http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,139060,00.html

Are you f-ing kidding me?????

YOU LOST BECAUSE 59 MILLION AMERICANS DIDN'T THINK YOU WERE QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT. YOU ALLIGNED YOURSELF WITH PEOPLE LIKE MICHAEL MOORE AND MADONNA AND ALIENATED ALL OF MIDDLE AMERICA! YOU NEVER TOOK A SOLID STANCE ON ANYTHING!

GET IT THROUGH YOUR F-ING THICK SKULL!!!

KERRY=CASTRO.

Always comforting when you hear a man like John Kerry parrot a Communist Dictator and America's arch-enemy.

Not only that, but OBL's tape read right from Fat-Ass Moore's talking points. How does that HELP Bush?

Give Kerry a couple of days and he'll change his mind.

I didn't think it was possible to dislike Kerry even more after the election was over. Guess I was wrong!

I'm sorry...when I read a Fox News Exclusive about something Kerry said to Geraldo Rivera, I can't help thinking that somebody somewhere FUBAR'd the story to the point where it's not remotely accurate.

Maybe Ted and him can share a drink together, and drown their sorrows.

I try to avoid FOX News like the plague, but this story reminds me of the Bush DUI story that intentionally broke the weekend before the 2000 election. There's just too much irony this time around.

Rivera found Kerry's comments in Al Capone's secret vault.

58+ million voted bush, 54 million voted kerry.

That's 112+ million out of the nearly 220 million of eligible voters.

100 million people voted for none of the above. Neither party ever has a mandate.

No, that last 100 million *didn't* vote. If they all had voted for neither Bush nor Kerry, the election would've been a lot different. But they didn't.

You don't fit into the mandate equation if you don't vote.

Of course they have a mandate. If you can't be bothered to get off your lazy ass and vote, than your opinion is worth stevestojan.

Maybe if "none of the above" was an option on the ballots more people would vote.

WRONGO !!!

Statistically, once your population sample size reaches a certain number, it correctly predicts the final outcome +/- some error tolerance and will not be that far off from the percentages determined from a sufficiently large enough subset of the entire population. However, there could be more variances than one might expect in the final electoral college counts. But, they would not be significant. This only works if the subset population accurately reflects the same characteristics as the total population. This would not work if for example you excluded ALL city dwellers, or all blacks, or all women, etc.

Also, this was NOT a choice between the lesser of two evils or even a choice between just two people because you have to account for the fact that Kerry did win a "runoff" against more than 10 others and even those 10 had to be selected from a larger number of potential candidates. And GWB had to do the same in 2000.

You are making an assumption that those 100 million wanted to vote for one of the candidates running. I am adding the variable that many of those 100 million did not want to vote for any of the choices which changes the parameters.

As far as primaries go - what percentage of people voted there - 20 %? (I don't have the actual figure.) So kerry was the lesser of 10 and bush was the lesser of 10 and then bush was the lesser of 2. That's inspiring.

Perhaps if Mr. Kerry had positioned himself more as a pro-war anti-terrorism candidate, the presence of the bin laden tape wouldnt have hurt him so much. But with his global test, and votes against the war, something like that was bound to do him in.

Good riddance Mr. Kerry

I didn't know Michael Moore posted on this board?

I'll take his money. Or GBs for that matter.

Yeah right. You can vote without actually voting for a Presidential candidate. When you're in the booth, there are plenty of positions to vote for. "None of the above" *is* an option. But 100 million of us couldn't even be bothered to say that. If they had, they'd have at least sent a message that there are 100 million voters out there waiting for someone to appeal to them. Again, they did not. They didn't do anything.

If 100 million voters had declined to select a Presidential candidate, maybe there'd be a shred of weight to your argument.

Ahhhhh, soundbites...

Spin, spin, spin...

Let's be honest here. Most of the 100 million who did not vote really don't matter because they were too lazy and didn't care enough about their country to go vote. I don't want to hear this "I don't want either so I'm not going to vote", there were other options to vote for, and it's a lame excuse.

I don't think they ever count to find out who voted but didn't pick a presidential choice.

Until the choice "none of the above" is listed on the ballot (and is publicized so people know that choice is an option) my argument stands.

If they pay taxes they matter. If they get support they matter. They affect the bottom line just as much as voters.

EXACTLY! If they cared so much, there were numerous other people to vote for besides Bush and Kerry. Why not go and vote for KRC? Or write in your mom if you think she'd do a good job.

"I didn't like the choices" is a lame excuse. Bottom line: No vote = Lazy piece of stevestojan who doesn't deserve the right to complain out the outcome. Period.

Then they should have gotten their lazy asses out there and voted.

Exactly.

bulls^&t !!! Your argument is not mathematically sound, nor is it true in any way, shape, or form. Certainly some of the 100 million might have wanted to vote for "none of the above"; but it is absolutely FALSE that all 100 million wanted to vote for "none of the above". The percent of people who would have voted for "none of the above" likely account for the margin of error in most polls.

Bu$h= friggin' idiot

It absolutely is a lame excuse in a democracy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

KD in CT
post Today, 01:52 PM
Post #24
Congratulations President Bush. Now, please start acting like a conservative.

Hey,the guy likes to write bad checks habitually.........

Bu$h certainly 'changes his mind' enough........

Me neither! I thought the PPP board was made up of azzholes!

Yes and Michael Moore is a F$Ckin AZZHOLE

So in other words...

Terrorists LIKE GWB

People, terroists like to fight. They wouldn't be terrorists if there was nothing to fight about.

Especially in America... You can see how ONE extremist can start a lot of crap.

They do it to get a reaction.

Give 'em a reaction, they feel empowered.

Bush won this election on two things and two things only. Fear and Homophobia.

He turned soccer moms into security moms and rallied his homophobic base (ie religious right).

So, yes, in a way, with OBL coming out so last minute, I'm sure that turned more soccer moms into security moms.

One would think that OBL would help Kerry because it proved that W was not able of leading this country. We are currently in a war with a country we don't need to be in, yet the guy who was in charge of 911 is still alive and enjoying life. He's taunting us. The problem is that this is a chess match and Osama is smarter than Bush.

You appear assured of your own intellectual superiority (apparently recently aquired when you moved from GA to NY), yet you seem to be lacking in the ability to communicate your brilliance into a logical argument.

Nice Post Goo!

HUH? Are you saying Kerry was not smart enough to articulate this argument? I thought OBL was trying to help John boy on this one???

What a GOO

What are you talking about?