Jimmy Leeds Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Without beating a dead horse, I thought it was interesting when I heard yesterday, not realizing it beforehand, that while Bush won Ohio by 150,000 votes, Kerry only won Pennsylvania by 123,000 votes. They both had about 5.6 million voters. So while NJDJester says Kerry was only 150,000 votes away from the Presidency, think further south to PA while you are at it. So chew on that thought when the Susan Sarandon's keep talking about voting fraud and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Diablo Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Susan Sarandon's <{POST_SNAPBACK}> :puke: Ranger Fan... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 i thought kerry won PA with a 66% margin? anyway that is a good point leeds, there are about 5-6 states where kerry won by less votes / percentage then bush did in ohio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 FYI squish..... Pennsylvania race for President 9411 of 9425 precincts - 100 percent x- John F. Kerry Dem 2,883,833 - 51 percent George W. Bush (i) Rep 2,756,361 - 49 percent Michael Badnarik Lib 20,830 - 0 percent Michael Peroutka CST 6,464 - 0 percent David Cobb Grn 6,234 - 0 percent Ohio race for President 11477 of 11477 precincts - 100 percent x- George W. Bush (i) Rep 2,796,147 - 51 percent John F. Kerry Dem 2,659,664 - 49 percent Michael Badnarik NP 14,331 - 0 percent Michael Peroutka NP 11,614 - 0 percent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Devil Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Interesting numbers on the Penn. race. I heard somewhere (I can't remember the source, so I'm not standing by this as the absolute truth) that the 5 states where Bush had a worse showing than in 2000 all passed the anti-gay marriage referendum. This is significant because of the hysteria going on in some parts of the democratic party that bigotry against gays was solely responsible for the election day results. Some democrats do seem to get it. Never thought James Carville would be the voice of reason within the party. http://www.washtimes.com/national/20041109-120712-7714r.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 The funniest part of the whole election night was all the networks called Pennsylvania at like 8:30 or so, but CNN, CBS, and I think NBC refused to call Ohio because it was 'too close to call'. CNn it painted it green on their board! Turns out the Kerry campaign called these networks and asked them to not call it so they could 'count all the votes'!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Devil Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 To be fair I think the networks were trying to avoid a Florida 2000 embarassment. It was obvious , however, that Kerry's people were spreading the rumor that not only were there 250,000 uncounted provisional ballots, they were also from predominantly democratic leaning areas (Susan Estrich (sp?), normally a level-haded liberal commentator, was absolutely sure they would be able to make up the difference after talking to the Kerry people). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 I think the main reaason that CNN et al did not call Ohio sooner was because you still had massive lines of people waiting to vote in Ohio until the wee hours of Wednesday morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 I think the main reaason that CNN et al did not call Ohio sooner was because you still had massive lines of people waiting to vote in Ohio until the wee hours of Wednesday morning. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Polls closed at 8:00. You had to be on line at that time to vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 I think the main reaason that CNN et al did not call Ohio sooner was because you still had massive lines of people waiting to vote in Ohio until the wee hours of Wednesday morning. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Polls closed at 8:00. You had to be on line at that time to vote. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yes, you did, but they had people in line at that time who were STILL waiting to vote at 11pm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 They didn't care in 2000 when the Florida Panhandle was still voting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 They didn't care in 2000 when the Florida Panhandle was still voting. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Well, if you noticed, they were trying not to make that mistake this year, Jimmy. In fact, I noticed MSNBC was saying they were holding off on Florida this year in part because there were people in the Panhandle STILL voting even though the polls had closed, they were in line and singing "God Bless America" while they waited. OK??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 I agree to a point. But when they bow to Kerry's campaign's wishes and not make an obvious call, it's not right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Jimmy, your candidate won and you still aren't happy with the times the states were called. Were you happy when your children were born or did you quibble about the exact timings of the deliveries??? YOU WON. Try and be happy about it or we'll send YOU to Canada. Or better yet...France. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Leeds Posted November 9, 2004 Author Share Posted November 9, 2004 Jimmy, your candidate won and you still aren't happy with the times the states were called. Were you happy when your children were born or did you quibble about the exact timings of the deliveries???YOU WON. Try and be happy about it or we'll send YOU to Canada. Or better yet...France. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Okay, okay. I love politics (unfortunately) and still read up on the libs terrible reactions. (Not here, mostly) Please NOT FRANCE PS. They were the two HAPPIEST days of my life. (Thanks for the good memories ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SueNJ97 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Okay, okay. I love politics (unfortunately) and still read up on the libs terrible reactions. (Not here, mostly) Please NOT FRANCE PS. They were the two HAPPIEST days of my life. (Thanks for the good memories ) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> OK, not France. I'm not sure what Moustic would do with you after the second hour, anyway. Personally, I think Susan Sarandon and her cohorts should shut up and let the people whose job it actually is to look into these things handle it. There were some strange things that happened but it certainly didn't cost Kerry the election. However, for the sake of BOTH sides, so that the next election is smoother, there are some cases that they should investigate. I'm sure you wouldn't want whoever the Republicans are running next time to have some of the problems the optically scanned ballots seemed to be causing in Florida if it suddenly works the OTHER way, and overwhealmingly registered Republican counties suddenly vote Democratic and there is no way to go back and see why. We should let the GAO look into this stuff and other problems, find out what is going on so that we learn from it for next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Without beating a dead horse, I thought it was interesting when I heard yesterday, not realizing it beforehand, that while Bush won Ohio by 150,000 votes, Kerry only won Pennsylvania by 123,000 votes.They both had about 5.6 million voters. So while NJDJester says Kerry was only 150,000 votes away from the Presidency, think further south to PA while you are at it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I never bought that 150,000 vote thing anyway; Bush won 31 states to Kerry's 19 and Kerry lost the popular vote by about 3 million. To use a hockey analogy, that's like saying a team that got outshot 45-20 and lost 3-2 'almost' won, well yeah but did they really deserve to win? That's the larger point here, the Dems may have been close to winning on the scoreboard, but they weren't close to winning the hearts and minds of the people. ESPECIALLY considering the Repubs took both the House and the Senate again. If the Dems had just lost the presidency that'd be one thing, they don't have ANY branch of the government and haven't for years. You can't pander to 20 states and expect to win much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted November 9, 2004 Share Posted November 9, 2004 Turns out the Kerry campaign called these networks and asked them to not call it so they could 'count all the votes'!!!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yea I heard that on the news to... Imagine if Bush did that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Puddy Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 Eh, Dems need to get over the election. It's over. Move on to 2006. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djstubbs Posted November 10, 2004 Share Posted November 10, 2004 No political sigs. k thx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts