Bush vs Kerry

[McG]

Looks like Ohio will decide with its 20 votes.

Bush has 254, Kerry has 252, and there are 32 still to be decided.
I'll second that expectation of lawyers (especially because the news is reporting that both campaign teams have groups of lawyers already on stand-by).

 

[winchable]

I remember reading yesterday that the first lawsuit was filed sometime in the afternoon over the automated voting machines.

Whatever the case it's going to be dragged out a bit, I think it takes up to 10 days for the recount or something like that.
Huge irregularities, people lined up 6 hours past the time the station was due to close.

 

[NavyGrunt]

What happens if he doesnt get 270 electoral votes?

 

[Bograt]

If that happpens Aaron, the new elected Senated votes on who becomes President, and the House of Representatives vote on who become vice president.

Why is it that I can remember this bit of trivia, but this morning I forgot the name of the guy working next to me ?

 

[Guardian]

There won't be a tie. Ohio awards its 20 votes as a block, without splitting them up. One of the candidates will win the state, and that candidate will win the election - Kerry would have 272, or Bush 274.

Building on Bograt's point, since the House and the Senate appear to both be solidly Republican after the day's voting, a tie - if it were to occur - will mean Bush and Cheney return.

And Bograt, don't feel bad - I forgot my own name....  :crybaby:

 

[muskrat89]

I guess all the registered dead, pets and illieagal aliens just arn't doing it for the Dems. (Cats usually vote Republican anyway). Time to call out the lawyers!

Arizona passed a proposition, against protests from BOTH parties, to provide proof of citizenship when voting, and to deny certain (state) benefits to illegals. People can have no idea just how bad it is, unless they live here, or in another southern border state. It's interesting that all of the politicians were against this proposition, but the majority of citizens are for it.

Now it will be litigated to death, and perhaps, struck down. I can only hope that it sends a message to the politicians, especially Federal, that we're tired of this....

And now, back to the thread.....   

 

[a_majoor]

At least the citizens of Arizona seem to have their heads screwed on tight. If our political culture would evolve a bit in that direction.....

 

[Gouki]

Well, Kerry conceded to Bush, so unfortunately it's another 4 more years.

 

[a_majoor]

Unfortunately if you belong to Al Qadea or other jihadi groups; fortunately if you were among the majorety of voters in the United States.

We should worry more about however many more years of a Liberal government.

 

[winchable]

We should worry more about however many more years of a Liberal government

Exactly, this presidential election should be a sideshow compared to our own sheep show.
I noticed something else too, why is it that on my campus people were packed into the bar to watch the presidential election and bitch about the candidates, yet when it comes time for our own election, nothing.
The same people of course who will constanly assert our uniqueness from the Americans see our election as secondary to the POTUS election. (I swore I'd start using the term POTUS more often because it's hilarious)

So lets all focus our energy on bitching about our own government folks.
Bush won, Kerry lost. *Band plays* and it's back to work in Canada.

 

[dutchie]

Unfortunately if you belong to Al Qadea or other jihadi groups;

Kind of a broad assumption and generalization, don't you think?

fortunately if you were among the majorety of voters in the United States.

Calling a 51% or 52% election victory a majority, while correct, is only barely correct. It seems pretty obvious to me that the US populace is deeply divided on what they would like the direction of the country to be. As well, way more people voted this time around, indicating that there is more interest and strong political opinion this time around, which is not uncommon in wartime.

What I'm driving at is this: Bush, if in fact he does win, would be well served to try and bridge the chasm between Republican and Democrat. He tried to do that last time around, but was not sucessful. Then 9/11 came around.......

 

[Guardian]

Calling a 51% or 52% election victory a majority, while correct, is only barely correct. It seems pretty obvious to me that the US populace is deeply divided on what they would like the direction of the country to be. As well, way more people voted this time around, indicating that there is more interest and strong political opinion this time around, which is not uncommon in wartime.

Yes, it's a slim majority, but Kerry received 47-48%. Furthermore, Bush is the first president to receive a majority of votes since his dad did it in 1990. Clinton never managed it.... And there (probably) won't be the litigation and controversy surrounding this election due to this majority.

Compared to Clinton's wins, and Bush's own first win, this represents a clear mandate from the American people.

What I'm driving at is this: Bush, if in fact he does win, would be well served to try and bridge the chasm between Republican and Democrat. He tried to do that last time around, but was not sucessful. Then 9/11 came around.......

Agreed.

Bush now has an opportunity to reach out. A contested victor could not legitimately extend an olive branch, but now Bush is in that position. Repairing the political divide in the US electorate should be a priority - without that unity, a coherent response to terror and confident leadership on the world stage will be impossible.

Kerry gave him a scare in the run-up to the election. Bush's polling numbers are far below what they were after 9/11. Bush, if he's smart, will recognize that the American people are uncomfortable with the progress in the GWOT and unhappy about the situation in Iraq, but they still (generally) trust him to protect them. That trust will not be extended to his successor as Republican presidential candidate in 2008 unless three things happen:

1. Osama Bin Laden is caught or killed by 2008.
2. No major terror attacks occur on US soil.
3. Iraq shows measurable and clear improvement in terms of security and rebuilding.

Be interesting to see what he says in his speech...

 

[Guardian]

Incidentally, I wonder what Michael Moore will have to say about this. I'd love to see it - he's going to be so disappointed....  ;D

 

[dutchie]

He's probably drowning his sorrows in a dozen Big Macs.

Get it in ya, fatty!

 

[Bograt]

Did you hear that?

It sounds like Mr. Martin went into the closet and got the muzzle and leash for Caroline Parrish.

"Coalition of the Idiots.... no no no, she was interupted, she was saying the coalition of the idiot savants......"

 

[rifleman]

It sounds like Mr. Martin went into the closet and got the muzzle and leash for Caroline Parrish.

"Coalition of the Idiots.... no no no, she was interupted, she was saying the coalition of the idiot savants......"

What! we aren't allowed to have our own opinions anymore?

 

[dutchie]

Sure we are. YOU can go on network TV and call Bush whatever you like, MPs cannot. MPs are representatives of Canada to foreign governments, they are law makers, and they are supposed to be professional. As an MP, especially one frrom the ruling party, you cannot go on national TV and call Bush (and Blair) an idiot. It is inflamatory, insulting, unprofessional, disrespectful, and not representing the views of the government or the people as a whole.

She should have been fired.

 

[I_am_John_Galt]

Incidentally, I wonder what Michael Moore will have to say about this. I'd love to see it - he's going to be so disappointed....  ;D

Check out the graffiti in the picture ('colourful' language warning): http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/006886.html

 

[Infanteer]

Calling a 51% or 52% election victory a majority, while correct, is only barely correct.

That is alot better then we can do; we make Prime Ministers with about 30% of the popular mandate.

 

[dutchie]

That is alot better then we can do; we make Prime Ministers with about 30% of the popular mandate.
Of course, we have more than 2 parties.

The point that Bush is the first President with more than 50% of the popular vote is noteworthy, though. Not because it is a difficult thing to do, but because it ends quite an amazing streak for a 2-party nation. Clinton in both of his election victories had less than 50% (Perot), and Bush in his first election had less than 50% (Nader). Bush is the first President since Bush Sr. to have at least 50% of the popular vote.