Posted on 11/28/2004 12:46:45 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Snotty? I'd say so.
Some Democrats still suffering the post-election blues***....There's a reason Democrats are taking the loss of the White House personally. This time, it is personal, Dashev said.
"The big difference between 2000 and now is that, if you were given the choice between having your wallet stolen or losing your wallet, you would choose to have your wallet stolen," he said.
"Clearly, if it is stolen, it has nothing to do with you. If you lose it, well then you feel like you are just a bumbling fool."....***
I wonder what those deluded, deranged, desperate democrats have to say about this. My guess is they'll claim (which they're already doing) yet again that the media is in the gop's pocket and scream "liar liar pants on fire," or else this is (laughably) a cunning "strategy" to lull us into a false sense of security.
With all the snide remarks peppered throughout this article, Kerry supporters can take "comfort" in the fact that those odd religious, trailer living folks cast those awful votes - it wasn't thinking, wealthy Americans who voted for that cowboy Bush.
What a waste of a reporters time. I could understand an out of state newspaper doing this, but surely the Miami Herald employees know how those counties vote and were not the least bit surprised by the results?
Sometimes I find it very interesting that many people in DU hate (some) MSM as much as we do. But, they do have their favorites. Not surprisingly, Dan Rather is one of them.
I wasn't aware of the law that allowed the bearer of a journalism degree, who happens to be working at a crappy So. FLA newspaper, to double as an elections supervisor.
They knew, it's just intimidation and LIBERAL angst.
They're LIBERALS with access and approval from their paper to lean on these voting districts.
The explanation is very simple. Old School Democrats in the Northern Panhandle and in the I-4 Corridor are conservatives who haven't bothered to switch parties. They vote their beliefs not their party label.
Zell Miller democrats.
Zell Miller bump!
Wrinkles aside, The Herald count confirmed that Bush's message sold in a part of the state where many voters may be Democrats by registration only.
Is there any chance the mainstream press, incluging that smug Oberman on pMSNBC will air this stroy? <[> I seriously doubt it. Email this story to every media outlet you can find.
The problem is, they never will.
I live in what most objective observers would probably consider to be the most conservative neighborhood-with the possible exception of Boro Park-you'll find without actually crossing the Verrazano.
Yet I'm willing to bet that if you took a statistical sampling of Dyker Heights, you'd find that a majority of the people surveyed would be registered as Democrats.
Just because someone is registered as a Democrat doesn't necessarily mean that they're some latte-sipping, Krugman-quoting, Birkenstock-clad Eurotrash wannabe who gets off on reading the New York Review Of Books.
Yeah - not all Democrats follow their party's stance of "America bad, France good." It bears keeping in mind there are still millions of Democrats in Flyover Country who are patriots to the core and don't like what their party has now become.
My numerous misspellings, not to mention the fact that my head is about two inches away from crashing onto my keyboard, tell me that it's time to retire for the night.
Or, as the case may be, morning.
-good times, G.J.P.(Jr.)
It isn't just Florida. Democrats go crazy in a lot of places when Republicans win despite Democrat registrations being much higher. Democrats are crazy enough to think they are owed election wins just because they snared a lot of motor voter registrations and such. Democrat voters are lazy, not motivated to go to the polls, thus their huge get out the vote efforts.
This is a serrious problem in the blue states..
Do you know someone who has,
P.U.B.E.S. ?
People
Upset
By
Election
Syndrome
I'm sure since they're so impressed by Kerry's impressive loss, he's a shoo-in for 2008, if not the presidency than certainly the nomination. Very conveniently overlooking the fact, that at least in theory and on paper, Bush "should" have lost by so many points--a messy war, high gas prices, widespread perception of a listless economy, the draft lie perpetuated, his bad 1st debate performance, most negative media coverage of a gop candidate in 20 years, high-profile Hollywood a$$holes shreiking their punk mouths off, a very united anti-Bush democrat party. Yes, very impressive that Kerry "only" managed to lose by 3 points--NOT.
So dems, if you want to run the Frankenstein stiff again, go ahead--I'm sure he'll do reaalllll well without the anti-Bush wind at his back (which accounted for most of his "support"), a war that may very well be "resolved" and an economy that may completely recover in 4 years, extraordinarily high expectations set due to his 3 impressive debate "wins" in 2004, and the fact that he'll be even more gruesome-looking in 2008.
Another psychotic delusion dribbles down the legs of the 'Bush didn't win' nutlets. Poor lunatics can't catch a break. Here's hoping this little article will help nudge a few more of these fruitcakes in the direction of the Canadian border.
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.