Bush Won!!!

[Jonathan]

Or could be the one thing that stops the Gulf stream from contiuiing, hence creating those 3 big storms, all this comes from that very very very scientific movie, The day after tommorow


It would then freeze your/our economies...permanently

I like that movie; ended up buying it...
A nice breather from the usual blood n' guts war movies

[ChrisTech]

I may have been watching the wrong channel, but
I did not see Bush declare victory last night.

Plus, isn't it the Electorial votes before Popularity vote?
Or maybe the other way around...

Even so, wouldn't he have won if the ballots added up
with him in favor even if he had given up?

Few notes.

Bush's victory was the NARROWEST win for a sitting president since Woodrow Wilson in 1916.

In spite of Bush's win, the majority of Americans still think the country is headed in the wrong direction (56%), think the war wasn't worth fighting (51%), and don’t approve of the job George W. Bush is doing (52%).

There are nearly 300 million Americans -- 200 million of them of voting age. We only lost by three and a half million! That's not a landslide -- it means we're almost there. Imagine losing by 20 million.

Over 55 million Americans voted for Kerry. That's more than the total number of voters who voted for either Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Gore. Again, more people voted for Kerry than Reagan. If the media are looking for a trend it should be this -- that so many Americans were, for the first time since Kennedy, willing to vote for an out-and-out liberal.

[Buddha]

all this comes from that very very very scientific movie, The day after tommorow

My support for Global Warming comes from $50 a barrel oil and a consumptive economy with import deficit of $54 billion and imports growing twice as fast as exports, the US economy is dependent on consumer spending. But I think you two have the right idea, time to relax, watch a movie and forget about all this political-economical BS.

The next big CBO report isn't out till January anyway. Ok ... I admit am not very good at relaxing.

[Frank Hagan]

Few notes.

Bush's victory was the NARROWEST win for a sitting president since Woodrow Wilson in 1916.

In spite of Bush's win, the majority of Americans still think the country is headed in the wrong direction (56%), think the war wasn't worth fighting (51%), and don’t approve of the job George W. Bush is doing (52%).

There are nearly 300 million Americans -- 200 million of them of voting age. We only lost by three and a half million! That's not a landslide -- it means we're almost there. Imagine losing by 20 million.

Over 55 million Americans voted for Kerry. That's more than the total number of voters who voted for either Reagan, Bush I, Clinton or Gore. Again, more people voted for Kerry than Reagan. If the media are looking for a trend it should be this -- that so many Americans were, for the first time since Kennedy, willing to vote for an out-and-out liberal.

Statistics are so fun. Everyone is trying to spin them, and I detect enough spin in yours to make this a fun discussion. Before I pick nits, I do think you're right ... the "overwhelming mandate" talk from those on my side of the aisle is just spin. The electorate, as it often does, favored one candidate by just a few percentage points over the other. That means the positions taken by both candidates were close to the electorate's concerns.

So what were those positions? Kerry moved so fast to the center that everyone got whiplash and accused him of flip-flopping. The biggest concern his campaign had was of him being labeled a "liberal", and he worked hard to assure everyone he would kick ass just like Republicans promise to do.

He did not run on reduced military and intelligence spending, pro-abortion rights, more domestic welfare spending, fairness to union workers, economic justice, women's rights, etc. He tried to run as a moderate, not a liberal.

In Kerry's rush to the middle, he almost met the majority of the American people. But given the numbers you cited, about Bush's job approval, direction of the country, management of the war effort ... how do you explain that a moderate democrat nee liberal couldn't win the popular vote? Especially in a state like Ohio, with large union membership, lousy economy, and traditional Democrat values?

Liberalism needs to jettison the leftists and get back to the liberalism of Harry Truman, Jack Kennedy, and Scoop Jackson. The Michael Moore crowd is sinking you guys ... along with those mush-headed "stars" out of Hollywood, few of whom have any idea what's going on (there are notable exceptions, like Mike Farrell and Susan Sarandon, but most of the rest should just shut up and sing or dance.)

[ChrisTech]

In Kerry's rush to the middle, he almost met the majority of the American people. But given the numbers you cited, about Bush's job approval, direction of the country, management of the war effort ... how do you explain that a moderate democrat nee liberal couldn't win the popular vote? Especially in a state like Ohio, with large union membership, lousy economy, and traditional Democrat values?

Liberalism needs to jettison the leftists and get back to the liberalism of Harry Truman, Jack Kennedy, and Scoop Jackson. The Michael Moore crowd is sinking you guys ... along with those mush-headed "stars" out of Hollywood, few of whom have any idea what's going on (there are notable exceptions, like Mike Farrell and Susan Sarandon, but most of the rest should just shut up and sing or dance.)

This could be part of it

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041105/ap_on_el_pr/voting_problems

"COLUMBUS, Ohio - An error with an electronic voting system gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus, elections officials said. Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. Bush's total should have been recorded as 365."

"In one North Carolina county, more than 4,500 votes were lost in this election because officials mistakenly believed a computer that stored ballots electronically could hold more data than it did."

or

"But in Perry County, a punch-card system reported about 75 more votes than there are voters in one precinct. Workers tried to cancel the count when the tabulator broke down midway through, but the machine instead double-counted an unknown number in the first batch. The mistake will be corrected, officials say."

Wonder how many more problems around the country with voting problems and miscounts happened?

According to whatever news channel was on last night, they stated that the USA's voting ways are terrible. That its all de-centeralized. No main office, ect. That would of been nightly news I believe. Nov. 3rd actually, it was the day after the election, and they were talkin about all the problems, including people handing out leaflets telling people they could vote on "the 3rd of Nov." and others telling people that "if any member of your family had been found guilty of a crime, your entire family could not vote".

Trying to find an archive on their website now of it.

[Jonathan]

...including people handing out leaflets telling people they could vote on "the 3rd of Nov." and others telling people that "if any member of your family had been found guilty of a crime, your entire family could not vote".

Trying to find an archive on their website now of it.

I hate people who interfer with elections to ensure the
success of their side. I pray to God they weren't on Bush's side.

As for the machines, I don't know... You'd think they would
have gone through extensive testing, plus the fact both
sides had people watching the polls + polling officials...

[Jonathan]

Just gotta post this URL http://www.lolatkerry.com/

[Frank Hagan]

This could be part of it

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041105/ap_on_el_pr/voting_problems

"COLUMBUS, Ohio - An error with an electronic voting system gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in suburban Columbus, elections officials said. Franklin County's unofficial results had Bush receiving 4,258 votes to Democrat John Kerry's 260 votes in a precinct in Gahanna. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. Bush's total should have been recorded as 365."

"In one North Carolina county, more than 4,500 votes were lost in this election because officials mistakenly believed a computer that stored ballots electronically could hold more data than it did."

or

"But in Perry County, a punch-card system reported about 75 more votes than there are voters in one precinct. Workers tried to cancel the count when the tabulator broke down midway through, but the machine instead double-counted an unknown number in the first batch. The mistake will be corrected, officials say."

Wonder how many more problems around the country with voting problems and miscounts happened?

According to whatever news channel was on last night, they stated that the USA's voting ways are terrible. That its all de-centeralized. No main office, ect. That would of been nightly news I believe. Nov. 3rd actually, it was the day after the election, and they were talkin about all the problems, including people handing out leaflets telling people they could vote on "the 3rd of Nov." and others telling people that "if any member of your family had been found guilty of a crime, your entire family could not vote".

Trying to find an archive on their website now of it.

The type of errors you cited were not "ballot box stuffing", but normal glitches. Unless someone is directing the results from black helicopters hovering overhead, it can be expected that the overcounts, undercounts and other mistakes don't favor any particular candidate. They hit them both equally.

I have heard the joke about voting on a different day every election year since the 1968 election ... it usually goes "Because of higher expected turnouts, it is recommended that Democrats vote on Nov. 2, and Republicans vote on Nov. 3" I actually heard it this way this year, from a liberal cousin. The stories from the wild eyed Dems (as opposed to the wild eyed Repubs) is that Republicans were seriously supporting this kind of thing. Nonsense.

I also doubt the stories about phone calls telling people if they have unpaid parking tickets, they can't vote. Phone banks are incredibly expensive to set up, and people with the money to set one up want to have more impact than the very little impact this kind of ruse would have.

Its hard to say that votes were suppressed when you have the highest turnout in decades. I haven't seen the figures yet, but I suspect minority voting was higher than the record setting year of 2000. The one thing that may have happened this year is that the 4 million evangelical Christians who didn't vote in 2000 may have gone to the polls this time. So if you need a boogeyman, you can pick on them.