Why Bush won? (for a paper-- please help!)

[bigtoe]

hm. to broad for me. i'd tell your teacher to shove it and demand my money back.

good luck, really.

Mike

[wing]

hm. to broad for me. i'd tell your teacher to shove it and demand my money back.

good luck, really.

Mike

he's actually a really good teacher. i'm just a rather crappy student.

[Girl Toes]

Here are some nice places on the Internets that might help.

http://www.michaelmoore.com/

And Dick Cheney's favorite website:
http://www.factcheck.org/

I'm not sure if this is a joke or not, I imagine it is, but:
http://www.kenpangburn.com/misc/election.jpg

And though it might not help, it sure is fun:
http://www.kidpix.com

Anyhoo, I would really recomend thinking of who are some major comentators on these issues, both pro and anti bush, and checking out their personal websites. New York Times reporters and talk radio hosts...

[Girl Toes]

http://www.blacknews.com/
http://www.naacp.org

I didn't see any articles on "why bush won," though I suspect a lot more will be out by the end of the week. I did find articles on reducing turn out for black voters, computer gliches, and so forth. The republican's "Turn out the vote" campaign, and that article that has all ready been posted in this forum about the theocrats.

The Village Voice also has had some nice articles in Print over the past few weeks, one entitled "Why they love him." I don't know if its online, but I think I might still have the paper around here some where, I could see about scanning it and emailing it to you if you'd like. I have not checked their web site too much, but I can bet you it will be one of your best sources:
http://www.villagevoice.com/

And, another useless but fun one: http://www.theonion.com/ which reads "God Puts His Tool Back Into Office."

[Piotr]

Here's one you haven't mentioned, and I'm sure if you dig a little you will find some hard numbers.

Apparently a solid majority of Hispanics nationwide voted for Bush because of his stand on so-called moral issues such as abortion and gay marriage. These are staunchly conservative catholic voters who happened to be motivated this election.

I was told this by this year's director of Oregon's get out the vote drive for the Dems...

[wing]

alright guys, finished.

and i doubt it makes any coherent sense, seeing as how i don't have time to read over it and edit it whatsoever. oh well!!

http://www.headexplosion.com/jonathan/d ... ushwon.doc

ps: tried being as objective and unbiased as possible... hope i am.

[ottokbre]

My Theory...

[wing]

100/100 - A

Thanks guys!

[CyberSpy]

My own theory is that all of the advertising that the democrats did backfired. It caused a bunch of the republicans to panic and run out to vote.

[clamp]

Here's my theory.

The majority of people look toward strong and responsible people to back them up and cover their ass. And the majority of people see who they had as the guy who would keep someone else mean away from them and then beat that F**cker down. big brother may always be looking over your shoulder but most of the time it's to watch your back.

[Tim Casey]

The New Yorker had the best (and most sensical) analysis.

Basically, 48% percent of the people voted for Bush for two reasons: 1) they always vote Republican and 2) there is a war going on. Throw in a few people that had beefs against Kerry (or liked Bush) for "issue" reasons and the election is all over.

For a wartime president, Bush didn't actually do too well. And as far as the argument goes that we'd been misled as to why we went to war - people don't like to admit they were wrong.

As far as the "moral values" thing is concerned, the exit poll question asked voters to pick one reason why they voted the way they did. The reasons were:

a) Iraq
b) terrorism
c) the economy
d) education
e) healthcare
f) moral values

I may have missed one, but as you can see, Kerry people would probably pick any one of a thru e; Bush people had nothing that resonated with them except for "moral values".

This analysis is a paraphrasing of the New Yorker article, but it seemed to have more common sense to it than most of what I read about how the US is turning into a bunch of Christian fundamentalists.

It also confirms what I thought about the whole Iraq war - Republicans, when feeling a dip in the polls, will start a war just to insure their political futures. Bush Sr. did it, and so did his son, being advised by the same set of people.

[high tek]

Here's my theory.

The majority of people look toward strong and responsible people to back them up and cover their ass. And the majority of people see who they had as the guy who would keep someone else mean away from them and then beat that F**cker down. big brother may always be looking over your shoulder but most of the time it's to watch your back.

ha ha, i got a good laugh at you there homeboy.

are you serious?


firstofall:
you said " ....the guy who would keep someone else mean away.....

someone else mean ?

MEAN ??????????!!!!!!!!!!

ha ha ha

"...beat that F**cker down ..."

lol

youre either under the age of 12 or simply a simpleton.

what a joke.

------------

regarding wings essay - obviously its over, but ....
hello?

he won cause of the diebold machine fix in ohio and florida.
duh...

just play the class votergate.com

[hammertime]

You should probably evaluate competing arguments. I think those from Pollsters tend to be the most neutral and non-judgmental. Those from Michael Moore.com and whoever tend to have the least value objectively. You're professor is probably going to want to see you draw your own conclusions, and I'd probably rely on as much objective data as possible. I think the reasons Bush won are probably too complex to encapsulate in one paper -- but since the margin of victory was relatively narrow, you could argue that one or more reasons was decisive. The ones I see on the news --Hispanic voters, traditionalists, fewer women for Kerry than for Gore -- and I'm sure there are a million others.