Could Russh Limpbaugh have won if they ran him instead of Bush?

[mtnsnake]

PLEASE, don't make this into a vote fraud thread. Okay? Thank you.

Look, I know they'd never run someone like him, but in all seriousness....is the mindset of this country so unbelievably WARPED right now that someone as despicable as Limpbaugh could have gotten the same number of votes Bush did, considering how many idiots there are in this country?

(BTW, I misspelled the fucker's name on purpose because I realize that certain morons probably do searches on his name to see what people are saying about their idol.)

[DireStrike]

1. I think so.

What do we have against him?

Russh -> Oxycontin
Bush -> Coke

Russh -> Blatant lies and flip flops
Bush -> Blatant lies and flip flops

Russh -> Hateful warmonger
Bush -> Hateful warmonger

:shrug:

We had all the same ammo for Bush, it wasn't really fired and when it was it didn't work. Nobody paid attention and they shifted the blame (usually to Clinton.)

[mtnsnake]

8. Exactly, and that's what makes me worried that

Limpuke might've gotten the same number of votes as the chimp. Anyone STUPID enough and GULLIBLE enough to vote for a lying, warmongering bastard like Bush would probably vote for someone else with all the same qualities.

[tsuki]

24. I think the marriages would have stopped Rush. It's not moraaaal.

[progressiveBadger]

2. No

Too obviously wacko-far right wing and he can't hide it like Bush does.
Not to mention the whole ESPN thing...

[prairie populist]

23. Agreed

Plus he would have been pilloried over his whole married-divorced-married-divorced-married-divorcing record.

What a poster boy for the sanctity of marriage, isn't he?

[tridim]

3. They could have run Rush's ass boil

and it would have won. They cheated.

[signmike]

6. Exactly. Is this a search for the worst possible candidate?

I can't imagine picking anybody dumber and more evil than Bush. The repugs have majorly dissed the Americans by installing the Chimp - they can put anybody or anything in place they wish.:puke:

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mtnsnake]

11. Hey Spyro your answer has ZERO relevance to the topic

of this thread. It's not about vote fraud, it's not about Bush beating Kerry, and it's not about who was the crappier candidate. It's about whether or not this country is so fucked up and WARped that Limpuke might've gotten as many votes as the IMBECILE, George W Bush did.

on edit: meant Spyro, not Spryro

[Cats Against Frist]

12. Who's judging who is crappy?

If "Middle America" tells me "what's crappy," I'm going to pick the opposite, because it's probably better, even if I'm on the losing team.

You're working on the argumentum ad populum fallacy -- just because more "people" voted for George Bush, doesn't mean he was a better candidate. It could simply mean he fooled more people. Or that people are really that dumb, or any number of other possibilities.

[mtnsnake]

13. You're right on, Cats.

just because more "people" voted for George Bush, doesn't mean he was a better candidate. It could simply mean he fooled more people. Or that people are really that dumb, or any number of other possibilities.

Absolutely, and we need to figure this out. We need to determine things like this if we're going to approach the next election with a fighting chance. We need to find out if the country really is as stupid as many of us think it could be, and if it is, what is there that we can do about it...if anything.

[hughee99]

14. I see you're new, so just to get you up to speed...

Some people (not all) on DU take it as "gospel" that * stole the election. If you assert that he did not, you have to PROVE to them that he didn't, while they are able to assert that he did with no proof, or circumstantial evidence. I suspect something was amiss in this election, though I'll wait for evidence before I chalk up *'s victory to simple fraud.

Some people (not many) on DU also believe that John Kerry played no role in his election loss. He lost because of fraud, ignorant americans, racists, homophobes, the MSM (Right wing Mainstream Media) and religious fundamentalist christians. For these people, it is simply not possible that the Kerry campaign was anything less than putting our best foot forward.

But your big mistake was your first statement "Apparently the only person dumber and more evil than Bush was John Kerry"... This has FREEPER (Free Republic A**hole) written all over it (along with the fact that your a newbie), and you should expect to get lots of people pissed off insinuating that our presidental candidate is dumb or evil. This will even upset those of us that weren't big Kerry fans. If your goal was to do exactly this, enjoy your very short stay on DU.

If you were just trying to point out that there were 2 awful choices in the last election, you may want to choose your words more carefully. Everyone here supports free speech, but unfortunately some only support it when you agree with them.

Getting back to the main topic though, This post has nothing to do with it.

Welcome to DU

[robbedvoter]

18. In the name of "some people - not many" thank you for the name calling

Some people refuse to accept the e;ection was stolen - as the lack of democracy is hard to deal with. being a loser seems a more appealing proposition.

[hughee99]

21. So If you are speaking for the "some people - not many"

then you believe that Kerry was a great candidate who ran a great campaign? I do not agree.

You say that some people refuse to accept that the election was stolen. I do not refuse to accept the POSSIBILITY that the election was stolen, because there is evidence that it MAY have happened. I currently refuse to blindly accept that the election was actually stolen until there is PROOF that this is the case. If we lost for other reasons (because our message wasn't clear, because we didn't get the job done with voter recruitment, because we weren't spending money in the right places to make a difference) then I want to know that. This will help us in the future. IMHO, saying that we lost only because of election fraud, and refusing to investigate all other possibilities as well, is intellectually lazy.

I remember when people were more interested in finding out the truth, than deciding what the truth was and then setting out to try to prove it. Call me old fashioned I guess.

On Edit: What name did I call the "some people"?

[ArthurDent]

4. Hard to say.

Of Bush's 51%, what chunk was more anti-Kerry that pro-Bush? It wouldn't matter much if the issue were Iraq, security in general, gay marriage, or simply anti-MA liberalism. Limbaugh would get most of those voters.

The ones he wouldn't get were the ones not turned off by Bush himself -- Bush is the good cop in the campaign's good-cop/bad-cop show.

[troubleinwinter]

5. Well, at least he manages to lie without stumbling over words.

[leftofthedial]

7. they could run a badly trained dog and "win"

I believe

[Rambis]

15. Yep

The sheeple are in line, the voting fraud is in line I don't see why not. YIKES!

[w4rma]

16. Yes. That is the power of big media. (nt)

[robbedvoter]

17. Anyone. media could have made Rush /any idiot

into God. And we'll just pretend Diebold doesn't exist - but the point remains: anyone the BFEE puts as a figurehead becomes one in the empire.
And Rush would have talked more fluently English too.

[seaofcrisis]

19. He's said too much

After being on the air for all those years, he's said a ton of crazy things. There are a lot of websites devoted to recording and publishing the more extreme of his positions. Think of all political ads that his opponents (dems and republicans) could make from those libraries of sound bites. I just think he's said too much. They'd take him apart.

Plus, in case you haven't noticed, there seems to be some discrimination against obese people and bald guys in the US. Imagine fat, bald rush standing on a stage next to a tall, fit, handsome Kerry. I just can't see rush having any chance at all.

Finally, rush doesn't really have any debate skill. Reporters would crucify him if he had to answer questions. He's used to being able to to hang up on people.

No, I don't think rush has a chance in hell.

[w4rma]

20. Does it matter what he said if big media doesn't cover it negatively?

Fat? Bald? You ever watch "extreme makeover"? With just a few stacks of ten thousand dollars (Rush makes well over 5 million dollars per year, I believe) *anyone* can be slim with a head full of hair with only a few months waiting time to heal.

Debate skill? When would he have to debate anyone? Bush lost miserably against Kerry in the debates, and that was the only time in the past 4 years he's had to answer non-softball questions.

[Zinfandel]

22. Of course, they own the thousands of electronic voting machines

with no paper trail...even a dead Richard Nixon would have "won" with these conditions.