Kerry 252 - Bush 286

[Dofuss3000]

Thats it, Kerry 252 - Bush 286.

I have nothing else to say.

(The final electoral college count - You saw it here first)

 

[Dofuss3000]

I am going to sleep now, its been almost 10 hours for me... cya guys tommorrow.

 

[ntdz]

nice. Bush cleaned house.

 

[AFB]

Originally posted by: ntdz
nice. Bush cleaned house.

Umm, not really. It was decided by a single state.

 

[poopaskoopa]

Here's a nice, heartfelt FU to Ohio.

 

[MidasKnight]

Originally posted by: amdfanboy

Originally posted by: ntdz
nice. Bush cleaned house.

Umm, not really. It was decided by a single state.

and don't forget the 3 million + popular votes over Kerry ... :laugh:

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: MidasKnight

Originally posted by: amdfanboy

Originally posted by: ntdz
nice. Bush cleaned house.

Umm, not really. It was decided by a single state.

and don't forget the 3 million + popular votes over Kerry ... :laugh:

Popular vote is mingless because all it measure of is how many people in the locked states had either nothing better to do or a local election that was important to them

 

[Buzzman151]

Originally posted by: poopaskoopa
Here's a nice, heartfelt FU to Ohio.

and Ohio sends one right back

 

[PatboyX]

i dont see it nowhere!! where??!?! i need news!!!!

 

[dmcowen674]

That is the final tally.

I was crosseyed and added a bit off

I had posted 288 252 when I went to sleep.


It can only be 286.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: PatboyX
i dont see it nowhere!! where??!?! i need news!!!!

For some reason Ohio, Iowa and New Mexico are not being called yet even thought they all show at least a 1% win for Bush in each state.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: PatboyX
i dont see it nowhere!! where??!?! i need news!!!!

For some reason Ohio, Iowa and New Mexico are not being called yet even thought they all show at least a 1% win for Bush in each state.

i need closure!!!
oh, anxiety.

 

[Irrational]

Popular vote is mingless because all it measure of is how many people in the locked states had either nothing better to do or a local election that was important to them

Gotta love it. Flashback 4 years and liberals couldn't get enough of the popular vote. Some even based the reasoning for that pointless whining soley on the fact that Gore won it.

:roll:

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: MidasKnight

Originally posted by: amdfanboy

Originally posted by: ntdz
nice. Bush cleaned house.

Umm, not really. It was decided by a single state.

and don't forget the 3 million + popular votes over Kerry ... :laugh:

Popular vote is mingless because all it measure of is how many people in the locked states had either nothing better to do or a local election that was important to them

That is quite possibly the most ignorant statement I have ever read.

 

[Dofuss3000]

bump

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: MidasKnight

Originally posted by: amdfanboy

Originally posted by: ntdz
nice. Bush cleaned house.

Umm, not really. It was decided by a single state.

and don't forget the 3 million + popular votes over Kerry ... :laugh:

As a percentage of the popular vote, that is less of a margin than most past elections other than 2000. 3 million sounds like a lot, 3% seems a little less impressive

Don't get me wrong, Kerry CLEARLY lost. But cleaning house? Nah, that's more what Reagan did in '84.

 

[Vic]

"Cleaning house" is FDR in 1936 (largest electoral landslide in US history, 523-8 with 62% of the popular), or Nixon in 1972 (520-17 electoral and 60% of the popular), or Reagan in 1984 (525-13 electoral and 59% of the popular).
By historical standards, this election was extremely close. For example, some have pointed out that Bush received more popular votes than any other presidential candidate in history. This is true, but Kerry received the second largest number of popular votes in history, more popular votes even than Reagan received in his landslide in 1984, the previous record.

Informative website with historical presidential election numbers

 

[Stifko]

Originally posted by: poopaskoopa
Here's a nice, heartfelt FU to Ohio.

Here is another one.
I am still in shock.
How could so many people be so easily duped ???

 

[assemblage]

Yipee!

 

[Valvoline6]

Bush won by a larger margin than 2000 in the electoral college, and has a much bigger popular vote lead than Gore had. 3.5 million vote advantage. He also received more than 50% of the vote, something that hasn't happened in a presidential election in 24 years. It's a convincing victory.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Valvoline6
Bush won by a larger margin than 2000 in the electoral college, and has a much bigger popular vote lead than Gore had. 3.5 million vote advantage. He also received more than 50% of the vote, something that hasn't happened in a presidential election in 24 years. It's a convincing victory.

All true, but 2000 was a VERY close election, as close elections go in the last 20 years, 2000 was closest, 2004 is next.

 

[chrisms]

I hate him with a passion, but the best of luck to G.W. in his next four years. Now at least he has the chance to redeem himself, if he can win in Iraq I think most will look back on him as a good president. If he had been dumped we would've never been able to fully blame him for all of the failures in the war.

 

[Valvoline6]

1960 was even closer popular vote wise than 2000. Kennedy won by about 100,000 votes nation wide. BTW when you say "The closest election in the last 20 years" that's only 3 elections. So while this one is the second closest it's also the second largest magin of victory.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Valvoline6
Bush won by a larger margin than 2000 in the electoral college, and has a much bigger popular vote lead than Gore had. 3.5 million vote advantage. He also received more than 50% of the vote, something that hasn't happened in a presidential election in 24 years. It's a convincing victory.

All true, but 2000 was a VERY close election, as close elections go in the last 20 years, 2000 was closest, 2004 is next.

With the exception of the ridiculously close vote in 2000, 2004 was the closest election in the electorals since 1916.
And it's been 16 years since a 50% of the popular has been acheived, not 24. Even using the raw numbers margin in the popular vote though, 2004 was the closest election since 1976 (not counting 2000).

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Valvoline6
1960 was even closer popular vote wise than 2000. Kennedy won by about 100,000 votes nation wide. BTW when you say "The closest election in the last 20 years" that's only 3 elections. So while this one is the second closest it's also the second largest magin of victory.

Your math is faulty. 20 years = 6 elections. 2004, 2000, 1996, 1992, 1988, 1984.

2004 - 20 = 1984

If a doctor tells you to take one pill every half hour, how many would you take in a hour?

Answer: 3

And like I already posted, with this exception of 2000, this is the closest electoral college victory (the only one that really matters) since 1916, and the closest popular since 1976.

See my link above. It's very informative.