Posted on 08/03/2004 7:02:20 AM PDT by veronica
Was there not also a "Democratic Machine" in South Dakota that, in the case of Thune and Johnson, when Thune was something like 500 ahead of Johnson, the "Machine" was able to 'see' Thune's 500 and 'raise' him 500 just from precinct (of Injuns or something) in the last hours of the race? Could happen again with Thune and Daschle...
And "Remember The Florida Panhandle!"
(OK, doesn't quite have the ring of "The Alamo".)
From what I have read from Florida and about Florida, the areas that had no disputed 'chads' or other such problems used the optical scan hard-copy ballots and have since purchased more of such and are ready to go. But, on the other hand, the disputed area opted to fix their 'chad' problem by going the very expensive touch-screen rout with no ballots or just 'ether' ballots on a server... We have read here on FR of their problems with those in 2002. (should have made the whole state optical scan ballots and machines). I have also read that those precincts in Florida have registered multiple thousands of 'disenfranchised' and new voters (even felons) in those disputed areas (Broward and Dade?) so that they can 'in our face' the 'stolen' election so that it won''t happen again... no mistaken votes for Buchanan or hanging or bumpy ballots of voter intent this time!
Florida concerns me. Does it not concern you?
They never were. They never were intended to be.
A tie in the electoral college would be thrown to the NEW House of Representatives, because a tie isn't a tie until the Electoral College votes are opened and counted (after the new Congress is sworn in January 3).
A mandate is preferable -- first, Democrats have obstructed President Bush heavily on the basis of alleged "illegitimacy" -- a second term with an popular vote loss (which is almost certainly a prerequiste for a Bush EV tie) wouldn't be good.
Moreover, I'd worry about the risks of both faithless Electors and House members switching side. The pressure to "follow the will of the people" and the rewards for doing the same would be absolutely immense. A single elector would make the difference, and it would only take a handful of Congressmen to flip it in the House.
Yeah, but compared to what the dimwits would have everybody believe, 57% is huge and a comparative landslide.
If that happens I'm going to be all,
"IN YOUR FACE, RATBOY"
for about four years.
Homey
If that happens I'm going to be all,
"IN YOUR FACE, RATBOY"
for about four years.
Homey
But I already said that.
3 months from Yesterday we will know for sure.... but until then I take nothing for granted. We still have to continue to pray for our nation and President Bush and his family.
Hopefully, the Kerry/Edwards will self distruct.. it is on to a great start.
According to Webster's: "An election victory in which the winning candidate receives a substantial majority of the votes, usually meaning at least ten per cent more than any opposing candidate."
Hopefully Bush wins by a large margin, and not by a slim one. This way the libs can't cry about another "stolen" election and they can't whine about the "popular vote", and they can all eat their words and go sulk in the corner for 4 years!
You're totally correct about that, my mistake. Regardless, I still think that Bush would win it easily even in the unlikely event that we lose the House, because each state delegation gets one vote, and most of the House Dems are tied up in a few large states like California and New York. We will certainly still have a solid majority of state delegations, probably by something close to 30-20.
I agree. I talked to the leader of our Young Repubican group here in Texas and she is from Ohio and she says it is too close to call in Ohio. Lots and Lots of Libs there and they have lots of influence. It will come down to Ohio for sure.
Wrong. We only need 55, 56 or 57 Senate votes to assure a sea-change in Senate behavior toward judicial appointments. First, we can bribe and pluck off the few remaining votes we need and, second, more Senate RATS will be facing the electorate in 2006. They will not want the bullseye of obstructionism on their campaign.
Everyone is too pessimistic. Kerry has to pull an inside straight to have any hope of an electoral college majority. We are playing on their turf -- MI, PA, OH, WI, etc. We have 160 or more electoral votes in our back pocket.
Kerry's road map to an electoral college win is about as likely as Barry Goldwater's.
Landslide, schmandside.
How much of a margin will it take for us to be able to tell the Dems to STFU???
no posted yesterday on FR.
I don't think it's possible.
This is a statistical model derived by Professor Helmut Norpoth of SUNY Stony Brook. The model would have accurately chosen the winner of every election since 1912.
You'll enjoy reading it!
Screams of the left are irrelevant noise. Do you not remember how Xlinton claimed a mandate with 43% of the popular vote after the '92 election?
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.