2020 EV WATCH
Trump : 186
Biden : 352
Click here

2020 SENATE WATCH
GOP : 49
DEM : 49
IND : 2
Click here

EGO BOOST
GALLUP
AMERICAN RESEARCH GROUP
PUBLIC POLICY POLLING
RASMUSSEN REPORTS
    Search

    Bush Stole The 2004 Election

    That is what Robert Kennedy Jr. tries to claim in a new article in Rolling Stone that has spread like wildfire across the Internet.

    Zzzzzzz….

    Posted by Dave at 6:38 am
    Filed under: Election 2004 News (Recent) | Comments (17)

    17 Responses to “Bush Stole The 2004 Election”

    1. pw says:

      Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

    2. Tim V says:

      those ethical kennedy’s

    3. Hello Dolly! says:

      What? Is this the pot calling the kettle black?
      Remember PaPa Joe Kennedy during JFK’s run for the presidency. Bought lots of votes….
      I repect the older Kennedy women much more than the Kennedy men, young or old.
      Woe is us. Surely the devil was the first politician who persuaded 1/3 of the angels to
      rebel against God.

    4. Richard Herko says:

      Let me get this straight…a Kennedy is channelling Hillary Clinton and her vast right wing conspiracy?

      Not to mention he is talking about 1% error and doesn’t care that there were inner city precincts reporting more than 100% turn out for the second straight presidential election.

      Bottom line this is part of the work that misguided Californians have launched to subvert the Constitution and allow popular vote (the big states) to elect future Presidents.

    5. bill says:

      If the exit polls were so reliabile how do you explain the overwhelming predominence ofwomen voters being interviewed as opposed to males? I also remember that the results gathered by older exit poll workers tabulated very closely with actual results. Whereas, the results tabulated by the younger exit polls workers were the ones that were off base. Obviously, when you staff an exit poll with young left wingers this is what is going to happen. They lie just like Bobby Jr lies.

    6. Florence Schmieg says:

      Just another example of Bush Derangement Syndrome and the total absence of any substance in the liberal playbook anymore. Still fighting the 2000 and 2004 elections. Do they not see how pathetic they look to people not afflicted with BDS?

    7. BillW says:

      Kennedy’s article is just a rehash of the conspiracy theories shopped around the internet for the last year and a half by a couple of loonies – notably Cliff Arnebeck, a Columbus lawyer that the Ohio Attorney general tried to disbar last year; and the Green party candidate who originally demanded the recount in Ohio (David Cobb), and are still pushing appeals with the Ohio Supreme Court.

      Since the election is now ancient history, this is probably an attempt by Kennedy to affect the Ohio governor’s race – Ken Blackwell, as secretary of state, is the uber-villain of Arnebeck and Cobb’s paraoid delusions.

      I wonder if Kennedy has been seen eating lunch with Ted Strickland recently?

    8. This article is filled with so many lies and distortions that it would take a week to refute.

      It relies mainly on the old nonsense from the 2000 election that voters who did not vote in the Presidential election but cast a ballot some how were mysteriously forced to do this. It also assumes that these voters were overwhelmingly Kerry voters. These voters either did not want to vote for President or made a mistake. There is nothing that can be done to solve this mystery. Considering what happened in the 2000 election, you think the Democrats would better educate their voters to vote on a punch card but I guess they did not do a very good job.

      It uses anecdotal evidence from a few precincts to make you believe that it happened every where in Ohio. Bush won the state by 118,000 votes. You need to
      specifically prove this and you do not do this by citing a few precincts where the vote was counted incorrectly because voters were give the wrong ballot at a multi-precinct polling place in Cleveland.

      The biggest distortion is citing the Connally judicial race as an indicator that Kerry lost thousands of votes because he ran behind Ellen Connally a Black pro-gay rights candidate in certain rural counties. It leaves out the fact that Connally was running in a non-partisan judicial race and therefore was not listed as a Democrat like Kerry. Any competent election analyst knows that this is like comparing apples to oranges. Non-partisan candidates have a totally different voter support pattern compared to candidates who are clearly listed as the nominee of a political party. Judicial elections are low profile and usually have little focus on the candidates views on the issues as do partisan races. Many who would never vote for Democrat John Kerry for President might vote for a woman with an Irish name.

      There is nothing new in this article that has not been previously rejected as ridiculous by even the MSM since they have chosen to ignore it since 2004.

    9. Phil says:

      If Kennedy was really concerned about voter fraud he might want to take a look at Wisconsin.

      Uh, don’t hold your breath.

    10. Neal says:

      Yet another Kennedy brain drenched in and destroyed by alcohol!

      Sad!

    11. pw says:

      Florence,
      Or PEST. It has a couple of different names.

    12. Jeff W says:

      I didn’t read all the way to the end of the article, but does he at any point admit that he’s using the wrong exit polls at the beinning? When he talks about exit polls showing Kerry killing Bush in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, and even close to winning in states like North Carolina, those were the initial exit polls leaked in the early afternoon. I remember being shocked, because they didn’t make any sense.

      Then, later in the day, the final (official) exit polls came out and they were all accurate to within 1%. Basically, what happened was that the people who were able to vote early in the day (non-working women and the unemployed) tended to be Democrats, while the people voting in the evening (working people, mostly men) tended to be Republicans.

      So, to say that the exit polls were off by 6 or 9% in states, and that there is a 1-in-a-million chance that Bush could have one these states is intellectually dishonest. Those statistics would be true if he was using the official exit polls. But he wasn’t, he was using the leaked exit polls with incomplete data. Very unprofessional all around.

    13. Ironman says:

      Kerry ran way behind Connally in rural southern ohio. I suspect much of this region gets its TV from WVA TV and knew a lot more about Kerry than Connally.
      A reivew of the OH SC vote indicates there were some northern counties where the R judge’s ran ahead of Bush, was that foul play or a good campaign in those areas by the judicial candidates?
      Besides, for a lib to run well in S OH is bizarre, for a Dem to run well is not unusual

    14. pw says:

      Double negative!

    15. Go DUKE!!! says:

      I thought that this guy is in rehab? or a different screwed up Kennedy?

    16. MBT says:

      DUKE – Different Kennedy – Patrick is the one in Rehab.