Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
2 posted on
10/29/2004 7:17:26 AM PDT by
jmstein7
(A Judge not bound by the original meaning of the Constitution interprets nothing but his own mind.)
To: All
Take a look again at the RealClearPolitics link, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/hi_polls.html , which I posted a couple days ago. Bush leads in Hawaii over Kerry.
Now, combine this with historical context, about Hawaii only voting GOP in Republican re-election landslides, Reagan in 84, and Nixon in 72, and there is some news to be real happy about...if you are Republican, that is.
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
While I am heartened by the Hawaii data, this article is a classic example of misreading and misstating statistical aberrations. Just because two events happen concurrently does not mean there is a causal relationship, or even a correlation, between them.
The article suggests that Hawaii voting for the Republican is caused by there being a landslide on the mainland (with a sample size of two previous events). Hawaii voting Bush could have several other, more likely, explanations, to wit: (1) the high number of veterans in Hawaii and Kerry's unpopularity with vets; and (2) Hawaii's sense of insecurity about terrorism being the closest US state to Indonesia and the Philippines, which are bubbling hotbeds og Muslim hatred.
The fact that the polls show it close on the mainland suggests that these other explanations are more likely.
4 posted on
10/29/2004 7:22:06 AM PDT by
massadvj
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
My Mom (lives on Oahu had been having some problems with her Dem neighbor and his putting a Bush Bashing sign out on a communal fence, but on the portion in front of her house at the end of the block - the police were called, and she told the police that she would continue to take down what was offensive to a President in a time of war--especially when her late husband flew 35 missions over Germany in a B-24 liberator, and her son was 101st Airborne Ranger in Vietnam. The neighbor has been such a poop, that I wrote to the Republican party there, to ask for help -- Mom is 83)
When I heard the news last night, I wrote back to the Chairman of the GOP there.
I said:
Wow, when you promise Hawaii's 4 electoral votes...you deliver!!! I hear Vice President Cheney will visit Hawaii Sunday night! How exciting! Thank you so much for bringing home Hawaii for President Bush, and my Mom! Please thank EVERYone there!!! I'll promise the President San Diego! (L.A. and San Fran are hopeless)
The response was:
"we're doing our best ;-)"
LET FREEDOM RING(even if it's from the Dems! in Hawaii's case)
5 posted on
10/29/2004 7:25:03 AM PDT by
NordP
(Stem Cell Research? Taxes? Oil $ ? --None of them will matter, if I'm dead ...or in a burka!)
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
There have been posts on FR from DUmmie trolls saying they know many who voted for Bush in 2000 but will go Kerry in 04, but none or few who voted Gore and will now go for Bush.
I think the DUmmies have been suckerpunched bigtime. I smell a landslide. Yeeeehawwwwww!!!!
6 posted on
10/29/2004 7:25:56 AM PDT by
fizziwig
(I h)
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
The reason for this is the time zone difference. Because Hawaii knows who won the election during a landslide election by 2pm Hawaii time it depresses the losing parties voters who do not show up, or votes for the "winner" instead of the person they would otherwise have voted. Same thing happens in Alaska -- In 92 Alaskan exit polls showed a huge spike up in perot votes after 3pm by which time it was known Bush Sr. lost. Alaskans still could not stomach voting for Clinton.
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
This is almost as significant as GOP not winning Ohio means they lose.
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
One other question I had about all these polls is what percentage of Dems adn Repubs have caller Id or blocked caller. I'd wager a good percentage more Repubs have them. In some areas of the country, where there are wealthy libs (conneticut, Rhode Island), the differences might be different. dunno if this factors in or not just a thought..
16 posted on
10/29/2004 10:14:15 AM PDT by
traviskicks
(http://www.neoperspectives.com/johnkerry.htm)
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
In 1992 Bush ran for reelection.
This was the result:
Clinton 48.1
Bush 36.7
Perot 14.2
17 posted on
10/29/2004 10:54:19 AM PDT by
EQAndyBuzz
(Control the information to society and you control society.)
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
Hawaii... only votes GOP in Republican re-election landslides. BTTT
21 posted on
10/29/2004 2:17:12 PM PDT by
scripter
(Tens of thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
Hawaii [...] only votes GOP in Republican re-election landslides. That's a great headline. LOL.
29 posted on
10/30/2004 6:49:55 PM PDT by
the invisib1e hand
(do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
Boston won the World Series...
31 posted on
10/30/2004 6:57:56 PM PDT by
Hotdog
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
The MSM is spinning like a top. On Friday's NBC Evening News, Tim Russert told Brokaw that Bush HAS to pay attention to Hawaii to counteract the 4 electoral votes he expects to lose in New Hampshire. All together now... Bwahahahaaaaaaa!
32 posted on
10/30/2004 7:50:45 PM PDT by
ntnychik
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
I love little factoids like this.
33 posted on
10/30/2004 7:54:50 PM PDT by
BunnySlippers
("F" Stands for FLIP-FLOP ...)
To: Laissez-faire capitalist; All
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
Cool! Screw Spain for vacation! I'll go to Hawaii. Those women are quieter too.
36 posted on
10/31/2004 1:25:44 PM PST by
BobS
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
Hawaii sits alone in the Pacific .. they'd best vote for Bush. Imagine the carnage of a hit on Waikiki.
37 posted on
10/31/2004 1:26:01 PM PST by
onyx
(John "F" Kerry deserves to be the final casualty of the Vietnam War - Re-elect Bush/Cheney)
To: Laissez-faire capitalist
The Washington Redskins lost today. In 16 elections going back to 1932, when they lose in the game before the election, the incumbent loses. When they win the incumbent wins.
Oh no!
38 posted on
10/31/2004 1:28:46 PM PST by
Fatalis
(The Libertarian Party is to politics as Esperanto is to linguistics.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson