Bush supporters' aftermath thread

timberlandko wrote:

Allright, CdK ... I'll buy that.

Two fidy.

0 Replies

Two-and-a-quarter and ya gotta deal Laughing

0 Replies

HofT wrote:

Damn Tico - they're the true biblethumpers, as in "light above and darkness below and the gnashing of teeth".

I'm not sure I want to visit their thread - Apocalypse! - just yet, but let a single one come here and call us "Christian fanatics" when all our title says is a modest "...aftermath..." <G>

HofT, I'm going to assume that your tongue was in your cheeck when you wrote this. Anyone who read the thread knows that the title was a joke on ourselves. And anyone who read along knows that we didn't call anyone Christian fanatics. In fact, we didn't talk about 'you'. Though it looks like you guys did a lot of talking about 'us'.

0 Replies

"Cold, cold mountain" is your location FreeDuck? I don't blame you for wanting to come in from the cold - though I don't know you from Adam and from your only post I've ever read (since it was addressed to me) would prefer to keep a maximal distance. Your cooperation appreciated.

0 Replies

Wind 'em up and watch 'em go....

0 Replies

tee hee tee hee

Ohboyohboyohboyohboy!

Go get 'er, FreeDuck ... she's a pushover when it comes ta crossin keyboards. No good a fencin' at all.

<runs and hides>

0 Replies

I don't know what's sillier: the idea that someone you don't know should not address you on a public internet forum, or your cute little giggle.

0 Replies

Ain't much fun without a little silly now and again.

0 Replies

Not presented as proof of anything, just thought this was interesting:

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/histogram.png

Quote:

(Technically, not all the data points are counties -- some states, notably Maine, report by township rather than by county.)

The results show an interesting effect. There is a large "bump" of counties centered a little above 50%, where people voted roughly half-and-half for the two candidates, although with a slight bias in favor of the Republican candidate. And then there is a big "spike" on the left of the plot, representing counties where, to an excellent approximation, no one voted Republican. It appears that there are, as the pundits have been telling us, "two Americas," but they are not the ones people usually talk about. They are "divided America," where people split roughly evenly between Republican and Democrat, and "decided America," where everyone is a Democrat. The Democrats of "decided America" number about 5.9 million, or 11% of all Democratic voters. These people are unlikely ever even to encounter a Republican voter in their home town.

If one were to summarize simply, it appears that the election's winner won by a slim majority of people in counties that -- as counties -- were rather ambivalent about their decision. He was opposed by a nearly (but not quite) equal number of people a considerable fraction of whom live in counties that were very certain of their support for his opponent.

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/

0 Replies

Sorta seems to me that indicates there's more an isolated and abberational minority Democratic faction apart than a "Nation Deeply Divided".

0 Replies

In all the coal-rakin' that's been goin on around here lately, somethin' strikes me as glowin' pretty brightly. While 2004 overall voter turnout was up about 11% vs 2000, Kerry scored around 10% better than did Gore 4 years ago, while Bush bettered his own earlier performance by roughly 18%. Compared with Gore's performance, despite increased numbers due to increased turnout, Kerry did less well percentagewise than had Gore in nearly 2/3 of counties, while Bush improved his percentage compared to his 2000 performance - win or lose - in almost 90% of the counties (see the 2cnd and 3rd NYT maps nimh posted HERE ). Along with that tidbit, there is the roughly 51 - 47 Republican advantage when the 2004 Congressional popular vote is calculated as a whole, a statistically insignificant difference from 2002's 51 - 46 Republican Congressional popular vote advantage.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

Sorta seems to me that indicates there's more an isolated and abberational minority Democratic faction apart than a "Nation Deeply Divided".

"It's not so much that we are "divided", quote-unquote, but it's just that those bastards are really far away from us."

0 Replies

That's very good. Laughing

0 Replies

One last Mini Gloat

OK. I'm done now. Mr. Green

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

One last Mini Gloat

OK. I'm done now.

Done? Why? What fun is that? I thought his acceptance speech pretty much told the tale.

0 Replies

timberlandko wrote:

One last Mini Gloat

OK. I'm done now.

That was good, T! October 1, no less! Most impressive.

Not really a 'gloat', but something I'm proud of, nevertheless. Very Happy

0 Replies

Pfft, like the election was hard to predict. Laughing

October 3rd, 2002.

0 Replies

Damn dude.

http://www.thebearspot.com/images/ipb_smilies/worthy.gif

0 Replies

Craven de Kere wrote:

Pfft, like the election was hard to predict.

October 3rd, 2002.

Sorry to disappoint you, but that's no wonder post. It was and it is still too easy to predict the situation.

Appart from that you made mistakes:

Quote:

I predict a post war drop in Bush's popularity

Actually he was more popular,until the first soldiers were killed.

Quote:

I predict that Powel will resign from the administration

That has he not done.

I predict a new secretary will appoint by Bush soon.

0 Replies

Post war drop, Thok, post-war drop. It means a drop in Bush's popularity after the war (pretty much ended). As happened.

Hey, I predicted here in September that Bush would win by a 5% margin ...

of course, that was before I predicted that Kerry would win the EV by a hairwidth <ahem>.

Actually, the only state I got wrong in that final prediction, though, was Ohio ... bloody Ohio.

0 Replies

Bush supporters' aftermath thread

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know