recent questionnaire filled out for Durham for Obama:
I am proud to work for Cal Cunningham's campaign.
"Keep the Faith"
Thanks, Blue South
That sure sounds like a candidate who is prepared to deal with out health care crisis in a fundamental, compelling way. I'm glad we have a candidate who is intently focused on offering extensive, progressive solutions to this substantive problem and not just focusing on incremental, single policy proposals that may only make minimal changes to our health care infrastructure.
Yet another smart, comprehensive, yet defined position by Cunningham. North Carolinians have come to expect this from him -- and I, for one, believe they are very pleased.
-- A liberal originally from Yadkin County. Did I just blow your mind?
Why is this being hidden?
__ Cal Cunningham
Please, folks. When we start presenting false statements and false presentations, we just start driving a divide in our cause.
Stop with the false statements. \
Thanks.
Beware
Cunningham is being advised by Morgan Jackson and Scott Falmlen. These are the same 2 cronies that advised John Edwards, Mike Easley and Ruffin Poole. Any candidate they touch seems to end up being investigated by either the board of elections or the US attorney's office. For the kind of tricks they pull, I would not be surprised if one of both eventually end up paying stiff fines or serving jailtime.
Stick with the straight shooters, Marshall and Lewis.
Oh No! Not Scott Falmlen again?
Cunningham is being advised by Morgan Jackson and "Scott Falmlen"* Johnboy
The executive director of Fairjudges.net is Scott Falmlen, former Executive Director of the North Carolina and Florida Democrat Parties. In 1995, the St. Petersburg Times called Falmlen "an admitted liar" for his role in a campaign scam to deceive senior citizens during Florida's 1994 gubernatorial election.
The largest contributor on record to fairjudges.net is the North Carolina Academy Trial Lawyers Political Action Committee which has been a supporter of primarily Democrat candidates. All of the contributors on record are trial lawyers; however the complete list of contributors is unavailable. 527 political groups will not have to file their current list of contributors until January 31, 2007, well after the election.
Note: Mr Falmlen is the only Democrat consultant or advisor who funded a Neo-Con Republican Judical Candiate in the history of this State. To this day, Unfair Judges has never revealed their donors or ever file the paper work to renew it's 527 status....No doubt Mr Cunningham is either not aware of Mr Slezy past or either he is one of the Trial Lawyers that gave heavy to Mr. Falmlen phony front judical group.
http://www.rachelforjustice.com/GOP_RIPS.html
http://www.rachelforjustice.com/Trip_Alarm.html
Vote now and often
This "poll" does not say anything of importance. I can vote time and time again on it. So can anyone that wants to do so. No, I did not do that, but, hey...who has?
This says nothing. This proves nothing. I am amazed this was presented on BlueNC.
Not nothing
I understand the limitations of this kind of poll better than anyone. But as I wrote the last time we did this poll (30 days ago), it does give us a glimpse into the online communications capabilities of candidates.
You can argue that it's not worth the time it would take to even vote ... but I could also argue that it helps campaigns upgrade their communications activities to drive traffic and respond to developments in the marketplace.
Activating voters and responding to opportunities activities will be the name of the game in the weeks leading up to the May primaries. The campaigns would do well to get their skills sharpened sooner than later.
Can't buy it, James
Sorry James, but this kind of poll (regardless what kind of spin you put on it) means squat. If you give participants unlimited ability to vote, it is skewed BIG TIME.
I'm sorry I disagree with it and what you've said...Hope you understand.
Foxy
Can't buy it?
Well it's a good thing it's not for sale.
:)
Cute :)
You, of all people, know what I am sayin'.
But repeat voting shows
commitment at least =p
Vote early & often!
Pretty much
That's pretty much what has happened with regard to the Cal/Elaine/Ken poll here on BlueNC.
Thanks, Jake.
Query about Conflicts of Interest
Before I decide, I want to know for whom/what each candidate really wants to fight. I wish I had known what Hagan's interests (Hagan's stock holdings in drug maker) actually were before I voted for her! No wonder she is refusing to support the Public Option.
So who owns how much stock in what?
Another Poll, Another Argument About the Poll
Why not, instead of using the poll feature, ask the question and let logged in members vote in the comments section.
This would (hopefully) be viewed as more fair and while it is less anonymous, I think everyone here has pretty much showed their card already, right?
Either that or no poll at all, because it just ends up in a stint about poll manipulation.
My two cents..
Why not?
A good idea.
J
PS Feel free to make whatever post you want any time you want. Seriously. I welcome any and all contributions. BlueNC is something I do in my spare time, and it is definitely a money-losing proposition. Any help you're willing to offer would be much appreciated.
It IS a good idea..
I am surprised I did not get a tongue lashing from James for my "Vote now and often" remark, He's a prince for avoiding that after taking it across the bow, isn't he? :)
I agree. This is a GREAT idea on BlueNC polls.
I don't understand what ya'll are talking about
i voted once and each time I come back to read the thread all it says is "cancel vote". I haven't been able to vote more than once. Is it a browser thing?
Progressives are the true conservatives.
Sour grapes
It looks like you can only vote once (or change you're vote). I tried to clear my history, use different browsers, etc... Not saying this poll means anything but no one was complaining the last two times when Cunningham was winning. Now Marshall has the lead and the peanut gallery folks are upset.
Again, not that this poll means anything in the real world.
Ah..Aesop's Tales..Sour Grapes
One of my favorite Aesop's tales is Sour Grapes.
Yeah, guilty. :)
Good point.
I think it has been changed now
Looks like the poll here has been changed now.
Anyone know?
It's the same...no change
I just tested the other polls on the blog and they all work the same as this one. One vote for everyone. I can't reset anything to let me vote again. (not that I would.)
Not sure about that
I'd like to hear from James on this.
Thanks.
I haven't created any polls yet,
but I am an adminstrator, so I can see and do things others can't. That being said, I voted in this poll shortly after it was posted, and as soon as my vote was cast, my only option to vote again was to change my previous vote. That may be because I was (and am) logged in, but I don't see that any changes have been made.
I cannot believe you posted that
I voted in it without ever even signing on and then when I signed on, I voted again.
I am amazed at this presentation, Steve. But, I now see what is happening.
Where is James in this? Why is he not responding?
Steve, I am saddened by this.
Look at the number of people that it shows posted a vote. I know BlueNC is a good site...but, c'mon.
I hate it...I really hate you've gone there.
Foxy
Gone where?
Foxy, have you lost your mind? Understand this: I don't know what you're used to, but I'm not used to people questioning my integrity based on some half-baked conspiracy theory. To say I don't appreciate your inferences is a huge understatement.
If (as is very possible) the poll will allow those not logged in to vote multiple times, then it's sauce for the goose: no advantage given to any one candidate.
Then, say so, Steve
Just say what I am presenting is right or "possibly right", Steve.
Look, you and I are like minded on just about everything on BlueNC. But, when I say something happened and it is true....or at least can't be proven not true, best thing is to admit that.
I do not know why James is not responding to this but I do know he would be the deciding factor here. I am not ignorant nor am I unaware of what can be done on blogs or sites.
I do not want to be a person that questions everything here and anything here. I do know what I am talking about with this poll and to be honest, it is ME that is being made out to be someone with questionable integrity here.
I want James to tell me that in this poll...initially...posters were not able to post multiple times signed on or not signed on and that it was not changed after I questioned it.
You and I? We're fine, scharrison. I do not want to get into a pissing match with ya. I just want to get to the truth in this so that I am not made out to be someone that is ignorant or am in this thing for alterior motives.
Thanks.
I'm sure...
...James is enjoying his Saturday and will respond when he gets a chance.
I can only hope so
Thanks, Daniel
My answer
is posted above.
And, my answer
Is the same as it has been for many posts on this thread.
Dude, calm down!
Look, you're obviously upset because your horse in the race is losing a meaningless online poll but you shouldn't be questioning people's integrity over it. You are the only person who claims they can vote multiple times -- I don't see it and nobody else (including the admins) see it.
Granted, I'm new here, but yeesh -- this is silly.
We will see in the end
I am still waiting for James to say I am wrong.
If James says that I am wrong here, then that will stand true for me. Otherwise, no one truly knows.
Thanks, though.
I already did, Foxy
If you (re)read my comments, you'll see I mentioned "maybe it was because I was logged in" and that it was "possible people could vote multiple times". If there's any other question you have, I'll be glad to entertain it.
Now, I have a question for you. Do you see the glaring contradiction between your comment from yesterday:
and your comment from today?:
Yes
That is why I knew there was a problem with the poll. I forgot to sign in and just voted...then signed in and voted.
Now, you are trying your level best to trash me and to find me somehow complicit in something. Again, I hate you are trying to do that.
I see that James is not responding to my request and I see that you are doing your best to make me into something I am not and doing something that makes me look wrong in some way.
I hate it that you are doing this to me. I really do. I am right here...now I know it and now I know you know it but are trying to turn away that focus.
Is it truly that important to you to come up with things to look correct?
You are trying hard and you are doing your best to make my point about the fact that this poll was presented so that people could post on it multiple times by making me out to be the villian. You're good...but not that good, Steve. I see it...and those here that want to be favored by you by agreeing with you see it but want to be "accepted" by an "administrator".
I wait patiently for James' response.
Hopefully he is not reading this banter and trying to come up with something that gives me a token agreement but banks up your statements.
That would be just WAY too political.
Again, Steve, we're okay but if this continues in the same vain, we probably will have a falling out.
You can't see
the hand in front of your face. I posted an innocent comment about what I had observed when I voted, and you immediately responded by accusing me of being part of some dark plot. And instead of apologizing for questioning my integrity in such a fashion, which could have put an end to this, you continued to insinuate that something was afoot.
And now you want to play the "injured party", and claim that if anybody supports me, it's because I'm an administrator. Okay, tell you what: I'm issuing a blanket waiver to anybody that wants to say I'm wrong on this. Have at it. No arguments from me, no grudges held, no black list being developed for future use.
Just to be clear on this poll thingy
When this poll was put on BlueNC, you could vote as many times as you wish and you did not even have to be a member here.
Now, if that's not true, I would like for James to say that this is not true.
It is changed now for being able to do that.
If you did not originally get involved in it you cannot see the difference in what is on here now vs. what was on then.
Hey, I have been wrong many times in my life...might be wrong here. I would like for James to say one way or the other. If he does not respond or is out of town and not on here, then we just have to go with our own beliefs on it.
Truth is, though, regardless...it is not a big deal. :)
Good gracious!
Over the years I've learned that any post with a frenzy of comments in a few hours can't be good news. Sorry I haven't been around to help resolve things, but I'm dealing with serious life and death issues in my family.
Regarding the poll, I have basically replicated the post I put up exactly one month ago. The settings are identical ... anonymous visitors can vote and registered visitors can vote without signing in.
I personally tried to vote more than once after reading Foxy's first comment and was not able to do that. I then signed out and was able to vote one more time, but not more than once. I'm guessing that it may have something to do with cookies. People who don't allow cookies may have free rein to vote as often as they want ... I'm not sure. And honestly, it doesn't really matter to me. If someone wants to try to scam the system, so be it.
In the spirit of "do good, be nice, have fun," I encourage anyone reading this to take a deep breath and relax. This poll means nothing more than I originally suggested ... an exercise in seeing how campaigns respond to online opportunities. I certainly didn't mean for it to become a wedge between people who I know to be on the same side of the great divide.
We are all thinking of you and yours, James
Okay...I, for one, am willing to let this pass on by. May be something none of us understand. Sure did bring out our "passions", though.
Hope any hard feelings will not last.
James, anything you need, you know the folks here on BlueNC are ready to be there for you. You know we are all thinking of you and your family.
Thanks, James.
Foxy
Thanks.
I appreciate the sentiments. I'm face to face with the old "circle of life" on three separate fronts these days. Hard stuff ... and it definitely puts things in perspective.
I'll be driving all day tomorrow, eight long hours in the car. We do what we have to do.
Sorry to hear that James
Let me know if I can help.
Sorry, James
The last thing you need right now is having to settle a squabble.
My thoughts are with you, friend.