Do you think George W. Bush stole either election?

Question

Addendum: For those who are calling me a crybaby Democrat, fock off - just because I ask a question, don't stereotype me because you don't know my political affiliations. I am independent.

Answer 1

The first yes,
The second no.

Answer 2

The 2000 election was more than likely stolen by Bush and his cronies, while using the judicial branch as an accomplice to the crime. The second election wasn’t blatantly stolen per say, but the Bush administration was involved in some unscrupulous campaign tactics to tarnish Kerry to the point that it gave Bush the competitive edge.

What I am specifically referring to is the so called “Swift Boat Veterans for Truth” who were a group of individuals, who performed the same sort of work in Vietnam as John Kerry did; namely conducting military operations using swift boats. They all claimed, in their highly publicized book, that John Kerry’s medals were not earned honestly, though it has been proven that many of those who gave such testimony, contradicting Kerry’s heroism, were never actually there.

The Bush administration denied any involvement or funding of the “Swift Boat Veterans” but many newspaper articles have documented a paper and money trail linking key movers and shakers of the Bush administration and campaign officials with the “Swift Boat Veterans” for truth.

Given how close the election was, this hearsay against Kerry might have cost him the few votes he needed to win the election. In both elections the Bush campaign acted less than ethically, even by politician’s standards.


P.S. – I know this is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand, but I do believe in giving compliments when a person honestly merits them. I just have to say, assuming the pictures you posted on your Yahoo 360 page are accurate, you are quite beautiful.

Answer 3

Without doubt! The evidence is indisputable. The worst part of it is that we, as Americans let him get away with it! Anybody who would say otherwise either hasn't looked at the evidence, or is intentionally ignoring it. If the tables were turned and it was a democrat, we would never hear the end of it, and the brownshirts who support this illegitimate traitor of a President should never hear the end of it either. When we as a nation, have a new President, one of his or her first acts should be an investigation into the treason of the Bush elections, and to finally have justice.

Secondly for the fool who puts liberty over liberalism as a tag line. Have you ever noticed that liberty and liberal are derivative of the same word? Also have you noticed how the right wing is the political side of the coin that wants to curb our freedoms more and more? By putting that phrase as your "tag line" you are proving yourself to be an idiot.

Answer 4

Honestly, it's hard to say. There are good points on both sides. Below is an article recently published in Rolling Stone that supposedly proves that the election was stolen, and also an article that refutes the evidence used. It's fairly safe to say that in the 2000 election, however, Bush did not win the popular vote and likely did not win the electoral vote either (the third article).

Answer 5

Of course not. The system doesn't allow for anything as bizarre as that. There are simply a lot of crybabies who weren't pleased with the results. If either election had been decided otherwise, there would have been a different (but no less vocal) batch of disgruntled souls. We have a free country, which allows us to complain long and loud whenever we don't get what we want. Ain't it grand?

Answer 6

It has already been proved, Gore had more votes in FL than Bush

Look at a paper on the 04 election by Stephen Freeman. Exit poll data vs. actual count. Whoever controls the unregulated electronic voting machines will choose the outcome.

Answer 7

President George W. Bush won both elections fair and square, despite continuous kvetching ever since, by children on this site who just don't know any better. Also, some adults tried to rig both elections against him with bought votes ($5-10 or a carton of cigarettes, whatever worked best), bogus votes by dead people and their pets, and attempts to throw out absentee votes from our fighting men and women overseas, most of whom vote a Republican ticket. These facts are well documented.

Answer 8

No. I think some people got overzealous at the local levels, but I don't think it was a concerted effort or conspiracy. Although they may have conspired to hide the truth after the fact. Greg Palast wrote an interesting book that touches on the subject: _The Best Democracy Money Can Buy_.

Answer 9

No way! And, seriously, if you think so you need to get over it. The counts have been done and re-done and the guy won, pure and simple. Good thinkg, too! Can't imagine what a mess we'd be in w/ Gore or Kerry as Prez. Both have proven themselves to be true world-class idiots.

And jeez, THERE WERE STATE-WIDE recounts! The guy won! The press didn't like it so it wasn't ballyhooed very loudly, but it was reported!

Answer 10

No, he did not. However, the irregularities surrounding the results of both elections (the Florida situation in '00, the inaccuracy of exit polls in '04) have led some to believe that he must have somehow rigged them. You'll find many such folks here - you've read through their answers to get here.

Answer 11

Obviously not. The only votes that really matter are the electoral votes, and nobody has ever suggested that they were manipulated. There is also no evidence that the popular vote was manipulated, even though plenty of people believe it was because they saw it on the internet. Those people also believe that gullible is not in the dictionary.