Kerry pins loss on Sept. 11

New York Daily News ^ | 1/31/05 | HELEN KENNEDY

[UpHereEh]

No doubt

[GnL]

Exactly. Flipping 60,000 votes in every state would change a lot of things. Wasn't the spread in Pennsylvania around 120,000 or so?

This is a bogus Democratic talking point and should be countered at every opportunity. It makes this election seem much closer than it really was.

[rod1]

Considering 2001 happened well before Kerry's point of no return commitment to run for the presidency,

The Headline should be--

Kerry chooses to run even after events made a win impossible. (Ambitious, Dumb, Totally Selfish Rat Alert).

[night reader]

2. you cant win with lies
4. when you have a nasty wife with a foul mouth keep her hidden.

Not sure I agree.
2. Witness Clinton.
4. Witness Clinton

[R. Scott]

He still doesn't have a clue.

[cardinal4]

What tripe. Both from Kerry and the author. Relatively unpopular president?? Yeah, right..

[R. Scott]

Or that he openly admitted committing sedition, bragged about committing treason …

[CurlyBill]

Kerry ultimately chalked up the results to 9/11, saying it was hard for people to forsake their President after such a national trauma.

Wrong Mr. Skerry!! America didn't want to vote for the weaker America (in typical French fashion) that you would have given us!

[eclectic]

No more Kerry, please, please ... No, I do NOT care what he says or thinks. I am not interested in his opinion in the least, ever since the danger of the terrible catastrophe has passed the last November...

[Road Warrior ‘04]

If kerry had signed form 180 it would probably show that he was given a dishonorable discharge for aiding the enemy and should have never been able to run for any public office. My belief is that he does have a dishonorable discharge. He's a traitor!

[InvisibleChurch]

sounds kind of like an expresident we know of, eh?

[StonyBurk]

Bingo

[Marauder]

I believe that 9/11 was the central deciding issue in this race

Oh? Didn't sheer stupidity have something to do with it?

[maggief]

"If you take half the people at an Ohio State football game on Saturday afternoon and they were to have voted the other way, you and I would be having a discussion today about my State of the Union speech."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6886726/

[Liz]

....I find it absolutely hilarious how the dems have done a total about-face--they are only concentrating on the electoral vote (if Kerry had prevailed) when I thought they cared SO MUCH about only the popular vote.....

Maybe this is why.

Conservative pro-life Christian voters made monumental contributions to GWB's 2004 vote totals. Pres Bush won with 63 Million Votes (13 million more than 2000).

The map, though impressive, conveys the misleading impression that blue state Catholics voted for Kerry (a CINO).

According to EWTN "The World Over Live" analysts, with the exception of VA, where Catholics spit 70/30 in favor of Bush, the majority of Catholic voters split 55/45 for Bush.....a whopping number of votes since Catholics number about 52 million Americans.

According to CNN exit polls, Bush voters included 38% of union members, 40% of those with union members in their households, 42% of those earning $15,000-$30,000, 44% of those who earn under $50,000 and 44% of Latinos, 45% of youth (aged 18-29), 13% of liberals—even 11% of Democrats voted for Bush.

If you look closely, the map appears to place the insignificant "Other Voters" in the ocean.....that's accurate, because "Other Voters--RINO Republicans" were on cruise ships.

(MAP UPDATE Bush won Michigan, Ohio, Iowa and New Mexico later.)

[hellinahandcart]

However, many Democrats are still baffled at how a candidate with so much money and such a united party could lose against a relatively unpopular President who sent the nation to war for weapons that didn't exist.

Amazing. I keep looking for quotes around this statement, and they keep not being there.

Time for Helen Kennedy to run a premise-check.

[Liz]

Deep, deep fantasy.

THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM

Don "Kerry" Quioxte and Sancho "Eddie" Panza

[BB2]

So George Soros.... if Kerry didn't offer a credible alternative to Bush, why did you waste 26 million on him?

L O S E R ! ! ! ! !

[hellinahandcart]

Geez, there's more.

But host Tim Russert's lengthy grilling about details of a mission on the Cambodian border 36 years ago showed how well Kerry's opponents undercut his valorous record, and how badly Kerry fought back.

How well can he fight back when he's caught in a lie? He ain't Clinton. And valorous? Woof!

Russert spent a good part of the interview asking if Kerry would release every item in his military record, which Bush has never done

Yes he did. Apparently the author slept through the AP's FOIA request and the resulting final document dump last fall. The media just never found they dirt they wanted.

Are we absolutely sure this is Helen Kennedy and not Helen Thomas?

[Conservative Infidel]

Absolutely correct. Their god, Bill Clinton, received less than 50% of the popular vote in both of his elections. Yet, both times, the Clintons insisted that they had a "mandate" from the voters. It is curious - when they win with less than 50% of the popular vote, they love the electoral college. We all know how they feel about it now.