Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen?

@koedoe (101)
South Africa
January 18, 2007 4:25am CST
I came across a number of sources as well as the title of a book with this heading ? Where the author puts forward that, their is legitimate claims and or evidence that The American public and average Joe was dupe ? Do you think that U.S.A got a fair selections and that the outcome reflects the publics choice
5 responses
@MrNiceGuy (4147)
• United States
18 Jan 07
Yes I do believe voters got what they wanted. Before the election there was a massive campaign by liberal media, society, and popculture to "Get out and vote" "vote or die" and the like. Bush supporters answered the call as well and even though lots of people voted against him (not necessarily FOR Kerry) Bush still won, I believe the largest popular vote total of all time.
1 person likes this
• United States
19 Jan 07
Now, what else would MrNiceGuy be saying? Always the propagandist! MrNiceGuy, the 2004 presidential election was just a formality! As the questionaire so correctly stated, "selections". It was all a mindgame, and a win-win for the "skull & bones" members. I believe John Kerry, also a bonesman like his brother George W. Bush, was a candidate to help his bones brother pull through! The result of the election was the voice and will of big businesses, as every true human now knows!
1 person likes this
19 Jan 07
Netsbridge - so you too have noticed that Mrniceguy seems to be in the employ of either George W Bush, or the Republican party, and all his answers have a common thread. I find his responses to my postings tediously predictable.
20 Jan 07
haha
@4ftfingers (1314)
18 Jan 07
i don't beleive it was stollen no, he gained an obvious majority. but whether or not he deserved that support i would despute. he did use the 9/11 attacks to gain public support for a second war on iraq. the reasons for war are too vague for me to judge whether it was necissary but becoming a 'war-time president' made him very popular.
@koedoe (101)
• South Africa
18 Jan 07
LOl nicely put "dispute"
18 Jan 07
lol yeh am trying to say it politcally correct so no one can claim im talking sh*t about their precious bush
• United States
20 Jan 07
Arnold, you are going to go places in the USA with political correctness! That is the key to success in the USA! That's what I just cannot seem to be able to do! Lucky you!
@Netsbridge (3242)
• United States
19 Jan 07
"Selections" - now, you just answered your own question! Selection indeed. I believe the USA 2004 presidential election was just a formality. George W. Bush had engaged the world in an unnecessary war with Iraq, all in an effort to coerce and intimidate the Arab world (for the sole purpose of making the Middle East malleable for a customary revenue generation strategy for both the British and US governments - plundering)! The US government had to have someone who is very zealous about acquisition, and George W. Bush was it! Now, both W. Bush and John Kerry are members of "Skull & Bones", a secret society that is engross with power and world domination. It is my opinion that John Kerry was actually a candidate to help his bones brother, George W. Bush, pull through! The 2004 US presidential election was just another mind game!
19 Jan 07
that's a good point. i know bush supporters laugh at everything that sounds a bit odd, calling it conspiracy. and i try to avoid it because i just cant be bothered to argue over things neither of us can prove or dissprove. but if everything is as black and white as bush supporters want to believe it is, why do politicians need to be members of secret groups. isn't it's obvious that sort of thing is bound to raise suspician? do they want that suspician?
• United States
20 Jan 07
My dear Arnold, I do not think that they give a rat's behind about anything! They are under the impression that they are gods and common you and I can see, hear, or say no evil about them! They have managed to own the resources and can buy, trade or sell you, and therefore assume that you and I will not be that stupid as to question any action of theirs!
20 Jan 07
woww!! you're a texan!? lol bush had me believe all his state's men were behind the charming fella
• United States
18 Jan 07
The 2000 Election is the one that was not the will of the people. 2004 was a result of better marketing by the conservatives then the Liberals. Remember that Florida went to Gore by 20,000 votes not Bush by 251. 2000 was the stolen election but 2004 had it irregularities as well of course. 2008 will definately be entertaining if nothing else.
@MrNiceGuy (4147)
• United States
18 Jan 07
I disagree, since the recounts gave the election to Bush, but I guess that was his brother Jebs fault right? I think its pretty obvious a democrat will win in 2008 though... Which is ok, cuz then it'll be my turn to gripe and moan unreasonably. What will really be interesting is how the media decides to handle it.
• United States
19 Jan 07
What media, MrNiceGuy? The people already have you, the tiredless false propagandist? Do you ever sleep? Just checking!
• United States
20 Jan 07
Actually MrNiceguy Gore v Bush was filed to allow the re-count in Florida to go on. By ruling for Bush the recount was stopped. What is interesting about it is the UK magazine the Standard paid a temp agency to do the complete statewide recount in 2002 to answer the question of who won. The urban myth of the Libral Media made ever so small peeps about the results and gee wiz. Gore won the state by over 20,000 votes. It is too late to do anything about it of course but the Supreme Court decided the florida election and not the electorate. Just like in 1824 when Congress decided that election. So this is not the first time but it is interesting that both times the conservative won.
@Smith2028 (797)
• United States
19 Jan 07
There is no substantial evidence that this election was stolen. Thanks to the 2000 elections there will always be the conspiracy theories. More people in America voted for President Bush than have in history. That is a fact that can not be denied.