Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Why Did Bush Do So Poorly?

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Why Did Bush Do So Poorly?
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In United States history, there have been six war time elections during which the sitting president has sought re-election.

1812/War of 1812
Madison Clinton
128 EC votes 89 EC votes
No popular vote recorded


1864/Civil War
Lincoln McClellan
212 EC votes 21 EC votes
55% 45%

1944/WWII
Roosevelt Dewey
432 EC votes 99 EC votes
53.4% 45.9%

1964/Vietnam
Johnson Goldwater
486 EC votes 52 EC votes
61.1% 38.5%


1972/ Vietnam
Nixon McGovern
520 EC votes 17 EC votes
60.7% 37.5%


2004/WOT
Bush Kerry
286 EC votes 252 EC votes
51% 48%


The smallest margin of victory, by far, for a sitting war-time incumbent, no matter how you measure it.

[ November 08, 2004, 09:36 PM: Message edited by: Jesse ]

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Star Pilot 111
Member
Member # 1972

 - posted      Profile for Star Pilot 111     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
You Go, Jesse
Posts: 337 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The other guys didn't have the full force of the US & international press against them, nor was the press as free to libel under the post-Sullivan rules of the Supreme court re defamation, nor did 527s exist.

Madison, Lincoln, Rosevelt, and Johnson all had anti-war people thrown in jail for far less defamatory claims than people regularly got away with against GWB. Moore for example would have been shot under Madison, Lincoln or FDR, and probably would have simply dissapeared under Johnson.

I am unaware of Nixon actually jailing members of the press. But give John Kerry some credit here: he was no McGovern. Kerry was a good candidate -- the best the party had to offer. And McGovern never had a daddy Soros-bucks backing him.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Star Pilot 111
Member
Member # 1972

 - posted      Profile for Star Pilot 111     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote Pete
The other guys didn't have the full force of the US & international press against them, nor was the press as free to libel under the post-Sullivan rules of the Supreme court re defamation, nor did 527s exist.
________________________________________________

So are you implying that all the US and international press were wrong for questioning anything Bush did or said? Should they have been arrested?

In my opinion, if the 527s did not exist, Kerry would have won. [Smile]

Those 527s against Kerry were discracefull.

Posts: 337 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
SP1: Are you nuts? Of course I think nothing of the sort. I was simply answering Jesse's question of why Bush's numbers were lower. The fact that Bush could have raised his numbers if he'd been willing and able to imprison everyone who lied about him, would not justify such action. I do not believe that the ends always justify the means. Do you?

As for your theory of Kerry winning without 527s, you must be posting in an alternate factual universe. In the one I'm posting from, Kerry got huge milage from Moveon.org, from Mikey Moore, etc.

[ November 09, 2004, 12:00 AM: Message edited by: Pete at Home ]

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
towellman
Member
Member # 1462

 - posted      Profile for towellman   Email towellman   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"In my opinion, if the 527s did not exist, Kerry would have won. [Smile] "

lol, you may want to do a bit of research. In the last few years purely democratic 527's raised more than $600 million while republican ones only gathered in about $250 million. link

So, in fact you may want to consider revising your statement to:

"If the 527's did not exist, Kerry would have lost by much more."

Unless of course a few ads by the Swifties can counter a $350 million advantage in spending.

Posts: 220 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
CBS, NYT, Farenheit 9/11, Mark Halperin and his "Bush's lies are worse" memo, George Soros, paid voter registers, Draft Scares, Social Security Scares, a poor Republican speaker, a VP who looks like a Sith Lord at times, a pro Kerry MSM (check out Howie Kurtz's analysis).

Plus the message about the vision of the Iraq war is resistant to sound bites even with the best speakers. GWB is not the best speaker.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Snowden
Member
Member # 407

 - posted      Profile for Snowden   Email Snowden   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
a VP who looks like a Sith Lord at times,
[Smile]
Posts: 971 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So, the votes of the American people are bought and sold based on advertising budgets?

Not the way I view things, but everyone is free to make their own judgements about the American electorate.

Since we've kept records of the popular vote, war time incumbants have won by an average of 15.8%.

The lowest previous victory margin was Roosevelt who won by 7.5%, going for his fourth term.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So Jesse, by your logic, and from your failure to respond to my points about different media situations, am I to infer that you think that the votes of American people are unaffected by what the press tells them and what they are told round the clock?

Which of the following facts do you dispute?
1. Americans vote based on what they believe to be true.
2. The media and advertising affect what people believe to be true.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Jesse
Member
Member # 1860

 - posted      Profile for Jesse   Email Jesse   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"The Media" does not exist.

Obviously, the facts we present to each other daily in our arguments come from somewhere. That "somewhere" is the media.

For all the cries of bais, the facts are available to anyone who chooses to look for them.

The truth is, newspapers denounced Lincolns military policies daily. His opponent campaigned on negotiating a peace with the South, short of total victory.

The "media" had condemned the war in Vietnam as un-winnable 4 years before Nixons re-election. The international community opposed our continued involvement, Sarte had published "On Genocide". My Lai was headline news. The nightly news was showing clips of Veterans throwing their medals over the fence at the pentagon.

Roosevelt was attacked for spending Government funds to transport his dog, for the "delay" between entering the war and invading Europe, for "wasting" troops in North Africa.

There is nothing unique about this race or the media.

Posts: 11410 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Star Pilot 111
Member
Member # 1972

 - posted      Profile for Star Pilot 111     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote towellman
a $350 million advantage in spending
___________________________________________

I didn't like the dirt slinging from either side, but I do give the Republican side credit, for by far being the most effective. They did overcome the 350 million, because of preemptive action.

Kerry got trashed way more than Bush, and his records were available. It was interesting how none of W's service records could be found. George H W was head of the CIA, and he knows how to make things disappear. Most of W's real records were either seal by executive order of George H W during his term, or by W during his first 4 years. And no one knows how many were destroyed. He's clean as a whistle. [Wink]

Posts: 337 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yes, Jesse, but are you denying my assertions that some reporters were jailed & otherwise censured for making far less offensive and far less deceptive claims than were regularly made over Bush?

The bombgate incident, for example of a false one, or Abu Ghraib for example of a true one. Lincoln or Rosevelt would have jailed the reporters on either. And under Johnson they'd probably have been picked up and beaten up.

Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Star Pilot 111:
quote towellman
a $350 million advantage in spending
___________________________________________

I didn't like the dirt slinging from either side, but I do give the Republican side credit, for by far being the most effective. They did overcome the 350 million, because of preemptive action.

Kerry got trashed way more than Bush, and his records were available. It was interesting how none of W's service records could be found. George H W was head of the CIA, and he knows how to make things disappear. Most of W's real records were either seal by executive order of George H W during his term, or by W during his first 4 years. And no one knows how many were destroyed. He's clean as a whistle. [Wink]

Is that the new tinfoil hat, deny reality theory I should be aware of for the next four years? That Kerry was all out their with his records and Bush's records were no where to be found? Good to know.
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Kerry's records were not as available as they should have been, and the media pressed less to get them out than it did Bush's.

However, this assertion that "Michael Moore would have been shot or disappeared..." I din't know if I buy.

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Star Pilot 111
Member
Member # 1972

 - posted      Profile for Star Pilot 111     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote Pete at Home
SP1: Are you nuts?
______________________________

It depends on what you mean by the word "nuts" [Wink]

Posts: 337 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Star Pilot 111
Member
Member # 1972

 - posted      Profile for Star Pilot 111     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
reply quote from javelin
Is that the new tinfoil hat, deny reality theory I should be aware of for the next four years? That Kerry was all out their with his records and Bush's records were no where to be found? Good to know.
_____________________________________________

All of these threads boil down to a difference of opinions, and it's nice to hear them. Aren't we trying to convince one another that our opinion is correct? I personally have learned a lot from these posts. I have changed my feelings on some subjects because of some smart people. However, some of us may never change our opinion of some things, and that's ok, for me. I hope it's OK for you. [Smile]

Now to answer your reply.

Sarcasm will get you no where. [Big Grin]

Posts: 337 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Star Pilot 111
Member
Member # 1972

 - posted      Profile for Star Pilot 111     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote RickyB
Kerry's records were not as available as they should have been, and the media pressed less to get them out than it did Bush's.
______________________________________________

What I saw on TV, has brought me to some of my conclusions. I live in Northern California. I think I really should have been seeing more anti-Bush stuff than anti-Kerry. The, articles I read and the national news I saw especially on Fox News, seemed to question Kerry's record more than Bush's. And when they couldn't find the answer, for either candidate, it seemed to me they forgot about bush and continued with Kerry.
Of course it may have something to do with the Swift Boat adds. It seemed like every show I watched on TV had a Swift Boat add.

I just now got the thought that the strategic placements of those adds were very well done.
And how for months I've been hearing how the republican campaign strategists were better than the dems. Now it seems to be true. They did do a better job. But I will not concede that America elected the better person, because the better person wasn't even running.

Posts: 337 | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
javelin
Member
Member # 1284

 - posted      Profile for javelin   Email javelin   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Star Pilot 111:

All of these threads boil down to a difference of opinions, and it's nice to hear them. Aren't we trying to convince one another that our opinion is correct? I personally have learned a lot from these posts. I have changed my feelings on some subjects because of some smart people. However, some of us may never change our opinion of some things, and that's ok, for me. I hope it's OK for you. [Smile]

Now to answer your reply.

Sarcasm will get you no where. [Big Grin]

Fair enough [Smile]
Posts: 8614 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1