I'm reading here and there the dissatisfaction of Democrats, due to the overwhelming popular vote tally for George Bush. (He now holds the record for greatest popular vote; over Reagan.) I'm reading posts declaring the next 4 years, asking which country will be invaded first. I read this on indymedia:



I even read something about Kerry not being likeable at all.

You guys act as if this wasn't a close election. I'm not calling it. I'm pretty sure Edwards and Kerry are using this extra 12 - 24 hours to plan some sort of legal retaliation if they don't get Ohio. It ain't over till it's over. The only person on the side of Bush's campaign calling victory is Andrew Card. I'd say it's preemptive.

My point is, no one has reached 270 EC votes yet. The popular vote in Ohio could indicate little more than an opposite trend to the EC's pickings. Ohio has 20 votes; right now, both candidates are called at 254 (Bush) to 252 (Kerry).

Look, from the other side of the aisle, I smiled. I watched as states turned red on a dime last night. I watched a majority rise up to the occassion. But I also saw a new competition; one who cared more than previous years, so angry at the President that they wished to vote, and did so valiantly. Don't look at your shoes and kick the dirt if Bush wins. You have four more years to make your claims, stake your passion, and fight to election day. There is no way this President can unite America. You and I both know that. Kerry wouldn't have been able to, either. It's a face. Democracy works best with two sides at each other's throats, not some placated middle compromising the shit out of everyone.

Democracy isn't just once every four years. It's more than voting. It's writing your Senators, Representatives, Governors, etc. etc., even your President. It's protesting legislation. It's marching for peace. It's everything you guys have done in the past year against one man. But if Bush takes it, I'd be pretty sad if you didn't do more to make your voice heard before the next election.

Here's to the best man winning, at least, sometime soon, or whenever... maybe I should say, here's to the honest man conceding.

Good luck.

A look on the "bright" side for the Anybody But Bush people if he wins this thing (which seems fairly likely).

____________________________________________

Another endorsement for Bush
By Gwynee Dyer
October 21st 2004

Russian President Vladimir Putin wants George W Bush to be re-elected, Osama bin Laden undoubtedly wants him to be re-elected, and the head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council has just endorsed him for re-election, so it's hardly surprising that one of my sons has done the same. He must remain nameless, of course, but he has given me permission to quote his exact words on the subject of Mr Bush's candidacy: "He has sown the wind; let him reap the whirlwind."

This nameless offspring of mine has never worked for the KGB, planned terrorist attacks or been nominated as a member of the Axis of Evil, but he does share with the three gentlemen above a rather Machiavellian turn of mind. His point is that Iraq will go to hell and the US economy will run into heavy weather in the next four years no matter who is president. Those things are already practically set in stone-so let the man who actually caused them carry the can.

There is no way that Iraqi hostility to the American occupation can be turned around at this point, and the current outbreak of fiscal irresponsibility in the US-a huge budget deficit and a huge trade deficit, amounting to almost half a trillion dollars each-will certainly result in a great deal of economic pain and misery for ordinary Americans in the coming years. We all know who got the US into Iraq and who created the budget deficit, but the man who is president when military defeat and economic crisis can no longer be denied will bear the political blame.

The main concern of Nameless was that a Kerry election victory, followed by a humiliating scuttle from Iraq and a crash in the US dollar at home, would generate a "Dolchstoss" myth on the American right. He was referring to the alleged "stab in the back" by the German left that was used to explain away Germany's defeat in the First World War. (In fact, the left had loyally supported the war, but had little say in its conduct-until, after Germany's generals admitted irretrievable military defeat on the Western Front, the government was swiftly handed over to the Social Democrats so they could surrender and take the blame.)

The "Dolchstoss" myth, which denied that it had been a mistake to start the war and blamed Germany's defeat on a failure of will, poisoned all subsequent efforts to create a healthy democratic republic on German soil. No analogy is perfect, but similar myths already exist in US politics. Many on the American right still believe that the Vietnam war that could have been won if only the spineless traitors of the left had not weakened American "resolve"-and they say this even though President Richard Nixon, who was elected on a promise to end the Vietnam war and presided over the whole latter phase of it, was a Republican. What could they do with a lost war on a Democratic president's watch?

The war in Iraq is unwinnable for the same reason as the Vietnam war, and all the other wars of the '50s, '60s and '70s in which Western armies tried to beat local resistance movements. The Western armies won almost all the battles and imposed casualties on the insurgents at a ratio of ten-to-one or even more, but the locals had an inexhaustible supply of angry young men who were willing to die.

The Western occupiers had to contend with voters at home who could not see why their children should be killed in faraway places in wars fought for imperial power, economic advantage, or obviously misconceived "strategic" reasons. As the casualty toll rose, eventually they would rebel at the cost of the war and force the government of the day to bring the army home. It will happen that way in Iraq, too-unless Senator John Kerry is lying and secretly intends to pull American troops out right away if he is elected.

That would minimise the humiliation suffered by the United States, but it would still be seen by most Americans as a humiliation, and the Democratic Party would pay a high price for it politically unless post-occupation Iraq miraculously turned into a Middle Eastern Switzerland.

Staying longer would only make the eventual humiliation greater, so Senator Kerry has no good options. Except, maybe, to lose the election.

My son's point was that the mess created by the last administration cannot be fixed and forgotten before the 2008 election no matter who wins next month-so why not vote for George W Bush to ensure that the blame is pinned on the right man? That way, there can be no "stab-in-the-back" legend to haunt the Democratic Party in years to come, and to fuel a driveby hard-right radicals flying the Republican banner to regain the White House in 2008.

The down side of this, from a Democratic point of view, is fourmore years out of executive power, a Supreme Court packed with Bush appointees, and significant damage to both America's reputation and the US economy. The negative consequences from Iraq's point of view are even bigger: years more of violence and death before the insurgents finally drive American troops out, which would probably do major damage to Iraqis' long-term hope of living together in peace.

It is Hobson's choice, and I am almost glad I do not have a vote in this election: it saves me from the responsibility of choice. If I were an American, however, I suspect that I would probably abandon all these "tactical" voting calculations in the end. One look at Vice President Dick Cheney, and you know that it's just not worth the risk.

- Gwynne Dyer is a London-based independent journalist whose articles are published in 45 countries.

I agree. Except that I can hear the fat lady warming up... we're talking about a deficit to the tune of 100,000 - 135,000 for Kerry to make up.
With more than 97% of the votes counted, it's implausible. And that's putting it mildly.

<-- The Prez for the next 4 years

You must live in Newton!

This is a very good point. While I refuse to completely extinguish my hope for Kerry yet, I think the Democrats and those that supported Democratic candidates have a lot to be proud of. Many people got involved and interested for the first time. This interest and involvement isn't going to just evaporate now.

no but it does have 6 letters

I found this interesting


Do you think that there is a possibility that Bush will “stealâ€

can't be from Saugus

[quote="xboxjunkie"]

EV: It’s striking that there hasn’t been more reporting done on black box voting by this company called Diebold. I believe they are based in Texas, which raises questions. It also raises questions when the guy who runs the company says publicly, “I will do whatever I can to provide or give this election to you.â€

nope south of boston

[quote="VoiceOfReason"][quote="xboxjunkie"]

EV: It’s striking that there hasn’t been more reporting done on black box voting by this company called Diebold. I believe they are based in Texas, which raises questions. It also raises questions when the guy who runs the company says publicly, “I will do whatever I can to provide or give this election to you.â€

[quote="edzeppe"][quote="VoiceOfReason"][quote="xboxjunkie"]

EV: It’s striking that there hasn’t been more reporting done on black box voting by this company called Diebold. I believe they are based in Texas, which raises questions. It also raises questions when the guy who runs the company says publicly, “I will do whatever I can to provide or give this election to you.â€

Thanks to Common Word for the one gracious and positive post I've read on the board this morning.

If I have time today, I will be preparing my concession speech, which will be so long winded it will make John Kerry sigh.

In the meantime, I wanted to state something that I think a lot of Kerry supporters are feeling this morning and it relates to keeping up the fight in the house, senate, local government, etc... I am more disheartened today than I have ever been about politics. Not because I believe that my side failed to do what was necessary, but because I feel that my side exceeded all of my expectations and still lost, and lost badly. You may say that the election was close, but the Republicans gained congressional seats, and Bush won with a majority of the popular vote, a strong if not overwhelming majority.

I don't know where the Democrats go from here, because I'm not sure that there is any fight left in us after rallying 55 million voters for our side and finding that America does not seem to be a country that we can win in anymore. I don't understand the majority of Americans. What parts I do understand I don't like, and the rest just confounds me. And sad as it may seem, I don't really want to understand them, because somehow I think that I would have accept Jesus Christ as my personal Lord and Saviour to do so.

There are those who have been talking about wanting to leave America, and I must confess, the thought did cross my mind. I honestly feel that those of us in the north and on the west coast have more in common with Canadians than we do with "Americans" these days. I wonder what the world would be like if we had just let them go their own way 140 years ago. "The South will rise again." Yeah, I guess so.

Anyway, I ramble. I'm just very lost and unfocused today. Perhaps later I'll be able to organize my thoughts a little better and express where I think we go from here. I do see positives in this whole thing, and I'll go into those later. My main fear today, on a personal level, is that I and so many of my most loved ones have poured so much emotional energy into defeating Bush that I think there will be some deep depression all around me as the winter approaches. I have the ability to be philosophical about such losses, eventually, but some people I love are too emotionally attached to the world to see any positive today or soon, and I worry about them.

--PunkDavid

He holds the record for the most votes because there are MORE PEOPLE in the US to vote.

I have absolutely no fight left in me. I'm done with politics.

It's not quite done yet, and I'm not going to stop hoping until it is.

"Personally, I played my bongos at many rallies to defeat Bush. I had some phat beats going sometimes for hours, I really gave it my all. "


priceless....

But if he wasn't as popular as you all claimed, those "extra" people forming the surplus populous would have gone for Kerry.

Face it, if Kerry had hit those votes, the media would be screaming "MOST POPULAR CANDIDATE SINCE KERRY".

Incidentally, you could have a nice little run with the fact that the statistic relies on data from 1984, but since I've mentioned it, I'm just not going to give it to you.