Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

So was the Bush base really big or what?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Goldeneye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:26 AM
Original message
So was the Bush base really big or what?
Because there was high voter turnout, which usually favors dems.
And, the undecideds broke for Kerry (I think it was something like 2 to 1). Before the election undecideds were the major player, who ever they went with was supposed to win. They went for Kerry. The evangelicals didn't vote in higher numbers than usual. And from anecdotal evidence, there were more bush 2000 voters switching to Kerry in 2004, than there were Gore 2000 voters switching to Bush 2004. I just don't get it. How'd Bush win by 3 million votes? There is obviously something wrong with this, that even people who aren't on the internet should be able to pick up on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Razorback_Democrat Donating Member (756 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
1. I think Ben Stein's apathy has caught up with most Americans n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emcguffie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
2. there's fraud everywhere you look
I think you can find evidence of fraud all over the place. It's just a question of having the resources to look everywhere, I think. Right now people are focusing on Ohio because that can change the outcome of the election, and because Blackwell was so obvious in his efforts to suppress Dem turnout.

Those three million came from all the states where the exit polls were way off.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldeneye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. I don't doubt there was fraud
I just don't understand how people can be so blind...there is clearly something wrong. No way did bush win by 3 million votes without the independents. Are they trying to tell us the fundies were a bigger voting block than independents? Obviously they weren't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewYorkerfromMass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
3. I believe it was. 2000 turnout x 1.2
Edited on Thu Dec-09-04 10:33 AM by NewYorkerfromMass
In light of assumptions of fraud in Florida and Ohio, I thought I'd take a quick look at the vote totals in 3 uncontested, non-battleground, non-swing, "safe" Kerry states. A simple comparison of 2000 to 2004 Bush totals shows the following:
..................... 2004 .... 2000
Massachusetts 1,067,163 878,502 (21.5% Bush increase)
Rhode Island .. 161,654 .. 130,555 (23.8%)
Delaware ....... 171,660 .. 137,288 (25%)!!!

You might attribute the high Mass and RI votes to anti-Kerry voters who know him and simply hate him, but the Delaware number is mind numbing.
These percentages also, unfortunately, agree with the current Bush popular vote total of 60.7 million, which would be a 20% increase over his 50.5 million in 2000. Depressingly, Bush somehow, actually, really got all of these new voters this time.
It is in fact completely depressing.

on edit: I have found that Delaware's population increased about 25% since 2000, which would help explain the large increase there. The same would be true with other states with very large increases in turnout.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnarchoFreeThinker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. those numbers are scary, except...
the game wasn't played in those states at all. The Kerry camp focused on the swing states--on one too many of them IMHO (FLA)--and basically nowhere else. The popular vote total wasn't at issue in this campaign--especially after what happened after the popular vote win/electoral "defeat" of 2000. Don't get me wrong--the Kerry camp didn't do enough to counter Bushco fear rhetoric in the swing states--but I don't think it matters much that Kerry's camp completely neglected indies/undecideds in the safely blue states.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StephanieMarie Donating Member (642 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
6. What the numbers PROVE
is that there was systematic vote-padding going on in every state of the union to inflate Bush's popular vote and "give" him that mandate that he's always dreamed of! We need to go state by state and recount every freaking vote. Ooops. We can't, because there's no paper trail. The repugs thought of everything this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Flaming Red Head Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 10:54 AM
Response to Original message
7. Privatizing registration under the guise of voters rights
is going to make things much worse.


04 was worse than 00 and 06 is going to be worse than 04 by 08 we’ll all know how futile casting a ballot is in any race.

They're going to cross check voter registrations, against criminal records, against hospital billing records, insurance records, (and probably against library usage at some point) all under the guise of voter protection and homeland defense and it's just going to get worse and worse.

Hello President Cheney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
8. "or what"
------------------------------------
Would Jesus love a liberal? You bet!
http://timeforachange.bluelemur.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smartvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
9. Correction to post -- should read "...aren't on the internets." :-) nt
Edited on Thu Dec-09-04 11:40 AM by smartvoter
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-09-04 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
10. You spell it out perfectly, I can't wait for the books to come out on this
The MSM is ignoring it now, but nothing adds up -
except that Bush cheated. I'd love to hear another
plausible explanation but so far fraud is the only
thing that makes sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC