>
> I never heard that before. I thought all the predictors were caught with
> their pants 'round their ankles when Gore didn't win by 5-7% and Bush did
> win.
>
> And the popular vote thing: I heard that the nationwide popular vote was
> closer than the uncounted mail-in ballots in California alone but they
> didn't count them cause the state was won by Gore by more than the
> difference in that state. So Gore may have won the California vote but Bush
> 'may' have won the nationwide popular vote. There were other states, like PA
> grrrrr, where they didn't count mail-in ballots for the same reason.
>
well they were still votes from the rich, rednecks, fundamentalists, and
economists like JDG. (why doe all economists have to be
archconservative?) Also when you have a popular/electoral split (and
whatever way it went wasn't statistically significant and so there) it
shows the country SHARPLY divided along urban/rural lines. THe midwest
OVERWHELMINGLY voted for Bush. urban areas tended to vote for Gore (except
in Texas I guess, but if you don't carry your home state you're pretty
hard up....)
i feel alienated from "that" america, it is not my america at all and
sometimes I wish the part of america that votes liberal could secede and
leave the rural stuff to the conservatives since it is so wildly different
a culture. I don't like rednecks or fundies or (especially) so-called
rugged individualists who use freedom as an excuse to act rotten selfish
and DESTROY THE ENVIRONMENT. they are all convinced there won't BE any
future generations because the world is going to end soon anyway.
terrifying because they will take the rest of us with them.
K.
