Posted on 12/03/2004 12:39:26 PM PST by ambrose
It is worthy to include as an example of shoddy journalism and sentence construction.
Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrng. The sentence is inaccurate. Bush still won big. He has a final margin of 119,000 votes. Close? Only if you believe like our friends over at DU do, that Kerry somehow can pull a rabbit out of the hat in time to be inaugurated come Jan. 20th. Not going to happen.
Looks like they forgot some punctuation ("--"):
"Bush's margin of victory in the state that put him over the top in his re-election bid will be about 119,000 votes--smaller than the unofficial margin of 136,000, the county election board figures showed. That means Kerry drew closer by about 17,000 votes."
You mean "write" the story, of course.
Bush's margin of victory in the state that put him over the top in his re-election bid will be about 119,000 votes - smaller than the unofficial margin of 136,000, the county election board figures showed. That means Kerry drew closer by about 17,000 votes.
Looks like ABC (the source of the article at the top of this thread) is the culprit who screwed it up.
Uh, that means Bush WON by 17,000 votes??? This writer is awful.
Someone needs to tell him that commas are our friends.
Jesse Jackson must be so disappointed. Kerry couldn't win by one measly, f*ckin' vote? No way mama! I don't feel his pahn! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
By reading that sentence it looks as if Kerry only lost by 17,000 votes.
Ridiculous.
And liberals lie even if they don't have to. Trust me, DU will spin a new urban legend from this: the election was stolen from Kerry by 17,000 votes! ;-)
Yup - and the neurotics at DU are being fed lies by the left-wing radio mock-show hosts like Randi Rhodes of Err America. (They are up to 40 radio stations so far, so watch out!)
See post #49. The tinfoil hat moonbat DU Dummies will go stark raving mad.
What did we used to say? Close only worked in horseshoes and hand grenades.
119,000 is still substantially more than the 10,000 vote difference in Wisconsin - where's the Green Party there to make sure that Kerry actually won that state? Or how about in New Hampshire?
This recount business, under the auspice of "counting every vote," is a bunch of crap.
Bush's margin of victory in the state that put him over the top in his re-election bid will be about 119,000 votes, smaller than the unofficial margin of 136,000, the county election board figures showed. That means Kerry drew closer by about 17,000 votes.
The smaller the win the bigger the SALT SHAKER I say!~}
I find myself doing that a lot lately. I mess up there and their. Stupid stuff. I think I just don't pay close enough attention.
If the sKerry Campaign is so very concerned about the vote count being "done accurately and completely," why aren't they paying for recounts in New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin?
Good post. Thanks.
Note to Dems:
Ohio is NOT a swing state!!
Not only that, they will probably, over time, call the election invalid, being that it's in some sort of margin of error.
Just as Florida 2000 was.
To anyone taking a look, those raw numbers indicate massive democrat fraud. This is still an @$$ kicking, even with the fraud in Cleveland.
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.