What was the deciding factor?

Langston · Post by **Langston** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:39 am

What do you think? Please, no need for diatribes or finger pointing... just real honest impressions. The election is over, there is no need to try to "convince" anyone that one was better than another. All stagecraft and soapboxing aside, what do you REALLY think was the main reason that Kerry lost the election? If Bush really is as stupid and incompetent as most of you believe, why did 51% of the voters decide to give him a second term? If Kerry really is the saviour of the US in this "time of crisis", how is it possible that only 48% of the people agree with you?

This is about why do you think Bush won or Kerry lost - not who is the better person.

I just got done reading the most recent threads in this forum, and they all are saying things like "Americans must hate gay people" or "Americans are scared shitless" or whatever other emotion-filled response to the insinuated disappointment that Kerry has very likely lost this election.

It saddens me to see that this election truly did come down to the "lesser of two evils". I know well that most people on this board believe that Kerry was that "lesser"... but the American people voted in record numbers and disagreed with you.

In my opinion, Bush didn't win this election so much as Kerry lost it. Kerry was his own greatest enemy - he could never adequately put to bed the impression people had that he had no clear direction aside for a couple of issues, that he had wavered on too many things in the past, that he had in some people's opinions committed actions which were borderline treasonous after Vietnam, and that he has all the intentions of dragging this election into the courtrooms after the ballots were cast.

Again, in my opinion, these things, and a number of others, caused people to have a lack of trust in Kerry. They weren't pleased with the prospect of Bush - but Bush was a known quantity; they knew what to expect from him. Kerry, on the other hand, was still ethereal... he had never given himself depth in the eyes of the voters. Clearly, there was issues with even understanding what was important to the man - when asked "What does Kerry stand for?", most people would respond back with some witticism like "you mean what does he stand for TODAY?". This doesn't sit well with the common voter, and Bush played up that aspect of Kerry very well.

I don't believe that Bush being reelected has anything to do with the American people hating gay people or that Bush is better (or worse) on any number of other issues. In the end, I think it came down to knowing the person and trusting that you understood his principles - even if you might disagree with them.

Diekan · Post by **Diekan** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:49 am

Won? I guess you haven't been watching the news have you? Turn on the TV.. suprise! It's not over yet.

Tacks · Post by **Tacks** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:54 am

No matter who wins (there's no doubt in any rational person's mind that Bush is going to win) the American people still lose. Our country has never been more divided than it has been the past 4 years. It's sad that the person who wins is only going to have support of HALF of the people in the entire country. I'm still waiting for a good candidate who can unite the country and throw aside the stupid political affiliations and do what is best for the country.

Post by **Lyion** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am

As much as some media stations would like to keep this alive and are bullshitting to appease, this race is over.

I find it comical that with 1% precincts, CNN declares blue states. With 100%, and a 130,000+ GW lead they won't declare Ohio, and claim they are not calling it due to a tight race. That's hilarious.

Tacks · Post by **Tacks** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:58 am

Who the fuck cares about CNN Lyion, I mean seriously? Shut the fuck up about it. Everyone knows CNN is biased are you trying to make sure the last 1% of the people who don't know this somehow see the light?

Langston · Post by **Langston** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:01 am

Diekan - I'm sorry - but it's over. It's numerically possible for Kerry to win Ohio IF 95.5% of the provisional votes are for him; however, that's not statistically probable... not even in the realms of lunacy. Kerry has lost the election.

So, that being said, please try to keep to the original intent of this thread. This shouldn't be a flame war - it's an honest attempt to get impressions as to the *real* factors that people on this board feel caused the election to turn out this way. If no one likes that idea... then fine - flame away - but there's a handful of other threads out there where that is already carrying on... please try to keep it to those. I really think this could be a very interesting conversation if we can keep it civil, insightful, and to the topic.

Tacks · Post by **Tacks** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:13 am

It's obvious for states in the south who voted for Bush. The good ole boys like a gun-totin redneck. I surprised that Ohio's economy turned to shit and they still voted for Bush. I'm happy that the majority of my state didn't vote for Bush. My area probably voted 2 to 1 for Bush but the big cities made up for our rednecks.

I think what really decided the election was that Kerry was not firm enough in his views. People do not like change and if they are going to vote for a change then they need to know why they are voting that way...many people I feel did not.

Post by **Lyion** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:15 am

Taxx wrote: People do not like change and if they are going to vote for a change then they need to know why they are voting that way...many people I feel did not.

I agree with that.

Diekan · Post by **Diekan** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:16 am

Well in that case. I think Kerry suffered two major blows toward the end of his campaign. First, his statement that we, “need to pass a global test” left a lot of people with an uneasy feeling (including me). No one wants the UN, or any other country for that matter to decide whether or not we can defend ourselves. Now, whether or not that was what he intended is irrelevant because that’s what the American people interrupted it as. Secondly, I am sure he suffered a blow by his wife’s comments. Remember when she said, “Laura Bush has never had a real job”? Considering Laura was a teacher at one time I am quite sure that created a good deal of resentment among many of the blue collar voters. Keep in mind while you and I can separate the two [Kerry from his wife], there are a lot of people who will fail to do so. They’ll see Kerry as being another rich bastard who looks down upon the working class… now not that they already thought this to begin with, but her comments just re-enforced it altogether. Those are just two of the blows I, personally, think he suffered.

I have others, but I'll post later - I have to go to work.

Langston · Post by **Langston** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:18 am

For sure, the South is, and probably will be for some time, hardcore conservative. I wouldn't necessarily call it redneck - the South is that for sure, but I think it's the religious conservativism moreso than the hayseed-mentality.

Same is true of the Midwest which also was pretty staunchly Bush supporting states.

If anything, we saw where there were almost zero surprises in this election. States that tend to be liberal voted for Kerry (NorthEast, West Coast), and states that are traditionally conservative voted for Bush (South, Midwest). Very few surprises there - and more support for the theory that Kerry really didn't "wow" anyone enough to sway the conservative states to move his direction.

vonkaar · Post by **vonkaar** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:19 am

Determining the 'deciding factor' is probably the easiest that it's been in many years...

The youth didn't turn out. One in TEN people 25 and under voted.

I'm fucking disgusted with my country right now.

Post by **Lyion** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:22 am

With the massive voter turnout, your post is completely contradictory and hypocritical, Vonkaar.

horendus · Post by **horendus** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:22 am

vonkaar wrote:Determining the 'deciding factor' is probably the easiest that it's been in many years...

The youth didn't turn out. One in TEN people 25 and under voted.

I'm fucking disgusted with my country right now.

I've been disgusted for years.

Tacks · Post by **Tacks** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:22 am

I'm under 25 and I voted yay me. Still I think we're heading in the right direction, we're supposed to have the biggest voter turnout yet. But you're right, if the under 25 demographic turned out proportionately to all the other age groups then Kerry would have won. The 25 and under group is typically hardcore Democratic.

Phantomfist · Post by **Phantomfist** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:23 am

Diekan wrote:Won? I guess you haven't been watching the news have you? Turn on the TV.. suprise! It's not over yet.

After listening to the BBC a couple hours ago, all Bush needs to win Ohio is roughly 10% of the provisional ballots to go his way. Seeing as how it's a pretty close race in Ohio to begin with, the odds all but 100% in his favor.

Kerry on the other hand needs to win virtually every single provisional vote in order to win Ohio. If history repeats itself, this won't happen due to roughly 10% of all provisional ballots - at least in Ohio - are found to be invalid for various reasons.

If 1 in 10 ballots don't past muster, Kerry loses. Even if every single solitary pro-Bush provisional vote is ruled invalid, Kerry still loses.

Kerry pretty much needs every one of these votes to break his way and for every vote to be considered valid, which is considered statistically impossible.

What isn't up for grabs is the popular vote. Bush won that hands down this time.

The irony of it all....

In 2000, Al Gore supporters were decrying the Electoral College. Gore supporters, even to this day, believe he won the presidency because he won the popular vote.

Now that Bush has won the popular vote and it's all but a done deal that he also won the Electoral College vote, those very same people have changed their tune about the Electoral College and are now clinging desperately to it.

Langston · Post by **Langston** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:24 am

I definitely agree that Kerry's wife was a massive detriment to his campaign. When Kerry was standing on the stump saying "no more outsourcing!!" and behind his back Heinz is shipping thousands of jobs overseas, that looks bad... really, really bad. Granted, Kerry is not his wife... nor vice versa - but there's a relationship there - you know, Kerry does (I would assume) reside with her, talk with her, and probably even sleep in the same bed next to her. If the man can't even enforce his opinion at home, how does he expect to accomplish it Nationwide (yes I know I'm being simplistic)? We, as men, know how much control a woman truly has over our decision-making... President of the US or garbage man, it's still true, and I'm sure that played a role in this to some lesser or greater degree.

Post by **Lyion** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:31 am

The deciding factor was that if Kerry won, Hillary could not run in '04.

There it is.

Langston · Post by **Langston** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:31 am

vonkaar wrote:Determining the 'deciding factor' is probably the easiest that it's been in many years...

The youth didn't turn out. One in TEN people 25 and under voted.

I'm fucking disgusted with my country right now.

How can one be anti-establishment and full of angst if you march in the herd of people to go participate in a dogmatic process of non-self-determination such as voting for the government of a republic where in the end your voice is not heard and your opinions are not carried forward? (yes... that is sarcasm)

If you wish to be disgusted, be disgusted at the right people. The teens and twenty-somethings these days need to get over themselves and start to realize that the universe doesn't actually revolve around themselves and their whims. The country, as a whole, encouraged EVERYONE to vote... if that age bracket decided not to, then be disgusted with them - not the country itself. Overall, records were broken as to the number of voters ... this election raised the bar and it's truly too bad that the younger folks chose not to participate for whatever reasons they might have had.

Langston · Post by **Langston** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:32 am

Lyion wrote:The deciding factor was that if Kerry won, Hillary could not run in '04.

There it is.

LMAO - I'm scared to admit there might be a small kernel of truth in that.

Post by **Martrae** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:35 am

Kerry was also seen as a 'kept' man. She has the money and therefore the power.

Tacks · Post by **Tacks** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:38 am

So who will win the next GOP nomination? McCain?

Langston · Post by **Langston** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:39 am

I'd say that's a strong possibility... 4 years is a long time though.

Tacks · Post by **Tacks** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:41 am

And does anyone think Kerry will continue to be a political factor?

Post by **Martrae** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:42 am

Probably be Dick Cheney.

Hopefully, the Dem pick will be Obama. He's someone I could vote for.

vonkaar · Post by **vonkaar** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 7:42 am

How is my statement in any way hypocritical? One in Ten 18-25 voted. Of that 10% which voted, there was as much as a 15-point lead in favor of Kerry (various polls). 15 points. That's not a deciding factor? If 30% had turned out, the swing states might have 'swung' in another direction. As MSN reports,

MSN wrote:Exit polls indicated that young people who did vote were strongly supporting Democrat John Kerry over President Bush, while they were evenly split between Bush and Democrat Al Gore four years ago.

You can't say that the message didn't get out. The effort was made... MTV, Musicians, Celebrities, Writers... everyone. Hell, even Ashton Kutcher backed Kerry, which was probably enough to sway people towards Bush... but it didn't help the youthful turnout.

The exit polls are fucking disgusting. I wish there was a 'are you an asshole, redneck retard' query on one of the polls. I swear, Bush DOMINATED that market.