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

To: muleskinner
They lost because the heavy Republican districts in Southern Cal. didn't vote in the same percentages as 2000 and 2004. 5 - 10 % less. W.T.H.

2000 and 2004 were Presidential elections. 2006 was a midterm. Turnout was pert near average for a midterm election, down about 3.5% from 2002. See the numbers for yourself here. Keep in mind the following: turnout doesn't always include absentee ballots. Don't rely on what the California MSM tells you. Earlier in the thread, I pointed out where the SF Chronic blatantly lied about turnout.

356 posted on 11/11/2006 4:15:20 PM PST by LexBaird (98% satisfaction guaranteed. There's just no pleasing some people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 344 | View Replies ]


To: LexBaird

This might interest you. If you estimate #'s in the blue-shaded categories based on history, it says there are about a million more ballots to be counted, in addition to the 577K that they identify.

http://www.ss.ca.gov/elections/gg2006_unproc_ballot_status.pdf


357 posted on 11/11/2006 4:26:17 PM PST by calcowgirl ("Liberalism is just Communism sold by the drink." P. J. O'Rourke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 356 | View Replies ]

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