The Winner of the US Presidential Election Is, Again...
 

And the winner of the US Presidential Election, for the second time in a row is.....complete confusion, paranoia, frustration, bickering, and incompetance. Arghh!!!

:wtf: WTF is happening to our voting system? We're in the modern age, after 224 years of practice,and it still comes down to confusion and indecision again. Of course back in the early days when votes were hand counted and riders had to carry the results to Washington from other states, the results took weeks to determine, but this is freaking 2004 for crying out loud! :confused:

The results have been determined.
It is just the loser has refused to give up.

Perhaps if we brought back the practice of dueling...

:eek: dueling? LOL

Bush should have suggested "pistols at dawn!"

Pistols at damn, what a novel idea. Or like Klingons, with batleths to prove who was the better warrior.

BUSH!!!!!!!



I didn't vote. Glad he won!!!!!!! :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

14th very cool avatar.

bush 254
kerry 252



Holy deja vu. At least it isn't Florida again.

What are you watching? CNN?

Bush has 269 evs, and has won Ohio.

If Bush had won by a landslide there would be no dispute and no argument, no problem.........but he didn't so what does that tell you?

That this nation is evenly divided, and not united?

Thanks. From the version that never became.

Depends on how you look at it.

Do you want to go back to the popular vote?

Much was said about Bush being "illegitamate" because Gore won the popular vote.
Looks like Bush won the popular vote by millions, so everyone that thought Gore should have won because of the popular vote should be honest and consistant, and support Bush as the victor, unless of course they are hypocrites.

Look at the map...map don't lie. Red states good, blue states few... stil no landslide?

I have to admit, this waiting thing to decide the presidency is getting on my nerves. This is a clear cut victory for Bush.

Modern presidential election losers need to look back at 1960 when Nixon lost the election. He and Kennedy were separated by 100,000 votes nationwide and Nixon did not pursue a challenge for the good of the country.

We all need to see a little of that attitude again...

Landmass doesn't quite equal a landslide, given the electoral college system. While I must sadly agree (concede, if you will) that Kerry has lost the race, anybody who accumulated better than 200 electoral votes should not be considered to have lost by a landslide.

I'm going to go watch Farenheight 911 and read my Al Franken books now..... :cry:

I was merely saying it wasn't such an overwheling victory that would lend itself to no dispute. If Bush had totally defeated Kerry by and overwhelming amount there would be no dispute. I was not getting into the issue of popular vs electorial college. It is obvious (to me) it is a hard to choice and the american people where very close on trying to decide....for me it is the lesser of two evils...I didn't like either candidate and I think it is seems(when I checked last) it was not a clear cut choice(by an overwhelming margin)........that is ALL I was saying

Yes CNN.

Howls of derisive laughter!

I hate M Moore and Al Franken much more than I dislike Kerry.

I agree that the electoral vote does not constitue a landslide, but the margin of the popular vote should mean something, especially to those that thought it relevant to Gore in 2000.

Map dont lie...Red states rock!

Darth, act your age. :LOL:

In too many of the red states, and yes, the blue, the percentage was incredibly close. That is what Julix is saying, I believe.

I said this at CA, and I'll say it here.

"Ok, I'm making my statement now, before things have a chance to get started. I know everyone has strong feelings right now, and are going to be tempted to say things they normally wouldn't. For some reason, you can say things you would never say to a person's face if you say 'damn Republican/Democrat'. Don't forget that there are real people behind any kind of statement like that.

We *all* want a better country. We *all* value family, home, prosperity and rights. We *all* try to create the best world we can. The election system is the way we try our best to achieve this. The partisan accusation is the unfortunate side effect.

We all have to 'live' here. Try not to say anything you wouldn't say to someone's face, when that face has a name, and it's someone you would normally call a freind.

That's all. I want to congradualte Bush and his constituents for showing the strength of their convictions, and the Democrats for doing the same, and both for showing grace. I am speaking of the millions of us, btw. All of us, because without us, they would have no power.

Lol... *ahem* Thank you, and don't forget to support me in the next election.

You all know what I'm saying."

Michelle -

That was one of the most intelligently thought out and well written posts I've ever seen when discussing the topic of politics. You did yourself proud, kiddo!

For the rest, I'm glad that some can discuss politics in an intelligent manner, but to those that lower themselves to the level of 10-year olds saying the equivalent of "my daddy can kick your daddy's ass", you should take the time to think about what you are saying and why?

Someone had to win and someone had to lose. Those that were on the side of the losing candidate are probably feeling somewhat disappointed. Let's not add to that disappointment by being a jerk on top of it. If the shoe were on the other foot, I'm sure that you would be in agreement.

The election is over (thank god!), let's all act like the adults we say we are and move on...

Best,
Bryan

Ok, if you want a Spock-like deadpan response, I can go that route as well.

With a greatly increased turnout as a percentage of voters, Bush won by a greater margin than any president in over a decade.

The Bush margin of victory is a higher quality win than the 2000 election.

While not a Reagan landslide, this is a significant win.

Huge margin, plus gains in house and senate means Bush does indeed have a governing mandate.

I was deliberately tweaking Darth.

Your right, the popular vote does mean something. It wasn't a landslide, but it is a majority and it means we're going to get the government we collectively deserve. By the numbers, Bush got more of the popular vote than Clinton did in either of his two elections. It means there can be no challenge whether he was legitamately chosen by the electorate, a claim that was open to serious question the first time around. It's one thing to be on the loosing side, it's another to wonder if you lost fair and square. No arguement on last night, but in 2000..... .

But that's ancient history now.

That makes a helluva lot more sense that "Red states rock!", which makes you sound like a sports fan. ;)

I'm so glad to be on a board where there's no flaming over this topic. Another board I'm on has erupted into a flame war, with me recieving a few "threating" pm's about my choice for President.
The more I'm here, the more I like it. I salute you, members of Colonial Fleets! :salute:

:viper: :viper2:

I'm just sick of people telling me that I should have voted party line to what they wanted. As far as when I registered to vote I was unaffiliated and still are! I made an informed decision when I cast mine. Will be counting the days till the next election, and no I am not revealling my vote either. That is between me and my maker!

Well, it was meant to sound foolish.

And old friend with diametrically opposing political views sent me a study that "discovered" that "red states" recieved more federal dollars than the "blue states" over the last four years.

While I do not discount the probability of preferential dispensing of the pork, I did find a few problems with the study's methodology.
Less populated states are always going to be greater per-capita beneficiaries than more populous states.

But would it have passed Kerry's global test, Darth?

I'm glad to see that the "healing" is already underway, here. Although, I didn't notice many bruises or black eyes.

:D

It's very healthy to have disagreements since, many times, they give us an opportunity to learn more about the other (person's) point of view. Overall, we do a pretty good job in not letting those disagreements get out of hand, although, we do have our moments.

:D ;)

Good job, folks! :thumbsup:

Putting spin aside (or at least trying to) :) --

I don't view the election results as a mandate, but more of an affirmation of current policies. Not an overwhelming affirmation, but an "approval", nonetheless.

Given the results, it would seem prudent for the "electees" to pay a bit more attention to some of the issues from the "other side" and to, at least, try to extend an olive branch, of sorts, by addressing some of those issues. They are important to a great many folks. That may help to accelerate the "healing process".

"Red Rocks"? -- aren't they in Colorado? ;)