Why can't liberals accept defeat?

Question

G. Bush Jr., wins in 2000 and they have to say he stole the election. Their case is based on a demand that military ballots should not be counted in Florida and that some "people" misunderstood "some" ballots.

G. Bush Jr wins by a larger margin in 2004 and they still claim voter irregularities and that he stole the election.

The "conservative" candidate wins in Mexico in 2006 and the loser (liberal) leader won't admit defeat and wants to challenge it in courts.

Why is it the liberals can not accept defeat? As far as voter irregularities do liberals really believe these only favor conservatives in elections? Do they not remember the history of the Chicago political machine for the democrats or the cemetary that votes 100% of the time in San Francisco - all one way. I mean seriously the irregularities are bad but they go both ways. Buses of voters hit multiple precincts in California, registration scams have hit both parties here too. So why can't the liberals accept it?

Hey Red; if you want to blame Bush for Golfing how about the BJ Clinton golf outings during the 8 years he saw al queda grow? You blame Bush for 9 months of ignorance and give BJ a pass for 8 years? Sad. Also have you seen the minority home ownership reports - the poor in America are doing better under Bush then ever in history. Why can't you give him credit on the very issues you raise?

Mary, dear mary, you make me laugh out loud. Yes the modern Liberal wanted more change like the revolutionary of the 1700's but that dear Mary is where your similarities end. Please Mary do your homework girl;

Todays' liberals hate the idea of private gun ownership; the 1700 Revolutionary demanded it;

Today's liberals can't stand liberating another nation and fighting for a good cause; and the 1700 revolutionary did.

Today's liberals are fathers of gay marriage, illegal immigration, and massive government = all of which the 1700 era revolutionary would have found repulsive.

No dear Mary your modern liberal is nothing like the 1700 revolutionary of America....not one bit.

gg - Mr. Rossi conceeded....has Gore?

Answer 1

Because in their warped sense of reality. Everyone should think like they do. If everyone thinks like they do then the only way they can lose an election is by it being "stolen". They cannot fathom that intelligent people might have a different opinion. And in their mind they are always right and if you don't agree you must be stupid.

Answer 2

It's a natural defensive mechanism. They can't accept that the majority of Americans don't agree with their philosophy or agenda, OR that a majority could possibly agree with the people & policies they have painted as evil in order to get out their own vote. By calling elections stolen, they can continue to see republicans as evil & deny the unwillingness of the middle to support liberal candidates.

Republicans are not so different, just that they were out of power for so long they understand you can't put up extremist candidates. Bush for instance is more liberal than the majority of republicans (look at issues like immigration, or fiscal responsibility), but he was selected expressly because he could appeal to swing voters - less so now maybe than when he was running for office, but that also is timed. Republicans since 94 have been much better strategically at being realists. Democrats now are struggling for control between the moderate (that can win & wants to reinvent the party) & liberal (that remains in denial & hands elections to almost any republican) branches. We'll see how that turns out, and the result will cause a swing in who republicans are able to run & still win.

I can't comment much on Mexico, even though I do live in Texas & have followed the election. However, I think you'll find the greatest number of voter problems were in allowing Mexican citizens in the US to vote (or rather not vote), when that block very strongly supported the pro-business candidate (who won anyway). We'll see how that changes for the next round of elections, but I bet there will be polling places in consulates & a much easier (less risky) registration process.

Answer 3

Since the Great Depression, the philosophy and tactics of the Democrat Party have been based on divisiness and class warfare. For 70+ years, their campaigns have boiled down to just three messages.

1) Republicans are interested in lining their pockets, and don't care about anyone else.

2) Conservatives are stupid and/or uneducated. If only they knew what we knew, they would vote our way.

3) You are a victim because of a) labor polices, b) racism, c) sexism, d) nationalism, e) patriotism ... Everyone is against you except the Democrat Party.

After 70+ years of saying this drivel, they have come to believe every word of it. And now, they feel that it is their God-given, elite, superior right to govern.

When they lose, they have no framework in which to understand why.

Answer 4

You're totally mis-stating the facts, but I'm going to ignore your question because you didn't even bother to phrase it properly.

All liberals aren't democrats, and all democrats aren't liberals. You should be saying "Why can't Democrats accept defeat"? There is no major party calling itself the Liberal Party in the US currently.

As far as Mexico, why not read up some on Mexican politics from the 60s till now, and then maybe you'll understand why their elections are under some suspicion.

Answer 5

We "liberals" sometimes do get carried away, and I personally think Bush won both elections. The reason we were pissed in '00, however, was because they said Gore won, then the next morning, Bush is the winner. WTF?
Also, we are fighting because Bush is too damn STUPID to be a good president. For the first nine months of his presidency, all his advisers knew, they KNEW that Al Queda was gaining power and planning on attacking us. And what did Bush do? He went golfing. GOLFING?!
Now, I ask YOU, why can't you conservitive right-wing republicans get your heads out of Daddy's pocket and help the poor people?

Answer 6

Ask a conservative if they accepted defeat after the 1960/1964 Presidential elections. Same situation with voter fraud and a country that was increasing voting in liberal candidates.

No one side holds sway for long

Answer 7

So you think that not being able to accept defeat is a SYMPTOM of libralism?

Any time you make a braod generalzation or umbrella statement like that - its called PREJUDICE.

Here is a generalzation for you that you might not like...

Since you appear to be SO pro bush and pro conservative - I can only assume you are a devout christian. Right? You dont even have to confirm or deny. I know i am right.

The only people still dumb enough in this country to be on Bush's side are people who are looking forward to the Rapture.

Idiots.

Answer 8

You would be surprised to know that many conservatives are not against abortion, like me. Now I would never have one, but hey if anyone wants to have one, I don't care. When they meet their maker, they have to face the consequences. The reason I am OK with the abortion law is I was in high school when abortions were illegal and remember girls trying to use coat hangers to abort their babies. A desperate female will do anything including what I told you. So I would rather a doctor perform this rather then the females try to do it to themselves.

Answer 9

Because we're Americans, jack#ss. Did the goosestepping right column give up when Clinton took office?? H@ll no! They spent 44 million dollars with Ken Starr trying to prosecute the Clintons on charges that were proved to be FALSE.

Ken Starr was the RNC's dimpled darling for eight very expensive years. Remember??

Americans don't quit, bub. No matter what side of the political fence we sit on.

Get used to it.

Answer 10

Did the Colonists accept defeat under the rule of the first King George? Of course not, they rebelled, organized and defeated him - driving him nuts in the process. Since we Liberals far more resemble the first Americans than today's neo-Con sheep, who have no ideas that weren't first talking points, guess who will succeed in the end?