When your candidate loses ing accept it.

[Marcus Bryant]

If it isn't a conspiracy theory involving voting machines and the New World Order or whatever it's that the electorate is comprised of idiots which doomed Kerry's candidacy. Funny how I don't recall similiar exhortations from the liberal-left in this country when Clinton won in 1992 and 1996. Actually I don't recall much of that sentiment expressed in 2000. Well, there was definitely some conspiracy theories floating around.

You lost because your candidate failed to win enough states. Why? Because he was unable to persuade enough voters in those states to vote for him.

Both times that Bill Clinton ran he won the presidency with a plurality. In fact in 1992 he won with only 43% of the popular vote and proceeded to pursue a fairly left wing agenda in his first two years in office, despite 57% of the electorate not supporting his candidacy. Now Bush wins while garnering a significant majority of the popular vote and suddenly he doesn't have a mandate? Yeah right.

I know that a lot of those on the right weren't much better when it came to expressing their feelings for the opposition's candidate during the 1990s but at least when they lost they didn't immediately believe it was "stolen" or that those who resided in the states that went for the opposing candidate were full of "idiots." They thought their candidate lost because he failed to make the case. Because he sucked. Because they didn't work hard enough.

Had Bush lost then this would have been seen as a major rebuke. Well, he won. Much bigger than most expected. I'm sure if he had lost then we would have heard plenty about the wisdom of the American people and nary a conspiracy theory would be advanced. Well the American people have spoken.

Now I see some of you who supported Kerry understand this but clearly not an incon uous few in this forum and in this nation do not. I've never seen this level of collective hysteria. Frankly as someone who would prefer a GOP president to a Democrat one, I hereby implore to continue to believe that Bush was elected president because he stole it and/or because idiots voted for him.

Keep up the good work.

-MB

[Drachen]

Ill accept it, I wont put forth any conspiracy theories. I will, though, complain immensely if bush doesnt moderate his views just a bit. The reason why I say this is due to the results, the only mandate he has, as a good elected official of the people, for the people and by the people, is to do so (seeing as 1/2 of the nation didnt want him). I know I am asking for way too much (regardless of party), because there is rarely a politician that governs for the people, so that is what gives me the right to complain.

[Bandit2981]

there are a lot of questionable things going on with the voting machines, a lot of the irregularities are slowly coming out as we speak. i had a feeling Kerry was in trouble though when I learned awhile back the Diebold companies head honcho personally guaranteed Bush a victory in Ohio, by "delivering" the necessary electoral votes...not to mention the man hired as head computer programmer for the Diebold election machines was an ex-felon convicted of embezzlement.

[AlamoSpursFan]

Drachen: He doesn't have to moderate doo-diddly-squat. He won. Why should he bend over and let the LOSERS screw him in the ass? You libs need to get this through your thick heads: There is only ONE winner. Your side was not IT. Shut your freaking pie-holes.

Bandit: Let it GO, man...

[Clandestino]

there are a lot of questionable things going on with the voting machines, a lot of the irregularities are slowly coming out as we speak. i had a feeling Kerry was in trouble though when I learned awhile back the Diebold companies head honcho personally guaranteed Bush a victory in Ohio, by "delivering" the necessary electoral votes...not to mention the man hired as head computer programmer for the Diebold election machines was an ex-felon convicted of embezzlement.

well, kerry had a chance to fight, but CONCEDED... maybe, just maybe, if he wasn't such a pussy he would've tried to fight it. obviously, he is either (a) a pussy and didn't fight, or (b) he is smart enough to know he lost so let it go.

[MannyIsGod]

Dan posts a lot of whacko things in here, and that's nothing new.

By the same token, whenever a legit arguement is presented by someone not driving a 4x4 with Bush stickers and 2 US flags on it, it's not taken very seriously either in here. So Whatever.

[Drachen]

Drachen: He doesn't have to moderate doo-diddly-squat. He won. Why should he bend over and let the LOSERS screw him in the ass? You libs need to get this through your thick heads: There is only ONE winner. Your side was not IT. Shut your freaking pie-holes.

Bandit: Let it GO, man...

Because he was elected to represent americans, not a slice of americans.

[Bandit2981]

well, kerry had a chance to fight, but CONCEDED... maybe, just maybe, if he wasn't such a pussy he would've tried to fight it. obviously, he is either (a) a pussy and didn't fight, or (b) he is smart enough to know he lost so let it go.

i have to agree with you, especially part a)....even Edwards was urging him not to concede. im not being a sore loser, but if Kerry had waited a few days he could take advantage of some of the irregularities starting to come out about the vote tabulations...oh well, he wussed out! coulda shoulda woulda...

[exstatic]

Badnarak lost, and I have moved on.

[Hook Dem]

Badnarak lost, and I have moved on.

Now that was really an upset!

[SpursWoman]

@ ex

[dcole50]

well, kerry had a chance to fight, but CONCEDED... maybe, just maybe, if he wasn't such a pussy he would've tried to fight it. obviously, he is either (a) a pussy and didn't fight, or (b) he is smart enough to know he lost so let it go.

I'd go with B. Kerry didn't become an Al Gore and I'm glad. He had less of a chance at reversing the decision than Gore did.

It's obvious to me that Bush won the election. Even if there were voting errors, and there are always will be some, Bush was the chosen candidate. More people voted for him -- plain and simple.

Stop this conspiracy . Accept Bush as the president and do your part to support your candidate in '08. The left had eight years under Clinton, then the right bounced back with the eight years of Bush. If you're not happy with the direction the Republican party is headed after these next four years, do your part to try to shift the balance of power in '08. With all due respect Bandit, whining about voting machines isn't going to do that.

[ChumpDumper]

Bush so won.

The only thing that remains to be seen is how much pull the Chrisitian Coalition types have in the next lawmaking sessions and Supreme Court justice selections.

[whottt]

I just hope they kick the out of frivilous lawsuits and lawyers.

[Hook Dem]

I just hope they kick the out of frivilous lawsuits and lawyers.

I'll second that!!!!!!!!!

[Bandit2981]

Even if there were voting errors, and there are always will be some, Bush was the chosen candidate. More people voted for him -- plain and simple.

um, your statement contradicts itself...how would you know more people voted for Bush if you admit there could have been voting errors? maybe they did, maybe they didnt...no one really knows at this point is all im saying

Stop this conspiracy . Accept Bush as the president and do your part to support your candidate in '08. The left had eight years under Clinton, then the right bounced back with the eight years of Bush. If you're not happy with the direction the Republican party is headed after these next four years, do your part to try to shift the balance of power in '08. With all due respect Bandit, whining about voting machines isn't going to do that.

im not whining, look ill make it simple for you...it is a FACT that Diebold hired an ex-felon convicted of embezzlement to be its head voting machine computer programmer....it is also FACT that the CEO of Diebold sent out a GOP fundraising letter claiming he would deliver the necessary electoral votes in ohio to Bush...speculate what you will about it, but they are facts to chew on. research it yourself if you dont believe me.

[whottt]

um, your statement contradicts itself...how would you know more people voted for Bush if you admit there could have been voting errors? maybe they did, maybe they didnt...no one really knows at this point is all im saying


im not whining, look ill make it simple for you...it is a FACT that Diebold hired an ex-felon convicted of embezzlement to be its head voting machine computer programmer....it is also FACT that the CEO of Diebold sent out a GOP fundraising letter claiming he would deliver the necessary electoral votes in ohio to Bush...speculate what you will about it, but they are facts to chew on. research it yourself if you dont believe me.

It's also a fact that liberal whining, inability to ing read a ballot, and lack of class, lead to the usage of electronic voting machines. Damned if we do damned if we don't. No matter what you guys are going to .