Help Unstack the Deck At Vote.com

Vote.com ^ | 20 June 2003 | Doc Farmer

[DocFarmer]

Greetings!

A few days ago, Vote.com put up a new subject. "Should American States Recognize Canadian Same-Sex Marriages?" was the question, with replies being sent by e-Mail to the President and to the voter's representatives in Congress. So far, so good. Vote.com does a lot of stuff like this.

But what's odd is that on the first day, the vote was running about 70/30 against. Now, it's running about 75/25 FOR, and it appears that the lib/dem/soc/commies have been stacking the deck. One of my fellow posters on Vote.com did a bit of searching, and found the vote being mentioned on a number of pro-gay sites. I checked with the Chief Technical Officer at Vote.com, and found out that the slant in the vote had nothing to do with their security system. That seems to be intact. But from roughly 8,000 votes on the first day to almost 50,000 votes now (and the normal vote span there is between 8,000 and 15,000), well it just seems a bit fishy to me.

If you'd like to make your voice heard on this subject, just click on this link -

http://www.vote.com/vote/60134952/index.phtml

Many thanks.

Doc Farmer Doha, Qatar

[John Beresford Tipton]

There's a disconnect here.
In domestic relations matters it has always been up to each state, not the federal government, as to whether it recognizes a marriage performed outside the United States. Whereas, within the United States it must, under the Constitution give "full faith and credit" to the acts of another one of the 50 states"

[lilylangtree]

Just thought you'd like to know that at 8:52 a.m. PST a notice was posted calling for freepers to freep this poll at vote.com.

[Between the Lines]

Macro bump

[DocFarmer]

With respect, I don't think it worked. If anything, the percentage has swung more toward the "Yes" votes, giving gays the edge.

[mickie]

11:20EST

75% Yes
25% No

I don't like the way the question was worded.

[DocFarmer]

06:57 EST

77% Yes
23% No

Vote.com always screws up the wording. But considering that immeiately after the first message the split was 72/28, I'd say that the good guys are losin' ground here.