[color=red]BUSH 269 [/color] [color=darkblue] KERRY 269[/color]
[color=red]AL (9) AR (6) [/color] [color=darkblue] HI (4) CA (55) PA (21) [/color]
[color=red]AK (3) CO (9) [/color] [color=darkblue] IA (7) ME (4) CT (7) [/color]
[color=red]AZ (10) MO (11) [/color] [color=darkblue] MN (10) MI (17) DE (3)[/color]
[color=red]GA (15) NV (5) [/color] [color=darkblue] NH (4) NJ (15) IL (21)[/color]
[color=red]ID (4) WV (5) [/color] [color=darkblue]OR (7) MD (10) WA (11)[/color][color=red]
IN (11) FL (27) [/color] [color=darkblue]VT (3) OH (20) MA (12)[/color]
[color=red]KS (6) WI (10) [/color][color=darkblue] NY (31) RI (4) DC (3) [/color] [color=red]
KY (8) NM (5) [/color]
[color=red]LA (9)
MS (6)
MT (3)
NC (15)
NE (5)
ND (3)
OK (7)
SC (8)
SD (3)
TN (11)
TX (34)
UT (5)
VA (13)
WY (3)[/color]
It’s times like these that remind me of what my grandaddy always used to say: “A fool and his predictions are soon partying.”
I’m having a “none of the above” victory party with a bunch of nekkid girls down at the local pooban wine shop. So far it’s just me and the girls and the mamasan.
Hey, does anybody have a link to a good antimatter website? I’m stuck on a Parallel Universe/unified field theory thing on my application form for the Nobel Prize in physics.
With lots of different kinds of Johnny Foreigners in lots of different countries all over the world, even if not many of your countrymen will have much idea where those countries are or why you are fighting them except that Bush and Cheney will have made it understood that they’re somehow linked with bin Laden and legitimate targets in the so-called “war against terror”.
Ah yes Omni:
Too bad you cannot find one quote by Bush saying Saddam was directly linked with 911. What Bush said is all terrorist and those who support them are going down. We all understand and appreciate that message. Iraq was supporting terrorists, it went down, ditto for Afghanistan, ditto for the volte face in Libya, Pakistan has gotten the message, the chickens have come home to roost in Saudi Arabia, Syria is withdrawing from Lebanon. All such terrible things and how stupid of Bush to make them happen. I mean these problems all existed for the better part of 35 years but many despite frequent “negotiations” and “dialogue” have proved intractable until the last three years. Why do you suppose that happened? Coincidence?
And given that the terrorists were already heading to Spain in the early 1990s to plan for the day when they would bomb the Madrid subway, what makes you think the “ignorance is bliss” approach of the 1990s both in the US and in Europe was somehow better. Is not knowing something bad is going to happen to you better than knowing and fighting back against it? Ignorance is Bliss.
Regardless, we should have the Senate locked down. Bush may lose and given his spendthrift ways and failure to push vouchers, I don’t care. Internationally, we will have to regroup and keep the pressure on. Can we do that with a Kerry President? I think so. In fact, his fearful shifting to polls leads me to believe that with a Senate majority, we can get Kerry to do what perhaps Bush could not, invade or certainly rachet up the pressure on Syria, and take out the nuclear sites in Iran. Hell, Bush will most likely be unable to do that.
Finally, when France and Germany do NOT come to Kerry’s aid, then I think we will also see an angry America reacting in precisely the way that I want them to. We need to upgrade or restructure NATO and if the Europeans won’t do it, then we need to selectively choose who will defend. Perhaps, therefore, a Kerry win could be seen as a one step backwards to take two steps forward. Let’s wait and see. I naturally hope Bush will win but I can certainly see plenty of areas for advancement of what we want with or without him.
[quote=“fred smith”]
Too bad you cannot find one quote by Bush saying Saddam was directly linked with 911.[/quote]
“I would tell them the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the war against those who caused the deaths on 9/11 is necessary.”
President George W. Bush, October 22, 2004
I still don’t understand why this quote isn’t good enough for you, you barbiturate-sopped pond dweller.
If that’s not enough for you, how about this one?
“Yes, I meant to make people think Saddam was directly involved in the 9/11 terrorist attack by repeatedly naming Iraq and 9/11 in the same sentence.”
George W. Bush, deathbed confession, April 2037
Why spooky:
A barbituate-soaked pond dweller? hahahaha That paints a picture hahaha. What have you been doing? Hanging around with Comrade Stalin? haha I cannot do any work right now I am laughing so hard. haha
Okay, that was a moderately good quote but it does not really clearly say that Iraq was linked with 911. To me, it could just as easily read the terrorists in Afghanistan, those in Iraq and those that were responsible for 911. No?
Anyway, I take your point but it is a fevered one. Tigerman has supplied so many speeches by Bush in where he outlines the points that he has continually made, the ones that I had absolutely no problem understanding and that is the broken window approach to dealing with crime can also be used toward terrorism. You crack down on all the nasty people and clean up the mess so that the swamps that breed terrorists are drained. I don’t see why this is so difficult to understand. In fact, I don’t think that even you fail to understand Bush’s position. You just deliberately want to pretend that you do not understand it to score political points. Fine, do so, but don’t expect us to respect you for posting such a lame argument. Soon, you will be spending your time like Rascal arguing about how you didn’t really mean this, that or the other because the comma, the verb tense, the translation from one language to another, blah blah excuse, excuse mean that you are not wrong. Right? Right!
And just to rub it in a bit more, Spooky, I want to win this election but even if we do not, we still win and I think you know what I mean by that. The policies that took out Afghanistan and Iraq are for the most part irreversible. Libya looks set to stay with its nonwmd status, Sudan has the pressure on and Syria is being pressured to get out of Lebanon. This has all had the effect of making the Israeli-Palestinian conflict one of many to be resolved and that is how it should be. Iran has been a problem since 1979, North Korea since 1945, so those problems will just have to be kicked down the road for the next president to take care of and whoever that may be, he or she will have the ultimate benefit of having had George Bush to have cleaned the plate of so many others. Hip hip hooray but I really do believe that with Blacks voting 18% instead of 9% for Bush that we may find that it was precisely and ironically enough the Blacks in Florida who were supposedly so dispossessed and disenfranchised in 2000 that will seal George Bush’s victory in 2004. That would and truly put an end to this ridiculous Democrat-fueled lie of the “stolen” election. Talk to you tomorrow.
I think I catch your drift, Fred: If you blow up enough little children who live in “swamps” where such children might possibly grow up to be terrorists, then you’re well and truly nipping the threat of terrorism in the bud. So that’s what the Bush administration’s preemptive strike doctrine really means!
Much better to leave those children in squalid refugee camps where they become drug addicts or dealers and victims of rape (both boys and girls) to become suicidal psychopaths or whores and die at the age of 30 right? I mean war is always wrong. Much better if those 3.5 million Afghan refugees were still in these squalid camps as long as NO blood was spilled by military action right? Much better for them to live marginal existences in countries where they are not wanted rather than return home to build their futures as long as lefties and Eurogovernments can feel good about themselves because of all the money that they donate for food and to ensure that little Ayesha has a new pair of shoes than to have the balls to send someone to take care of the root problem? Right? Is that what you in all your sanctimonious robes of bullshit are saying Omni? Or did I miss something?
What do you way when 3.5 million refugees are no longer a problem? What do you say when a country like Afghanistan has its first election? What do you say when Saddam and sons are gone? What do you say when an end to Saddam’s wars which killed 3 million are at an end? What do you say when Saddam is no longer killing 300,000 to 500,000 Shias or a couple of hundred thousand Kurds? What do you say when his rape rooms are shut down, the torture stops and the political oppression is no longer institutionalized? Why you say 24,000 Iraqis have died from all such violence in the past 18 months and that the US is very very bad for having used its military rather than engaging in endless negotiations. Bad bad America! You are evil and must be punished for committing the biggest sin: Acting. How dare you to go beyond talking and shame the rest of us for our inability or unwillingness to do anything about stopping these kinds of atrocities. Why it reminds me of the time the US took out Bosnia and Kosovo from the atrocities column, when it pressured Sudan to make or even pretend to make deals in Darfur. Right?
Ah, a preemptive Final Solution. I get it.
I’m starting to get the hang of this preemptive thing. The possibilities are endless:
Preemptive quotes (putting words in other people’s mouths when you don’t have time to wait around for them to say it themselves)
Preemptive law enforcement (shooting first and asking questions later when the crook quota clock is running and baby’s just gotta have that new pair of shoes)
Preemptive pay raises (embezzlement-smezzlement, just save your boss the trouble of doing the paperwork)
Preemption has so many possibilities we should just make a slogan of it:
Preemption – When You Just Don’t Have Time for Messy Details
[quote=“Flipper”][quote=“flike”]
His estimate of the popular vote:[ul]Kerry: 50.3%
Bush: 47.7%
Nader/other: 2.0%[/ul]
[/quote]
well, duh. if you take all the polls and then give Kerry an extra 3-4% across the broad then he wins big. do you really need a phd to see that?[/quote]
gee, i guess if you don’t give kerry an extra 4% he loses. this guy’s predictions actually correlated nicely with the actual results until they started just throwing votes kerry’s way for no reason. undecideds will split 3-1 for kerry! wrong. large turnout will add 2% to kerry’s total! wrong.
my favorite part about all this is how silly some of the polling experts look. after a while it became more cheerleading than statistical analysis.
[quote=“Flipper”]gee, I guess if you don’t give Kerry an extra 4% he loses. this guy’s predictions actually correlated nicely with the actual results until they started just throwing votes Kerry’s way for no reason. undecideds will split 3-1 for Kerry! wrong. large turnout will add 2% to Kerry’s total! wrong.
my favorite part about all this is how silly some of the polling experts look. after a while it became more cheerleading than statistical analysis.[/quote]
Yeah, I think that clearly he failed to account for an enormously important exception to the general ‘undecided voters break for the challenger’ rule - the US is at war. Americans don’t like to switch horses midstream --> American undecideds will break for the incumbent when America’s at war. This mistake is related to the ‘big turnout’ must favor the challenger premise, too, I suspect.
He’s not alone, either. John Zogby called the election for Kerry on The Daily Show last week, then went on about how much he prided himself on accuracy. In fact, if I remember correctly, he predicted that, in addition to indulging himself in what amounted to some kind of depressive hibernation period if Bush won (more accurately, if his prediction was wrong), his business might get seriously damaged, too.
Not only did Zogby - among others - get it wrong, they didn’t even see that Bush would garner 51% of the popular vote. Ouch! That’s gotta hurt!
Prophets:
EEzzee (wrong about numbers, though, and seemed to switch later?)
Okami
Butcher boy
Maposquid
rooftop
False prophets:
twocs
me, Screaming Jesus
ac_dropout
Mike N.
Rascal
hoedad
Cleverly uncommitted
Fred Smith
Hobbes
imyourbiggestfan
How was Zogby suppose to know how conservative rural theological people suppose to vote?
Zogby is an urban well educated liberal. Unlike Paris Hilton, its not like he does road trips to the country for the Simple Life TV show.
Obviously something is wrong with reality, since it is not conforming to the predictions.
Well done Bush, a hard fought win. My predictions seemed sensible but turned out to be hopeful and ultimately wrong. Very wrong.
This is not the place to question or quibble or fret about election issues and the future.
[quote=“Screaming Jesus”]Prophets:
EEzzee (wrong about numbers, though, and seemed to switch later?)
Okami
Butcher boy
Maposquid
rooftop
False prophets:
twocs
me, Screaming Jesus
ac_dropout
Mike N.
Rascal
hoedad
Cleverly uncommitted
Fred Smith
Hobbes
imyourbiggestfan[/quote]
Hey SJ, you didn’t include me as the greatest of all the estimated prophets 
I correctly prophesized the end of the Redskins’ last home game prior to the election outcome indicator streak.
Tigerman the soothsayer.
[quote=“Screaming Jesus”]Prophets:
EEzzee (wrong about numbers, though, and seemed to switch later?)
Okami
Butcher boy
Maposquid
rooftop
[/quote]
Thanks SJ but I’m afraid you give me too much credit. True I had Bush for the popular vote, but I had Kerry for the big prize. For a while on Wednesday it looked a distinct possibility. However the margin of the popular vote win made it unlikely.
Unfortunately, I got it dead right – for at least the last month before the election, I always thought it was blindingly obvious that Bush was going to land it by a comfortable two or three percentage points. I never had sufficient faith in America’s lumpen masses to believe that anything else could be possible.
A black day for the world.
Boo-Hoo.
The masses have spoken!
(gloat gloat gloat gloat gloat gloat!)
:bravo: 
:bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo: :bravo:
[quote=“Flipper”]Bush will win. democrats are pinning their hopes on the young first time cell-phone-using voters energized to finally cast a ballot. as Kerry’s victory over dean showed, this is more fantasy than reality.
Bush will take ohio and florida and the results will not be as close as in 2000.
if I’m wrong, I’m wrong. but this is my prediction as of today.[/quote]