Sarah Palin thinks only small towns are pro-America

[applejack]

<p>LogicWarrior - I’m baffled as to what exit polling by CNN has to do with anything. Research the FACTS and then get back to me. Polling, no matter how it’s done, is notoriously inaccurate. </p>

<p>The efforts made by Republicans to deny people the right to vote is epic. Maybe a part of you is vested in the Republican Party. I don’t know. But even Republicans have come out and stated that the elections were rigged. It’s not just one side - it’s pretty much assumed now that JFK went to the White House on a rigged election as well.</p>

<p>There’s an extensive documentary film about 2004 and an elaborate article in Rolling Stone magazine about 2004 if you want to study how.</p>

[LogicWarrior]

<p>“Polling, no matter how it’s done, is notoriously inaccurate.”</p>

<p>I’m not talking about just one poll. Nearly every poll before and after (exit) the election had Bush winning by the margin he did.</p>

<p>Basically, if Republicans had made efforts to deny people the right to vote, that would have shown up by giving Bush a bigger lead on election day than what he had in the polls.</p>

<p>[RealClear</a> Politics - Polls](<a href=“http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Presidential_04/oh_polls.html]RealClear”>RealClear Politics - Polls)</p>

<p>Polling is notoriously unaccurate, but it got Ohio dead right. Let’s look at polling in states where you don’t charge fraud.</p>

<p>[RealClear</a> Politics - Polls](<a href=“http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry_sbys.html]RealClear”>RealClear Politics - Polls)</p>

<p>With the exception of Wisconsin and Hawaii, the polls were accurate each time. Polling isn’t “notoriously inaccurate”, but your views sure are.</p>

[applejack]

<p>Jesus, Logic. Relax. </p>

<p>You’re hooked on this polling issue, when the issue had much more to do with the Secretary of State. </p>

<p>Just look it up and stop arguing.</p>

[LogicWarrior]

<p>[2004</a> United States election voting controversies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_election_voting_controversies]2004”>2004 United States election voting controversies - Wikipedia)</p>

<p>Yes, people had problems voting. However, there is no evidence that this affected one side more than the other.</p>

<p>Just admit that Kerry was a bad candidate. Even had he won Ohio, he would have lost the popular vote while just barely winning the election. And he lost Ohio by a lot more than Gore lost Florida.</p>

[nbachris2788]

<p>

Just admit that Kerry was a bad candidate.

</p>

<p>Kerry was NOT a “bad candidate”. He wasn’t an exceptional one, but it has been historically difficult to unseat a war-time incumbent. The election wasn’t Kerry’s to lose; rather, it was Bush’s. Remember, at the time, a lot of people still thought Iraq had something to do with 9/11. And Katrina hadn’t hit yet. “Stay the course” wasn’t as bad as it sounds now.</p>

[la_la]

<p>politics…<em>yawn</em></p>

[Bennie]

<p>Funny that a McCain campaign source said it was harder to get Palin up to speed than any candidate in history. In '12, the GOP will run a Palin/Joe-the-Plumber ticket in an attempt to broaden the party’s growing popularity among voters who are suspicious of candidates who are smart, articulate, and well-informed.</p>

[applejack]

<p>Well, Logicwarrior, if wikipedia says so, I guess you must be right. All Hail.</p>

<p>Actually, self proclaimed warrior of all that is logical, the link you posted revealed quite a large degree of voter suppression and discrepencies in the polling. </p>

<p>Here’s one side:
[Was</a> the 2004 Election Stolen? : Rolling Stone](<a href=“Music News”>Music News)</p>

<p>Here’s the a rebuttal:
[2004</a> Presidential Election Stolen by George Bush? A response to the Robert F. Kennedy Rolling Stone article | Salon News](<a href=“http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/]2004”>http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/06/03/kennedy/)</p>

<p>Even the rebuttal, while clarifying Kennedy’s overstatements and questioning whether Blackwell’s illicit activities could have swung the vote, still states:</p>

<p>

To date, dozens of experts, both independently and as part of several research panels, have spent countless hours examining 2004’s presidential election, especially the race in Ohio. Many of them have concluded that the election there strains conventional notions of what a democracy ought to look like; very little about that race was fair, clean or competent. Way back in January 2005, a panel headed by Democratic Rep. John Conyers of Michigan reported that it had found enough irregularities in Ohio to call into question the state election results and the entire presidential vote.

</p>

<p>Whether the criminal acts were necessary or not, our White House has been hijacked by those who tried to throw an election. Yet, somehow I’m kind of happy it happened. The dark energy could not have fully gestated and collapsed without 2005-2006. We will not see a Republican Party that drunkenly beligerant or a Democratic Party that spineless for a long time to come.</p>