If Kerry does concede at 1pm as he has promised, then I think he is a great man for conceding the election in such a gracious manner. No one wants to see the Democratic party go through the tarring they did when Gore decided to play the lawyer game last time around. And if anything, this election sets up a solid Democratic run in 2008 (Rudy for president????)

Big media is so slow. Matt Drudge called the election by the time I had gotten back from poker (2am ish) while CNN and CBS were still debating over Ohio (which was long won for Bush).

Now that Bush has carried both the popular votes and the electoral college votes, there is an air of legitimacy to his presidency now. No more "elected, not selected" rantings from people who believe he 'stole' the 2K elections.

The Republican controlled House and Senate scare me to shit.

I think this year proved the EC has some merits. I've always been a favor of making sure the voice of the minority is heard ... an election without an EC would mean all the attention would swing to huge metropolitan areas ... would the voice of the rest of the nation be heard then? I mean, if anything, we should keep it just for the comic value of watching TV reports and "analysts" add up all the different numbers to try to get to 270. How boring would it be just to count everyone's votes? Where would the strategy be there then? "Well, if Kerry gets 2,000,000 more votes, he'll win!!!!!

I'm quite surprised at the number of people who (joking, I'm sure) claim they want "out of this country" because Bush won. I don't quite understand this. Is your personal dislike of someone so great you want out of our great nation? I mean, I think it's honestly just foolish.

Although it really didn't bother me at first, the more "oh well, the world is going to shit" messages I read, the more angry I start to get. Guys, it was a 4-year presidential election. The world is not going to blow up. The world is not ending. There are plenty of people worldwide who did not want to see Kerry in office (same for Bush). Business in the world will continue. There's no need to become drama kings and drama queens over a friggin' election. The election was not a black-and-white issue where your views were clearly right thus making 50-million people "stupid." Bush is not a "monkey" nor are people being "deceived" by Bush. Grow the fuck up and get some class. There were plenty of people like me who actually have been keeping up with the issues prior to the whole election who decided that although, yes, Bush has some very big flaws, that his positives outweigh the negatives. Sometimes I wonder if the the strong Kerry supporters even realized this ... or whether the media-slanted "hatred of Bush" affected them in such a manner they never got a chance to address the issues at hand.

Thought of the day: HUGE amounts of young people and internet people support Kerry. Why is this? What is it about young people and people who spend a lot of time on the internet (I guess there's a huge overlap there) make them such strong Kerry supporters?

Posted by roy on November 3, 2004 at 09:47 AM in Ramblings | 11 Comments

Related Entries

Linked Entries

These are Tabulas entries which have linked to this particular entry.

Want to comment with Tabulas?. Please login.

Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 02:20 PM
Ahem, I don't think the Republican party had any cleaner hands than the Dems in 2000 with the lawyering after the election. If anything, it was slightly more, as is evidenced by the fact their lawyering won out.

Big media was being careful this time as opposed to 2000 when they were quick to jump the gun and ended up having to take back some what they said. The Drudge Report is a giant piece of rumor-mongering shit. Lots of people predicted that Bush would win. Michigan also looked like it was going to go Bush early on in the night. It didn't. So it was not at all clear that Ohio was going to Bush.

Yes, Bush was legitimately elected for this election.

Uh, I don't know if you've noticed, but we've had a republican house and senate and judiciary for the last 4 years already. They've only strengthened their control. Also, with the expected retirements of as many as 4 supreme court justices, expect the supreme court to be completely dominated by conservative judges.

As I've said before, the problem is not with the fact that we have an EC (despite what many will try to argue). The problem is with the fact that the ECs ALL go to the winner of the state. This all-or-nothing system is what's wrong about it. Note that there are a few states which don't do this, but I think it's like 3 or 4 states.

The reason people are joking about getting out of the country is because they think it's funny. And because they feel that, to some degree, it's scary living in the US with someone as possessed of faith, rather than reason, in his correctness. The increasing loss of personal liberties, and general pro-Christian, anti-gay attitudes of the administration certainly are another contributing factor. That being said, keep in mind it is still being said in jest, and should not be taken completely seriously.

Yes there are people in the world who wanted Bush to win. I highly doubt this number was nearly as high as those who wanted Kerry to win. Yes, it's only 4 more years. The world is not blowing up. But Bush has given every signal of only increasing his current policies to a feverish level in his second term. Because the second term for a president is guaranteed to be his last, he has to waste no time or effort campaigning, or even keeping people happy. Thus with these restraints removed, there is a very real worry about what Bush will do with regards to both domestic policy and foreign policy. The invasion of another country is a possibility, and while it will not be the end of the world for us, there is a good chance it will be the end of the world of the thousands of people who will be killed in that country. At home, the deregulation of everything from energy and media to environment and technology will be opening a floodgate that cannot be easily stemmed once it's opened. Problems are much easier to create than the fix, and because many of the problems lead to short-term gains and only manifest their negative sides long in the future, it is a very scary thought that one man can have such a large impact. And given his track record on these issues, it is very likely that deregulation will continue at a breakneck pace.

Yes 50-million people are not "stupid." Bush is not necessarily a monkey, but I do believe he is deceiving the public. How can you look at the statements made by his administration regarding the justification for invading Iraq as anything other than deception of the American people?

If you think the media slants left, read Noam Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent. Media has always been and will always be at the bid of the government and the businesses who support it financially. The little bit of "anti-establishment" they report on is done so as to cleverly ignore the big picture, leaving you with two very limited options (very much like CNN's crossfire quickly boils things down to Red vs. Blue, etc.).

Young people are more liberal on issues, because they are more open to change. The definition of conservative is one who does not want change. Thus in general, older people (especially the wealthy) do not want change because change will most likely hurt them. Young people (college students in particular) are also better educated than many of their parents. And throughout the world, more educated people (professors/artists/scientists/etc.) all tend to be liberal.

Note that there are two groups of young people that tend to vote republican, and those are:

1. Those in the military. Military spending is a huge GOP concern. But despite what many people think, the democrats in the past few decades have been no less pro-military, with military spending not being significantly cut back during Clinton's years, for example. In large part, this has to do with all candidates increasing support on military contractors' money for their elections.

2. Christians. The GOP is much more vocal about Christianity (but I highly doubt it is actually any more religious than their Dem counterparts). Bush's increasing reliance on faith alone to sustain him through the tough decisions he has to make is, to many Christians, a sign of one of great faith. Bush has also very frequently used religious imagery in his speeches, drawing ire and praise from separation of church and state people and religious groups, respectively.
Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 03:04 PM
and about Christians... true Christians actually detest how Bush practically USES God to fulfill his social agenda. it's nothing more than shameful on his part. separation of church and state aside, i believe most Christians who vote for Bush do so not because he invokes God in his speeches, but because they happen to have the same social values. i believe that if Bush were a muslim, he would still get more Christian votes than Kerry if he held the same social values, and that's just simply inherent in the populace. if you wanna change that, go on a crusade.
Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 04:20 PM
I think Bush feels that what he has done has been approved of by the American people, as signified by his reelection. Therefore, if he wants to leave behind a good image of himself, he will most likely feel that doing more of the same would accomplish this goal. If he were to take a more centrist view, I think he would interpret that as a sign of weakness, something he definitely does not want to be remembered for. He feels (with apparently a large portion of the populace agreeing) that he has done the right thing, and that is why I think we can expect more of the same as far as foreign policy is concerned.

About college students, yes, we have no sense of permanence right now and cannot thus fully understand what change means. But we have the will and the flexibility for change, something which most old people lack. And change is necessary if society is to survive and evolve; things tend towards corruption,antiquation, and disrepair if left as they are.

As far as Christian are concerned, you are probably right about their agreeing more with his social stance than his religious one. Just to confirm, if Kerry held those same social viewpoints [and Bush did not], would the Christian vote have gone to him? And no, I don't want to go on a crusade, I was merely making an observation.

Anonymous (guest)

Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 11:40 PM
i guess we'll have to agree to disagree on what Bush plans to do (being more centrist vs. more of the same).

good points on the change thing. i do agree with what you say, it's just that i get so disillusioned on campus from all the people who try to shove what you have to say down my throat, without fully thinking about and comprehending what they say. it's the fanatics who lack intellectual analysis on anything that frustrate me, and it just so happens that most of the people i encounter with this problem are extremely liberal.

i think if Kerry held those same social viewpoints he would have garnered a much larger percentage of the Christian vote for sure... but then he might have lost a number of votes from people who hate christianity, maybe to the Libertarian candidate or to no vote at all... who knows.
Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 02:59 PM
Bush is not going to use his second term to do whatever the hell he wants. on the contrary, he'll probably be much more centrist. just look at all the other presidents who were elected for their second term. the main goal for all of them was to preserve their legacy, and there's no better way to do that than to gain respect in the eyes of the american people and in the eyes of the international community. look at reagan with the soviets, or clinton in the mideast at the end of his second term. it's all about trying to appease everyone, and i know Bush realizes this... hence it won't be as bad foreign policy-wise as you might think.

the real reason why most college students are liberal is because they simply don't comprehend what change means. they have no real jobs, no family, no spouse, no income, no home, no financial obligations, nothing. it's very easy to want change when it doesn't affect you in an immediate fashion.
Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 01:03 PM
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, which is what makes this country great. However, how can you tell people to "grow the fuck up and get some class" because they're upset that Bush won? They make a stink because they don't feel comfortable with him being the representative for them or their country, and that's their right. Now by generalizing people who support Kerry, and use the internet, you're not doing the very thing you're telling these people to do. I'm up on current events, I've done my homework, and I will proudly say I voted for Kerry. Now I do understand that there's only so much one office can do in 4 years, but I didn't feel certain areas of the job were being done well enough, so I chose otherwise. I will not raise a stink, it's out of my hands, and I can't gaurantee that Kerry would've been any better. But I am grown up, have a fair amount of class, but still consider Bush somewhat of a monkey.
Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 02:15 PM
<em>"However, how can you tell people to "grow the fuck up and get some class" because they're upset that Bush won?"</em>

You totally missed the point of that comment. I am not saying that people making a stink cause Bush won need to grow up and get some class. I'm saying those people who are saying things like, "Man I really want to move to Canada" and "America is going into a shithole now" are the ones who need to grow up and have some class. These are people who are overdramatizing the impact of the election on their lives and are taking a very serious concept (being an expat) and just throwing it around like nothing. To that, I take offense.
Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 03:30 PM
That I can understand. Perhaps there was some over-reacting going on with my response, but I've been dealing with people making sweeping generalizations about others party affiliations all day, so pardon me if I seemed a bit brash. People do tend to over-dramatize every little thing about election time, and what most don't even realize, is that it isn't necessarily the man who holds the office that's making all the calls they feel are "ruining our country" and such.
Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 12:16 PM
All the young Bush supporters are likely over at FreeRepublic and FreeDominion. But those places are a little bit scary, starting with the black background.
Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 12:12 PM
They are more than welcome to go to mexico. When i go to Tiajuana, you don't need a passport of any kind to go there. Just one to get back.
Comment posted on November 3rd, 2004 at 11:12 AM
this was a very emotional election. people tend to get irrational when they're emotional. that's all. plus, it's easier to freak out about things online. =b if that's really how a lot of people felt, you'll be seeing riots or something.