Didn't Bush "steal" the 2004 election?

Question

I mean with this undisputable evidence I cannot believe how anyone doesn't believe otherwise.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/front.htm

Will you people look at the link and realize I was being sarcastic.

I hang my head in shame... My fellow republicans do not even click on the link before responding.

Ace, how ill informed are you??? Florida had nothing to do with the 2004 election.

LB, the electronic machines were used cause the uneducated democrat base couldn't figure out a ballot that was posted in the newspaper weeks before.

LOL, anyone who calls me a liberal has not read my past Q and A... It's wide open, take a gander.

Answer 1

OK now I get it LOL..... sarcasm at its BEST!!!!!!

Let me see.... 270 electoral votes needed to win:

GWBush got 286 electoral - Komrad Kerry got 252
GWBush got 51% of the vote - Komrad Kerry got 48% of the vote

Even liberaIs shouldn't find this hard to understand'

Why is the left still sniveling about this, they need to get over it, its been over 3 years and NO COURT has changed the result.

Liberals want a system like the communists have, its manadatory that you vote during all elections, (ITS THE LAW), you better vote for the ONE communist candidate thats on the ballet. That's what you get for a choice in the type of government people on the left want for us here in America. Us true Americans do not want the "new communist" country envisioned by the left.

==========================================
For decades democrats have had a LOT of deceased people voting for them. Here in Kommiefornia I've seen hispanics in front of super markets registering illegals to vote. Tell me how anyone can be a citizen and can't speak or understand English, when, at least the last time I checked, the citizenship test was in English.

Answer 2

Both the 2000 and 2004 elections are in question. In 2000, many African-American votes (i.e. those that tend to vote Democrat) were "removed" from voting lists, a recount was thwarted which proves the Republican side was fearful of the result of it, some crappy ballot was made confusing thousands of voters, the lists goes on. In 2004, the game was electronic voting machines--in some instances the software was unreliable showing votes of 10 million for Bush in places where the poplulation was under 100,000 or corrupted, showing results that confliced by almost 100% with exit polls. In short, while my personal belief is the election was absolutely stolen, even the biggest Bush defender cannot support the use of these machines that (a) yielded no paper trail, (b) had software that was not allowed to be reviewed by local voting officials and (c) were full of errors. Unfortunately, they were used though, and that ladies and gentlemen is why it was so easy to steal the election.

Answer 3

That is a nice map but I don't think many people are looking at the link, but instead choosing to attack you for the question.

People like to make excuses when things don't go their way.
A way to disparage somebody or some process is the first step.

My brother is an extreme liberal and he has emailed me links to websites that even offer the Programing code to alter the electronic voting machines that a college professor offered as proof to voter fraud by the DIEBOLD company.

Of course this is just one conspiracy nut feeding of a bunch more conspiracy nuts. Which it turns out is rather easy to do.

If you convince yourself that some process or person is corrupt. It makes you a lot more likely to believe the most insane lies told about him or it by other loons.

Of course proof or evidence means very little. Just the possibilty that it could actually have happened seems to be the only prerequisite to further the "CONSPIRACY."

Answer 4

No. The activist Florida supreme court attempted to steal the election by changing election rules after the balloting. They usurped authority that belonged to the Florida legislature who soley has the authority to write election law. Bush won a majority in the electoral college no matter how one calculates. Even if the selective recounting was allowed to continue as the Florida court had mandated, the results would not have changed. Counts by independent groups after the election bore this out.

Answer 5

No, how did he steal it? The electoral college is different than the popular vote you know.

Okay, I just looked at the link. I knew that he took 60%+ of the counties and more area, but I hadn't seen that map in quite some time.

Good question!

Answer 6

Of course he stole the elections, all elections republicans win are because the diebold machines are rigged. Yet not one democrat complained about the 2006 elections. AMusing, the hypocriscy isn't it? ^_^

Whoo hoo, 2/3 of the country red!

Answer 7

No one stole any elections, Charles. Unless winning equates to stealing now. In that case, almost every President this nation has ever had stole an election or two.

Just because you don't like the results does not make them invalid. Who do you think is going to steal the Superbowl this year? Who's gonna steal the NCAA championship?

Answer 8

you liberals just dont get it do you? its been four years and eight since the first one and STILL your whining about it.
ok, last time here before your next repeat post
the Ny Times commissioned a study of the Florida vote count and I live in Ohio and can tell you that Ken Blackwell did the same in Ohio. in all four scenarios driven for the undervote and overvote bush one. in SAMPLE communities was close but didnt win. Gores was SELECTIVE recount taking things out of context is not new to a liberal, im sure your aware. bottom line here.
the answer to your question is no as no theft occurred
now its been four years.
GROW UP
GET OVER IT
GET A LIFE

Answer 9

No. But Gore tried to steal the 2000 election

Answer 10

It's true the 2004 election was stolen, but it was stolen by other powers who wanted Bush in office.

The coming election in 2008 will also be manipulated by the same powers.