Congress Certifies Bush's Win After Protest

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Centinel
So then why quote news stories that twist the actual truth and then fail to bring up voting irregularties from BOTH sides?

You say my sources are biased, yet your credible sources dont mention the voting irregularities I did, and then harp about long election lines in Ohio as one of the reasons for Ohio being lost....under the assumption that all those people in line were voting democrat when they knew damn well they werent.

Uhh, I didn't post any links to any particular story, just general news. I know there were irregularities on both sides and I've posted so up here during the election.

Again, since you're a "n00b", I toe no political party line. I have typically voted Republican since 1984 but I'll vote Democratic or Independent or National Barking Spider Resurgence Party if I feel that candidate is the best person for the job. There is not one political party that is 100% nor is there one that is 100% wrong. Too bad many people think that's the case, though.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: daniel1113

No... I believe they are saying that it won't affect the outcome of this election... Bush won, period.

Correction - America lost, period

America would have lost with either of them idiots in the WH. Bush had already proven himself to be dishonest, I was willing to risk it on Kerry and give him the opportunity to be an honest president. I really didn't care what he did as a sentor from Massachusettes, just like I didn't give a crap about how Bush had run Texas. Bush's record for the first 4yrs was my reason to vote against him. And why do we get people like Bush lite when there are good people like John McCain? It's baffling

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: conjur
Good to see it's officially certified.

That doesn't mean there were not widespread problems during the election and after (during recounts).

Our entire voting process is a joke. It's even sadder that we've had four years to fix it after the last debacle and it's only been made worse.

:thumbsup: Correct on all points.

 

[Centinel]

Originally posted by: rickn

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: daniel1113

No... I believe they are saying that it won't affect the outcome of this election... Bush won, period.

Correction - America lost, period

America would have lost with either of them idiots in the WH. Bush had already proven himself to be dishonest, I was willing to risk it on Kerry and give him the opportunity to be an honest president. I really didn't care what he did as a sentor from Massachusettes, just like I didn't give a crap about how Bush had run Texas. Bush's record for the first 4yrs was my reason to vote against him. And why do we get people like Bush lite when there are good people like John McCain? It's baffling

Because John McCain is smart enough not to run for president again. Same with Powell.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28
...
WTF, those are all FACTS!! Jesus F Christ, you can argue that vote manipulation might not have happened, but what Conjur referred to is INDISPUTABLE FACT.

No, actually theres not a single fact in there, lets go through them one by one before you start flipping out.

No paper trail on e-voting.

Not speaking for Ohio, every vore in Ohio had at least a paper copy.

Ohio SoS Blackwell seeking to keep himself from even being interviewed about problems in Ohio.

Thats a fact? and if it is, what difference does an interview make?

Much longer lines and less equipment in poorer urban precincts.

You cant have a fact based on a relative term, "longer" is a relative term. Thats like saying "Fact, ice is colder" But colder than what? Its a useless statement. And its also BS, I voted in a very urban district in Ohio, I was in and out in 5 minutes.

Problems handling early ballots and provisionary ballots.

also doesnt apply to Ohio, Ohio did not have early voting, nor did they count the provisional ballots (not enough to make a difference) so neither of these apply

Problems with moving voting locations days before the election.

Never heard of this one, care to link? my voting place was moved since 2000, but I knew about it MONTHS ahead of time for 2004. Got TWO post cards in the mail from Secretary Blackwell, informing me of my voting location, and im registered as an Independent

And on and on and on.

lol, you wish.

I thought you said you were living in reality? You cant tell a fact from what you wish to be true? Sounds like dreamland to me. Wake up

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Centinel

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: daniel1113

No... I believe they are saying that it won't affect the outcome of this election... Bush won, period.

Correction - America lost, period

Your opinion, period.

Ah, but I am certainly not alone, there is that other 49% of America that sides with me.

Unfortunately 50.9% of RRR FLL America owns that 49% right now.

We'll have to wait 4 more years to see if that remains the case or even if America survives.

 

[rickn]

Originally posted by: Centinel

Originally posted by: rickn

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: daniel1113

No... I believe they are saying that it won't affect the outcome of this election... Bush won, period.

Correction - America lost, period

America would have lost with either of them idiots in the WH. Bush had already proven himself to be dishonest, I was willing to risk it on Kerry and give him the opportunity to be an honest president. I really didn't care what he did as a sentor from Massachusettes, just like I didn't give a crap about how Bush had run Texas. Bush's record for the first 4yrs was my reason to vote against him. And why do we get people like Bush lite when there are good people like John McCain? It's baffling

Because John McCain is smart enough not to run for president again. Same with Powell.

He ran in 2000 for the party nomination, the repubs nominated Bush. McCain was the better choice.

 

[Tommunist]

Originally posted by: HalosPuma
Congress Certifies Bush's Win After Protest
:thumbsup:

Sen Barbara Boxer (D-CA) cries after Bush is certified. When will these liberal adults grow up? They are supposed to represent us in Congress, yet cry if they don't get their way?

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yi...0106/i/r3349095374.jpg
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yi...oral_votes_dcgh101.jpg
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yi...0106/i/r3520569600.jpg
http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yi...oral_votes_dcgh102.jpg

"Each chamber then debated the objection, and rejected it, the Senate by a 74-1 vote, the House 267-31. The state-by-state certification was completed a few hours later."

BTW - Why was Congress so empty? Where are all of our reps and senators?

I don't blame her for crying. I've considered moving elsewhere b/c of Bush's reelection. This doesn't have anything to do with his political party and more to do with the fact that I think he is one of the worst presidents in the history of this nation.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Darkhawk28

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: conjur
Care to point out where I said anything about a conspiracy?

Leave it to CsG to exaggerate someone else's claims.

Your little list is chalk full of conspiracy laden theories.

Leave it to conjur to not see reality...

CsG

WTF, those are all FACTS!! Jesus F Christ, you can argue that vote manipulation might not have happened, but what Conjur referred to is INDISPUTABLE FACT.

I think CsG is reverting back to infancy in the wake of his newborn child. Fantasy is now reality.

No, I'm quite aware of reality - it's where I live. You and others on the other hand continually show you have little to no sense of reality and bleat conspiracy BS to fuel your hatred of Bush. Well, again I'll say- keep it up. Voters love to see your types.

CsG

I rarely find myself defending Conjur, but he is right on the money here. He said absolutely nothing about any kind of conspiracy. He said absolutely nothing about the problems being limited to the Right.

There are major problems with our election system, and they need to be fixed. Ignoring them because your candidate won is not helping to solve the problems. We have held elections in Afghanistan and are weeks away from holding them in Iraq, how can we say to the world, "these elections are fair," when our own system has the kind of problems it has?

This isn't about putting Kerry in office (thank God), but it is about making sure our future elections run more smoothly, the counts are more accurate, and the numbers have more integrity. The problems may not have had a large effect in '04, but if we do not fix them, they may in '08.

 

[Tommunist]

Originally posted by: rickn


He ran in 2000 for the party nomination, the repubs nominated Bush. McCain was the better choice.

I couldn't agree more.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: rickn


He ran in 2000 for the party nomination, the repubs nominated Bush. McCain was the better choice.

I couldn't agree more.

Me neither. This country would be som much better off if McCain were in office. Had he been chosen in '00, not a single Democrat would have wanted to run against him in '04.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: rickn


He ran in 2000 for the party nomination, the repubs nominated Bush. McCain was the better choice.

I couldn't agree more.

Me neither. This country would be som much better off if McCain were in office. Had he been chosen in '00, not a single Democrat would have wanted to run against him in '04.

That's because he is 1/2 Democrat, 1/2 Republican. That also explains why he will never be president, ever

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: Tommunist
I don't blame her for crying. I've considered moving elsewhere b/c of Bush's reelection. This doesn't have anything to do with his political party and more to do with the fact that I think he is one of the worst presidents in the history of this nation.

I find it interesting that Barbara Boxer is crying now, and yet I have yet to see her shed a single tear over the tsunami victims or even 9/11. Hmm...

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: bamacre

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: rickn


He ran in 2000 for the party nomination, the repubs nominated Bush. McCain was the better choice.

I couldn't agree more.

Me neither. This country would be som much better off if McCain were in office. Had he been chosen in '00, not a single Democrat would have wanted to run against him in '04.

That's because he is 1/2 Democrat, 1/2 Republican. That also explains why he will never be president, ever

And do you know who's fault that is? OURS. Because people will only vote for who the R's and the D's nominate. In reality, we should see who the two parties nominate, and then say to ourselves, "ok, those two guys are who we shouldn't vote for.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: bamacre
And do you know who's fault that is? OURS. Because people will only vote for who the R's and the D's nominate. In reality, we should see who the two parties nominate, and then say to ourselves, "ok, those two guys are who we shouldn't vote for.

Your method is as ridiculous as only voting Republican or Democrat. Vote for the person, ignore the party affiliation.

 

[Tommunist]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: Tommunist
I don't blame her for crying. I've considered moving elsewhere b/c of Bush's reelection. This doesn't have anything to do with his political party and more to do with the fact that I think he is one of the worst presidents in the history of this nation.

I find it interesting that Barbara Boxer is crying now, and yet I have yet to see her shed a single tear over the tsunami victims or even 9/11. Hmm...

Have you been following her around looking for emotion? I can't believe I'm even responding to you - what you just posted was meaningless.

 

[Tommunist]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: bamacre
And do you know who's fault that is? OURS. Because people will only vote for who the R's and the D's nominate. In reality, we should see who the two parties nominate, and then say to ourselves, "ok, those two guys are who we shouldn't vote for.

Your method is as ridiculous as only voting Republican or Democrat. Vote for the person, ignore the party affiliation.

Unfortunately it seems like not voting for one of the 2 party nominations is like throwing your vote away. Not sure how to change this....

 

[amish]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: daniel1113

No... I believe they are saying that it won't affect the outcome of this election... Bush won, period.

Correction - America lost, period

Correction - Democrats lost, period.

 

[Tommunist]

Originally posted by: amish

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: daniel1113

No... I believe they are saying that it won't affect the outcome of this election... Bush won, period.

Correction - America lost, period

Correction - Democrats lost, period.

Correction - <insert disagreement here>, period

 

[amish]

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: amish

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: daniel1113

No... I believe they are saying that it won't affect the outcome of this election... Bush won, period.

Correction - America lost, period

Correction - Democrats lost, period.

Correction - <insert disagreement here>, period

:thumbsup:

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: conjur

No paper trail on e-voting. Ohio SoS Blackwell seeking to keep himself from even being interviewed about problems in Ohio. Much longer lines and less equipment in poorer urban precincts. Problems handling early ballots and provisionary ballots. Problems with moving voting locations days before the election. And on and on and on.
[/quote]

I was not allowed to vote

I was disenfranchized

I was disenfranchised

I was denied the right to vote





Where are the news articles about the individuals that were denied the right to vote? Maybe I am just searching wrong?

[/quote]

 

[Tommunist]

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur

No paper trail on e-voting. Ohio SoS Blackwell seeking to keep himself from even being interviewed about problems in Ohio. Much longer lines and less equipment in poorer urban precincts. Problems handling early ballots and provisionary ballots. Problems with moving voting locations days before the election. And on and on and on.

I was not allowed to vote

I was disenfranchized

I was disenfranchised

I was denied the right to vote





Where are the news articles about the individuals that were denied the right to vote? Maybe I am just searching wrong?

[/quote]



[/quote]


deja vu

 

[Ozoned]

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: Ozoned

Originally posted by: conjur

No paper trail on e-voting. Ohio SoS Blackwell seeking to keep himself from even being interviewed about problems in Ohio. Much longer lines and less equipment in poorer urban precincts. Problems handling early ballots and provisionary ballots. Problems with moving voting locations days before the election. And on and on and on.

I was not allowed to vote

I was disenfranchized

I was disenfranchised

I was denied the right to vote





Where are the news articles about the individuals that were denied the right to vote? Maybe I am just searching wrong?

[/quote]


deja vu[/quote]

You want to take a stab at it? All other requests have been denied.

 

[HalosPuma]

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: amish

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: daniel1113

No... I believe they are saying that it won't affect the outcome of this election... Bush won, period.

Correction - America lost, period

Correction - Democrats lost, period.

Correction - <insert disagreement here>, period

Amish is correct, the Democrats lost: Presidency, House, Senate, Supreme Court nominations. That is not a disagreement, that is fact. To say that America lost, however, is highly subjective.

 

[bamacre]

Originally posted by: HalosPuma

Originally posted by: Tommunist

Originally posted by: amish

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: daniel1113

No... I believe they are saying that it won't affect the outcome of this election... Bush won, period.

Correction - America lost, period

Correction - Democrats lost, period.

Correction - <insert disagreement here>, period

Amish is correct, the Democrats lost: Presidency, House, Senate, Supreme Court nominations. That is not a disagreement, that is fact. To say that America lost, however, is highly subjective.

With the only candidiates being Bush and Kerry, America lost way before the November elections.