English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Facts are facts. What will liberals think of next?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html

2007-06-14 16:29:53 · 28 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Elections

Cary Cyd - I did produce facts, complete with source material and references from an unbiased source. Did you miss something?

2007-06-14 17:14:13 · update #1

28 answers

I love it and your source is the bleeding heart liberal PBS. Liberals fear the truth. They run from it. The truth interferes with their "feelings". Also, they really hate it when you can support the truth with facts from credible sources. I often wonder if liberals know what the words truth and fact mean. I know they don't know how to use them.

2007-06-14 16:35:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 8 5

President Bush failed to win the popular vote in the 2000 Presidential election. He was elected by winning the electoral vote, which is all that matters in a Presidential election anyway. Gore received about 500,000 more total votes than Bush, but Bush won enough electoral votes to defeat Gore. This is not the first and likely will not be the last time a candidate loses the popular vote, yet wins the electoral vote.

I cite the Federal Election Commission's website.

2007-06-15 00:38:36 · answer #2 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 2 1

Hmmm. From what I see here, both sides of the issue are saying they are right based on facts. Both sides say their facts are from good sources. Sounds like a stalemate.

Would both sides like to list their sources of facts?
Who would then decide which were relevant?
What would happen next?

All I know is I watched all TV stations I could receive with the rabbit ears on my TV & read my local newspaper & what I remember hearing was the following:

1. Chads were left hanging
2. Re-counts of Florida votes were flawed, so process was changed for future elections.
3. There were also questions about the vote counting in Ohio, so their process was also changed for future elections.

If there were no problems, why were processes changed?

Instead of people calling each other names & making stereotypical statements about each other, which is usually a sign of defensiveness, learn the rules of civilized debate. Produce evidence, note sources & debate the ISSUES not the other person's traits, appearance or personality.

2007-06-15 00:07:24 · answer #3 · answered by Cary Cyd 5 · 2 3

Liberals and Democrats live in an alternative state of mind. They believe so much in the rightness of their point of view that any person who disagrees with them are not only stupid but evil. They cannot conceive of any scenario where the average person could accept such things as patriotism, Christianity or conservatism. Liberals equate all of these things as equivalent to Nazism.

So how can the Red staters actually out vote the rich lib knowitalls and their vast numbers of undereducated entitlement whores. Worst of all (in their minds) these "neo" cons also love the military. They are confused because somehow the People have missed the lessons of Viet Nam. We didn't. What we learned was that if Liberals are left to their unchecked rants, they WILL abandon the Soldiers, Iraq, and the Constitution. On the plus side they will allow gay marriage and abortion for twelve year olds.

Now why was it we didn't vote for Kerry or Gore?

2007-06-14 23:46:54 · answer #4 · answered by morgan j 4 · 4 3

umm I love that you all say liberals... who said Bush was a conservative?? TO CONSERVE YOU WOULD SAVE. The last three "conservative" presidents have spent more money than any other president in US history. BUT not I like "liberals" either. Or should we say democrat wait is there a difference? NO there aren't democrats or republicans, THERE ARE NEO-CONS! They have taken over our country and destroying what our fore fathers created. They are spending money on imperialism and now are even talking about using tactical nukes against a country that has done nothing to us! What happened to the American Vaules that we stay out of other countries buisiness and just trade with them. The reason we are attacked by "terrorists" is because of invasive foriegn policies that have been going on for the past 50 years. Its time we stop and just leave the world alone then they would stop attacking us! wouldn't you attack someone if they came into our country and said HEY WE ARE GOING TO OVER THROW YOUR GOVERNMENT! WAKE UP AMERICA! WAKE UP!!!! Ron Paul is the only man that will protect our constitution and get us out of these spending sprees! RON PAUL 2008!

2007-06-15 01:28:15 · answer #5 · answered by Eric _ 1 · 0 3

I looked at your source. You've GOT to be kidding. You want to use wouldas, shouldas, and couldas to say Bush won the popular vote? There was a good reason the USSC halted the recount in Florida, it was a frigging mess. Sorry, but you can't make facts out of conjecture or what "might" have happened according to one accounting firm. According to all records, the final popular count was as follows, and there's no way to change it, even by fantasizing:

http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/elecpop.htm

Bush 47.87% 50,456,002

Gore 48.38% 50,999,897

I don't know where you took math, but my education tells me that Gore won the popular vote. Let us know if you discover a new way to do math that can show differently.

2007-06-15 00:24:15 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

It is true that Mr. Bush won BOTH the popular and electoral votes in 2004, however, in 2000 election Mr. Bush did win the electoral votes, but not the popular votes. You should get your facts straight. No resentment, President Bush has shown splendidly what he has done for the country.

2007-06-15 00:09:39 · answer #7 · answered by AliBaba 6 · 2 3

Liberals aren't the only ones, this is just a tool. Nobody ever argued Bush lost the popular vote. The reason I (myself) believe the elections were stolen because the Diebold machines used and the programmer is on video testifying to congress that it was possible for someone to change results without any trace at all. And if they could why wouldn't they?

http://youtube.com/results?search_query=diebold+machines&search=

2007-06-15 00:45:52 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

He won, that is what they can not grasp. Seems like the more you spank them, the more they yell, hard head I guess, can not take no for a answer. When they loss, that is when the bash Bush campaign started, they started the propaganda and let the rest carry it on, like of that that Sheehan thing. One thing for sure, Sheehan learned her lesson the hard way, when Libs were finished using her, just before the election, they dumped her like a load of crap. They got elected and hung her out to dry.

2007-06-15 00:07:57 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Well, actually my friend, Gore won the national popular vote and Bush won the electoral vote, and therefore the election. I do agree with this statement for the 2004 election though. Thanks!

2007-06-15 02:05:25 · answer #10 · answered by derekgorman 4 · 2 1

They have nothing better to do. Besides they want to say as many bad things, true or false, about Bush so they will win the White House in '08. That is all they care about, the next election. Peace

2007-06-14 23:38:46 · answer #11 · answered by PARVFAN 7 · 7 2

fedest.com, questions and answers