Bush Wins, Again (LA Slimes editorial)

LA Times ^ | December 13, 2004

[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.

[RWR8189]

DUmmies can't believe that the Slimes is not frothing at the mouth over the election that we "stole"

I hope you're all aware that the LA Times is now officially part of the VRWC.

[goldstategop]

They complain and complain and complain. After today - good riddance to the PESTS til 2006.

[agere_contra]

"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!

[goldstategop]

The gripe about the Electoral College is old hat. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[West Coast Conservative]

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.

I can't believe this is from the LA Slimes. Whatever...I still hate the LA Times!!

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Don't forget Ken Blackwell!

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.

[beyond the sea]

Bush Wins, Again

Someone please call Jesse Jack-asson.

[lizma]

They're just play acting sanctimonious while planning their 2008 "Let the dead decide the E.C. vote" strategy.

They finally, 4 years later, figured out that their "Let the dead decide the popular vote" strategy wasn't working.

[beyond the sea]

Lady Antonia Frazier won it for Bush in 2004!

She of "if you back Kerry, you will be voting against a savage militaristic foreign policy" fame.

You may have a point.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

When there's no room left in hell, the dead will walk the earth...and start campaigning for the Democratic Party.

[weegee]

"Loser" of the popular vote? Keep beating that broken drum. 0.52% more of the popular vote is NO indication that Al Gore actually won the popular vote. We would need a FULL recount of every county to verify that.

Move on, looosers.

[VisualizeSmallerGovernment]

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.

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.

[johniegrad]

Had 59,388 Ohioans switched from Bush to Kerry, 2004 would have repeated the acidic result of the electoral college winner

If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle.

[wildwood]

Had 59,388 Ohioans switched from Bush to Kerry

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!

[Credo]

I tend to suspect that Gore possibly would not come out ahead in the nationwide popular vote count in 2000. John Fund alludes to about 50,000 lost votes in Florida for Bush in his "Stealing Elections" book. Democrats believe in "counting every vote" unless of course it's Republican.

This book is an eye opener - John Fund - Stealing Elections.

[Harmless Teddy Bear]

I hope you're all aware that the LA Times is now officially part of the VRWC.

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?

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Dem. elections supervisor:

COUNT ALL THE VOTES! COUNT ALL THE VOTES! Except if they're Republican votes...DON'T COUNT THOSE VOTES!!!

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

http://citypaper.net/articles/2004-04-15/cover13.shtml

[MinuteGal]

It's amazing that journalists at a major metropolitan newspaper aren't educated enough to know we're a republic, not a democracy. Management should send all these know-nothing writers back to a fourth-grade refresher course.

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.

Leni

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't "new" leftist/bespectacled radical Robert Scheer still writing a column for the L.A. Times?