69dejavue Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 http://www.vanshaver.com/election_statistics___some_unrep.htm If someone can please post the map and stats please do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherri Leicht Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 here ya go! Election Statistics Some unreported stats about the 2008 election Professor Joseph Olson of Hemline University School of Law, St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning the 2008 Presidential election: -Number of States won by: Democrats: 20; Republicans: 30 -Square miles of land won by: Democrats: 580,000; Republicans: 2,427,000 -Population of counties won by: Democrats: 127 million; Republicans: 143 million -Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Democrats: 13.2; Republicans: 2.1 Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory Republican won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens. Democrat territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in rented or government-owned tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..." Olson believes the United States is now somewhere between the "complacency and apathy" phase of Professor Tyler's definition of democracy, with some forty percent of the nation's population already having reached the "governmental dependency" phase. Notice that in the states of Alaska and Oklahoma: All counties were won by McCain/Palin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kahmann Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 LOL this is silly. If only acres of land could vote, McCain would have won in a landslide! Have you ever been to Oklahoma or Alaska? There aren't many people in any of those counties. Hardly any comparison can be drawn from Queens County, New York to Ward County, North Dakota. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted March 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Now we can use this map to start secession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormeaston Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDT Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 In a twisted way it makes up for the 2000 Presidential Election/Fiasco???????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormeaston Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 You were wrong............ . He did respond! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDT Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 You were wrong............ . He did respond! All you "WHINERS" got me wrong!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormeaston Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Kool!! :hysterical:And touche'...........that's what I said in 2000 and 2004!.........WHINERS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted March 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 In a twisted way it makes up for the 2000 Presidential Election/Fiasco???????????? What fiasco? In the end Bush won by all account in Florida. There were recounts, independent recounts by the media and he still won. Not by much, but even one vote is sufficient. Bush had more votes in Florida than Gore and subsequently won the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted March 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 The media reported the results of the study during the week after November 12, 2001. The results of the study showed that had the limited county by county recounts requested by the Gore team been completed, Bush would still have been the winner of the election. The Florida Supreme Court had ordered "counting of the legal votes contained within the undervotes in all counties where the undervote has not been subjected to a manual tabulation." The U.S. Supreme Court overruled the Florida Supreme Court and stopped their recount via an unsigned "per curiam" opinion in Bush v. Gore, with three Justices (Rehnquist joined by Scalia and Thomas) concurring in a separate opinion. Four Justices (Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer) each wrote their own opinion with various combinations of the other three joining.[3] The media recount study found that under the system of limited recounts in selected counties as was requested by the Gore campaign, the only way that Gore would have won was by using counting methods that were never requested by any party, including "overvotes" — ballots containing more than one vote for an office. While some of these ballots recorded votes for two separate candidates, a significant number (20 percent in Lake County, for example) were cases of a voter voting for a candidate and then also writing in that same candidate's name on the write-in line. A judge supervising the recount told the Orlando Sentinel that he had been open to the idea of examining the overvotes, and had been planning to discuss the matter at a hearing when the U.S. Supreme Court stopped the recount. According to Mickey Kaus of Slate.com (emphasis in original), "If the recount had gone forward Judge Lewis might well have counted the overvotes in which case Gore might well have won."[4] The New York Times did its own analysis of how mistaken overvotes might have been caused by confusing ballot designs. It found that the butterfly ballot in heavily Democratic Palm Beach County may have cost Gore a net 6286 votes, and the two page ballot in similarly Democratic Duval County may have cost him a net 1999 votes, each of which would have made the difference by itself.[5] The rest of the media consortium did not consider these because there could be no clear determination of a voter's intent. Candidate outcomes based on potential recounts in Florida presidential election 2000 (outcome of one particular study)[citation needed][clarification needed] Review method Winner Review of all ballots statewide (never undertaken) • Standard as set by each county canvassing board during their survey Gore by 171 • Fully punched chad and limited marks on optical ballots Gore by 115 • Any dimples or optical mark Gore by 107 • One corner of chad detached or optical mark Gore by 60 Review of limited sets of ballots (initiated but not completed) • Gore request for recounts of all ballots in Broward, Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia counties Bush by 225 • Florida Supreme Court of all undervotes statewide Bush by 430 • Florida Supreme Court as being implemented by the counties, some of whom refused and some counted overvotes as well as undervotes Bush by 493 Unofficial recount totals • Incomplete result when the Supreme Court stayed the recount (December 9, 2000) Bush by 154 Certified Result (official final count) • Recounts included from Volusia and Broward only Bush by 537 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
69dejavue Posted March 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 You were wrong............ . He did respond! Guess it really wasn't fair. It was sort of like entrapment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
svttim Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 In a twisted way it makes up for the 2000 Presidential Election/Fiasco???????????? You mean Sore/Loserman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDT Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 I am not "SORE" and definately not a "LOOSER".................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stump_breaker Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 I've always found Louisiana interesting. It went all blue except for a few parishes. The ones that went red were generally within 10%. http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/state.p...f=0&elect=0 Now look at the Orleans Parish - home of New Orleans the "you owe it to us" capitol. http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/statesu...submit=Retrieve I'm just saying.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDT Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 What fiasco? In the end Bush won by all account in Florida. There were recounts, independent recounts by the media and he still won. Not by much, but even one vote is sufficient. Bush had more votes in Florida than Gore and subsequently won the state. The University of Chicago recount officially had Gore the winner of Florida............. :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilmor Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 LOL this is silly. If only acres of land could vote, McCain would have won in a landslide! Have you ever been to Oklahoma or Alaska? There aren't many people in any of those counties. Hardly any comparison can be drawn from Queens County, New York to Ward County, North Dakota. Ken Very true. I thing I take away from this is that the Democratic party, to stay in power, feeds off of the wants and desires of certains types and classifications of people who for the most part live in the blue areas. These people are great in number and are a large % of the population in the blue areas. As these groups grow in size, so does the power of the Democratic party. The more that the Democratic party does to increase the size of these groups, the more assured they are of staying in power. The policies which Obama, Pelosi and Reid have passed, including in the so-called Simulus bill, and that they will work to pass in the future, are primarily focused at increasing the size of these groups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtup1 Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 The University of Chicago recount officially had Gore the winner of Florida............. :rolleyes: I live in Chicago and wouldn't trust anything counted here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtup1 Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Very true. I thing I take away from this is that the Democratic party, to stay in power, feeds off of the wants and desires of certains types and classifications of people who for the most part live in the blue areas. These people are great in number and are a large % of the population in the blue areas. As these groups grow in size, so does the power of the Democratic party. The more that the Democratic party does to increase the size of these groups, the more assured they are of staying in power. The policies which Obama, Pelosi and Reid have passed, including in the so-called Simulus bill, and that they will work to pass in the future, are primarily focused at increasing the size of these groups. AMEN just what we need is the whole U.S. on welfare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STLShelby Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Very true. I thing I take away from this is that the Democratic party, to stay in power, feeds off of the wants and desires of certains types and classifications of people who for the most part live in the blue areas. These people are great in number and are a large % of the population in the blue areas. As these groups grow in size, so does the power of the Democratic party. The more that the Democratic party does to increase the size of these groups, the more assured they are of staying in power. The policies which Obama, Pelosi and Reid have passed, including in the so-called Simulus bill, and that they will work to pass in the future, are primarily focused at increasing the size of these groups. I agree ilmor. Simply put the Dems buy votes with Government handouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2007GT Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Very true. I thing I take away from this is that the Democratic party, to stay in power, feeds off of the wants and desires of certains types and classifications of people who for the most part live in the blue areas. These people are great in number and are a large % of the population in the blue areas. As these groups grow in size, so does the power of the Democratic party. The more that the Democratic party does to increase the size of these groups, the more assured they are of staying in power. The policies which Obama, Pelosi and Reid have passed, including in the so-called Simulus bill, and that they will work to pass in the future, are primarily focused at increasing the size of these groups. It's called group and identity politics and is basically class warfare. The Democrats can't win with their ideas so they pander to certain groups. Wait until they "Legalize" 30 million illegal aliens. They will be in power forever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormeaston Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 The University of Chicago recount officially had Gore the winner of Florida............. :rolleyes: Yeah.......................................Let's base a presidential election outcome on ONE University's official recount. Oh yeah.................didn't you hear, the University of Foggy Bogg had a recount and Bush won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ingram4868 Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 :jackinbox: my response Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markhudd Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Bottom line...Liberals wanted a socialist country, they got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aonebadbone Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 I voted for ol Al but in hind sight I am glad he lost. the stuff coming out of his pie hole is just plain STUPID. With that being said I didn't vote for Obama I just don't think he has the experience to lead this country. To much finger pointing and the Democrats have lost touch with the people but not there wallet just check it and see. Where are they getting all this money and why is it so important for them to spend money on global warming. Since the new administration took office people have been losing jobs by the thousands every week and they have done nothing to stop it. They have however raised the cooperate tax.that is why people are losing there jobs. It is a great idea tax the people that put people to work. If they cut taxes and helped employers to keep more capitol in there pockets that would put more people to work and the more people working the more taxes they can collect. I never figured why unions wanted democrats in power they really aren't looking out for the working man at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdscooby Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 Yeah.......................................Let's base a presidential election outcome on ONE University's official recount. Why not, the media got Obama elected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turnsignaldelete Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 All you "WHINERS" got me wrong!!!!!!!!!!! I am not "SORE" and definately not a "LOOSER".................... NO, we do not, "have you wrong". We, understand the words/statements of a Socialist/Marxist's, who along with your China, Russian and Cuban comrades want to take our great Country into Socialism and then Communism. We, Patriotic Americans, tried to warn other voters of Obama's TRUE Agenda, but were ignored or were called, Racists. It was not Obama's skin color, that we had issue with, it was, and is, Obama's belief that America needs to be radically changed and should be a Socialist/Communist Country, if not in total, at least in the manner of other Socialist/Communist modern practices/views, currently followed by the , 'Big 4'. Sadly, now millions of Americans, can see the Far Left Socialist agenda of Obama and his tax, tax, and Nationalize, Socialist/Marxist thugs, in action. Instead of trying to reverse your Leftist Propaganda posts, why don't you go use your food stamps and buy some twinkles and cool aide, sit on your Obama Pray rug, and worship, your Socialist/Marxist God, Obama, Obama, Obama, and stop trying to convince anyone on his Forum, that you give a Damn about the United States, or the Free Market, or the private ownership principles America was founded on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rag Top Day Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 NO, we do not, "have you wrong". We, understand the words/statements of a Socialist/Marxist's, who along with your China, Russian and Cuban comrades want to take our great Country into Socialism and then Communism. We, Patriotic Americans, tried to warn other voters of Obama's TRUE Agenda, but were ignored or were called, Racists. It was not Obama's skin color, that we had issue with, it was, and is, Obama's belief that America needs to be radically changed and should be a Socialist/Communist Country, if not in total, at least in the manner of other Socialist/Communist modern practices/views, currently followed by the , 'Big 4'. Sadly, now millions of Americans, can see the Far Left Socialist agenda of Obama and his tax, tax, and Nationalize, Socialist/Marxist thugs, in action. Instead of trying to reverse your Leftist Propaganda posts, why don't you go use your food stamps and buy some twinkles and cool aide, sit on your Obama Pray rug, and worship, your Socialist/Marxist God, Obama, Obama, Obama, and stop trying to convince anyone on his Forum, that you give a Damn about the United States, or the Free Market, or the private ownership, principles America was founded on. +1 Thank you for saying what alot of us feel about the direction this country is headed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ilmor Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 It's called group and identity politics and is basically class warfare. The Democrats can't win with their ideas so they pander to certain groups. Wait until they "Legalize" 30 million illegal aliens. They will be in power forever. I know - that's why the Democrats have even offered immigration to Gaza residents! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DDT Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 NO, we do not, "have you wrong". We, understand the words/statements of a Socialist/Marxist's, who along with your China, Russian and Cuban comrades want to take our great Country into Socialism and then Communism. We, Patriotic Americans, tried to warn other voters of Obama's TRUE Agenda, but were ignored or were called, Racists. It was not Obama's skin color, that we had issue with, it was, and is, Obama's belief that America needs to be radically changed and should be a Socialist/Communist Country, if not in total, at least in the manner of other Socialist/Communist modern practices/views, currently followed by the , 'Big 4'. Sadly, now millions of Americans, can see the Far Left Socialist agenda of Obama and his tax, tax, and Nationalize, Socialist/Marxist thugs, in action. Instead of trying to reverse your Leftist Propaganda posts, why don't you go use your food stamps and buy some twinkles and cool aide, sit on your Obama Pray rug, and worship, your Socialist/Marxist God, Obama, Obama, Obama, and stop trying to convince anyone on his Forum, that you give a Damn about the United States, or the Free Market, or the private ownership principles America was founded on. How sad that your this "BITTER" and "PARANOID"........I should feel sorry for you???????????????? You definately don't know me!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.