Re-Election..

classicalclarinet · Post by **classicalclarinet** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:43 am

Nonwithstanding the Ohioan provisional ballots (which I don't think will boost Kerry) seems like Bush won.. he even won the popular vote majority, so I can't argue..

I guess I'll slink back to my chair, not read papers for a while and nurse my ego back to health... heck, even the senate Republican Majority grew bigger...

Perhaps in coming years things will change..

Of course, you Bush Fans oughta be real happy.

Episcopus · Post by **Episcopus** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 4:13 pm

Why do you wink to the Bush fans that takes out the post LOSER reflection tone which was effective. If it was a hateful wink I retract my advice for a retraction thereof.

Emma_85 · Post by **Emma_85** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 4:44 pm

He's definatley won, Kerry's just conceded. 4 more years of Bush

... OMG...

Democritus · Post by **Democritus** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:37 pm

Emma_85 wrote:He's definatley won, Kerry's just conceded. 4 more years of Bush ... OMG...

http://www.blackboxvoting.com/

http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

EmptyMan · Post by **EmptyMan** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:52 pm

I don't know what to think about Bush's win. I am socially conservative but economically liberal. I agree with his stance on stem-cell research, and the Iraq and Afghan wars, but his tax cuts scare me. Where the heck is my party?

classicalclarinet · Post by **classicalclarinet** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:11 am

Where mine is...

klewlis · Post by **klewlis** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:14 am

I guess I don't really care too much cuz as long as NAFTA is still in place, Canada gets screwed regardless of who is in office in the US. :)

although I do feel his effects on the world at large, and for that I am dismayed.

anyway, the REAL question is:
who watched Jon Stewart's election special last night? It was hilarious. :)

annis · Post by **annis** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:15 am

klewlis wrote:who watched Jon Stewart's election special last night? It was hilarious.

It was. I have to say I found some of it gut-wrenching, though.

classicalclarinet · Post by **classicalclarinet** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:25 am

ach, I missed it.

EmptyMan · Post by **EmptyMan** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 1:46 am

classicalclarinet wrote:Where mine is...

Lol. They have a Reagan Democrat party? Where can I sign up.

Rhuiden · Post by **Rhuiden** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 3:18 am

EmptyMan wrote:I am socially conservative but economically liberal.

That is an interesting combination. With most people who are split, they are economically conservative and socially liberal. What are some issues that you are economically liberal on?

Rhuiden

cweb255 · Post by **cweb255** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 12:47 pm

Economically conservative and socially liberal. But heck, I'm moving to Canada now. I don't think I can stand four more years of this hypocritical bible thumping *probably never even read the bible* neofascist.

Rhuiden · Post by **Rhuiden** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 3:35 pm

cweb255 wrote:Economically conservative and socially liberal. But heck, I'm moving to Canada now. I don't think I can stand four more years of this hypocritical bible thumping *probably never even read the bible* neofascist.

Have a safe trip.

PeterD · Post by **PeterD** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 4:08 pm

The Uk paper, Daily Mirror, expressed what's on the minds of billions of people around the world with this front page headline:

How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB?

Indeed!

Here's a video snippet to 4 more years of GWB:

www.hategun.com/features/mistaken/index.html

~PeterD

Episcopus · Post by **Episcopus** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 4:28 pm

Have you already subtracted the blacks

PeterD · Post by **PeterD** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:11 pm

Episcopus wrote:Have you already subtracted the blacks

Actually, the headline should have been "How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB or PSYCHOPATHIC?"

There's is a statistical study published in the highly- regarded British medical journal, Lancet, done by scientists at John Hopkins University, showing, at a minimum, 100,000 excess civilian deaths after the Iraqi invasion.

All these senseless deaths because some one with an IQ of a doormat had this wild hunch that Saddam was dangerous to the US. And the American electorate chose him for 4 more years --amazing!

"God Bless America"

~PeterD

11/4/04: Edited slightly to clean up language. -Marie

Democritus · Post by **Democritus** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 5:32 pm

cweb255 wrote:Economically conservative and socially liberal. But heck, I'm moving to Canada now. I don't think I can stand four more years of this hypocritical bible thumping *probably never even read the bible* neofascist.

Don't leave, cweb, we need you here. Remember that the arrogant are always brought down, in the end.

We have work to do. The voting machines need to be repaired, and the poor misguided Bush voters need the wool pulled from over their eyes.

This is a marathon, not a sprint. We have not even begun to fight.

PeterD · Post by **PeterD** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 6:03 pm

Democritus wrote:Don't leave, cweb, we need you here. Remember that the arrogant are always brought down, in the end.

This is a marathon, not a sprint. We have not even begun to fight.

Democritus is right, cweb. Stay and fight!

The majority of Americans are good people: less than 20% of the American population actually voted for bush -- i.e, the YAHOOS are in the minority! Sure, there is a lot of work to be done -- social, enviromental, economic, and strengthening the peace movement -- but it WILL be done, and the sooner when good people stay and fight.

~PeterD

p.s. besides, cweb, as great a country as Canada is, I think a boy from Tenn. might find the winters a bit cold.

Emma_85 · Post by **Emma_85** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 8:37 pm

What do you mean only 20% voted for Bush?

He had more votes than Kerry I thought?

I agree with the Daily Mirror headline, there was also a similar one on a German tabloid, but on a serious one too.
Die Bild: "Victory using the Schröder-trick" (i.e. they say he won the election the same way Schröder won it)
Die Zeit's headlines (very serious paper, i.e. thicker than most books): "The hated winner" and "The man who won anyway"
other newspapers:
Berner Zeitung (Switzerland): "After election-outcome (there is) cause for concern"
Tages Anzeige (Switzerland): "Threat of a oneparty-dictatorship"
Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland): "Bush's win is not good news"
Blikk (Hungary): „Four more years, another four years of war?“

Turpissimus · Post by **Turpissimus** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 9:25 pm

What do you mean only 20% voted for Bush? Confused He had more votes than Kerry I thought?

I suppose he means 20% of the total population, including those americans who either did not vote or were not of voting age.

PeterD · Post by **PeterD** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 9:26 pm

Emma_85 wrote:What do you mean only 20% voted for Bush?

Hi Emma,

The population of the US is just over 300,000,000.

He had more votes than Kerry I thought?

We can't be sure of that, especially in Ohio, the Buckeye State. All exit polls in Ohio had Kerry ahead by 5 points. What happened? Exit polls don't make mistakes. There were many irregularities reported in Ohio (as well as other key states) of voter intimidation, voided ballots in poor and minority precincts, not to mention the uncounted ballots. Plus, last year, the CEO of DIEBOLD, the company that makes the electronic voting machines (the ones that leave no paper trail!) promised the republicans that he would deliver Ohio to Bush. Don't you like a guy who keeps his promises?

Anyway, if you have some time, check out www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.pb and www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=392&row=0 .

Take care,

~PeterD

p.s. Question: How will the Americans conduct proper elections in Iraq when they can't conduct fair elections at home?

Post by **Jeff Tirey** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 10:56 pm

PeterD wrote: All these senseless deaths because some one with an IQ of a doormat had this wild hunch that Saddam was dangerous to the US. And the American electorate chose him for 4 more years --amazing!

I edited your post because I don't like even the suggestion of bad language.

mariek · Post by **mariek** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 11:15 pm

PeterD wrote: Anyway, if you have some time, check out www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.pb and www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=392&row=0 .

I couldn't get to the tompaine link, but got the gregplaast to load OK.

mariek · Post by **mariek** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 11:22 pm

jeff wrote:
PeterD wrote: All these senseless deaths because some one with an IQ of a doormat had this wild hunch that Saddam was dangerous to the US. And the American electorate chose him for 4 more years --amazing!
I edited your post because I don't like even the suggestion of bad language.

Sorry, Jeff. I should have bleeped out the entire word.

Rhuiden · Post by **Rhuiden** » Thu Nov 04, 2004 11:52 pm

PeterD wrote:We can't be sure of that, especially in Ohio, the Buckeye State. All exit polls in Ohio had Kerry ahead by 5 points. What happened? Exit polls don't make mistakes.

That is incorrect, the exit polls have been wrong in the last 3 elections. I have been hearing that reported for two days by several of the major news organizations as well as various talk radio shows. They have reported that this time the exit polls were weighted 60-40 women because most of the people conducting the exit poll were women. Also, it was not scientific because no attempt was made to get a representative sample. Sounds like some errors were made to me.

PeterD wrote:There were many irregularities reported in Ohio (as well as other key states) of voter intimidation, voided ballots in poor and minority precincts, not to mention the uncounted ballots.

Were is the evidence of these reported irregularities? Someone can report anything but that does not make it true. If there were problems, the news media would have reported nothing else for the past 2 days and Kerry would not have conceded.

PeterD wrote:Plus, last year, the CEO of DIEBOLD, the company that makes the electronic voting machines (the ones that leave no paper trail!) promised the republicans that he would deliver Ohio to Bush. Don't you like a guy who keeps his promises?

Rumors and falsehoods like this have been circulating since 2000. Do you not think that the democrats and republicans would have had people examine the machines to see if they could be tampered with in any way? Do you really believe things like this or do you just say them to get someone to react? Better watch out for the black helicopters. (no offense intended, just having a little fun with you)

I will check out the link though to see what it says.

Rhuiden

Eureka · Post by **Eureka** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 12:02 am

I agree with Rhuiden on the exit polls. What people say when interviewed is not always true.

For example, most pre-election polls here are done via telephone. However, one of the groups who do polling do it via asking people face-to-face who they'll vote for. This poll always predicts a Labor win. It seems, therefore, that some people vote Liberal but never admit it (even to a stranger). These exit polls would have a similar problem.

Rhuiden · Post by **Rhuiden** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 12:34 pm

Another thing I have heard reported about the exit polls was that they were conducted primarily in urban areas. Those are not very representative of the country as a whole. This brings the question....were these truly errors or were the polls purposely conducted in a manner to get a "desired" result?

The pollsters are professionals and are paid large sums of money to conduct their polls. I find it very hard to believe that they suddenly forgot how to do their job properly. The only possible answer then is that the exit polls were planned and conducted in such a was as to get the "desired" result. I believe they were trying to suppress the republican vote in much the same way as what happened in the Florida panhandle in 2000.

OK, so there is my conspiracy theory.

Rhuiden

PeterD · Post by **PeterD** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 6:51 pm

Rhuiden wrote:Do you really believe things like this or do you just say them to get someone to react?

Coming from a superb investigative journalist like Greg Palast, yes I do. Healthy scepticism keeps a democracy strong.

By the way, don't you think electronic voting machines that leave no paper audit trail is odd? These machines leave no permanent record. How do you verify if a vote was counted or not?

[Rhuiden, I have a feeling William's patience with us is running thin.

]

William · Post by **William** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 7:42 pm

PeterD wrote:[Rhuiden, I have a feeling William's patience with us is running thin. ]

No, I'm okay. Carry on...

William

PeterD · Post by **PeterD** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 9:57 pm

William wrote:
PeterD wrote:[Rhuiden, I have a feeling William's patience with us is running thin. ]
No, I'm okay. Carry on...

William

Excellent...

Now, as for the Ohio exit polls getting it wrong, I find that hard to believe. The people who conduct these polls are exceptional in their field; they are not first-timers; they are professionals; and, they asked the same question they asked in Florida in 2000: Who did you vote for? Remember the Florida count in 2000 when the exit polls showed that Gore won? When they finally got around to counting ALL the votes, Gore did win.

I am not saying this because I did not like the outcome of the election. True, it is no secret that I believe Bush to be a horrible president who simply got away with bloody murder (literally), by avoiding serious issues like the war, the economy and the environment, and usurping them with petty issues like god, gays and guns, etc. I thought Americans (and this fragile world) deserved much better than Bush or Kerry. No, I am saying this because it's strange that the pollsters tally did not match the total votes counted. And I simply ask, why not? Were not all the votes counted?

~PeterD

Rhuiden · Post by **Rhuiden** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 10:36 pm

PeterD wrote:Remember the Florida count in 2000 when the exit polls showed that Gore won? When they finally got around to counting ALL the votes, Gore did win.

What do you base this on? I have heard that 5 or 6 different news organizations did recounts after everything was done and Bush won each time. Had Bush not won, it would have been on the front page of every newspaper and on every news show in the world. I believe it is time for people to let this go.

PeterD wrote:No, I am saying this because it's strange that the pollsters tally did not match the total votes counted. And I simply ask, why not? Were not all the votes counted?

I think the answer is obvious. Pollsters do not ask every single person who they voted for. As I said in a previous post, it does not appear that they were trying to get a representative sample. First, the exit polls were concentrated in urban areas. Second, the exit polls were weighted 60 % women and 40 % men. Next, not everyone who is asked will respond to the exit pollsters and some who do will lie to the pollster. Combine these with the fact that on Monday (in the final pre-election polls) almost every major poll showed Bush winning 51% to 48% and the exit polls do not look very reliable.

Bush won with an overwelming mandate, the only question now is whether or not the Republican majority in the House and Senate will grow backbones and begin to implement the conservative agenda.

Rhuiden

PeterD · Post by **PeterD** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:15 pm

Rhuiden wrote:
PeterD wrote:Remember the Florida count in 2000 when the exit polls showed that Gore won? When they finally got around to counting ALL the votes, Gore did win.
What do you base this on? I have heard that 5 or 6 different news organizations did recounts after everything was done and Bush won each time. Had Bush not won, it would have been on the front page of every newspaper and on every news show in the world.

It WAS frontpage news all over the world. The BBC even did a documentary on it. It's just that your mainstream media did not have the backbone to cover it. Check out www.gregpalast.com for the links.

Bush won with an overwhelming mandate,

A 51 - 48 split of votes 'counted' is not exactly an 'overwhelming' majority. Remember, he has the support of less than 20% of the US population (i.e., 59m / 300m = < 20%).

the only question now is whether or not the Republican majority in the House and Senate will grow backbones and begin to implement the conservative agenda.

Be careful what you wish for...you just might get it.

~PeterD

classicalclarinet · Post by **classicalclarinet** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:33 pm

Exit polls would lose their reliability in such tight elections as these, it's harder to get right even when you use all the methods possible. Take the numerous polls (telephone polls, more accurate than exit polls) who predicted bush and kerry would tie.

classicalclarinet · Post by **classicalclarinet** » Fri Nov 05, 2004 11:33 pm

the only question now is whether or not the Republican majority in the House and Senate will grow backbones and begin to implement the conservative agenda.

Filibuster, anyone?

EmptyMan · Post by **EmptyMan** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:23 am

cweb255 wrote:Economically conservative and socially liberal. But heck, I'm moving to Canada now. I don't think I can stand four more years of this hypocritical bible thumping *probably never even read the bible* neofascist.

Lol. That's a trip, I would rather have facism than communism

. Have a good time in Canada

EmptyMan · Post by **EmptyMan** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:26 am

All these senseless deaths because some one with an IQ of a doormat had this wild hunch that Saddam was dangerous to the US. And the American electorate chose him for 4 more years --amazing!

Lol. The funny thing about the ignorant comment is Bush's SAT's were higher than Kerry's.

classicalclarinet · Post by **classicalclarinet** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:27 am

I thought it was an IQ-test?

EmptyMan · Post by **EmptyMan** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:42 am

classicalclarinet wrote:I thought it was an IQ-test?

IQ, whatever. I am sick of people insulting Bush. Just because he does not speak like a pretentious bafoon does not mean he is not intellegent.

Episcopus · Post by **Episcopus** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:54 am

EmptyMan wrote:
classicalclarinet wrote:I thought it was an IQ-test?
IQ, whatever. I am sick of people insulting Bush. Just because he does not speak like a pretentious bafoon does not mean he is not intellegent.

hahaha

check how inverse this is, just for you

http://media.skoopy.com/vids/vid_00323.mov

Eureka · Post by **Eureka** » Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:59 am

Episcopus wrote:hahaha

check how inverse this is, just for you

http://media.skoopy.com/vids/vid_00323.mov

Bringing the nation togeather.