Skip to comments.
BUSH BY A LANDSLIDE
National Review (The Corner) ^
| 8-3-04
| Peter Robinson
Posted on 08/03/2004 7:02:20 AM PDT by veronica
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-131 next last
To: Old Sarge
I'm just not comfortable with the numbers; anything below 60% and the left will continue screaming that "Bush Has No Mandate!"The left will not stop screaming no matter what, you should not allow that to discomfort you.
I always remind myself what Rush has been saying for years: The more power they loose the kookier they get. This election season we are seeing that play out in spades IMNSHO.
41
posted on
08/03/2004 7:22:00 AM PDT
by
Mister Baredog
((Part of the Reagan legacy is to re-elect G.W. Bush))
To: EQAndyBuzz
Which is what I hate about national elections now. they aren't national.
To: Old Sarge
Reagan won a landslide at 55%. Anything more than 10 points is a landslide.
43
posted on
08/03/2004 7:22:16 AM PDT
by
Wphile
(Keep the UN out of Iraq)
To: veronica
Does it take into account all the Democrap fraud that is bound to occur? . . . as happened last time in WI (union fraud; vote buying), IO (more people voted than were registered), MI (union s stuffed ballot boxes), MO (polls kept open late), PA (documented busloads of blacks going to several different polling places), NM (2 missing ballot boxes in Republican districts in a state decided by 500 votes), CA (millions of illegals registered; 1 million absentee ballots, including military, never counted), and FL (on my God!) . . . . O.K., so I am probably forgetting some states and some instances of fraud. But, remember that Bush "lost" all of these escept MO and, yes, FL. The point is: if the election is close at all, be afraid! Be very afraid!
44
posted on
08/03/2004 7:22:28 AM PDT
by
MrChips
To: kinghorse
and yeah, once again it'll come down to the debates.
To: Peach
Why don't you tell us what you really think of the guy.
46
posted on
08/03/2004 7:24:12 AM PDT
by
SittinYonder
(I was a believer)
To: Mister Baredog
The more power they loose the kookier they get. This election season we are seeing that play out in spades And what happens when they realize they have nothing more to lose?
I'm just hoping the MSCA missions we've planned don't get used.
To: cripplecreek
Voters will get into the polling booth and have their moment of truth about John Kerry, Michael Moore, Howard Dean, and Islamist terrorism.
GWB wins.
48
posted on
08/03/2004 7:24:25 AM PDT
by
angkor
To: veronica
BUSH BY A LANDSLIDE
Any more photo-ops like the one showing Kerry making his point by aiming his
finger to the chest of the young Marine (in Pennsylvania?)...
and it will be a landslide.
But no time to get over-confident! The loyal opposition has their "Band Of Lawyers",
writs to keep voting booths open late in places like St. Louis and
cigarettes to trade for votes in Wisconsin...and probably worse...
And "Remember The Florida Panhandle!"
(OK, doesn't quite have the ring of "The Alamo".)
49
posted on
08/03/2004 7:24:55 AM PDT
by
VOA
To: Old Sarge
Such a number would mean a landslide in electoral votes.
50
posted on
08/03/2004 7:26:35 AM PDT
by
justshutupandtakeit
(America's Enemies: foreign and domestic RATmedia agree Bush must be destroyed.)
To: veronica
My gut instinct is that this election is going to be a repeat of 2000 - GWB losing the popular vote yet winning the electoral college.
51
posted on
08/03/2004 7:26:42 AM PDT
by
crv16
To: Republican Red
"What was the prediction in 2000?"Ah, you've hit the nail on the head: the first attempt at extrapolating from his data, Mr. Fair's prediction was a flop.
52
posted on
08/03/2004 7:28:26 AM PDT
by
Redbob
To: Old Sarge
I'm just hoping the MSCA missions we've planned don't get used.I haven't had my coffee yet. What does that mean?
And what happens when they realize they have nothing more to lose?
I think they'll nominate M. Moore next time. LOL
53
posted on
08/03/2004 7:28:44 AM PDT
by
Mister Baredog
((Part of the Reagan legacy is to re-elect G.W. Bush))
To: VOA
Not many will get over confident over this model. I am sure that before the election Kerry will regain the lead in several polls.
54
posted on
08/03/2004 7:29:21 AM PDT
by
KJacob
(No military in the history of the world has fought so hard and so often for the freedom of others.)
To: veronica
In November 2003 Albert Wang predicted 45 State Bush Blowout.
In August 2004 Albert Wang predicts 45 State Bush Blowout.
When America takes a good look at the Democratic product they will Vote W.
To: crv16
I don't think so.
I think Bush will win by 3-5%. But who knows...
56
posted on
08/03/2004 7:31:11 AM PDT
by
veronica
(Hate-triotism, the religion of leftists, liberals, anti-semites, and other cranks...)
To: Old Sarge
A landslide of 57%? I've never heard it referred to as a landslide before.There can be popular vote landslides and electoral college landslides. Just for comparison, here are a few landslides of the last century. I think 1920 is particularly interesting because it clearly was a popular vote landslide but the electoral college wasn't in the same class as the others. On the other hand, 1984 wasn't quite up to the other popular vote landslides, but was right there in electoral votes:
1984
Reagan 58.8% 525 electoral votes
Monday 40.5% 13 electoral votes
1972
Nixon 60.3% 520 electoral votes
McGovern 37.7% 17 electoral votes
1964
Johnson 60.6% 486 electoral votes
Goldwater 38.6% 52 electoral votes
1936
Roosevelt 60.6% 523 electoral votes
Landon 36.8% 8 electoral votes
1920
Harding 60.5% 404 electoral votes
Cox 34.2% 127 electoral votes
To: Mister Baredog
MSCA - Military Support of Civilian Authority.
It's one of the National Guard's primary missions. Disaster relief, search & rescue...
...riot control and civil disorder.
To: veronica
Yesterday, my stepdaughter-in-law asked who I was for. When I said Bush, she said she wasn't really for Kerry, but she wished there was an alternative to Bush. I asked why, because I consider Bush to be among the top 5 presidents of all time. Then I noticed her TV turned to ABC News. I told her if she kept watching that crap, she would never hear the truth and was being filled with propaganda on an epic scale. I told her to ask me about any issues she thought were killers for voting for Bush. She said, "The deficit" and asked if it was true it was bigger than ever. I told her yes, it was true in dollars, but not as a percentage. She asked what that meant so we got into economics 101. I explained that if, back in the 60's, she was making $100.00 a week and had a debt of $5,000.00, then found herself in the 90's with a weekly income of $800.00, but with a debt of $30,000.00, that she was making 8 times as much, but had a debt of 6 times as much. I asked her which was the better situation. Unlike the rabid Dims, she understood that having bigger numbers did not outweigh lower percentages. I'll make a Republican of her yet.
59
posted on
08/03/2004 7:34:42 AM PDT
by
trebb
(Ain't God good . . .)
To: Old Sarge
...riot control and civil disorder.Thanks, I'm going for the coffee now.
60
posted on
08/03/2004 7:36:15 AM PDT
by
Mister Baredog
((Part of the Reagan legacy is to re-elect G.W. Bush))
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 121-131 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson