Athletes and politics often go hand in hand.When a team wins a major title, who is the first person they go to see?It is the President of the United States and then off to Disney World.Later on they hit the Leno or Letterman Show.Steve Largent, Tom Osborne, Bill Bradley are all in politics and now Lynn Swan is running on the Republican ticket in PA.Let me say for the record, I have never researched Tiger’s political beliefs or his voting record, but if I had to guess which party he would lend his name to one day, it would be the Republicans.
Tiger is the supreme example of Capitalism working at its best.He knows how to market himself to make the most from his ad campaigns.Either it is a shrewd business instinct on his part or that of his handlers at mega powerhouse IMG.Tiger never has to worry about winning a golf tournament to retain his tour card.He is paid more in appearance fees than he earns on the tour each year.This week in the Dubai Desert Classic it is reported that he is earning 3 million just to play in a tournament where the total purse is only 2.4 million.If he wins, which he is tied for first as I am typing this post, he will take home another 400,000.Okay, it is official; Tiger Woods just won bringing his total paycheck this weekend to 3.4 million and winning in back to back tournaments to begin the season.Go ahead and roll over PGA tour field, it must be the year of the Tiger on the Chinese calendar.
One more reason Tiger is a Republican; he has won back to back events, sort of like George W. becoming a two term president.Also, Tiger is pretty tough in the Middle East and we all know how the Democrats feel about Iraq.
And the last reason I know he must be a Republican is Tiger not only has ringing endorsements from Buick, (Pushes those SUV type vehicles that use lots of fossil fuels), Target, and American Express, but he knows a thing or two about getting government funding?This is where I really have to say that he knows how to work the system.One of his charities is getting 100,000 dollars from the US government to help with a 25 million dollar educational building in Anaheim, CA.Come to think of it, he may just be a Democrat!
By the way, I am a registered Independent, but I found this map that shows all of the counties that voted for George W in 2004. Not only did he carry more states, but just counting counties he wins hands down. The trouble is that the counties that Kerry won happen to be high population centers. Just food for thought. Can you spot the county that Tiger hails as his current home and the one where he grew up? That might give you a clue to his political leanings. This post in no way endorses one party over another. I make equal fun of both parties at times.
It wasn't, he just carried more counties where less people live. If you look at maps of Bush-Gore, it would look similar even though Gore won the popular vote, and in Clinton's two races, Bush Senior and Dole carried more counties than Clinton.
The Election for Reagan, and both of George W. races were lopsided, but places like NY, Los Angeles, San Fran, Detroit, New Orleans, and Chicago always have heavy Dem turnout. That is why the founding fathers instituted the electoral college system, to make voting represent all areas of the country even ones without heavy population centers. There are several other logistical reasons for the electoral college in the late 1700's but those are not needed today. I will save that for a political blog.
SoCal, since you raised the issue, and since the reasons really aren't complicated, I'll explain it. Since I won't cite to my own political science articles as possibly biased, I'll cite to the Federal Election Commission's explanation at www.fec.gov's:
“There were competing interests because of thirteen states who did not want to lose control to a central national government, who were su####ious of political parties, who did not feel that public campaigns should occur, a small population spread along the Atlantic with limited communications and contacts.
The idea of having Congress decide was rejected as divisive, potentially corrupt, and would upset the balance between Congress and the Executive Branch.
The idea of having state legislatures decide was rejected because it might permit the states to erode Federal authority.
The idea of having the President elected by direct popular vote was rejected because they feared that without sufficient information about candidates from outside their State, people would naturally vote for a "favorite son" from their own State or region. At worst, no president would emerge with a popular majority sufficient to govern the whole country. At best, the choice of president would always be decided by the largest, most populous States with little regard for the smaller ones.
Finally, a so-called "Committee of Eleven" in the Constitutional Convention proposed an indirect election of the president through a College of Electors.
Last edited by MissouriValleyBlog on February 5th at 4:38 PM.
The original idea was for the most knowledgeable and informed individuals from each State to select the president based solely on merit and without regard to State of origin or political party.”
The reasons for the Electoral College ended, pretty much, in 1828 when Andrew Jackson defeated John Quincy Adams. Those who fear it will harm their candidate (Republicans, since a significant number of small states usually vote Republican) oppose it. SoCal, I don't blame Republicans for opposing any change because without it, and five Republican appointees to the Supreme Court (two other Republican appointees voted against the Bush position), Bush wouldn't be President.
Because it exists, fraud (in 1876 and 2000 by Republicans, and 1960 by Democrats in Illinois and Texas) in a presidential race is more likely to occur since a race can be decided by just a few hundred votes in one state. Ask Sleepless about the questions behind Governor Christine Gregoire’s win in Washington where Democrats did what Republicans did in the Bush-Gore race. If you control who counts the votes, and the court who will decide how the votes are counted, you can win under highly su####ious circumstances.
Last edited by MissouriValleyBlog on February 5th at 4:37 PM.
But, going back to your original point, I doubt any Democrat has won a majority of counties since Franklin Roosevelt, and he may not have in 1940 and 1944.
Wow, we have a TD in this game.
If I did this correct, I posted on my site the map showing what percentage counties voted blue or red (or purple).
Last edited by MissouriValleyBlog on February 5th at 5:20 PM.
The point Jack, and Missouri, has nothing to do with Tiger and/or his political party, but just light hearted fun at how Tiger is able to extort money to play in Dubai, for his charities, and in general to say he is possibly the most savy business athlete since MJ. He has capitalized on his popularity like no other athlete, and coming from a golfer no less, it is truly amazing.
Also Missouri, the popular vote has been to close to call in the last two elections. A recount could have happened in 5 states for George W. but he elected not to have it done as the outcome was already certain.
Gore beat Bush by 540,000 votes nationally. Gore beat Bush by more than four times the number of votes Kennedy beat Nixon in 1960.
The winner needed 269 electoral votes, and Bush won with 271 electoral votes with the Supreme Court decision. Florida was worth 25.
The states Bush would have contested where the margin was a realistic amount that Bush could have had enough votes thrown out was one, New Mexico (5 electoral votes), where Gore won by less than 500 votes.
You mentioned four others. I'm aware of Iowa (7), Oregon (7), and Wisconsin (11) where Gore won between 4100 and 6000. There were other states where Gore won by a small percentage like Minnesota, but 58,000 votes would have had to be rejected.
Bush had to be awarded Oregon and Wisconsin along with either Iowa or New Mexico to offset Florida.
You commented that the Bush campaign would have challenged, I'm assuming, these four states.
Both the Wisconsin Democratic and Republican Party did review voting, because it wasn't clear how the Florida recount would go, and both the State Senate and State Assembly were at stake (one was tied, one was a couple seat margin), and both parties were trying to knock out as many votes as possible to gain a legislative seat.
Republicans questioned about 500-1,000 votes in Milwaukee County, according to the Wisconsin State Journal. Otherwise, what each party found pretty much offset what the other party found, and the numbers were maybe a few dozen.
Last edited by MissouriValleyBlog on February 5th at 11:33 PM.
I worked for a, believe it or not, Republican Iowa County Attorney in my past life, and Iowa doesn't have voter fraud issues where 4200 votes are magically cast for a candidate. Democrats LOST CONTROL of the Iowa legislature in the 1990's because a Democratic Senate Majority Leader was retiring and taking with him about $40,000 in unspent campaign funds, as he was legally allowed to do. Honest mistakes are made, but not 4100 votes’ worth. Both parties review all voter registrations. There were some same day registrations that disallowed, but the Iowa Republican Party has never claimed Gore was incorrectly awarded 4100 votes in Iowa, the margin of victory. The County Attorney I used to work for is a former member of the Iowa Republican Party's Central Committee, we're still friends (believe it or not), and we discussed this a few years ago. We discussed whether Bush would have won the presidency without Florida (sound familiar?), and I was told no (only New Mexico was doable), and he spoke to more Bush campaign people off the record then either one of us.
I can't speak for Oregon or New Mexico.
It's not in our country's best interests to have races where fraud issues in Florida, Illinois, or Texas decides a presidential race. Richard Nixon believed that what happened in 1960 justified everything that led to Watergate. Democrats, I'm sure if given a chance in a state a Barak Obama needs, won't forget 2000. Eliminating the Electoral College eliminates voter fraud that can determine the outcome of an election.
Last edited by MissouriValleyBlog on February 5th at 11:37 PM.
The red blue map is a fraud.......Large chunks of some of those republican states have no people in them at all. States with huge land masses and rather small populations. You win that state and you get to color this gigantic area red. Over and over and over again.
MVB and WP, anything to say about Tiger? Didn't think so. Sour grapes over who won an election, almost as bad as loser of the Super Bowl, okay worse. The point MVB is if you can contest those states, it shows just how split the vote totals are. I also notice you are talking about the Gore/Bush race and not the Kerry/Bush race which is where this map was taken from.
Which race it is from is not relevant....Both the republicans and the democrats get to color in their ares by winning votes in the cities and towns. The democrats in huge population centers with small land masses, and the republicans winning the smaller towns and cities in large rural states, which let's them color in huge areas red, despite their being little difference in the vote totals.
In brief, if someone thinks the red blue map means republican domination, that someone is an imbecile. You switch a few hundred votes in Florida Gore beats Bush, switch a few thousand in Ohio Kerry beats Bush. So almost the entire map being red does not mean very much.
OK, we are back to the same old Bush stole Florida statement and Gore got the popular vote statement. Get over it and move on people. Bush won Florida, they counted it how many times afterwards? Even the press had a count. If I recall correctly it was Bush wanting a statewide recount that Gore did not want. Plus it was Gore trying to dis the military vote coming in from over seas. And lets not forget the Johnny Bench's sitting there trying to "find the intent of the voter". Good grief, how do you find the intent of the voter anyways? If you cant punch a ballot card, which alot of these people siad they could not do, how do they do other things in life? Since when did you have to be a rocket scientist to go and vote? Fraud in Florida. What a joke. The Supreme Court had to stop the count, it was becoming a regular circus down there. If they wanted an honest recount they should have recounted the whole state, not Miami-Dade and the other county, both of which are majority Democratic.
Wesley, that is the point. I really do like your math too, switch a few hundred votes here, a few thousand there and our guy wins. LOL, if Seattle has a few calls this way, and Pitt has a few go that way, hey Seattle wins! It is always something, and last time I counted, the Republicans have the House, Senate, and White House, so all that red must mean something. As I stated before, I am a conservative independent, but this post is about Tiger, and his uncanny ability to garner appearance money that is 7 and 1/2 times the amount of the winner. He is an amazing marketing machine. The whole Republican/Democrat inferences in this post are all done tongue in cheek, but I did know it would elicit a response from Dems. The Repubs are not that upset, but wait until 2008.
Just shows you how out of touch the Democrats values are out of touch with the majority of America, or the "fly over" states that many elitist Dems in L.A. and N.Y. call the rest of the country since that is all it is to them, states they have to fly over on their trips back and forth between the only cities they feel matter most.
Dems carry the major cities because that is where most of the elitists, and victicrats (phrase coined by Larry Elder) live who scream for more entitlements and tax dollars because they have been done wrong in their mind, which in term leads to higher taxes for all of us whenever a Dem gets into office.
I am not denouncing the existence of certain social spending programs, but they are undeniably abused by many. They were designed to be temporary measures to briefly help America during the Great Depression, and were supposed to vanish after they accomplished their goal. They were kept around to provide temporary help to Americans who needed help to get on their feet today, not to be used for years on end.
Tiger's success financially doesn't dictate whether he is Republican or Democrat, it whether he thinks the federal government should take even more of his money, or if he should be free to donate more to his charities and manage more of his money himself.
I'd vote for Tiger if he ran for President, he is one of the most competitive people in the history of sports. All a President does anyway is say and do what his advisors tell him. Let's let Tiger run the country.
GOT, I have the ultimate Nuclear option to a filibuster, it is called deleting comments...LOL. I enjoy WP cause he makes it interesting and hopefully will put my blog on the MPB list today.
"The red blue map, as a general tool shows one thing mostly---In the blue areas you will find more and better educated people."
See, it's statements like that that the GOP eat up and use to their advantage in the general election. The dems, "the party of the people," have such an East Coast intellectual bias that thye are irrelevant to middle america. And I say that sadly as an east coast intellectual. Unless the party can wake up and realize that nominating Northeastern, privileged liberals (and you're kidding yourself if you think Gore has spent any real time in TN) is not the way to win the electoral college, they will not regain the presidency.
BTW -- I've been very impressed with the level of political conversation lately.
DC, not your average blogger here, at least I hope you don't think so. Thanks for all the comments and I totally agree with you on the selections by the Dems to win the whitehouse. Clinton, a southerner with an Oxford education won twice. Kerry and Gore, 0 for 2. What do you think of Hillary's chances?
WP: editor's note, popular vote does not guarantee victory. That is why we have an Electoral College.
I think Tiger is a Republican. WHy you ask. B/c not so long ago the NAACP was trying to get him to be a face in their organization, if you all remember back then. He said no. If he was a die hard Lib, then that would have been a no brainer for him.
As far as the Libs being smarter than the country fed ####, Republican, last I heard and saw Bush got better grades then Kerry did at Yale. If you are of the mind that college really means everything, then that blows that theory out of the water. I will give Dems some credit though, in the intellect department. They know how to keep the minority vote under control by telling them that Republicans run the House like a plantation...aka Hiliary said this last week. Are we in 1835 or 2006? And this coming from their front running presidential candidate for 2008.
Oh and yes the red/blue map does matter. B/c the blue areas dont believe we should have a gun and most dont in those areas, while all those red areas are fully loaded!
Re: Hillary -- too polarizing. I'd watch Mark Warner, the immediate past governor of Virginia, for the Dem nomination. He's a dot.com millionaire, fairly fiscally conservative but socially liberal. Virginia actually ran a surplus under him, granted most of that came off of inflated property taxes but... oh, and he has good hair, key to winning the Dem ticket.
LSU- I don't know about not being armed in the blue areas, L.A. and N.Y., among other major cities, are all blue, and they undoubtedly comprise the "most strapped" cities in the U.S.
DC- I still think Hillary is the front runner, even as polarizing as she is. Heck, the Dems chose Howard Dean to head their party.
If you like some occasional politics with your sports, check out my blog a little more often. I think you may have commented there once before, but as a Poly Sci Grad, I try to include an occassional post covering sports stories that involve a little bit of politics. Well, including my most recent one, I think I have only done two or three, but they are there.
I agree that I think Hillary is too polarizing to win, but she appears to be the front runner. As much as I would love to see Bill be the "first man" mostly for all the good gags we would have on SNL, but I don't think she has a snow ball chance in ... you get the idea. The real question is who are the Republicans going to run?
The gov. should always be a little in the red, never in the black. Being in the black means overtaxed citizens, or they just have not found a new program to put it into yet.
I'm sure you guys all watched the State of the Union last week...some I agreed with, some I didn't. But one thing that was evident, every time the camera panned around to Hillary, all I saw was red eyes and two really sharp horns!! Between her and Ted Kennedy, they are both doing everything in their power to bring down the democratic party....and the funny thing is, they actually think they're bringing down the Republicans.
The thing that confused me about Tiger's situation is this.....The NAACP has been after him for years to be their poster boy...well, I actually thought Tiger was half black, half thai. So how did he become totally "black"? Why couldn't he be "thai"? I think he has done a fantastic job of trying to leave race out of his life. He has been discriminated against, of course. But when was the last time you heard him complain or say anything involving his race? He has done so well for himself because he has remained an almost neutral political figure. Hmmmmmm...we could learn something from that!!
As Winston Churchill once said, "If you are not a liberal before age 30, you have no heart. If you are not a conservative after age 30, you have no brain."
Since Tiger is now older than 30, and he isn't an ####, I think we have our irrefutable proof.
As a southern gal, who yes has the accent and all that goes with it. I find it funny when we are referred to as ####. Yet it is #### who send people into outer space, Evented heart transplants and have the Number 1 ranked football team. I say this with drawl and all.
GOT I like you filibuster, I beleive a few here did!
BTW I loved this socal it was refreshing until the politics showed it's dreadful head! (~.~)
Love the southern accent rae, and yes these blogs do turn political from time to time. Two things people love to rant about are sports and politics. As long as it doesn't get out of control, I am fine with it. Wesley Powell and Storm can get out of control sometimes.
