Classic Hit & Run

Jesse Walker | October 23, 2008

From the vaults.

Comments

robc|10.23.08 @ 8:39AM|#

Probably not enough to cost him any safe Republican EVs, but enough to drive his popular vote totals way down from 2000.

Popular vote for Bush in 2004 vs 2000:
62M in 2004, 50M in 2000
53.7% in 2004, 47.9% in 2000

Wrong in the very first post.

robc|10.23.08 @ 8:41AM|#

While his percent was slightly down (.36% vs .32%), Badnarik got more raw votes than Browne did in 2000. Browne did much better in 1996 however.

|10.23.08 @ 8:53AM|#

Yeah, Barr flopped bigger than I expected in 2004.

|10.23.08 @ 9:23AM|#

Barr would be more effective as a libertarian advocate if he hadn't spent ALL his time in the house hate'n on teh gheys, voting vast new powers to the government (especially the executive), and tirelessly crusading to keep chronic pain sufferers from getting any relief.

|10.23.08 @ 9:23AM|#

Er, Badnarik. Not Barr.

Warty|10.23.08 @ 9:28AM|#

I wonder how well Harry Browne would have done in 2004. Badnarik was an annoying lunatic who turned lots of people like me off.

|10.23.08 @ 9:38AM|#

53.7% in 2004, 47.9% in 2000

Wrong in the very first post.

Actually, Bush only had 50.7%, which is still more than he got in 2000. Also, wrong in the first post. Is this a corollary to Joez Law?

|10.23.08 @ 9:39AM|#

By the way, I was hoping the link to a classic H&R post would be a link to "The US must invade Canada Now!"

robc|10.23.08 @ 9:41AM|#

Woo hoo, typo in the first post.

Probably is an example of joez law. But my history suggests I cant type at any time.

Warty|10.23.08 @ 9:55AM|#

It's not joez law, it's Muphry's law. Much funnier.

|10.23.08 @ 10:00AM|#

But what about Cole's Law?

|10.23.08 @ 10:17AM|#

It's not joez law, it's Muphry's law.

Mot sure this is a joe'z law (in that the writer wasn't insulting another poster's intelligence), but I will call it a minor violation of R C'z Law.

BDB|10.23.08 @ 10:18AM|#

Joe was right about Bush not losing any red states.

BDB|10.23.08 @ 10:18AM|#

Well, on second thought, he lost New Hampshire.

|10.23.08 @ 10:29AM|#

RC'z law?

|10.23.08 @ 10:44AM|#

It's not joez law, it's Muphry's law, you moran.

|10.23.08 @ 11:08AM|#

RC'z law?

Typos tend to be funnier/more insightful than the correct/intended post.

|10.23.08 @ 11:09AM|#

I only read the thread to make sure I wasn't in there saying something stupid. Not that I do that too often...

But Jesse, this sort of swift-boating is really unfair;)

|10.23.08 @ 11:55AM|#

Interesting how "dude" (the commentor) wanted Bush to lose in order to *save* the Rep party. Similar to how some small-govt Reps are hoping a McCain loss will allow a little libertarianism to creep back into the Rep party.

Dog\'s New Clothes|10.23.08 @ 12:24PM|#

Um, RC...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law

robc|10.23.08 @ 1:49PM|#

DNC,

We dont accept Australian terms around here.