NEWS
Tight race leaves Bush with lead
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Ryan Masse:
Related Stories:
- "Anybody But Bush" slogan is popular message (November 2, 2004)
- Bush, Kerry set to take debate stage (September 30, 2004)
- Nader will run again (February 23, 2004)
- Presidential campaign negative early on (March 25, 2004)
Share This:
by Ryan Masse
Wednesday, November 3, 2004
For as much as President George W. Bush and Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry have said the nation has transformed since 2000, the country looked like it had not changed a bit Tuesday night.
Much like the 2000 election, neither Bush nor Kerry could be declared the winner in the presidential election as of press time Wednesday morning. Bush defeated Democrat Al Gore in 2000 after a contentious 36-day legal battle.
For much of Tuesday night, states fell as predicted. Blue states in 2000 came up blue again, red states followed in suit, and for hours it appeared 2004 would unerringly follow the script 2000 established.
The swing states lived up to their name: Pennsylvania and Minnesota went for Kerry while Florida and Nevada fell for Bush. New Hampshire fell into Kerry’s column, and New Mexico — although officially unannounced — appeared slightly in Bush’s favor at press time.
And then there was Ohio, which, taking a cue from the Sunshine State four years ago, failed to produce a clear winner Tuesday night. With 99 percent of precincts reporting, Bush held a small lead in the Buckeye State, but Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell announced a large number of absentee and provisional votes remained unaccounted for.
In a statement released early Wednesday morning, Kerry campaign manager Mary Beth Cahill refused to concede victory in Ohio.
“There are more than 250,000 remaining votes to be counted,” Cahill wrote. “We believe when they are, John Kerry will win Ohio.”
Jessi Schober, chair of UW Students for Bush, said Ohio would side with the incumbent.
“We’re feeling good and eagerly awaiting a finish,” Schober said Wednesday morning.
With Bush leading the electoral vote count, a Republican victory in Ohio would ensure the president four more years in the White House. A Kerry victory would put Wisconsin, New Mexico and Iowa, all undetermined at press time, into play.
With memories of the erroneous projections television networks made in Florida in 2000 fresh in their minds, broadcasters displayed a cautious nature when making predictions throughout the night, UW emeritus professor of political science Charles O. Jones said.
The networks differed in Ohio, however, as Fox News and NBC declared the state for Bush. Others held back, finding the race too close to call.
With the numbers narrowly in favor of Bush, Schober said the Kerry campaign should accept its fate.
“The only chance for a Kerry win will come through a horde of lawyers,” she said. “I see it as a Bush victory.”
High turnout marked the day, a trend many viewed as benefiting Kerry. But Bush’s strong performance seemed to suggest Republicans could play the get-out-the-vote game as well, Jones said.
“Clearly the Republican strategy was to match the Democratic increase in turnout by going after strong Republican areas,” Jones said. “They were very successful in doing that in Florida.”
While the electoral vote remains in question, President Bush has a clear advantage in the popular vote, unlike 2000, where Al Gore bested the Texas governor. Should Bush prevail, Jones said the public should accept Bush’s victory better than the last election cycle due to the margin of victory in the overall popular vote.
Results were clearer in other federal races, with Republicans adding to their majorities in the House and Senate. In the hotly contested Senate race in South Dakota, no winner had been declared, but Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle trailed Republican John Thune, 49 percent to 51 percent, at press time.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 5:36am):
If Kerry has a shred of dignity, he'll conceed his loss today. This would do wonders to show that liberals aren't always a bunch of bitchy, whiny, useless peasants after all.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 5:40am):
It's amazing how the liberals in this country, especially Madison, made everyone believe that George Bush is hated by everyone' yet he won the popular vote by 4 million votes!!! What happened? It just shows that all of the democratic voter fraud, media bias, and michael moores of the world can only go so far. The bottom line is that you can't take away the vote of a true Republican. Go Bush!!!
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 8:08am):
Hey John John, check out he popular vote, the LARGEST in history. Sack up SENATOR and do the right thing.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 9:36am):
I's rather vote for a BADGER.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 9:53am):
It's amazing how all the conservatives in this country could vote for such a liar and an idiot. Media bias was clearly in favor of Bush, and it's unbelievable that they did not cover all the voter fraud and intimidation perpetrated by Republicans.
Laugh now, morons, because when you finish school, there will be no jobs for you, no health care for you, and although your federal taxes may be lower, your state and local taxes will be much higher to make up the difference.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 10:03am):
Boo Hoo, you had me and you lost me. 55 Votes in the Senate! The time for bitching is over, let's get to work!
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 12:25pm):
Shhh. Do you hear that? Yup, that is the thud of Kerry falling on his face. Eat crow democrats and stop your whining.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 1:06pm):
Im a republican but still disagree with Bush and every other politician when it comes to foreign policy. If this administration wants to fight "terror", we better quit poking our noses in EVERYONES business and should learn to chose our battles better (ie: Team America: World Police). Osama bin Laden just told everyone in an 18 minute video that reason for 9-11 is because we keep getting involved in the wrong places. Fuck other countries and their civil wars, this is why the middle east can't stand us, we keep playing mom and dad with them. But we say "I do it, because I love you" (or at least we love their foreign resources....teehee...)
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 1:06pm):
Im a republican but still disagree with Bush and every other politician when it comes to foreign policy. If this administration wants to fight "terror", we better quit poking our noses in EVERYONES business and should learn to chose our battles better (ie: Team America: World Police). Osama bin Laden just told everyone in an 18 minute video that reason for 9-11 is because we keep getting involved in the wrong places. Fuck other countries and their civil wars, this is why the middle east can't stand us, we keep playing mom and dad with them. But we say "I do it, because I love you" (or at least we love their foreign resources....teehee...)
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 1:12pm):
Somber mood on campus today. I think they're all just so surprised, because they all thought for sure EVERYONE hated Bush so much, but what they didn't realize was that they were wrong. But I understand, they just need a cause.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 3:24pm):
Im a republican but still disagree with Bush and every other politician when it comes to foreign policy. If this administration wants to fight "terror", we better quit poking our noses in EVERYONES business and should learn to chose our battles better (ie: Team America: World Police). Osama bin Laden just told everyone in an 18 minute video that reason for 9-11 is because we keep getting involved in the wrong places. Fuck other countries and their civil wars, this is why the middle east can't stand us, we keep playing mom and dad with them. But we say "I do it, because I love you" (or at least we love their foreign resources....teehee...)
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 3:24pm):
Im a republican but still disagree with Bush and every other politician when it comes to foreign policy. If this administration wants to fight "terror", we better quit poking our noses in EVERYONES business and should learn to chose our battles better (ie: Team America: World Police). Osama bin Laden just told everyone in an 18 minute video that reason for 9-11 is because we keep getting involved in the wrong places. Fuck other countries and their civil wars, this is why the middle east can't stand us, we keep playing mom and dad with them. But we say "I do it, because I love you" (or at least we love their foreign resources....teehee...)
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 3:27pm):
Im a republican but still disagree with Bush and every other politician when it comes to foreign policy. If this administration wants to fight "terror", we better quit poking our noses in EVERYONES business and should learn to chose our battles better (ie: Team America: World Police). Osama bin Laden just told everyone in an 18 minute video that reason for 9-11 is because we keep getting involved in the wrong places. Fuck other countries and their civil wars, this is why the middle east can't stand us, we keep playing mom and dad with them. But we say "I do it, because I love you" (or at least we love their foreign resources....teehee...)
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 4:21pm):
Whoever wrote that Bush is a liar and had the media on his side has to be the biggest fucking idiot on this planet. The Bush lied about Iraq line is old and unsubstantiated. It was the only platform and that the liberals had because Kerry is such a pathetic candidate. I can't wait until I visit Madison this upcoming weekend and see all of you pathetic little nothings whining and bitching; it's what you're best at.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 4:24pm):
"The Bush lied about Iraq line is old and unsubstantiated."
Really? So when he said Iraq had WMD, he wasn't lying?
"I can't wait until I visit Madison this upcoming weekend and see all of you pathetic little nothings whining and bitching"
With an attitude like that, you should probably lay low. As drunk as all the liberals here will probably be, they're liable to do something horrible to you.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 4:46pm):
He didn't lie about the WMDs...he was malinformed...along with almost every other major country in the world. Before you go spouting how Bush lied, realize Kerry agreed, along with many other people...being a hypocrite is pathetic.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 6:40pm):
First of all, he didn't lie about WMDs. You need to enter the real world and listen to a reliable news source other than the pathetic mainstream media. If he lied about the WMDs than that means that Bill Clinton, John Kerry, John Edwards, Putin, and pretty much every other major world leader also lied. See, this is the problem with you stupid liberals, you want to have things both ways. You don't want your own to ever be held accountable for their actions. As far as visiting Madison, the last thing I would worry about are a bunch of pussy drunk liberals.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 7:07pm):
Even if Bush didn't lie about the WMD, and I agree that he was misinformed, he did lie about Iraq's having any connection to 9/11. And he did lie about the cost of the Medicare prescription drug plan. And he lied when he said the NCLB act would improve public education.
Before you go labeling me as a "pussy drunk liberal," you should know that I'm an evangelical Christian, anti-abortion, anti-gun control, anti-gay marriage, and pro-tax cut. I'm just not some cookie cutter pissant sycophant like you. And if you do visit Madison, a dumbass conservative with no thoughts of his own wouldn't know what to do with himself around all these "pussy drunk liberals." I may disagree with them on all the important issues, but at least they can defend their positions with well thought out analysis instead of just quoting Ann Coulter like you.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 8:43pm):
Did you say that Liberals can defend their positions? That has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a long, long time. I did live in Madison for 3 years when I was a student and it is nothing more than a waste land of brainwashed 18 & 19 year olds whose personal opinions on politics are carbon copies of the biased liberal media. As far as Iraq and terrorism, you can't tell me that invading Iraq doesn't help our cause against terrorists. We many not be able to prove that Iraq had a direct relation to 9/11, but only a fool would claim that Iraq didn't have relations with and harbor terrorists. While catching Osama Bin Laden is the main goal, terrorism won't end until we destroy any nation that does or has catered to terrorist organizations. Think about WWII, who attacked us? Japan attacked, so was it wrong then that we sent troops to Europe to fight Hitler, and Mussolini even though they didn't have a direct link to Pearl Harbor. I'm not sure why you want to give Madison this "hard-ass" reputation. The way I look at it, Madison is a bubble and that bubble is surrounded by something that I call reality.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 8:49pm):
"While catching Osama Bin Laden is the main goal..."
I'm glad you at least recognize that. Why can't you recognize that all those troops sent to Iraq could have been sent to Afghanistan to help hunt for Osama? Ok, so many not the exact same kind of troops, and maybe more special forces, but the $80 billion plus we've spent on Iraq could have been spent on Afghanistan. Yes, Saddam would still be in power then, but we'd only have one failed state instead of two in our care and we might have caught bin Laden by now.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 9:49pm):
If invading Iraq was so important for the war on terrorism, why didn't we invade North Korea? They already have nuclear weapons and spend all their money on weapons while their people starve. Why didn't we invade Iran? They have a nuclear program expected to give them the bomb within a year, are known to have given shelter to members of al Qaeda, and sponsor terrorist organizations all over the world. Why didn't we invade Syria? They invaded Lebanon over 20 years ago, allow terrorists to launch attacks on Israel from their territory, provide support for terrorist organizations throughout the world, and admit to having chemical weapons. Why didn't we invade the UN? They provided all the money Saddam had through kickbacks in the oil for food program and provide all kinds of funding to terrorists through their programs in the Palestinian territories.
You can make a good case for invading any of those. But we invaded Iraq because Bush had a personal vendetta, and he failed to plan for the aftermath. The pride Bush takes in being ignorant and failing to analyze and plan for the potential consequences of his actions is terrifying.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 10:57pm):
Funny that 51% of Americans would follow his ignorance..maybe, just maybe, if so many people agree with him, it wasn't ignorance, it was the right choice.
Anonymous (November 3, 2004 @ 11:19pm):
No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." -hl mencken
