Posted on 12/10/2004 5:24:36 PM PST by calreaganfan
There's nothing desperate about telling the truth. Let's review the highlights of some posts you aimed at me.
>>>>It's clear now that you're actually off your rocker.
>>>>Your continuing implications to the contrary are positively Stalinist.
>>>>I'm beginning to think you're more of a "Flim-Flam Man" than a "Reagan Man".
>>>>This whole thing got started because "Reagan Man" reacted in a defensive and irrational manner to the simple fact that Pres.
>>>>The pompous "Reagan Man"...
Rational folks call those remarks, ad hominem responses, as in personal attacks. You lost the argument about Reagan v Bush43. Now you're mischaracterizing your own rhetoric, like you never said what you said. You're digging that hole deeper and deeper. Carry on.
"There's nothing desperate about telling the truth."
So then why are you avoiding the question? You've stated numerous times that my factual statements were "deadwrong" [sic] and made other similar comments. I've asked you many times to point out EXACTLY which statements that I made about Pres. Bush's victory are not accurate. You've repeatedly refused to answer. So again, which of the three statements below is not accurate?
All the vote count numbers that I've posted have been completely accurate as well as the factual statements that 1) Pres. Bush obliterated Reagan's popular vote record; 2) Pres. Bush inspired an historic voter turnout (the largest EVER since the voting rules were changed in 1972); and 3) Pres. Bush helped to achieve Republican Party victories that no GOP President had accomplished since the 1920s.
The issue on the table right now, are your ad hominem attacks aimed at me and your subsequent hypocracy. An apology would be nice, but I won't hold my breath.
"That hole is getting very deep. Look. Don't try and change the subject, again."
LOL! It's obvious now that everything you've posted on this thread has been a bag of hot air. You've stated repeatedly that my statements about Pres. Bush's victory are "deadwrong" [sic] and made other similar assertions, but you've yet to point out EXACTLY which statement about Pres. Bush's victory is not accurate. This has been THE subject of this thread. So again, which of the following statements about Pres. Bush's victory is not correct?
All the vote count numbers that I've posted have been completely accurate as well as the factual statements that 1) Pres. Bush obliterated Reagan's popular vote record; 2) Pres. Bush inspired an historic voter turnout (the largest EVER since the voting rules were changed in 1972); and 3) Pres. Bush helped to achieve Republican Party victories that no GOP President had accomplished since the 1920s.
According to you. LOL You want the equivalent of a golf "mulligan". You want to debate the same issue over again. Get over it already. You lost that debate. In fact, you had your head handed to you. I'm not going to give you an opportunity to cover the same ground again and listen to more of your irrational responses and ad hominem attacks. Reagan's legacy doesn't deserve such treatment and I've had enough of your juvenile crapola.
Either apologize, or be move along.
"I'm not going to give you an opportunity to cover the same ground again"
I've asked you repeatedly throughout this thread to point which SPECIFIC statement I made about Pres. Bush's victory is "deadwrong" [sic]. You've NEVER answered the question. The reason is obvious. It's because everything I've stated about Pres. Bush's victory has been accurate. All your sputtering and spewing has been for nought.
All the vote count numbers that I've posted have been completely accurate as well as the factual statements that 1) Pres. Bush obliterated Reagan's popular vote record; 2) Pres. Bush inspired an historic voter turnout (the largest EVER since the voting rules were changed in 1972); and 3) Pres. Bush helped to achieve Republican Party victories that no GOP President had accomplished since the 1920s.
So Kerry is at 59,007,869?
I guess that the London newspaper that printed the November 3, 2004 headline "How Could 59 Million Americans Be So Stupid?" was correct after all. : )
I checked out the CA Secretary of State's site, and they have lower numbers for both Bush and Kerry. See http://vote2004.ss.ca.gov/Returns/pres/00.htm#cty
What's your source?
In RI, I also get lower numbers for Bush and Kerry: http://www.elections.ri.gov/2004GE/TopTicket.htm
"I checked out the CA Secretary of State's site, and they have lower numbers for both Bush and Kerry. See http://vote2004.ss.ca.gov/Returns/pres/00.htm#cty
What's your source?"
My source is the individual CA county websites. If you check out the Imperial, Lake and Butte County websites, you can obtain add'l Bush & Kerry votes that are not on CA SOS website. In fact, the CA SOS stopped updating the state website on the evening of Dec 6.
The CA SOS posted the final results today. The final vote totals are Bush: 5,509,826; Kerry: 6,745,845. Pres. Bush lost CA by exactly 10% (44.4%-54.4%). Here's the link:
http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/sov/2004_general/formatted_pres_detail.pdf
"In RI, I also get lower numbers for Bush and Kerry"
Check out the link below to the RI Board of Elections website. Make sure you look at the far right column which includes both "Polling Place" and "Mail" ballots:
http://www.electionri.com/Results/TopTicket.htm
What scares me is how good he did, had the press simply been neutral it would have amounted to a landslide.
The nation has a much larger voting population than in 1984. Too bad Reagan did not have a solid republican legislature to work with, we might be doing without much of the nonsense we have now (Depts. of Ed and Energy, Legal Services Administration, Corp for Public Broadcasting, etc.).
Thanks for the info. I see you were ahead of the Secretary of State sites!
"Pres. Bush lost CA by exactly 10% (44.4%-54.4%)."
Actually, when one divides the Kerry and Bush votes by the total number of votes cast for candidates (including write-ins), Kerry got 54.31% and Bush 44.36% in CA, so Kerry won the state by 9.95%.
BTW, you should double-check your NM numbers, since I think you may have inverted some numbers (the official site has Bush at 376,930 and Kerry at 370,942).
"Make sure you look at the far right column which includes both "Polling Place" and "Mail" ballots"
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.