1072:
can't quickly find results for 1964, but I thought LBJ brought in larger
Democratic majorities in both houses. Some people would say he was being re-elected (incumbent returned to office) and some wouldn't (he was elected in 1960 but only to the Vice Presidency). If his party's majorities did increase, and the quoted addition to this article depends on the second interpretation of "re-elected", then I think it would be better to reword to avoid the ambiguity. Something like: "The election marked the first time that an incumbent President won his second bid for the White House with increased margins in both houses of Congress since Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1936 election. It was the first time for a Republican since William McKinley in the 1900 election."
31:
888:
5-Nov-2004)...." It seems to be a little self-consciously "on the one hand, on the other hand". I left the facts in but removed that introductory phrase. In addition, some of the interesting features about the election, like the small number of states that changed hands as compared with 2000, don't fit readily into the category of claims about the margin, but this listing of factoids seems to be the best place to include them.
1213:, Bush's popular vote count has climbed to 60,366,889. Can anyone correlate with any other source? I understand that states have not turned in their official tallies, yet, and presume that those official reported tallies will ultimately be reported here, but if, say, two or more sources report higher totals than what are here, I'd say we should update.
722:
mob of Cubans stormed a
Florida election office and forcibly stopped a recount that would probably have helped Gore, it was certainly one among many factors that impaired Bush's chance for a happy Presidency -- but I'm sure many Republicans would rather put up with four years of hearing "We wuz robbed!" than with four years of Gore in office.
658:
it is obvious he will get 52% and being a man of principle (remember, this IS a hypothetical ;-)) he concedes to his opponent. Well, that wouldn't change the process at all. It's like a candidate who dies but gets elected anyway (think
Missouri, 2000), the challenger does not automatically get the job as second in line.
721:
On the other hand, plenty of people wouldn't be at all happy with letting the opposing candidate become
President if it could possibly be averted. Some Democrats have criticized both Gore and Kerry for being too "nice" and not fighting all-out on issues that could legitimately be contested. When a
673:
Consider this scenario. In 2000 the election kept going on stuff like hanging chads, pregnant chads, dimpled chads, and many many lawyers. This was not good for the country (imagine if the 9/11 attacks had occurred then, when leadership was uncertain) on many levels, but it was tolerated essentially
657:
I looked at that article, and for those unfamiliar with US law and tradition I'd like to make a point. It's true that concessions have no legal force in terms of election law. Suppose a candidate said "I will get 55% of the vote or I will not serve because I want a clear victory." OK, election night
637:
I see that the maps are giving Ohio, and indeed
Florida, to Bush, even though to the best of my knowledge, a significant number of absentee ballots remain to be counted in those states? Those elections supervisors and secretaries of state don't *work* for the candidate, they work for us voters, and
617:
again, just the hour before the polls closed in the USA. He reiterated his prediction (his word) of a Kerry victory. His earlier (February) prediction was Kerry:287, but he said that the numbers he gave today (Kerry:316 v Bush:222) were what he has been saying "for months" and so he said them again,
1071:
This addition caught my eye: "The election marked the first time that an incumbent president was re-elected with increased margins in both houses of
Congress since Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1936 election. It was the first time for a Republican since William McKinley in the 1900 election." I
1109:
I added the cartogram displaying the
Presidential popular votes, in which the sizes of counties have been rescaled according to their population. I'm not sure if it is usually a good idea to propose such a change first in an article such as this, I can imagine it probably is. However I figured I'd
940:
The colors are all wrong on the electoral vote map. Cause all the other maps on wikipedia have the
Republicans as blue and the Dems as red. Even though hardly anyone has it that way anymore, but for the sake of conformity- you guys need to make Bush's states blue and Kerry's red. Either that or go
887:
The following statement in the text was true but it just feels wrong to put it his way: "Several other claims have been made in attempts to either magnify or minimize the magnitude of Bush's victory; all of the following are accurate (based on the currently available, uncertified vote totals as of
913:
a charge that's made, as long as we don't adopt it. An earlier version was indeed improper. It read, "Note: These figures are based on returns which came in large part from corrupt voting machines." The current text makes clear that this is charged, not necessarily established. As for whether
698:
are for Kerry, and this then puts you in reach of a recount, and you claim enough fraud, etc., etc., and Kerry wins Ohio by 10 votes. Then what? The country has been dragged through another horrendous lawyer-fest, to find a candidate who "lost" by 3.5 million votes getting the
Presidency when his
949:
The first alternative is unacceptable, given the widespread currency of the "red state - blue state" division in this form. I agree with you that changing all the old maps would be an improvement, but it would also be a lot of work. They'll be changed when and if someone cares enough about the
1026:
This page seems somewhat redundant to the info on the "2004 U.S. election in progress" page, should an effort be undertaken to combine the two pages? There is little mention of any electronic voting or other controversies on this page (which happens the page linked to from the front door...).
759:
I know that
Wisconsin does not have provisional ballots because they have same-day registration in that state. New Hampshire has same-day registration too, so I imagine they don't have provisional ballots either. Ohio, on the other hand, requires citizens to register 30 days before an election,
145:
The 2004 election timeline is a terrific idea. I am glad to see people working on it already. As a high school history teacher, I intend to use this as a resource. The more well-informed I can stay on the election, the better I can teach my students. keep up the good work! and i'll probably be
667:
candidates' followers to "hang it up, we fought the good fight, let's move along." No more fulminating, no more grasping at straws, like at Knowledge, where a lot of us can't accept that their our candidate lost, so it must be rigged. But the concession also avoids "poisoning the well." Most
1096:
Wisconsin Law says that absentee ballots need to be received by election day, and are counted along with the rest of the ballots at their local precincts. As such, it would be very unlikely that any adjustments in the unofficial returns would change the margin by over 12,000 votes.
638:
I can't see that a) they have any call to stop counting just because Kerry says "enough", or b) this is a topic someone shouldn't already have brought up. Anyone got an authoritative reference on this, keeping in mind that it has to be, by nature, *Ohio* law that is being quoted?
927:
This coming from a Republican who was against the Kerry/Edwards ticket from the very beginning. But I know the toll that cancer can take on a person and their family. And I wish them nothing but the best as they fight this horrible disease. Hopefully she'll have a speedy recovery.
668:
candidates will want to run for something again in the future, or otherwise be in public life. The only candidate I know of who ever came back succesfully from a bad concession speech was Nixon. A bad concession speech will haunt the candidate, his party, and maybe the country.
900:
I noticed this towards the beginning of the article, before the results of the election are shown on the page. Am I crazy for calling this a NPOV violation? I believe a better wording, such as "erronous voting machines" would be better than outright calling them corrupt.
192:
I really like it. My only gripe is the picture of the country with the words: "Quick! Hurry up before the polling stations close! Vote peace! Vote prosperity! Vote Kerry!" superimposed. I have a screenshot in case they change it. I think it's in very bad taste.
750:
You might want to wait until the provisional ballots are counted. There may still be enough out there to swing Iowa and New Mexico. Maybe even Wisconsin and New Hampshire. But these are merely moral victorys and wont bring Bush below 270 regardless.
760:
according to the Ohio Secretary of State website, so they can validate that your information is correct. A provisional ballot is provided to those who are not registered and is counted once their identity and residence can be verified. --
1088:
There aren't enough absentees left to sway the outcome in Ohio or New Mexico from what I hear, but Iowa is another state that could change once the ballots are all counted. But I kind of doubt it, since most absentees are military vote.
545:
Should we put it in the article space? And for those who are wondering, Nader is running as the candidate of the RPUSA, but he has only pledged to use the RPUSA if he can't get on the ballot as an Independent himself.
1084:
I hear that a lot of absentee military ballots still have yet to be counted in Wisconsin. Since the military is big time Republican, and Wisconsin was so close- is there a chance it could still go to Bush?
737:
I see that Bush got 274 Electoral votes, and Kerry got 252. This adds up to 526. Yet the total in that column reads 538. Can someone please explain the missing 12 votes? Is this some new kind of math?
111:
It drove me crazy for a bit, so I wanted to warn page editors that the two map images *do* stack correctly in page view mode, even though they *don't* in diff mode (which is what I commonly look at).
86:
81:
76:
64:
59:
573:
Thanks 4 the Cn. on Peroutka. The reason I didn't put it the first time was do the fact I could not find it. Looks like i'll be digging into some FEC filings... :) -
961:
Concur. All new maps should be Red-Rep; someone should create a link page to which all the old borken maps can be linked so that some motivated soul can fix them.
47:
17:
1201:
So, congratulations and appreciation to everyone who worked on this entry. I thought you might enjoy this as a record of your achievement and popularity. :-)
594:
I'm going to take the sources out, as these refer to the 2000 election. There should be a single source for the vote count as this is still changing. --
197:
It was in very bad taste; I think it lasted about 10 minutes. I was (one of) the one(s) who yanked it until the corrected image could be put back up.
1150:
490:
690:
editorially admonished the candidates that they should avoid that, at least twice. So now look at Ohio. Suppose Kerry makes the calculation that
914:
we're reporting the charges accurately, yes, some people go beyond suspecting innocent malfunction and say that there was deliberate chicanery.
768:
The major networks have now called New Mexico and Iowa for Bush. That brings him up to 286 and gives him 2 states that Gore won in 2000.
614:
674:
because Gore got a 1/2 million lead on the popular vote so there was sentiment to check every possibility, but, nevertheless, he was
1131:
Someone is trying to be funny. From the "Presidential election" page, the 2004 election redirects you to the article on "penis"
521:
513:
509:
505:
501:
431:
131:
How about rural versus urban voting patterns? I think there is an even more solid pattern here than geographical distribution.
119:
of the text lead is disconcerting. I suggest that they be *forced* to stack vertically; does anyone know how to get that done?
584:
397:
563:
I'd say be consistent on the middle names. Either provide all of them or none of them; e.g. Michael Anthony Peroutka, etc. --
293:
258:
1145:
I don't know what that search produced that week, but on November 10th that search shows this Knowledge entry as #2.
1151:
http://dir.yahoo.com/Government/U_S__Government/Politics/Elections/Presidential_Elections/2004_Presidential_Election
38:
1053:
363:
532:
663:
However, concessions do have a couple of important purposes, the most important probably being that tells the
1163:
This is where the Knowledge entry appeared in the non-sponsored sections of some additional search engines:
746:
Iowa and New Mexico, which will almost certainly be Bush states when all is said and done. I'll update it.
154:
Glad you like it. However, it's six months later, and there are still gaping holes, like no biography of
769:
1214:
1034:
I found an election results map which shows quite an accurate picture, integrating population density.
187:
Perhaps your students can chip in and help by digging up biographies of the above, and filling them in?
115:
UPDATE: I'm wrong; looking at it now on Mozilla 1.6/Linux, they're stacked horizontally; the resulting
334:
1098:
1039:
708:
699:
party spent that last four pillorying Bush for "losing" by 1/7 that number. And he would face an
1063:
01:31, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC) Hopefully this will hold everyone over till the official map comes out.
971:
I don't think it would be too hard to repaint it, using the 'fill color' option in mspaint, lol
116:
1092:
Bush may still have a shot at winning Wisconsin, which would bring him to 296 electoral votes.
1139:
The #1 search on Lycos for the week ending November 6, 2004 was '2004 Presidential Election':
610:
1118:
I think that cartogram is a good addition to this article. It's interesting to look at. --
739:
619:
557:
556:
I'd say put it in the article space as soon as Bush is formally nominated on September 1. --
413:
402:
379:
328:
171:
155:
1005:
I think this image should be shoe horned in somewhere... but I'm unsure where it would go.
1073:
1028:
984:
951:
915:
889:
723:
564:
147:
132:
182:. It took some time before even all Democrats were covered, which is kind of surprising.
99:
Given that the electoral college has not met, should this be marked as an ongoing event?
1111:
1013:
Good idea. I stuck it underneath the map of electoral votes near the top of the page.
302:
263:
238:
100:
1060:
972:
942:
929:
752:
704:
626:
595:
436:
279:
170:, Green legal advisor to the party and former candidate for Texas attorney, nor even
1157:
941:
redo all the other maps from the previous elections (I tend to be a perfectionist).
1000:
962:
902:
761:
650:
639:
368:
298:
198:
179:
163:
159:
120:
983:
I think we should use purple and green as the party's colors just to be different
1006:
574:
550:
314:
310:
175:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
1054:
http://img125.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img125&image=ElectoralCollege2004-Large.png
536:
1035:
588:
349:
345:
338:
275:
167:
1119:
1014:
1038:. I'm not sure when placed in this article that would infringe copyright.
417:
1210:
440:
267:
1110:
make the change and if people don't like it it'll just be removed.
682:
of illegitimacy. OK, fast forward to 2004. A lot of the country was
678:
ahead in the Florida recount. Still the vote went on because of the
646:
703:
hostile Congress. Doesn't make for a happy Presidency, does it? --
383:
372:
242:
210:
I have taken the 2000 table and updated it for 2004. It's below:
406:
25:
587:. There's a movement afoot to change the table format. --
212:
618:
but conceded that the margin was likely to be narrower.
1140:
694:
almost all the provisional ballots are legitimate, and
158:, former State House candidate from Texas, a stub for
533:
U.S. Office of the Federal Register (electoral vote)
1158:http://www.opensecrets.org/presidential/index.asp
1001:http://www.boingboing.net/images/Purple-USA.jpg
733:Can someone please explain the curious total?
18:Talk:2004 United States presidential election
8:
583:You may want to check out the discussion on
1067:Comparison with other Congressional results
1036:http://www.bopnews.com/archives/002292.html
1059:ok, uploaded and done. did I do it right?
537:Federal Election Commission (popular vote)
162:, former Governor of New Mexico, none for
1022:Missing Election Controversy Information?
491:U.S. presidential election, 2004 (detail)
496:
488:
174:, former Congresswoman from Georgia or
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
7:
645:UPDATE: Courtesy of AskMetafilter:
24:
1135:Congratulations on search engines
1080:Could Wisconsin still go to Bush?
909:It's not a violation of NPOV to
649:Yes, they *will* keep counting.
647:http://slate.msn.com/id/1006461/
29:
633:Can someone explain concession?
585:Talk:U.S. presidential election
489:Detailed results by state: see
1:
605:Malcolm Mackerras Prediction
1149:(If you're curious, #1 was
478:
473:
468:
455:
452:
449:
427:
424:
421:
393:
390:
387:
359:
356:
353:
324:
321:
318:
289:
286:
283:
254:
251:
248:
1231:
686:a drag-out like 2000. The
1217:19:58, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
1042:08:33, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
905:07:39, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)
896:"Corrupt voting machines"
794:
785:
782:
742:13:14, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)
528:
483:
458:
230:
227:
221:
215:
150:02:30 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)
103:11:38, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
1122:01:09, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
1114:12:49, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
1101:05:27, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
1076:08:45, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
1031:01:43, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
1009:22:56, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
975:08:27, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
945:08:02, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
932:07:58, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
892:01:37, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
791:
788:
776:Table of overall picture
772:17:32, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
764:07:16, Nov 6, 2004 (UTC)
755:06:43, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
653:23:57, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
642:23:38, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
629:06:45, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
622:00:42, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
598:04:16, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)
591:06:14, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
567:20:42, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
560:17:41, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
553:07:27, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
414:Michael Anthony Peroutka
224:
218:
123:03:41, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
1017:20:00, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
987:01:56, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
965:23:14, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
954:08:13, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
923:Get well soon Elizabeth
918:08:15, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
726:00:39, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
714:19:54, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
577:06:19, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
369:Patricia Helen LaMarche
201:18:56, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
950:point to change them.
216:Presidential Candidate
206:making the table live?
883:"Claims" about margin
42:of past discussions.
1141:http://50.lycos.com/
264:Richard Bruce Cheney
166:, New Mexico Green,
1105:Added the cartogram
335:Peter Miguel Camejo
239:George Walker Bush
146:helping here too!
127:Rural versus Urban
107:NOTE on formatting
880:
879:
789:% those who voted
625:so much for that
611:Malcolm Mackerras
542:
541:
299:John Reid Edwards
276:John Forbes Kerry
233:(Electoral Votes)
92:
91:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
1222:
1205:60 million votes
1127:Redirect problem
780:
779:
615:Australian radio
403:Richard Campagna
380:Michael Badnarik
346:David Keith Cobb
213:
172:Cynthia McKinney
156:Michael Badnarik
73:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
1230:
1229:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1221:
1220:
1219:
1207:
1137:
1129:
1107:
1082:
1069:
1048:
1024:
998:
938:
925:
898:
885:
778:
735:
710:explains it all
688:Washington Post
635:
613:interviewed on
607:
498:Other elections
331:, (Independent)
208:
143:
129:
109:
97:
69:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1228:
1226:
1206:
1203:
1199:
1198:
1195:
1192:
1189:
1186:
1185:8 MetaCrawler
1183:
1180:
1177:
1174:
1171:
1170:??? Ask Jeeves
1168:
1154:
1153:
1136:
1133:
1128:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1106:
1103:
1095:
1081:
1078:
1068:
1065:
1057:
1050:I made a map!
1047:
1044:
1023:
1020:
1019:
1018:
997:
996:Purple America
994:
993:
992:
991:
990:
989:
988:
969:
968:
967:
966:
956:
955:
937:
934:
924:
921:
920:
919:
897:
894:
884:
881:
878:
877:
874:
871:
868:
864:
863:
860:
857:
854:
850:
849:
846:
843:
840:
836:
835:
832:
829:
826:
822:
821:
818:
816:
813:
809:
808:
805:
803:
800:
796:
795:
793:
790:
787:
784:
777:
774:
770:68.220.231.134
766:
765:
748:
747:
734:
731:
730:
729:
728:
727:
716:
715:
670:
669:
660:
659:
634:
631:
606:
603:
601:
581:
580:
579:
578:
544:
540:
539:
526:
525:
494:
493:
486:
485:
484:
482:
477:
472:
467:
461:
460:
459:
457:
454:
451:
448:
444:
443:
434:
429:
426:
423:
420:
410:
409:
400:
395:
392:
389:
386:
376:
375:
366:
361:
358:
355:
352:
342:
341:
332:
326:
323:
320:
317:
307:
306:
305:
303:North Carolina
296:
291:
288:
285:
282:
272:
271:
270:
261:
256:
253:
250:
247:
235:
234:
232:
229:
226:
223:
220:
219:Electoral Vote
217:
207:
204:
203:
202:
190:
189:
188:
184:
183:
142:
139:
137:
128:
125:
108:
105:
96:
95:Ongoing event?
93:
90:
89:
84:
79:
74:
67:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1227:
1218:
1216:
1215:170.35.224.64
1212:
1209:According to
1204:
1202:
1196:
1193:
1190:
1187:
1184:
1181:
1178:
1175:
1172:
1169:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1161:
1159:
1152:
1148:
1147:
1146:
1143:
1142:
1134:
1132:
1126:
1121:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1113:
1104:
1102:
1100:
1093:
1090:
1086:
1079:
1077:
1075:
1066:
1064:
1062:
1056:
1055:
1051:
1045:
1043:
1041:
1037:
1032:
1030:
1021:
1016:
1012:
1011:
1010:
1008:
1003:
1002:
995:
986:
982:
981:
980:
979:
978:
977:
976:
974:
964:
960:
959:
958:
957:
953:
948:
947:
946:
944:
935:
933:
931:
922:
917:
912:
908:
907:
906:
904:
895:
893:
891:
882:
875:
872:
869:
866:
865:
861:
858:
855:
852:
851:
847:
844:
841:
838:
837:
833:
830:
827:
824:
823:
819:
817:
814:
811:
810:
806:
804:
801:
798:
797:
781:
775:
773:
771:
763:
758:
757:
756:
754:
745:
744:
743:
741:
732:
725:
720:
719:
718:
717:
713:
711:
706:
702:
697:
693:
689:
685:
681:
677:
672:
671:
666:
662:
661:
656:
655:
654:
652:
648:
643:
641:
632:
630:
628:
623:
621:
616:
612:
609:I just heard
604:
602:
599:
597:
592:
590:
586:
576:
572:
571:
570:
569:
568:
566:
561:
559:
554:
552:
547:
538:
534:
531:
527:
523:
519:
515:
511:
507:
503:
499:
495:
492:
487:
481:
476:
471:
466:
463:
462:
446:
445:
442:
438:
437:Chuck Baldwin
435:
433:
430:
419:
415:
412:
411:
408:
404:
401:
399:
396:
385:
381:
378:
377:
374:
370:
367:
365:
362:
351:
347:
344:
343:
340:
336:
333:
330:
327:
316:
312:
309:
308:
304:
300:
297:
295:
292:
281:
280:Massachusetts
277:
274:
273:
269:
265:
262:
260:
257:
246:
244:
240:
237:
236:
214:
211:
205:
200:
196:
195:
194:
186:
185:
181:
178:, creator of
177:
173:
169:
165:
161:
157:
153:
152:
151:
149:
140:
138:
135:
134:
126:
124:
122:
118:
113:
106:
104:
102:
94:
88:
85:
83:
80:
78:
75:
72:
68:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1208:
1200:
1162:
1156:and #3 was
1155:
1144:
1138:
1130:
1108:
1094:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1070:
1058:
1052:
1049:
1033:
1025:
1004:
999:
970:
939:
936:Wrong colors
926:
910:
899:
886:
792:% all adults
767:
749:
736:
709:
700:
695:
691:
687:
683:
679:
675:
664:
644:
636:
624:
608:
600:
593:
582:
562:
555:
549:Comments? -
548:
543:
529:
517:
497:
479:
474:
469:
464:
432:Constitution
245:
231:Running Mate
222:Popular Vote
209:
191:
180:Ithaca Hours
164:Carol Miller
160:Gary Johnson
144:
136:
130:
114:
110:
98:
70:
43:
37:
1194:3 Vivisimo
870:116,382,654
815:103,617,346
812:Didn't vote
802:220,000,000
740:Pacific1982
620:Peter Ellis
558:Goobergunch
398:Libertarian
315:Connecticut
311:Ralph Nader
176:Paul Glover
133:Ed Sanville
36:This is an
1074:JamesMLane
1029:Zen Master
985:Zen Master
952:JamesMLane
916:JamesMLane
890:JamesMLane
842:55,905,023
828:59,424,706
724:JamesMLane
696:almost all
680:appearance
350:California
339:California
259:Republican
168:David Cobb
148:Kingturtle
141:Great idea
117:Dutch wrap
1197:12 Yahoo!
1191:??? Teoma
1179:2 HotBot
1176:5 Google
1173:7 Clusty
1112:Jacoplane
903:Mr. Brown
856:1,052,925
762:Mr. Brown
701:extremely
101:PhilHibbs
87:Archive 6
82:Archive 5
77:Archive 4
71:Archive 3
65:Archive 2
60:Archive 1
1182:2 Lycos
1061:Pellaken
973:Daddydog
943:Daddydog
930:Daddydog
783:USA 2004
753:Daddydog
705:Cecropia
684:dreading
627:Daddydog
596:Bernfarr
530:Sources:
418:Maryland
294:Democrat
1099:pm06420
963:Baylink
665:failing
651:Baylink
640:Baylink
575:iHoshie
565:Locarno
551:iHoshie
441:Florida
268:Wyoming
199:Baylink
121:Baylink
39:archive
1188:1 MSN
1167:5 AOL
1040:Whyerd
1007:RoyBoy
911:report
799:Adults
786:Number
524:, 2012
480:100.00
329:Reform
1211:Yahoo
873:100.0
867:Voted
853:Other
839:Kerry
676:never
589:RobLa
465:Total
447:Other
384:Texas
373:Maine
364:Green
243:Texas
228:Party
16:<
1120:J3ff
1015:J3ff
845:48.0
831:51.1
825:Bush
522:2008
518:2004
514:2000
510:1996
506:1992
502:1988
407:Iowa
1046:map
859:0.9
807:100
470:538
439:of
416:of
405:of
382:of
371:of
348:of
337:of
313:of
301:of
278:of
266:of
241:of
225:Pct
1160:)
901:--
876:53
848:25
834:27
820:47
707:|
692:if
520:,
516:,
512:,
508:,
504:,
500::
475:--
456:--
453:--
450:--
428:--
425:--
422:--
394:--
391:--
388:--
360:--
357:--
354:--
325:--
322:--
319:--
290:--
287:--
284:--
255:--
252:--
249:--
862:1
712:®
535:,
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.