What is their intent? Are they trying to pursue a recount or are they just trying to mar the legitimacy of his win

Winston -- somewhere there is a long, long quote from one of the moonbats (Kos, I believe) saying that the Big Job now is to attack the legitimacy of the election.

I guess they figure that if they can't win, the system is broken and needs to be torn down.

Is it just that...or do you think Kerry sits in his mansion at night waiting for the results to change while his foot soldiers wage this campaign to; find ballots, recount, and disqualify the results.

One should not question the results of the election. It is time to heal our nation and fall in life. Such is life under the GOP banner.

Prehaps 3rd party candidates paid for it. Such as they did in OHIO.

- Aside from using badly needed Cal tax dollars for this intemperate foolishness I for one want the moonbats to run out the string.... sort through the "mysterious" overcounts in the hundreds, where vote margins for Bush is at 395K as it now stands....go through the rural counties of Ohio with a fine tooth comb, spending hundreds of thousands of wasted dollars..... keep going till they're down to seperating a few specs of fly-dodo from the pepper....then when the asshats have exhausted all possibilities they can switch over to the usual gush of conspiracy theories and the yammering will quiet down....Overall good therupy for the eternally deluded....

- Olbermann seems to be trying to back away from his strident moon-battyness....

I have to wonder what countiues they're "researching." I live in Clay County, Florida, just south of Jacksonville. We use electronic optical scanners for voting: you get a large heavy paper ballot, which you mark by connecting a broken arrow with a black Sharpie. You then tear off the numbered tab on the ballot and place it into the scanner machine.

Our county relected Bush by about 69%-31%.

All the "researchers" would have to do is look at the last election to see the same or similar results.

My guess is that they're not looking at history. This is the same "theory" about why some counties in Florida with 70% Democratic registered voters wound up going 60% or more for Bush. The simple fact is that some of these people have been registered Dems since the dark ages, but wouldn't vote for one now if their lives depended on it. They're call "blue dog Democrats," and they voted the same way last time. But no one bothered to look before coming up with their conspiracy theories.

Go ahead, breathe hope and outrage into these people before we snatch it all away from them again. Believe me, there are moonbats who carry yet a glimmer of hope that Bush really didn't win and that somehow justice will be done. This might just revive their dreams, fan that spark into a flame before we douse it yet again and just laugh and laugh.

Hey guys would believe that the " ex espn sportscaster" replied to an e-mail I sent him. Man was he ever PO! Must have hit a exposed nerve. I replied back each time and he has answered 4 times. Must be getting to him. LOL. If I knew how I would post them here for you to read. Man was that "fun".

There's another, much more obvious explanation that seems to have eluded the authors of the study... MORE PEOPLE VOTED FOR BUSH THIS TIME.

Yes, I realize that idea may seem a little farfetched in Berkeley.

Well, when you can't win elections, you have a lot of free time to try to attack the administration and it's legitimacy, so i'm not surprised a lot of moonbats are still crying about it being "stolen".

This is probably just a media ploy by UCB. In any case, when this is all settled and Bush is still the winner, democrats won't be able to whine. Okay, so they'll whine... just not about cheating as much. Oh, who am I kidding? They'll still whine non-stop.

even as a moonbat (liberal, I guess) I question where the funding is coming from for this. It would be interesting to know the reason for shift in voting for strategic campaigning in the next election. As a social scientist just glancing at the data I don't feel as if there is enough control of the variables either and there are more variables that I would like to know about such as average time to wait to vote at each polling station and religious affiliation characteristics in each county. This is some interesting information however. Count this one liberal as one who is not thrilled with the election results but have let it go, and I am also damn P.O.'edabout the treatment of that young marine on video shooting the enemy, he is a hero and I am telling all my friends to let this issue go to. I want that young man in a ticker tape parade down the middle of every city in this country.

I guess this is the new paradigm for the Democrat Party: Lose elections over and over and over again and then claim the election was stolen by their opponents. Hey, as long as those Leftists are out of power they can count ballots to their hearts' content.

I suggest we all get behind the recount. The results will confirm the results and we can insist that the moonbats shut their stupid traps. Not that they will, but it'll be just one more bit of ammunition.

Imagine saying to the next moonbat you encounter, "You're STILL fucking talking about this?! You folks paid for a recount and STILL lost. GET OVER IT YOU FREAKING IDIOT!" Then you can invite them over for a beer.

patrick, we don't equate "moonbat" with liberal. We equate "moonbat" with "looney-toon wacko of the leftward persuasion," just as "wingnut" seems to refer to the "looney-toon wacko of the rightward persuasion."

Count this one liberal as one who is not thrilled with the election results but have let it go, and I am also damn P.O.'ed about the treatment of that young marine on video shooting the enemy, he is a hero and I am telling all my friends to let this issue go to. I want that young man in a ticker tape parade down the middle of every city in this country.

Previous comments of yours notwithstanding, these do not strike me as the words of a looney-toon wacko. Well said.

What's really amusing about all this is that by this endless carping over trivial, and invented, nonsense, the liberals are alienating the very people they hope to win over to their side by 2008.

Omni, I agree. The more stirred up and looney they are, the worse their chances of retaking Congress in '06 or fielding a credible candidate in '08.

With all of Kerry's advantages, extremely friendly press corps, more money than his Republican opponent (when's the last time a Dem had that?), a bloody war, the perception of a weak economy (if not the reality), a stock market that was still lower than what it was when the incumbent was sworn in and the perception by many that Bush is the most reviled world figure even against bin Laden, he still lost.

Does anyone think the Dems will have a similar set of advantages next time around?

I'm a statistician, and one thing that's striking is that they give no interval for the 130,733 number that they give. I'm in the middle of replicating their analysis and providing that interval. Should be interesting.

- Dead Parrot James - The REAL problem with the 130K number is it consists almost entirely of "set-aside" ballots, ballots that have been temporarily rejected for all sorts of reasons, most notibly lack of proof that the voter is actually alive and breathing and isn't named "Plastic Man", "Elvis", or "Mickey Mouse".

- Everyone in the Ohio Election board, Democrat, Conservative, whatever, has said publicly over and over that in general only something less than 20% of set-asides in the best instance turn out to be legitimate and that even then Kerry would have next to zero chance of getting more than 60% at best. You do the math.

- But it doesn't matter to moonbats, (patrick definately not reffering to you), they simply refuse to deal with reality. Denial seems to be hereditary in lab rats and Socialists....

I do not know if it really matters, but at least it tells us where his heart is...

From opensecrets.org:

HOUT, MICHAEL
OAKLAND,CA 94618
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-BERKELEY/P
8/15/2001
$300
Democratic Congressional Campaign Cmte

- Dead Parrot James - The REAL problem with the 130K number is it consists almost entirely of "set-aside" ballots, ballots that have been temporarily rejected for all sorts of reasons, most notibly lack of proof that the voter is actually alive and breathing and isn't named "Plastic Man", "Elvis", or "Mickey Mouse".

Nothing of the sort. The model they build has absolutely nothing to do with so-called "set-aside" ballots. They use the vote totals as reported by Florida; that is, they use votes that have counted.

Florida vote totals (source RCP):

Bush 3,888,909
Kerry3,497,541
Diff 391,368

130-260K discrepancy?

Bitch, please!

- DPJ- ...I thought you were referring to Ohio.... as andre just posted...in Florida its just plain forget it....Besides most of the so called "registered" Dem argument is all about Dixiecrats who voted for Bush which has been shown over and over but again the moonies just can't deal with reality.... but hey..... let 'em count to thier hearts content.....

252 to 274 MY ASS !!!!!

It's a shame that the left is subsidized by higher education -- they come up with these theories intending to discredit the right.

The funny thing is that the margin of victory in Florida is bigger than that anyway. But of course they're probably just trying to set up the idea that the GOP cheater all over, especially in Ohio.

Amazing how people with little understanding of the methods used feel free to criticize the voting research, making statements that are obviously contradicted in the research itself. The cozy comfort of talk radio, where everyone agrees on something and then spend their time egging each other on into their ill-founded beliers, is reflected in this "discussion" here. Just a taste of what's to come in Bush's American Dream.