The Last Last Election Thread II about the Last Election

[Ben Kenobi]

I don't see why this election is considered historic turnout.

More people voted for Bush in 2004, then for Obama.

The reason for the victory is that McCain managed to lose about 15 percent of Bush voters, who chose to stay home.

[Darius871]

dp

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
More people voted for Bush in 2004, then for Obama.

You're priceless Ben. Wanna make another bet?

[KrazyHorse]

Please don't quote him.

[KrazyHorse]

Especially not when he's making blatantly idiotic statements.

[Darius871]

Bush: 62,040,610
Obama: 64,563,551

(Why did I even bother?)

[Ben Kenobi]

And how is that historic turnout? Again, McCain lost more then 7 million Bush voters.

[Darius871]

[KrazyHorse]

Thank you.

[Darius871]

Ben I actually think I know where you're going with this, and ultimately it might even end up being a good point if thought through and articulated correctly, but that doesn't change the fact that "more people voted for Bush in 2004 than for Obama" is a specific, quantitative statement which is demonstrably false in actual fact.

Does that sort of thing even matter to you?

[Lancer]

Don't know if someone posted this before but Gordon Smith (R) lost to Jeff Merkley (D). One more senate seat to the Dems. So is it 57 now? Anyone?

[KrazyHorse]

Yes. 57, with AK and MN still to be called, while GA goes to runoff.

(That includes, as these counts always have, Lieberman and Sanders in the Dem total)

[Lancer]

So 60 is still possible... How do you think it will end up KH?

[KrazyHorse]

Probably 57.

[KrazyHorse]

Each of the three appear to be long shots for the Dems at this point, though I admit that I know little about the AK race (other than the candidates; I do not understand the geopolitics of AK).