Posted on 10/13/2004 6:57:45 AM PDT by 1smallVoice
So you really think Kerry is doing better than Gore when almost every state poll says otherwise?
One of us is dilusional.
We have a different world than 4 years ago and the changes are all in Bush's favor.
Something about "counting chickens" comes to mind here.
(Taking a day off from Obama?)
I've noticed you have been in a slump!...I am anxiously awaiting the election but I believe if we get out the vote, we can overcome.
BUSH/CHENEY 04...FOR THE SAKE OF OUR NATION
If Bush wins? Don't you mean when Bush wins?
Yep. Bush could have wrapped this thing up in that first debate, had he turned in the performance he did in the second one.
I am still just stunned that Bush was so utterly unprepared and did so poorly. Oh, I'm hoping for a Bush win, but I'm not confident, at all.
The press will never report the coming landslide and the democrats can not steal enough votes in enough states to make a difference. Look at all the close states that Bush lost in 2000 that he has firmly in hand.
After tonight's debate it will be over.
I hope you feel better soon...
I gave you a link to Ohio...
Do you admit that the trend is against Kerry? Looks like Kerry could even lose Illinois if this trend continues and Bush has written off Illinois!
Your information also points to a Bush Landslide victory.
As Hugh Hewitt says, "If it's not close, they can't cheat".
This election is waaaaaay too close for comfort. If you look at the registration figures in Ohio and other swing states, with registrations in some counties coming it at 125% of the population, we may be looking at vote fraud on an unprecedented scale.
I suspect this is where Soros' Twenty Million Dollars of "Get Out the Vote" money is going...
I am done..I hope you are right but you have shown nothing to back up your assertions..I am sure you'll post the same thing again tomorrow.
I put nothing by the Rats. There has been a lot of questionable goings on here in Wisconsin with voter registration. It's going on in heavy democratic areas (Milwaukee and Racine) that we know of. Then with the spin put on by the MSM it seems that Bush couldn't get a fair shake if you paid them. That's why I said if and not when.
http://realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/il_polls.html
Presidential Race
2004 Electoral Votes: 21 | 2000 Results: Bush 42.6, Gore 54.6, Nader 2.2 (Gore +12.0)
Poll | Date Sample MoE Bush Kerry Nader Spread
SUSA | 10/4-10/6 644 LV 4.0 39 55 - Kerry +16
Rasmussen | 10/4 500 LV 4.5 41 52 - Kerry +11
Did you just post that Illinois was in play in breaking news?..Good grief!..What tea leaves are you reading?
We were saved by Providence from the disaster of a Gore presidency in 2000. We need to remember that (because the 'Rats certainly do) and be on our guard against massive dirty tricks/fraud/violence this time around. Evidence of fraud is already coming in (for example, in my country, Franklin, in Central Ohio, where there are indications that there are more voters registered than the census bureau says there are people eligible to vote), as well as the sporadic (but systematic) violence against Bush campaign offices across the country. It's probably going to get worse as we head into these final weeks.
BTW, keep an eye out on how the MSM "scores" the results of Debate III. My guess is they're going to pull out all the stops to either fix the outcome in Kerry's favor (e.g., with loaded questions), or spin the results, no matter what they are, to a decisive Kerry win. This is the rubber match of the series and the 'Rats and MSM know if they can cheat it Kerry's way then they think it will give him a boost going into the home stretch. IOW, more dirty tricks from the 'Rats.
And the GOP is too weak kneed to do anything about it, and they cower at the mere prospect of being accused of being racist. And the RATS know that all they have to do is deal the race card and the GOP will fold.
While there is no doubt the Dems will try, I do not, nor have I, been quite as hysterical about "fraud" as were others.
Consider this: even in 2000, it was DEM counters who did their job carefully enough that it forced Gore to go to court; it was a DEM judge who threw out the "intention" issue; it was Dem canvassing boards who came up with but a handful of new votes for Gore. I'm not saying "trust the Dems, but I am saying that they have to present at least a facade of legitimacy, and there are poll watchers and lawyers on both sides.
After Pendleton, pols of both parties started to promise MANY MORE jobs to "interest groups" rather than small groups of core supporters. The result was, perhaps, better staffing of government, but at the expense of the growth of government as a whole. It was the single biggest cause of government growth in our history.
"Reform" in the early 1900s led to direct election of senators---and we saw the folly of that when the senate would not convict Clinton, due to electoral pressures.
In short, while I know what "reforms" you have in mind, trust me, they would be hijacked to our detriment. No, the minimal fraud we now have is preferable.
No. I would say allowing women to vote can be credited with that.
And the reform I am talking about is very minimal, such as requiring one to provide ID when voting and proof of citizenship when registering.
I've seen an economic assessment of the women's vote. It isn't close to the impact of Pend. in my opinion, because women themselves become an "interest group" that would not have existed without Pendleton.
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.