
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.

Emma_85 wrote:He's definatley won, Kerry's just conceded. 4 more years of Bush... OMG...
It was. I have to say I found some of it gut-wrenching, though.klewlis wrote:who watched Jon Stewart's election special last night? It was hilarious.
Actually, the headline should have been "How can 59,054,087 people be so DUMB or PSYCHOPATHIC?"Episcopus wrote:Have you already subtracted the blacks
Don't leave, cweb, we need you here. Remember that the arrogant are always brought down, in the end.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.
Democritus is right, cweb. Stay and fight!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.
Hi Emma,Emma_85 wrote:What do you mean only 20% voted for Bush?
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?He had more votes than Kerry I thought?
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 .
jeff wrote:I edited your post because I don't like even the suggestion of bad language.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!
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: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.
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: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.
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)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?
Coming from a superb investigative journalist like Greg Palast, yes I do. Healthy scepticism keeps a democracy strong.Rhuiden wrote:Do you really believe things like this or do you just say them to get someone to react?
Excellent...William wrote:No, I'm okay. Carry on...PeterD wrote:[Rhuiden, I have a feeling William's patience with us is running thin.]
William
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: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 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.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?
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.Rhuiden wrote: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.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.
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%).Bush won with an overwhelming 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.
Lol. That's a trip, I would rather have facism than communismcweb255 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.
hahahaEmptyMan wrote: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.classicalclarinet wrote:I thought it was an IQ-test?
Bringing the nation togeather.Episcopus wrote:hahaha
check how inverse this is, just for you
http://media.skoopy.com/vids/vid_00323.mov