Skip to comments.Bush Wins, Again (LA Slimes editorial)
Posted on 12/13/2004 2:01:47 AM PST by RWR8189
And you thought you were done with the 2004 election. Today the electoral college formally meets to reelect George W. Bush as president. Barring any last-minute surprises, the vote should be 286 for Bush, 252 for John Kerry.
This ratification will elicit yawns instead of the outrage it did in 2000, when the electoral college went for the loser of the popular vote. But don't think 2000 was such an anomaly. The country barely dodged a bullet this time around. Had 59,388 Ohioans switched from Bush to Kerry, 2004 would have repeated the acidic result of the electoral college winner the next president being the popular-vote loser. This time the travesty would have been even greater, as Kerry would have been sworn in despite receiving 3.3 million fewer votes than Bush, who received 543,895 votes fewer than Gore in 2000.
We have often been highly critical of the Bush administration, but because of his decisive win in the popular vote, we surely are glad that he is the certified Ohio winner. Even die-hard supporters of Kerry should thank their unlucky stars that he lost Ohio, to spare the country such an undemocratic outcome.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
I hope you're all aware that the LA Times is now officially part of the VRWC.
They complain and complain and complain. After today - good riddance to the PESTS til 2006.
"Had 59,388 Ohioans switched from Bush to Kerry..."
Just as Elian Gonzalez made the crucial difference in 2000, Lady Antonia Frazier won it for Bush in 2004!
The gripe about the Electoral College is old hat. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
It was no coincidence that in both FLA and OH-during both crucial presidential elections-we had capable public servants, ready to fulfill their duties in the face of extreme political pressure on the part of the left wing, media-supported, Dem. goon squad.
Someone please call Jesse Jack-asson.
They finally, 4 years later, figured out that their "Let the dead decide the popular vote" strategy wasn't working.
She of "if you back Kerry, you will be voting against a savage militaristic foreign policy" fame.
You may have a point.
Move on, looosers.
Bush's margin of victory in Ohio was LARGER than Kerry's margin of victory in Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan and New Hampshire. If 59,388 (or whatever) voters in each of those states switched to Bush, he would have won in a landslide.
If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.
and, let's see, if 10,000 voters had switched to BUSH in about four other states, the win margin would have been even GREATER..GEEZ!
This book is an eye opener - John Fund - Stealing Elections.
Oh man, who let them in? Do we have no standards anymore?
I was told that the VRWC was an exclusive club. How can we maintain that ranking if we allow some cheap third class broadsheet to join?
COUNT ALL THE VOTES! COUNT ALL THE VOTES! Except if they're Republican votes...DON'T COUNT THOSE VOTES!!!
I've always considered Slimes-type rags to be anti-American, but since they're all promoting electoral college elimination, I now consider them subversive.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "new" leftist/bespectacled radical Robert Scheer still writing a column for the L.A. Times?
Where did these people get their journalism degrees, from a Cracker Jack box?
If only 2,682,160 Kerry voters switched to Bush in 18 states plus the District of Columbia, Bush would have won the electoral college 538-0. This is only about 2.2% of the votes, and fewer votes than Bush received in Ohio alone.
If 50,000 or fewer Kerry voters switched to Bush in each of wisconsin, delaware, hawaii, vermont, maine, oregon and rhode island, Bush would have won 331-207.
If, in addition to that, if 83,000 or fewer Kerry voters switched to Bush in each of Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, and Michigan, Bush would have won 376-162.
This would have required a mere 455,449 votes.
Exactly. Which is why in all the hubba bubba about OH, you will never hear Jesse Jackson, the DU tinfoil moonbats and their amen corner in the legacy media mention how much larger Bush's margin of victory could have been. And all the attention now lavished on OH would have been a footnote in the history books.
Living in the FL panhandle, there is never any need to recount votes if you are talking about a Republican. Tallahassee is the only bastion of demorats (FSU), the rest of us are military or just plain conservative. The panhandle from Pensacola to Jacksonville is 2/3 Republican.
Speaking of meaninless footnotes, Bush won a higher percentage of the popular vote than any Democrat since 1840, with the exception of LBJ, FDR, and Samuel Tilden. That's right. Samuel Tilden in 1876 got a higher percentage of the popular vote than Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, John F Kennedy, Harry Truman, Woodrow Wilson, Grover Cleveland, James Buchanan, or Franklin Pierce.
The burning question is, of course, did Samuel Tilden have a mandate?
Had 5,000 voters in NH kept voting for Bush, we don't even need Ohio...
I'm not too familiar with the geography of the area, to be honest.
I just remember reading several stories about how the radical libs weren't able to reconcile themselves to the fact that Bush generated a lot of support among registered Democrats in the state of Florida.
Once again, someone should remind reporters to read the WHOLE Constitution, not just one line in the First Amendment. This is not a democracy and the President is not elected by a direct popular vote. Does Ross Perot own the LAT?
There would have been no travesty - President Bush would NOT have put the country through what algore did.
He would have returned to Crawford quietly, not whined about it.
Nor would he call for abolishing the EC.
Maybe the DUmmies don't realize there are more decent American citizens than they thought.
Yeah. And if my grandmother had balls she'd be my grandfather.
Yeah, and had I won the lottery, I would not be working today but instead on a monthlong trip to the Alps. And had I been born rich, I would not be stressing out over pennies. And I had I kicked my neighbors butt instead og him kicking mine when I was eight, I would not have had to contend with his bullying till I was eleven. And finally, had I worn boxers yesterday, I would not have skidmarks on the inside of my good pants.
Just felt I should share some of "woulda coulda shoulda" moments from my life ;-)
The LA Times whining. What else is new?
What does FSU have to do with Tallahassee being the "last bastion" in the panhandle. Yes, University professors, are overwhelmingly liberal, but it is the state workers there that make up the bulk of the demorat voting block. You must be a gayter.
Also, we must all work diligently in the coming months to convince progressives that the Democratic Party has let them down. They must abandon the party. Their only recourse is to join and work for the Green Party moving forward. I may even register as a Green Party member to swell their voter registration rolls. Divide and conquer.
Begin with putting all known progressives in your sphere of influence on the Green Party mail list from their website. Great fun. Start inundating them with information now.
LA Times is trying to save the Party from the lunatics demanding recounts.
If Kerry had won the electoral college and not the popular vote, they would suddenly be praising the E.C. after four years being spent undermining it.
If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we'd all have a merry Christmas!
If the Senate ever amends its own rules to eliminate filibusters, the Dems will sing that tune loud and long. As it is, their minority has the Senate by the throat.
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.