The Democratic Underground Poll Of The Day: When The Conspiracy Theorists Become The Mainstream

28 Nov, 2007 by John Hawkins

Print this article Font size -16+

This thread at the Democratic Underground, “Poll question: Do you believe George W. Bush was elected in 2000 and re-elected in 2004?,” is a real eye catcher.

Take a look at these poll results,

What this shows is how the conspiracy theorists have taken over the Left, lock, stock, and barrel because the “stolen election” pap in 2000 and 2004 is only marginally less kooky than the 9/11 conspiracy theories that libs seem to love so much.

Let’s take a quick look at the 2000 election first. Here’s an excerpt from my column, “The Two Year Old’s Tantrum That Never Ends“.

Here’s a question that the Democrats never really answer; how many times do the exact same ballots have to be recounted before the Democrats will concede that Bush won? Let’s recap shall we?

Bush won the first machine recount.

– Bush won the 2nd machine recount.

– Bush won when the absentee votes were added in. Incidentally, this should have been the end of it according to Florida law written before the election.

– Bush won the recount mandated by the Florida State Supreme Court that was ruled unconstitutional by the USSC 9-0. The USSC then ruled another FSSC recount unconstitutional 7-2 and stopped any further recounts via a 5-4 vote.

– Bush won the recount after the election done by the Miami Herald. Here’s a headline and the first paragraph…

“REVIEW SHOWS BALLOTS SAY BUSH

Republican George W. Bush’s victory in Florida, which gave him the White House, almost certainly would have endured even if a recount stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court had been allowed to go forward.”

– Bush also won a 2nd recount done after the election by eight media groups. Here’s what the New York Times, certainly not a Bush supporting paper, had to say about that. I am quoting the headline and the first paragraph…

“Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote

A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year’s presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward”

So, by almost any objective standard, Bush won the election.

Then there’s the 2004 election, where the accusations of fraud are even more bizarre. I mean, it’s understandable that the result in Florida was so controversial because Bush only won by a few hundred votes. However, in 2004, Bush won the key state of Ohio by 118,443 votes. To even make a victory of that size controversial requires an extremely active imagination.

On top of all that, the very fact that the Democrats did so well in 2006 completely undercuts the idea that the 2000 and 2004 elections were fixed. That’s because if the GOP did have control of the ballot box, given how many races there were polling as toss-ups in 2006, they could have easily retained control of the House and Senate by shifting around 40,000 or 50,000 votes nationally without anyone being the wiser. So, that undercuts any major fraud allegations in previous elections…yet, 92% of the libs at the Democratic Underground think the last two presidential elections were fixed and this view has become so prevalent on the Left that even Democratic politicians who know better don’t have the guts to admit that it’s all a bunch of hooey. It just doesn’t say much for the reasoning skills of the average liberal in this country.