Were many of Bush's votes really just votes against Kerry.

My basis for asking is really my Dad.

My Dad is a life long republican, I would say conservative maybe at times moderate. Although he really hasn't ever voted for a Democrat at times he gives them their dues (JFK, Al Gore, heck even Clinton). He wasn't no fan of Kerry though. For whatever reason he just couldn't stand Kerry. . . I never figured out why.

The thing is he hated Bush just as well. Well maybe not hate but I think my Dad didn't think he, or his beloved party, were doing much to really help. In the end though election came and he did indeed vote for Bush. However, I think his vote was a BFK (Bush Before Kerry) vote and not exactly a vote for Bush. Basically what I'm saying is just like many of the people on this board are stating they were voting against Bush not for Kerry, do you think it's possible a good chunk voted that way but the exact opposite. Basically they just voted for The Devil they know instead of the devil they don't?

I'm not completely sure what I'm trying to get at. I guess what I'm just asking is maybe a good chunk of Americans are just flat out tired of both sides, and reagardless of who they vote for a majority of their vote were "against a certain candidate" votes instead of a "For a certain candidates votes?"

Basically, did much of America not really like either Kerry or Bush and they just voted based on wether or not they thought change would help?

Like I stated in a earlier post I'm some what sick and been half asleep all day so again I apologize if I'm not making any sense. These posts to be honest are just really spur of the moment thinking that I decide to write down and see where it goes.

Bush ran an entirely negative and bullshitting campaign.

Bush's approval ratings always sucked, and suck more now.

Clearly Bush won, as his strategy suggested, merely by proving Kerry the greater of two evils and telling people to close their eyes to his screwups lest the terrorists win.

With Kerry gone, Bush tanks. You can't negative campaign without a campaign, although Bush tries to bring back that magic by slamming newsweek and trying to scare us with terror threats every other day.

If your guy sucks make the other guy even more unacceptable.

Discredit his strengths. Cast doubt on his military service. Of course it helps to have a compliant media and an opponent who never quite grasped that the rules of civilized politics did not apply.

And if all else fails, of course, there's always Diebold.

....alternative so I'll just stick with what I got because I think I know what that is and it's better than taking a chance on something I don't know.

Many of Bush's votes really were Kerry votes.

Thanks to evil-doers at Diebold who have the blood of many innocent thousands on their vile hands.

read as Bush votes through the wonders of Diebold...I agree.

John Kerry has investigated and exposed more government corruption than any lawmaker in modern history. Those who KNOW recent history and detest the corruption were THRILLED to vote for Kerry.

The corporate media's storyline was that Kerry didn't distinguish himself in the Senate. Well, only stupid people who never heard of IranContra, BCCI or the illegal wars in Central America fell for that LIE. Too bad there are so many ignorant people who believe the corporate media.

And, I must say, anyone who watched the debates and still thought Bush would be a better president than Kerry has a serious comprehension problem.

Hate to say it but when Kerry basically won and nodoby reported on the overwhelming fraud scandal, it put the killer on any real changes in the voting processes. Even though Bush had as many votes as he did, many others had to be switched from the other side and he had to have literal supression all over the place to make it look legitimate.

The whole thing comes down to Bush was selected and Kerry never would have done anything else anyway, since most people just didn't care.

Imagine if even HALF of Bush's incompetent or criminal acts were reported to the citizenry. What a far different world it would be.

have been some BBKs -- I know of a lot of republicans who did vote for Kerry. And a lot of independents who usually vote green who voted for Kerry.... so what happened?

check out these sites for some information

http://www.votersunite.org/
http://www.solarbus.org/election/index.shtml


And this report was just published in book form with Gore Vidal writing the preface:

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohiostatusrept1505.pdf

Here's a website talking about the report, and more information from
http://www.failureisimpossible.com/ElectionStudies/OhioConyers.htm

Alot of voters were voting against a candidate not for one.I hope next time we can find someone that isnt just a protest vote with many Americans.Unfortunately I think Hillary is too polarizing to be that person despite her overtures to the right.Im not sure who would be the ideal candidate yet.

I read the posts above with interest & thought... I suppose SOME people voted like that... BUT, I would guess most did not. It's an interesting question, but I'm going to go against the thesis. I say NO. I also believe more people voted for Kerry.

Your father fell for the lies of the Bush team and was to indifferent to care. Those who took the time to listen to Kerry and follow the election and debates realized that Kerry was the best candidate. I personally know of several republican voting males who enthusiastically supported Kerry.

I had people tell me they couldn't stand Kerry, but they also couldn't say why they couldn't stand Kerry. I always found that odd and wondered if they were the product of Fox/CNN bullshit that told them they couldn't stand Kerry, sort of like Catholics who couldn't vote for Kerry because their priests told them they couldn't.

But really, Bush? Do this people really think Bush was the better of the two?

I think this "thought virus" was put out for public consumption in order to explain away the election fraud evidence that has become so prevalent since November 2, 2004...

it's the media, stupid!

because of his anti-war protests and their view that he was a radical. Also, the swift boat lies stuck. I know several who didn't like Kerry but couldn't articulate why.

The one that pisses me off is when many voters told me that you shouldn't change Presidents during a war. :wtf: So, a President lies and takes us into war that is a mistake and then the voters decide to re-elect him. Several voters basically told me this.

(old friends that I have some Internet contact with - though less since the election) voted against Kerry mostly - I think because they watched FOX, etc. and were convinced that Kerry was the "greedy" one with lots of money.

They probably also believed the Swift Boat crap and think that B**h is bringing "security" to our country.

He's rounding up the terrorists. He's smoking them out. Even if they bring it on, we'll flatten them because they hate freedom. What's more, Bush gave our allies the boot, and why not -- they were just a bunch of Old Europe pussies anyway. Who needs 'em?

Not to mention that Bush is a Christian. Christ is his favorite philosopher and the Lord speaks to him and makes His will known to his humble servant, George W. Bush.

Naturally people were drawn to someone with those kinds of strengths and virtues.

Kerry, on the other hand, is a well-known Satanist who as recently as two winters ago led late-night raids to burn orphanages to the ground on Christmas Eve, as his Medusa-like wife -- who isn't even an AMERICAN-born person! -- laughed callously. Perhaps Kerry would have drawn more support if he had not been the shadowy gunman on the grassy knoll in Dallas and if he hadn't sabotaged Amelia Earhart's trans-Pacific flight.

And I'm not even going to mention the thing with the neurotoxins in the groundwater.

Kerry brought nothing to the table but calamity and apocalypse, while President Bush will protect us from the terrorists, the liberals, and the scientists.

Most if not all the I-couldn't-vote-for-Kerry "gut feeling" votes were predictable responses to a well funded media campaign that started before Kerry was even the candiate (on 9/12/01, to be exact).

Guess what? It pays to advertise. God bless America.

-- is completely right, and unfortunately so for the Kerry-Edwards ticket.

I thought immediately of the Swift Boat liars and still feel to this moment that a DVD should be made of their being stuffed into the mouths of half-starved crocodiles, the proceeds of which will go to the Democratic Party for 06 and 08.

and the asshole media helped promote those perceptions.

We were so caught up in hating Bush that we didn't realize how much they hated Kerry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sadly Kerry garnered little votes because of him...

I think Kerry was a mistake...