In article , Renata wrote:
On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 16:54:22 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

In article , Renata
wrote:
On Wed, 02 Feb 2005 07:35:26 -0700, Doug Winterburn
-snip-
One tally shows him winning by 3 milliion votes. Outta 120 million.

Closer to 4 million.

My heavens! Now he's up from 1/4 of 1% to 1/3 of 1% !
An overwhelming amount of support if I ever did see one! Yupper!
Gotta grasp those straws where one can.

Let me guess: math wasn't your best subject in school, was it?

Hint: one percent of 120 is one-point-two.

For the record, here are the actual figures:
Bush 60,608,582 (51.231%)
Kerry 57,288,974 (48.425%)
Nader 406,924 (0.344%)
[Source: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pag...lts/president/ ]


The problem here is that the prez and the rest of y'all have decided
that you'll just ignore the nearly equal number of Americans who voted
against the guy. And, that a lot of folks voted for him because they
were scairt.

I like the way you just gloss right over the figures in your snide remark
being off by _an_order_of_magnitude_.

No, Renata, the real problem here is that some people just can't get over the
fact that their guy _lost_. Are you one of the folks I read about in the paper
who's seeking therapy for Post Election Stress Trauma or whatever?

The difference is 3,319,608 votes out of 118,204,480 cast, or 2.806%.

Yes, I threw in an extra zero.

No, you left one out.

But this seems to be the SOP. 3% margin dictates a mandate; a couple
ancient shells indicates massive stockpiles of WMD; well, you get the
idea.

You didn't have any problem with Clinton winning two elections in a row with
less than a majority of the popular vote, did you?

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter
by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com
You must use your REAL email address to get a response.