Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pres. Bush Vote Total Now Exceeds 62 Million (exceeding all pre-election estimates).
SOS websites | 12/10/2004 | calreaganfan

Posted on 12/10/2004 5:24:36 PM PST by calreaganfan

The conventional wisdom of the political punditry has been proven wrong again. A huge national voter turnout was thought to favor the Democrat candidate, but Pres. Bush's national popular vote count from the Nov. 2, 2004 general election has now exceeded 62 million votes. As of 12/10/04, Pres. Bush has received 62,019,003 votes. The states of NY and PA have certified their official results in the past two days which pushed Pres. Bush's vote count over the 62 million mark. CA will certify its results tomorrow, but almost all CA votes are already included in the Bush total (by obtaining vote counts from CA county websites). Only MN, ME and a few other states have yet to certify their official results.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bushvictory; electionreturns; mediawingofthednc; napalminthemorning; partyofthehindparts; popularvote; rathergate
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-216 next last
To: tiamat

I hope it bit the photographer!


81 posted on 12/10/2004 7:34:21 PM PST by Tax-chick (Benedicere cor tuo! Quomodo cogis comas tuas sic videri?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Notwithstanding

I know who you mean, but I've neve seen her.


82 posted on 12/10/2004 7:34:28 PM PST by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno-World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

"It's great that Bush beat Kerry, but any comparison between Reagan's two landslide wins and Bush`s close reelection victory in 2004, is a dishonest effort to tear down The Gipper"

ReaganMan, I don't know why you are so defensive about Pres. Reagan. The fact that we are celebrating Pres. Bush's record-setting performance is not a put-down of Pres. Reagan. In fact, no one would be happier than Pres. Reagan himself since Pres. GW Bush is the true heir to the Reagan legacy.

I agree that Pres. Reagan's victories in '80 and '84 were remarkable (I worked in both campaigns as well as '76), but except for the anti-Carter 1980 vote, Pres. Reagan's victories did not translate into Republican gains. Pres. Bush is the first Republican since Coolidge to score gains for Republicans in both the US Senate and US House in BOTH the mid-term and general elections. Republicans have also made historic gains in the states and in voter registration stats. The 62 million votes for Pres. Bush is just the topping on the cake.


83 posted on 12/10/2004 7:35:42 PM PST by calreaganfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

So do I, and I would NEVER do anything like that to any cat, but I LOVE the image!


84 posted on 12/10/2004 7:37:44 PM PST by tiamat ("Just a Bronze-Age Gal, Trapped in a Techno-World!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Duke Nukum
The RNC did a fantastic job this time out, IMO.

Agreed. They held together, kept on message, raised and used funds well, improved organization and communication and were hugely successful with the GOTV. Kudos. Now to refine the formula and win the next battle.

I don't understand, however, why they backed away from Gingrich's masterful "Contract With America" tactic. Many responded to the "tell us what you are going to do, why, and when" message. IMO, when you find a winning formula, you use it again and again.

85 posted on 12/10/2004 7:44:34 PM PST by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Time to let slip the dogs...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
Kerry also shattered Ronald Reagan's blow-out popular vote total

Yes, but unlike his totals, each of our votes has only one live voter responsible for it.

86 posted on 12/10/2004 7:51:53 PM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (JFKerry led the "spit-fest" on Viet Nam Vets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: bormijitsu

Re: You're not suggesting that President Bush is wrong, are you? Or that regardless of what he told the American people, really agreed with the Swifties? Or...what ARE you suggesting?



Troll, let's follow your reasoning. If I agree with an issue, say abortion, is wrong and the Pope agrees that abortion is wrong as well, does that make me Catholic? No. Does that make the Pope a follower of Sullyism? No. So, if GWB agrees or disagrees with a particular point a 527 makes, that does not make him a sponsor of that particular 527. I know logic and liberalism rarely flow together but think about what you're asserting.

Btw, whereas Swiftboats For Truth have members that are registered Independent, Democrat, Republican, and otherwise, their stated purpose was to shed light on Ho Chi Minh Kerry's biographical lies and treasonous actions. They continue their work this day and will hound Kerry until he leaves office.

However, Moveon.Org sole purpose was to be the illegal advertising arm of the DNC for Election 2004. Proof is that they want to control the Democratic Party now, despite the fact that they were to be an organization without party affiliation during the election cycle as per CFR.

It's one thing to agree with a few of an organization's assertions; it's another thing to tow the party line 100% when you're not supposed to be affiliated with the party by law. Swifties continue their chartered work without the support of the WH but Moveon.org demands a place in the DNC hierarchy. Moveon broke the law. Swifties follow the law.


87 posted on 12/10/2004 7:54:59 PM PST by sully777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: calreaganfan; MeekOneGOP
Shocking footage from DU while EC vote certified for Bush!


88 posted on 12/10/2004 8:01:41 PM PST by IllumiNaughtyByNature (I got a fever, and the only prescription is MORE COWBELLS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MeekOneGOP

Did they zot the troll? Shoot, I was having fun! I NEVER HAVE ANY FUN.


89 posted on 12/10/2004 8:03:30 PM PST by sully777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: sully777

NB4THE ZOT! I think.


90 posted on 12/10/2004 8:05:04 PM PST by IllumiNaughtyByNature (I got a fever, and the only prescription is MORE COWBELLS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: K4Harty

10-4

BTW graphic: "That's not funny that's sick" National Lampoon


91 posted on 12/10/2004 8:06:59 PM PST by sully777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: calreaganfan
>>>>> ... I don't know why you are so defensive about Pres. Reagan.

If I'm not mistaken, I went through this with you before. You still don't get it. You have engaged in distortions on this thread and have attempted to undermine the legacy of a great President.

First off, you're obfuscating the 2004 election returns to make Bush`s victory seem larger then it was. If that wasn't bad enough, you have the audacity to compare Bush`s win with Reagan's landslide victories in 80&84. While its true that the GOP did pick up seats in the House and Senate, something that hadn't been done since LBJ in 1964, its also true, Reagan's party leadership and election day coattails actually gave the GOP control of the Senate for six years, from 1981-1986. Reagan used that Senate power and control to negotiate with Speaker Tip O'Neil to get his economic recovery plan passed into law.

I defend President Reagan for good reason. He set the stage for the 1994 GOP takeover of Congress and much of the current Bush policy agenda is straight out of the Reagan playbook. Strong defense, tax reform and support for pro-life issues.

But Bush`s victory this year was not amazing, surprising, astounding or record setting. Receiving more votes then Reagan did 20 years ago, when the nations population stood at 230 million, compared to 293 million today, isn't a great achievement. Turnout was key for the GOP victory and Christian consrvatives, aka. The Religious Right, came out in force for Bush. Just as they did for Reagan in 1980 and 1984. Reagan beat Carter by 8.4 million votes. Reagan beat Mondale by 16.8 million votes. Bush did receieve 11.5 million more votes then he did in 2000, but he beat Kerry by just 3 million votes. A solid win, but in historical terms, a tight victory margin.

92 posted on 12/10/2004 8:24:00 PM PST by Reagan Man ("America has spoken")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: calreaganfan
My point, friend, is that continuous population growth makes absolute numbers in elections meaningless over time. The same is true with currency inflation. For example, Congress authorized a salary for the President of the United States of $25,000 in 1789.

In the 2004 election (November numbers), Bush garnered 61.9 million votes (51% of those voting) while Kerry garnered 37.6 million votes (48% of those voting). A total of 122.0 million votes were cast.

However,

In the 1984 election, Reagan garnered 54.5 million votes (59% of those voting) while Mondale garnered 37.6 million votes (41% of those voting). And a total of 92.7 million votes were cast.

So, this means that 29.3 million more votes were cast in the 2004 election than in the 1984 election, and this is assuredly due to population increase (sorry, I don't have statistics as to the actual percentage population increase between 1984 and 2004). There is no way that GW in 2004 was that much more popular than RR in 1984. Don't forget, RR won 525 EV's to Mondale's 13 EV's!

I don't have time to do the research, but percentage wise, Bush won a sqeaker (thanks be to God!), but Reagan won a landlside. So let's get off the "GW won more votes than RR" schtick. It's pure hogwash.

93 posted on 12/10/2004 8:46:22 PM PST by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Time to let slip the dogs...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: calreaganfan

ping


94 posted on 12/10/2004 8:46:33 PM PST by Nascardude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tiamat

How the heck did they get the cat to wear that thing? Cats are easily disgruntled. In fact, their normal state seems to be at least 40% disgruntlement (or deception, via insouciance).


95 posted on 12/10/2004 8:55:49 PM PST by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Time to let slip the dogs...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: K4Harty

LOL!


96 posted on 12/10/2004 8:58:26 PM PST by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Time to let slip the dogs...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Mad_Tom_Rackham

Somewhere in an old moving box there is a picture of my cat with a doll's hat on. He is really angry. For some reason the hat caused him to sneak around as if he was under fire. Every five seconds he'd duck low as if there was incoming. The picture catches the moment of sheer terror and paranoia. Almost can hear the bomb whistling down. Eyes fixed in fear.

Can't find that hilarious picture to post but it would be perfect for a zot.

True, cats are the perfect vehicle for VK.


97 posted on 12/10/2004 9:04:19 PM PST by sully777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: calreaganfan
He ran a magnificent campaign.

Not according to many fringe-Freepers before the election.

98 posted on 12/10/2004 9:15:45 PM PST by Once-Ler ("He lives in Madison, WI. No wonder he thinks Bush is a conservative!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man

I could care less about the popular vote, other than it silenced the Dems ability to steal the election.

Reagan set records by achieving an electoral landslide. It was impressive and set records.

Bush set records by triumphing over fraudulent stories by MSM (Rather/CBS) and collaboration of the U.N with the NYT's (ammo dump). He did so not only by winning, but by making this the second election he has carried Reps to victory in House and Senate.

Both have proud records historical in nature.

It would be dishonest to deny either achievement by either man.


99 posted on 12/10/2004 9:17:27 PM PST by Soul Seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: sully777

You should have seen ours (twin orange tabby sisters) when we treated them for fleas a few months ago with the latest development. This was a tube of gook that was squeezed out onto their necks, at the base of their skulls. This stuff then spread down their backs, making their fur stand up and kind of greasy. They couldn't lick it off, and they refused to help each other (as they often do). But they did skulk around for two+ weeks leering at us, with ears peeled back and low to the floor, with that "you did this to us?" look. They were really PO'd, but the flea treatment worked great!


100 posted on 12/10/2004 9:19:53 PM PST by Mad_Tom_Rackham (Time to let slip the dogs...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 201-216 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson