I just thought I might calm the waters a bit.

...if it gets stolen again.

That's why I may not go to bed until the morning of Nov 7!

The final result was virtually a mirror image of the polling.

At 6:30-7 or thereabouts that election night democrats were jubilant and not in the know republicans despondent. Then presto chango, it magically turned completely around. More than fishy but Kerry, just like Gore, couldn't concede soon enough. It's the election version of battered wife syndrome, our guys fell all over themselves to quit.

The Christians all came out to vote against teh gay! That's why! That's WHY!! THAT'S WHY!!!

Then let me say that I think that there was a fair amount of blackmail going on with the bush/cheney cabal that might have had something to do with Kerry conceding so quickly

And no, it wasn't the polls that were wrong that night.

It's alright

Nate Silver calls Pew a "strong polling firm"

I think I go with that

The underlining factor is

The Pew poll was conducted from Thursday through Sunday, although more of the interviews were conducted in the earlier part of that period

Just because you do not link a result does not mean the polling firm is bad, rMoney got a bounce from the debate, but did not last long (O picked up +2 in both Gallup & Rasmussen today) The reason that it did not last long is because in the days after the debate all media outlets besides FOX have called rMoney on the fact he did nothing but lie in the debate

I'm hoping that we'll one day have a democracy at least as robust as Venezuela's

We may have to contend with this:



in 27 states with 270 electoral votes. Damn right I'm worried about it being stolen again!

Sickening. What a great "fighter".

voted for a bozo of the uber-magnitude likes of Bush. That was an epic fail on the part of the United States citizenry. Kerry should have won in a landslide if more people hadn't been so dumb.

which does not negate my point.

He was perhaps too trusting.

there's this from Bob Woodward:

"Kerry had decided not to concede. There were 250,000 outstanding ballots in Ohio.

So Kerry decides to fight. In fact, he considers going to Ohio to camp out with his voters until there is a recount. This is the last thing the White House needs, especially after Florida 2000.

So what happened?

James Carville gets on the phone with his wife, Mary Matalin, who is at the White House with Bush.

"Carville told her he had some inside news. The Kerry campaign was going to challenge the provisional ballots in Ohio -- perhaps up to 250,000 of them. 'I don't agree with it, Carville said. I'm just telling you that's what they're talking about.'

"Matalin went to Cheney to report...You better tell the President, Cheney told her." ...

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Carville-is-a-Spy-for-Bush-by-M-J-Rosenberg-080828-906.html

Kerry lacked that integrity. Shrub took full advantage of that fact.

He was finally told the numbers weren't there for him to win, and proving fraud and disenfranchisment would be a long drawn out process that would not be in the best interest of the American people. I was distraught and wanted him to continue to fight for a long time, but I know understand that Senator Kerry conceded as he did because it was in the best interest of the American people.

that he took back. The same team that told Gore to take back his concession, told Kerry the numbers were not there to make a case. He was about 100,000 votes down in Ohio and there were not that many provisional ballots that were not counted yet. It was mathematically impossible.

the army of us who left all behind to help him win (even though so many of us thought he was an absolute shitty choice), he conceded.

Couldn't bother to wait till the votes were at least counted, you know, to at least give the appearance of appreciating all that was done...

Nah, fuck that.

Whatever.

Julie

That is usually weeks later as they tally all the provisional, overseas etc. The fact is the Democratic experts realized that there were not enough votes in question to challenge Ohio. It would have destroyed our chances in 2006 and likely 2008 if as a party we challenged with n0o basis. Not to mention, I don't think the party would have backed Kerry in a challenge.

Not to mention - I assume that if you thought he was an "absolutely shitty choice" you were likely not that good an advocate - no matter how much you worked.

Kerry would not have been able to turn it around at that point.

It was a stolen election, but very hard to prove. Kerry did the honorable thing and went back to his job. I admire him for it.

But I don't think we should tolerate a stolen election again--too many are tuned into election fraud now. We should not let it stand.

My hatred for Bush was fuel enough. I didn't advocate all that much, I did other stuff like raise a boatload of money, run the office, host Elizabeth Edwards, Kerry's sister, Kerry's shipmate and a protest when Bush came to town. Worked more than full time hours throughout the election.

The disgust from the morning after election day is still lingering. I was never a die-hard Kerry fan, like you and BLM. Good to see you still carrying the torch though. Whenever I mention Kerry at least one of you shows up.

But nothing you say will ever change what happened and the lessons taken from it.

I can only hope the loss still stings for him as it does all of us fools who sacrificed so much for him.

Julie

I recall bad boy/goofball Edwards was willing to go the distance.

Doing "what's best for the nation" is a tired excuse at this point. I better not ever hear shit like that again where our votes are concerned. people were behind it.

Meh.

he didn't follow what Kerry's campaign wanted him to do during the campaign. he went against Kerry then. so why didn't he do what he wanted when it came to this?

Maybe he got horny and wandered off.

He claimed he wanted to even after Kerry conceded. Maybe he lied. I don't know that a vice-presidential candidate really coould do much , although I'm pretty sure Cheney would have swung his tired, nasty balls around.

Get like Pubbies, Dems. Really. You're even better at computers, generally speaking. Wink, wink...nudge...know what I mean?

wouldn'tit be for a good cause. he went against Kerry when it came to using certain campaign messages . if he can go against him for something like that why not something more important like voter fraud ?

getting his dingus polished was most important of all.

other than to show his character issues and what a lying sleaze he is.

It must have occurred to him that cheating on an ill and dying wife would destroy it.

Bon soir!

i don't think he was really into it . he might have felt some resentment towards her for it. when it was found out she had cancer again he was ready to drop out but she was the one who wanted to stay in.

i think she should have been the one to run for political office with/without him from the start.

they used a "king computer" to rig the election. He testified in front of Congress to that effect. He is an old school Repug who feels his party has left him and a computer expert that works to keep our credit cards safe. It will blow your mind!

And those are normally much more accurate. So there still seems to be no rational explanation for that one.

We also had the "laugh-till-you-vomit" excuse that Republicans lied to pollsters.

Pubbies are all-too-often enormous a-holes but they had for decades prior answered or refused to be polled.

they got rid of it beCAUSE it was so acurate

Posted by Newsjock:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014255567

Networks, AP cancel exit polls in 19 states
Source: Washington Post

Breaking from two decades of tradition, this year’s election exit poll is set to include surveys of voters in 31 states, not all 50 as it has for the past five presidential elections, according to multiple people involved in the planning.

The National Election Pool — a joint venture of the major television networks and The Associated Press — has not announced the states that won’t be included, but the decision is sure to cause some pain to election watchers across the country.

Voters in the excluded states will still be interviewed as part of a national exit poll, but state-level estimates of the partisan, age or racial makeups of electorates won’t be available as they have been since 1992. The lack of data may hamper election night analyses in some states, and it will almost certainly limit post-election research for years to come.

See this: http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/10/09/cbs4-investigates-palm-beach-countys-2012-ballot-debacle/

"what is was like to declare the wrong winners? Butcher said, “It humiliating. It was awful. It was never our intent.”

At least that person (Ms. Butcher?) wants a paper recount with a wider sampling, but it sounds like all machines are crap. But funny how it works in the Repub favor so often. (over 98%? was it)