Why did Kerry lose? Election fraud, or not enough votes?

[Clarkie1]

Poll question: Why did Kerry lose? Election fraud, or not enough votes?

In your opinion, did Kerry lose because of election fraud, or because not enough people cast their votes for him?

[MissBrooks]

1. Kerry said...

Kerry said there was not election fraud. Why did he say that?

[Clarkie1]

2. I don't know, there has never been an election without some fraud

And in this universe never will be.

What we need to do is minimize the fraud and opportunities for fraud as much as possible. There is a lot of work to do. I'm not asking in this poll whether there was some fraud or not. Of course there was some fraud. What I'm asking is did the fraud decide the election.

[Warpy]

4. he'll get richer under Bush

if he lives through it.

[MAlibdem]

5. Ridiculous...

power is far more important for a man who has all the money he could want...if he had a case at all, he would use it...for Kerry it was always about power, pure and simple.

[MissBrooks]

8. He needs more $$$?

I doubt that.

[Hippo_Tron]

3. I don't have enough proof to answer either one

I do know that if Kerry had run a better campaign, the election wouldn't have been close enough to steal.

[DFLforever]

7. You make the best point - the election was close enough to steal

[Crunchy Frog]

6. In my opinion, there's no way to really know

one way or the other and neither Kerry, nor the Democratic party seem very interested in finding out.

I think it's very possible that he did actually get more votes, but unless it can be truly documented, it's a moot point.

[madrchsod]

9. why? because his handlers

ran the dumbest campaign in history. they got their asses handed to them at every dam turn,the democrats didn`t have a clue about what was happening

[Pithy Cherub]

10. The Kerry campaign may have underestimated the fraud potential

and were left wondering themselves was it campaign tactics or the election system. It wouldn't be the first thing that was underestimated in the campaign.

[arikara]

12. If they underestimated the fraud potential

after what the chimpistas did in Florida in 2000, then they are very very stupid.

[AntiCoup2K4]

11. I don't see how a Bush win was mathematically possible

There's no way any Gore or Nader voters from 2000 voted for this piece of shit in 2004. And Bush was losing support from nearly every subsection of the Conservative vote. The numbers just don't add up for a legitimate victory for the Chimp.

[marcologico]

13. agree

I voted "fraud" but the campaign could have been better. The candidate was superb (debates, convention, rallies, policies), but the campaign was clueless, particularly in response to Rove. Why the HELL didn't they have an anti-Swiftie ad in the can BEFORE August, for example? Kerry has been taking shit from these clowns for thirty years!