Free Republic

Your words are very wise. I am in quite the same position as you, being young and counting tonight as the first big political defeat - except I had to suffer through Her Highness claiming victory in 2000's Senate race! That was unpleasant. But given all the unlikeliness of our historic wins in 2000, 2002, and 2004, it was all but inevitable to run out of steam eventually. The biggest shame is that we could not get past Iraq and, IMO, pretty much squandered the last two years of political capital (except for the Supreme Court nominations - that was damn good). But you are right, there is only the future to look to, and we only damn ourselves by doing otherwise.

Lots of people seem to be undecided in that model. Who knows how that would play out as a result...

I'm looking at ABC's wrap-up of the exit polls on their website, and what strikes me is actually that the Bush approval/disapproval numbers seem relatively FAVORABLE. Their wording is that "almost" 60% of voters voiced disapproval and "about" 40% approved the Pres' job - which indicates to me something like a 58-42, 59-41 sort of spread. That would actually be a step BETTER than the numbers the Pres has generally been pulling. Usually his job approval ratings tend to be around 38-62, 37-63 A/D respectively, going off the top of my head. I hope the math explains itself as quickly as it does to my overly-stressed brain, but this would indicate, bottom line, good things for the Republicans.

Hey, well I definitely appreciated the reference. Can't complain too much I'spose, Boondock Saints isn't exactly at The Godfather's level of name recognition. Fun movie all the same.

Didn't even catch that! That's awesome. =P

The attack will be commandeered by Adnan el Shukrijumah ("Jaffer Tayyer" or "Jafer the Pilot"), a naturalized American citizen, who was raised in Brooklyn and educated in southern Florida.

Uh-huh. The press has a NAME implicated, yet we're supposed to believe no one in the entire US government infrastructure has this info?

I went so far as to e-mail the couple thanking them for posting this. Giving the public this piece of history coupled with their very private, personal reactions was not something they needed to do. Very laudable and I would go so far as to say courageous of them. It's just overwhelming to watch, too.

Hehe! That episode of South Park is a brilliant take on the plague of political correctness. Mr. Garrison, an openly gay teacher, wants to get fired, so he puts on displays of increasingly overt sexual perversity (culminating in the classic Lemmiwinks saga) - only to find that every time he ups the ante, his superiors preach more and more about how they have to be "tolerant" of his "lifestyle." When the kids find it bizarre that he has a teacher's assistant named "Mr. Slave" they get sentenced to the "Death Camp of Tolerance." Finally, Garrison gets so frustrated that he snaps at all of his superiors, telling them that there's a fine line between tolerating those with differences and treating the insertion of the class hamster into Mr. Slave's ass as acceptable classroom policy. And for all that Garrison himself is sent to the Tolerance Camp for being "intolerant of the gay lifestyle"! LOL!

"They weren't told the truth. We're communicators and it's up to us to start doing it now."

Earth to Mikey: You tried it already. Your "communication" was successful. The American people got the message. And they rejected it, and you, and chose to re-elect President Bush.

Keep 'em coming if you must. Looking forward to winning in 2006 and 2008, too.

Hacker1: (laughs) I bet you didn't know this, but Michael Moore voted for Bush.

Hacker2: (laughs) He doesn't know it either.

Oh my... on the floor laughing! The whole thing was great.

Isn't Europe so much more enlightened than us lousy, backwards, Bible-thumping moral-value-trumpeting Americans? </sarcasm>

You know, the conventional wisdom seems to be that the 22% of voters who stressed "moral values" meant abortion and gay marriage, but I believe those are just two parts of a much larger trend towards enormous moral depravity which Americans have been ever so slowly taking notice of. They notice crap like this coming out of Europe, they observe that Europe is moving way over to the "enlightened" left, they realize where a Kerry presidency or DNC majority (driven, at least, by the Soros/MoveOn/anti-war coalition) would take us, and they put 2 and 2 together... that's my theory, anyway.

Hm, let's be careful, though. That didn't work too well for the Rats this past election, did it? I mean, I'm personally of the ABH persuasion myself, but if that's our only message - be it for her Senate race in 2006 or the presidency in 08 - then that's a losing message. And Pataki for Senate in 06 brings a lot of baggage with him, and if there's anyone who knows how to use your opponent's baggage it's Hillary.

At any rate, the NY GOP could sure as hell use the rejuvenation. Statewide, we were just demolished last week (possibly thanks, in part, to ol' Soros himself).

I can't resist... (I'm from LI, so Newsday is local to me, and this guy is such a scumbag)

Besides, if I was up, so many people, upon seeing every word I said of this election coming true on television in front of them, would be kissing my hands and embarrassing me with outlandish praise.

XD

When published reports showed a million new voter registrations in Florida and about 800,000 in Ohio, I made the election a lock. They were not rushing out for George Bush.

Whoops, blew it again. This one was easy, too - all poor Jimmy had to do was look at the GOP's GOTV effort and notice how many newly registered voters, committed voters, volunteers, etc. they had out in Florida and Ohio. This was written on 11/2 and so the aforementioned GOP numbers were out, and they were quite impressive. I remember looking at them and thinking "Wow, we've got to be truly on par with the Kerry/DNC voter registration efforts."

It didn't take much effort to be a more intelligent analyst than Breslin, did it?

But of this 170 million cell phone users there were 40 million between the ages of 18 and 29, and these people usually have no other phones. That had to be Kerry.

Come to think of it, the DNC itself never really touted the "cell-phone" voter line. There's a reason why only the idiotic Breslins, Michael Moores, and DUers hyped it up, and that's because they didn't know what the experts did. Anyone who looked to the allegedly underpolled "cell-phone" block was misunderstanding data. Let me consider myself as an example, because I fall into the category of 18-29 cell-phone only (well, I do have a land-line, but being a college number it'd never get polled anyway).

I have a cell-phone which would have placed me in this supposed "hidden" voter bloc. I have no land-line which can be reached by polls. I was a voter in this election even though the polls never would have reached me. Now suppose I was of voting age ten years ago. I would not have had a cell phone. I still would not have had a poll-susceptible land-line. So I still would have been "under the radar" of the polls. I also still would have voted.

Now what changed from one model to the other? The end result, whether or not I voted - which is what we care about - did not change from Model A to Model B. I also would not have been "detected" by the polls in either Model A or Model B. The only thing that changes is that I have a cellphone, and that is a piece of data completely tangential to whether I'm a "hidden, un-polled" voter. Get the picture? Whether I own a cell-phone is about as relevant to polling and vote totals as is owning a refrigerator or brushing your teeth with Crest instead of Colgate (go Crest!). In other words, the total number of people who went "under the radar" in 2004 would be no different from the total number of people in 2000, 1996, 1992, 1988, and so on. All that changes is that some of them have cell-phones.

But was it worth it watching the Breslins, the Moores, and the DUers fall for this false hope hook, line, and sinker? Oh yes. :)

Oh, but these young people never vote, the tales read. They will this time, and because of a one-word issue. Draft.

Sorry, the whole scare tactics strategy kinda blew up in your face. Back to the drawing board. But, hey, at least there was extraordinary turnout - too bad for you and Kerry that it was mostly comprised of evangelical Christians and new voters not willing to flush our country down the toilet. Better luck next time.

Hm. I always liked Huckabee, but didn't he undergo some political problems a few years back that might translate to baggage? Maybe I'm thinking of someone else...

He's also posted here on Free Republic, hasn't he? I remember his name coming up a few times in the 2000 election.

My dream ticket would be Jeb/Rudy, but it's not gonna happen. Giuliani won't win the nomination, he's off a bit too much to the left on social issues, and that'll cost him points, and Jeb will probably be too much Bush family members after two decades of having one in office (GWHB 80-88 as VP and 88-92 as Pres, and GWB 2000-08). So we need someone else as the frontrunner, preferably a strong conservative Governor. I think we'll see someone unexpected grab the nomination in the end.

AP used the word "liberal"? ::blinks::

This corrupt exercise in mass deception cost a billion dollars in TV advertising and twice that in campaign expenses (some of them genuine). But it was worth it for the big business interests that dominate American politics.


Really now?

Cripes. The "Bush = Satan" guy looks a bit like Satan himself.

So they think their problem is that the party is not far enough to the left? I love it. Please, infiltrate the DNC, take over the party and push it as far from the center as possible! We won't need to lift a finger come next election. :)

Been posted already Been posted already

Looks like this is just a regurgitation of his polls and not any analysis based on actual election day turnout/exit polls/etc. CO will not be going to Kerry despite what seems like a fixation of Zogby's on saying it will.