1149:
full state-by-state results table for the margin along with the full state result (I personally took the time to create numerically detailed state-by-state result tables for every election from 2000 going back so far to 1872, and I eventually hope to create them for all elections); while a colorblind user might not be able to tell who won a state by the party shading the information is also clearly conveyed by simply checking the numbers for the state. Similarly, I think the tables allow a colorblind user to find out, in numerical format, who won which state and by what margin, even if they can't tell by looking at the main electoral college map or the party shading on the table. So personally I think the most important and most detailed information about the election results are actually provided in a non-color-based format, the numbers on the state-by-state election results table.
1039:
county-level maps, the shading of the states by party on the state-by-state result table, and in indicating the state victory margins in the Close States section...and this color-based format is used in every single article in any way related to an
American election. It's pretty much impossible to replicate all the data communicated by that color without really making a mess of the article, having to write out "Democratic" and "Republican" in every spot where blue or red is used. In some cases it would be pretty much impossible, because going through say a county map and putting a D or an R in each of 3000+ counties would be very tedious to make and not very useful since you'd have to zoom in very close to actually see the result.
1091:
again it would look cumbersome to add "Democratic" and "Republican" next to each state, while right now the Close State section looks neat and orderly. Plus the winner color is not the important information being conveyed by the Close States section, the important information from the section is simply to inform the readers which states were closest in margin. But what about all the maps and tables which all depend on color? It would be extremely difficult to make them colorblind accessible. Wiki's color guidelines regarding colorblindness simply require that colors used be of sufficient contrast, the colors used in the Close States section both pass the Color
Contrast Analyser found at
1110:
election data. It would make the article very messy and cumbersome to write out "Democratic" and "Republican" every time blue or red is used, and again, there is nothing that can be done about the many maps and tables. Again I would strongly recommend the idea of trying to get
Knowledge to create a Colorblind version of Knowledge, there is already precedent for same-language Wikis like the Simple English version. And I'd be happy to contribute the best I could to election articles (my personal project for the moment) for a colorblind version, complete with maps using Rs and Ds instead of red and blue if that would work for such a purpose.
31:
727:
875:
for assertions with probable BLP implications. Actual news reports of statements by Dean or Kerry, on the other hand, are probably appropriate in the main text of the article (I haven't checked recently, but I believe similar comments about Nixon not disputing his loss based on alleged improprieties in
Illinois were either in his article or the 1960 election article at one point).
1003:
the opposite is true. According to RCP's aggregate, the margin closed slightly. There is a similar mention of this on the bin Laden tape's page. It specifically mentions a 6 point lead, but doesn't address what poll they are referencing, nor does it address the (more accurate) aggregation of polls showing no significant influence of the tapes. Should this be edited?
1729:
335:
Kerry and Dean's statements are not normal; they are exceptional, and notable enough to be mentioned in the intro. That's why it's been there since
September '07. Per your suggestion, however, I've added two quotes from the article in the main "Controversies" section. Anyone else have any thoughts on
1844:
I don't know if it's worth noting that this election made Bush the first 21st century president to win re-election, as he also was the first 21st century president in general, unless you count the year in which
Clinton was president, in which case this statement becomes false. Either way, I'm of the
1801:
I totally agree with you. Using a 1995 book as a source for that ambiguous claim doesn't seem right. I think that removing that sentence altogether wouldn't hurt the flow of the paragraph. The first and third sentences connect nicely over the issue of Saddam while the second adds really nothing more
874:
The source is an opinion piece, written by a partisan author, housed on the website of a partisan organization, and originally published in a magazine whose specialty is music and pop culture, not political news or NPOV analysis. I have a lot of trouble considering this a reliable source, especially
602:
According to
Knowledge, "Alaska is not divided into counties, as most of the other U.S. states, but it is divided into boroughs. Many of the more densely populated parts of the state are part of Alaska's sixteen boroughs, which function somewhat similarly to counties in other states. However, unlike
1148:
Well I think the articles do accomplish that to the best possible extent that they could. In the Close States section, the winner is not the important information, it's simply included for reference, the important information is simply the margin that made the states close. One can easily check the
1090:
But Close States is just one minor section. Color is used all over every single election page in so many different sections. It would look kinda silly and pointless to edit just one small section to be colorblind accessible when the rest of the page is all so clearly not colorblind accessible, plus
1002:
Having taken a new interest in the subject, I reviewed Real Clear
Politic's aggregation of 2004 US Presidential Election polling, specifically the dates 10/28 - 11/2. In the current Wiki page, it says Bush opened up a larger lead on Kerry following the bin Laden tape release on 10/29, when in fact
889:
You are making the uncertainty over the election's outcome a lot more significant and widely discussed than it actually is by giving it its own paragraph in the lead. I cannot find any mainstream news source disputing the outcome of the election, or assigning a different outcome a high probability.
399:
The objective fact that's more notable than the Kerry/Dean statements is the
Congressional challenge to Ohio's electoral votes. There was no such challenge perfected (i.e. supported by at least one Representative and at least one Senator) even after the scandalous 2000 election. I don't know when
1109:
Reading over my post I want to apologize if I appear to be coming across as insensitive to those who are colorblind. But I genuinely don't think there is an easy solution to making election articles accessible to colorblind users. The red-blue color scheme is thoroughly ingrained in how we process
1038:
I'm afraid there's really no easy solution for that without making the whole article very messy and cumbersome. It's just such a universal standard to use red for
Republicans and blue for Democrats, the colors are used on the main electoral college map, on the congressional district maps, on the
619:
I don't see how anyone can say George Bush won every county in Alaska, when Alaska does not have counties; Official Alaska election results are not provided by borough; Bush did not carry every house district; A private map shows him winning 4 regions without explaining what how the regions are
1770:
This seems like nothing more than an opinion with no balance to it and is referenced by a book written nine years before the election takes place. I'd suggest this takes more away from the article than it adds to it. Should this be removed or changed? It could be said that the last part of the
1043:
impossible) to try to provide a colorblind solution on top of the color scheme system used in the main articles. If we can get a Colorblind version of Wiki, I would be happy to help contribute in making at least state-level maps and tables and communicate party data without relying on color.
532:
I think that John Kerry's current picture in the 2004 election is not good enough. I think it should be changed to Kerry's congressional photo with columns in the background, because I think that photo looks more recent and it looks better. I will change it. Thank you for your understanding.
1042:
I agree it's very unfortunate for colorblind users, I wonder if Knowledge would consider possibly adding a Colorblind version of Knowledge where all that information could be conveyed using exclusively non-color based methods, because it would be too messy and very difficult (in some cases
893:
My proposed change would be: "As in the 2000 presidential election, voting controversies and concerns of irregularities emerged during and after the vote, particularly in the state of Ohio. However, there was far less controversy about this election than in 2000." That seems entirely fair,
372:
the assumption, they only say that the matter is unknowable. But that's a moot point, as the intro never presented their suspicions as fact; it only noted that they'd expressed them, and that in itself is a very rare, and thus notable, occurrence in presidential politics. Best,
1766:
In the Background section, the second sentence of the third paragraph reads: 'The Iraq issue gave Bush an antagonist to present to the people, (similar but different than that of 2001) rallying support against a common enemy rather than gaining voters through ideas or policy.'
753:; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Knowledge. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
1022:
unfortunately, a significant portion of the information is conveyed exclusively using color, which is inaccessible to the blind and color blind. In particular, using red/blue to indicate states won by republicans and democrats. any ideas of how to fix this problem?
202:
The panel to the right of this article currently shows Kerry to have won the 2004 election. The body text of the article remains correct, as far as I can tell. An editor needs to flag this article as inaccurate until someone puts up the right information.
148:
because the effect of votes for 3rd party candidates didn't swing the popular vote, the election, governed not by the popular vote, but by the easily swayed electoral college, vote splitting didn't effect the election... which is problematic.
400:
the last time any such challenge occurred -- probably the nineteenth century. Its rarity makes the controversy worth mentioning in the introductory section, and the Dean/Kerry opinions throw light on why the challenge was brought.
1824:
POTUS election articles would be greatly improved if a percentage point swing was included in popular vote as reported in the infobox. See legislative elections in the United States and other nations on Knowledge for reference.
298:
That's all fine, but the sentence doesn't belong in the lead part of the article. It should be in the election controversy section. I'd also be grateful if you could get sources for some of the other info in that section.
827:{{cite news|url= http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0601-34.htm |title=Was the 2004 Election Stolen? : Rolling Stone |publisher=Rollingstone.com |author=Kennedy, Robert F.|accessdate=November 3, 2008}}</ref: -->
1771:
sentence ('...rather than gaining voters through ideas and policy.') is simply inaccurate and misleading. The removal of Saddam was both an idea and a policy, with voters being gained and lost through its pursuit.
598:
This article currently says "Six states saw every county vote for one candidate: Bush won every county in Utah, Alaska, and Oklahoma while Kerry won every county in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Hawaii."
578:
I changed a few sentences in the opening paragraph because they were worded awkwardly. Is the information up there, like which states switched sides from democrat to republican and such, relevant though?
324:
belong. When was the last time that a presidential nominee and the chairman of his national committee directly called an election's result into question? I don't think Nixon or his RNC even did so in
1646:
606:
Further, the Alaska Secretary of State's office does not give election results by borough, but instead presents it broken down into 40 House Districts. Bush did not win all 40 House Districts. See
275:
Kerry clearly opines here that "voting in Ohio did not proceed fairly and that, had it done so, the Democratic ticket might have won that state and therefore the election." Dean concurred, saying:
894:
considering that dispute over this election is mostly expressed in far-flung conspiracies, and that Kerry himself declined to seek a recount and has barely talked about the election ever since. --
1784:
890:
If you have one, show it. And there are many, many factors that affected the election's outcome, such as the Swift Boat attacks or allegations of Kerry's flip-flopping, that are not in the lead.
559:
Photo's in election articles should not necessarily be recent (reflecting current appearance) but rather should reflect the appearance of the candidate in the election year (in this case 2004).
826:
have stated their opinion that voting in Ohio did not proceed fairly and that, had it done so, the Democratic ticket might have won that state and therefore the election.<ref name=RS: -->
1130:"Ensure that color is not the only method used to convey important information". if the information is not important, than there is no problem. the parts of the article that fall under
645:
in the caption under his picture from former minority leader to former majority leader because even though he was more recently a minority leader, majority leader is a higher position.
950:
72:
67:
59:
603:
county-equivalents in the other 49 states, the boroughs do not cover the entire land area of the state. The area not part of any borough is referred to as the Unorganized Borough."
612:
Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections presents the election results by 4 Regions with Bush winning all 4 regions, but it is not clear to me how the regions are defined.
697:
For Arkansas, the table lists 573,182 votes for Bush, but the FEC report (p.27) at the link I mention lists 572,898 votes for Bush. There are discrepancies for Illinois also.
283:
Because both quotes are clearly reflected in the intro sentence, and because such claims are rare and notable in presidential elections, I'm putting the sentence back in. Best,
1740:
255:
have stated their opinion that voting in Ohio did not proceed fairly and that, had it done so, the Democratic ticket might have won that state and therefore the election.
840:
1917:
1616:
The RM wasn't necessary as a bot is going to move all the articles in the next few days. However, as this was requested ahead of time, I've just moved it manually.
1509:
1505:
1491:
1381:
1377:
1363:
1253:
1249:
1235:
47:
17:
1012:
457:
It's funny that Kerry was elected in Minnesota's congressional district in the electoral map of 2004 although Bush had been winning all of these states
175:
Shouldn't these two sections be merged, they are pretty much the same thing. Also shouldn't this be completely under "results" not a seperate section. --
1638:
1441:
1313:
1185:
1073:
568:
553:
329:
325:
271:
Kerry conceded, however, that the widespread irregularities make it impossible to know for certain that the outcome reflected the will of the voters.
1642:
1341:
779:
733:
665:
204:
1826:
613:
1603:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
1457:
147:
because of the electoral college one person's vote can effect the voting of an entire state's electoral college delegation's vote --: -->
513:
464:
95:
1788:
1722:
979:
913:
895:
545:
156:
912:. I don't think conspiratorial, distorted views and isolated statements made by the election's losers deserve a place in the lead. --
694:
states: "Note also: Official Federal Election Commission Report, with the latest, most final, and complete vote totals available."
976:
uses the term, "presidential"-(w/o capitalizing the "P" which in the Knowledge MOS appears to recommend using "P" in these cases)
792:
408:
972:
Somewhat related, a page that links here uses the term, "presidential election 2004", and a candidate from that election's page
1627:
1709:
146:
the reasoning in the section on votesplitting went: -- people were concerned about the effect of 3rd party candidates --: -->
1213:
819:
248:
263:
removed it, writing: "the source doesn't support the claim that Kerry admitted votes werent counted correctly." From the
121:
1552:
490:
310:
1868:
1854:
1834:
1811:
1792:
1753:
1715:
1658:
1632:
1580:
1557:
1427:
1299:
1158:
1143:
1119:
1104:
1085:
1058:
1032:
987:
962:
921:
903:
884:
869:
855:
796:
712:
677:
654:
631:
588:
521:
495:
472:
440:
412:
382:
363:
345:
315:
292:
229:
212:
184:
164:
136:
103:
788:
264:
814:
The winner was not determined until the following day, when Kerry decided not to dispute Bush's win in the state of
1736:
1647:
Knowledge talk:Naming conventions (government and legislation)#Proposed change to election/referendum naming format
946:
942:
938:
38:
1882:
1667:
1594:
354:, the Kerry-Edwards ticket would've won? Those are very highly political biased assumptions by Kerry & Dean.
1508:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1380:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1252:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
908:
Article from a source politically similar to Rolling Stone completely debunking the cited article in the lead:
208:
92:
Wasn't Kerry up 5% in the polls just before the election? I'd like to see a section on polls in this article.
1830:
1342:
https://web.archive.org/20131104201819/http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2004/politics101/politics101_ecmap.html
949:. I think that all three capitalization should lead to the same place, so I have nominated both redirects at
517:
99:
1864:
1543:
1449:
468:
584:
1345:
1068:
it's really not that hard to fix. so long as the information is not conveyed exclusively using color (see
983:
917:
899:
880:
778:
To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant
564:
549:
160:
1679:
1675:
1604:
1527:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1515:
1419:
1399:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1387:
1291:
1271:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1259:
1008:
708:
1802:
than the cliché of the "common enemy" and is badly sourced. I think that sentence needs to be removed.
1448:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
614:
http://www.uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/datagraph.php?year=2004&fips=2&f=0&off=0&elect=0
1458:
http://web.archive.org/web/20080426032536/http://www.wired.com:80/politics/security/news/2003/12/61640
1850:
1807:
1803:
1780:
1743:
until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
1482:
1154:
1150:
1115:
1111:
1100:
1096:
1054:
1048:
1044:
865:
541:
509:
460:
405:
152:
1622:
1004:
958:
673:
650:
436:
378:
341:
288:
224:
818:. The state held enough electoral votes to determine the winner of the presidency. Both Kerry and
1897:
1860:
1702:
1139:
1081:
1028:
664:
Is this a credible source? If so, it seems the article needs to be updated to cite this source:
627:
180:
1607:
after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
1512:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1384:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1256:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1528:
1400:
1272:
1576:
1323:
1195:
876:
851:
836:
737:
560:
359:
132:
1774:
I've never really submitted anything like this before but this stands out like a sore thumb.
1744:
1654:
1461:
1415:
1287:
704:
691:
580:
485:
305:
1535:
1407:
1279:
1910:
1846:
1331:
1203:
1127:
1092:
1069:
861:
831:
It would seem to be rather notable as it may have determined the outcome of the election.
607:
401:
1693:
The images in the infobox are sized differently (at least on mobile). Can this be fixed?
1214:
https://web.archive.org/20081006100202/http://fec.gov:80/finance/disclosure/srssea.shtml
1617:
1494:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1366:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1238:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
954:
758:
669:
646:
432:
374:
337:
284:
219:
124:
1534:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1406:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1278:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
479:
Sorry, but I don't know what the hell you're talking about. Could you clarify please?
1695:
1217:
1135:
1131:
1077:
1024:
765:
642:
623:
176:
1572:
847:
832:
355:
128:
117:
951:
Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 November 19#2004 Presidential election
1881:
ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.Posted Jun 01, 2006 5:02 PM (Posted June 01, 2006 5:02 PM).
1650:
1501:
1373:
1245:
823:
480:
300:
260:
252:
46:
If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
772:
1500:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1372:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1244:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
973:
909:
726:
1741:
Knowledge:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 13#Re-election of George Bush
761:
then you may need to upload it to Knowledge (Commons does not allow fair use)
116:
Is there any reason why there is no mention of the half baked idea of the UK
785:
This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image
666:
New Court Filing Reveals How the 2004 Ohio Presidential Election Was Hacked
1728:
1328:
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
1200:
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add
1346:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2004/politics101/politics101_ecmap.html
718:
File:Al Sharpton by David Shankbone.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion
1571:
popular votes listed, as they didn't get him his 1 electoral vote.
1840:"First 21st century president to win re-election" worth including?
1336:
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
1208:
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
194:
There's no mention of presidential primary debates in this entry.
978:]. Due to this problem I am hesitating on changing anything there
279:"I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided."
815:
806:
Issue of Kerry's decision to dispute the win being in the lead
120:
newspaper to intervene in Clark County? See USA today article
25:
805:
1727:
1674:
Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this
1467:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
1351:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
1223:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
687:
It seems that the data in the by-state tally is incorrect.
332:, but that page has an election controversies section also.
1452:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
771:
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try
1462:
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2003/12/61640
692:
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2004/federalelections2004.pdf
350:
Do we have any concrete evidence, showing had there been
1312:
I have just added archive links to one external link on
1184:
I have just added archive links to one external link on
328:. Nobody remotely as prominent has called into question
1445:
1317:
1189:
846:
Anyone else that should be included in the discussion?
608:
http://www.elections.alaska.gov/ei_return_2004_GENR.php
1735:
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect
1666:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
953:. Your comments in that discussion would be welcome.
780:
image page (File:Al Sharpton by David Shankbone.jpg)
506:The acronym "ES&S" is used without definition.
1504:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1376:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1248:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
764:If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no
700:Is there an explanation for these apparent errors?
243:I've restored the following sentence in the intro:
1682:. No further edits should be made to this section.
1218:http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/srssea.shtml
998:bin Laden tapes' effect on polling mis-represented
683:Bad data in table of popular vote counts by state
431:Good point. I'll try to address that before long.
368:Please note that neither Kerry nor Dean actually
997:
1883:"Was the 2004 Election Stolen? : Rolling Stone"
812:
1490:This message was posted before February 2018.
1362:This message was posted before February 2018.
1234:This message was posted before February 2018.
1076:section would just need some additional text.
810:Should this text be in the second paragraph:
528:Why John Kerry's photograph should be changed
18:Talk:2004 United States presidential election
8:
736:, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
527:
910:http://www.salon.com/2006/06/03/kennedy_39/
1778:
1593:The following is a closed discussion of a
1440:I have just modified one external link on
1052:
1639:United States presidential election, 2004
1442:United States presidential election, 2004
1314:United States presidential election, 2004
1186:United States presidential election, 2004
1916:CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (
1643:2004 United States presidential election
1072:) there is no problem. for example, the
1873:
1721:"Re-election of George Bush" listed at
734:File:Al Sharpton by David Shankbone.jpg
1906:
1895:
1785:2A02:C7F:DC8B:1200:DC9C:CF46:76ED:93CB
44:Do not edit the contents of this page.
1479:to let others know (documentation at
537:Darren Monaghan, 22 July, 2009, 21:24
7:
1859:I agree. I've removed the sentence.
1612:The result of the move request was:
768:then it cannot be uploaded or used.
171:Close State vs. Battleground States
24:
1444:. Please take a moment to review
1316:. Please take a moment to review
1188:. Please take a moment to review
1845:view that it should be removed.
725:
29:
1739:. The discussion will occur at
732:An image used in this article,
1716:04:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
1586:Requested move 1 December 2018
1013:00:40, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
941:presently redirects here, but
934:Presidential elections in 2004
1:
1581:01:21, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
1428:00:33, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
1159:02:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
1144:15:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
1120:04:25, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
1105:02:02, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
1086:00:25, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
1059:21:55, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
1033:14:25, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
988:23:03, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
963:12:41, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
820:Democratic National Committee
797:01:46, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
641:I changed the description of
632:12:33, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
249:Democratic National Committee
230:20:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
213:20:35, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
1835:05:36, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
1793:14:03, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
1659:09:45, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
1633:12:03, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
1134:are probably not important.
589:16:50, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
413:23:26, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
383:22:46, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
364:18:21, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
346:02:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
316:23:06, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
293:21:41, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
218:it's been fixed, thanks.. --
185:20:33, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
165:09:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
137:03:37, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
127:(Bush won Clark county BTW--
104:22:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
1300:21:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
945:redirects to a dab page at
922:00:00, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
904:22:07, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
885:20:22, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
870:08:39, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
856:08:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
841:08:30, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
713:02:54, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
239:Kerry and Dean in the intro
1938:
1759:Background to the election
1737:Re-election of George Bush
1567:We shouldn't have Edwards
1521:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1437:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1393:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1334:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
1309:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1265:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1206:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
1181:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
947:2004 presidential election
943:2004 Presidential election
939:2004 Presidential Election
773:Commons Undeletion Request
740:for the following reason:
655:04:41, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
522:01:11, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
496:14:49, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
473:14:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
441:03:32, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
1558:16:16, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
690:The button for the link:
678:16:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
569:07:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
554:20:24, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
1869:05:22, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
1855:02:26, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
1812:18:43, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
1754:16:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
1723:Redirects for discussion
1672:Please do not modify it.
1645:– RfC passed, plase see
1600:Please do not modify it.
860:Seems reasonable to me.
594:Alaska counties/boroughs
1433:External links modified
1305:External links modified
1177:External links modified
1905:Check date values in:
1732:
829:
789:CommonsNotificationBot
742:Other speedy deletions
660:Ohio court disclosures
1731:
42:of past discussions.
1502:regular verification
1374:regular verification
1359:to let others know.
1320:. If necessary, add
1246:regular verification
1231:to let others know.
1192:. If necessary, add
574:Gramatical Touch-ups
1492:After February 2018
1471:parameter below to
1364:After February 2018
1355:parameter below to
1236:After February 2018
1227:parameter below to
336:this debate? Best,
1885:. Rollingstone.com
1733:
1546:InternetArchiveBot
1497:InternetArchiveBot
1369:InternetArchiveBot
1241:InternetArchiveBot
766:fair use rationale
1795:
1783:comment added by
1522:
1426:
1394:
1298:
1266:
1061:
1018:Over use of color
803:
802:
746:What should I do?
738:Wikimedia Commons
544:comment added by
512:comment added by
502:Undefined Acronym
463:comment added by
411:
352:no irregularities
259:In late January,
155:comment added by
85:
84:
54:
53:
48:current talk page
1929:
1922:
1921:
1914:
1908:
1903:
1901:
1893:
1891:
1890:
1878:
1751:
1630:
1625:
1620:
1602:
1556:
1547:
1520:
1519:
1498:
1486:
1422:
1421:Talk to my owner
1417:
1392:
1391:
1370:
1335:
1327:
1294:
1293:Talk to my owner
1289:
1264:
1263:
1242:
1207:
1199:
757:If the image is
729:
722:
721:
556:
524:
493:
488:
483:
475:
404:
313:
308:
303:
227:
222:
167:
81:
56:
55:
33:
32:
26:
1937:
1936:
1932:
1931:
1930:
1928:
1927:
1926:
1925:
1915:
1904:
1894:
1888:
1886:
1880:
1879:
1875:
1842:
1822:
1761:
1745:
1726:
1691:
1686:
1628:
1623:
1618:
1598:
1588:
1565:
1563:Results section
1550:
1545:
1513:
1506:have permission
1496:
1480:
1450:this simple FaQ
1435:
1425:
1420:
1385:
1378:have permission
1368:
1329:
1321:
1307:
1297:
1292:
1257:
1250:have permission
1240:
1201:
1193:
1179:
1020:
1000:
936:
808:
720:
685:
662:
639:
596:
576:
539:
530:
507:
504:
491:
486:
481:
458:
455:
311:
306:
301:
247:Both Kerry and
241:
225:
220:
205:137.165.240.191
200:
192:
173:
150:
144:
114:
90:
77:
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1935:
1933:
1924:
1923:
1872:
1861:marbeh raglaim
1841:
1838:
1827:108.56.152.243
1821:
1818:
1817:
1816:
1815:
1814:
1760:
1757:
1725:
1719:
1690:
1687:
1685:
1684:
1668:requested move
1662:
1636:
1610:
1609:
1595:requested move
1589:
1587:
1584:
1564:
1561:
1540:
1539:
1532:
1465:
1464:
1456:Added archive
1434:
1431:
1418:
1412:
1411:
1404:
1349:
1348:
1340:Added archive
1306:
1303:
1290:
1284:
1283:
1276:
1221:
1220:
1212:Added archive
1178:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1167:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1162:
1161:
1063:
1062:
1057:comment added
1040:
1019:
1016:
999:
996:
995:
994:
993:
992:
991:
990:
935:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
925:
924:
906:
891:
807:
804:
801:
800:
776:
775:
769:
762:
748:
747:
730:
719:
716:
684:
681:
661:
658:
638:
635:
595:
592:
575:
572:
529:
526:
503:
500:
499:
498:
454:
451:
450:
449:
448:
447:
446:
445:
444:
443:
422:
421:
420:
419:
418:
417:
416:
415:
390:
389:
388:
387:
386:
385:
366:
333:
281:
280:
273:
272:
257:
256:
240:
237:
235:
233:
232:
199:
196:
191:
188:
172:
169:
143:
140:
113:
110:
108:
89:
86:
83:
82:
75:
70:
65:
62:
52:
51:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1934:
1919:
1912:
1899:
1884:
1877:
1874:
1871:
1870:
1866:
1862:
1857:
1856:
1852:
1848:
1839:
1837:
1836:
1832:
1828:
1819:
1813:
1809:
1805:
1800:
1799:
1798:
1797:
1796:
1794:
1790:
1786:
1782:
1775:
1772:
1768:
1764:
1758:
1756:
1755:
1752:
1750:
1749:
1742:
1738:
1730:
1724:
1720:
1718:
1717:
1714:
1713:
1712:
1707:
1706:
1705:
1700:
1699:
1698:
1688:
1683:
1681:
1677:
1673:
1669:
1664:
1663:
1661:
1660:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1644:
1640:
1635:
1634:
1631:
1626:
1621:
1615:
1608:
1606:
1601:
1596:
1591:
1590:
1585:
1583:
1582:
1578:
1574:
1570:
1562:
1560:
1559:
1554:
1549:
1548:
1537:
1533:
1530:
1526:
1525:
1524:
1517:
1511:
1507:
1503:
1499:
1493:
1488:
1484:
1478:
1474:
1470:
1463:
1459:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1451:
1447:
1443:
1438:
1432:
1430:
1429:
1423:
1416:
1409:
1405:
1402:
1398:
1397:
1396:
1389:
1383:
1379:
1375:
1371:
1365:
1360:
1358:
1354:
1347:
1343:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1333:
1325:
1319:
1315:
1310:
1304:
1302:
1301:
1295:
1288:
1281:
1277:
1274:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1261:
1255:
1251:
1247:
1243:
1237:
1232:
1230:
1226:
1219:
1215:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1205:
1197:
1191:
1187:
1182:
1176:
1160:
1156:
1152:
1147:
1146:
1145:
1141:
1137:
1133:
1129:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1121:
1117:
1113:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1102:
1098:
1094:
1089:
1088:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1071:
1067:
1066:
1065:
1064:
1060:
1056:
1050:
1046:
1041:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1034:
1030:
1026:
1017:
1015:
1014:
1010:
1006:
989:
985:
981:
977:
975:
971:
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
964:
960:
956:
952:
948:
944:
940:
933:
923:
919:
915:
911:
907:
905:
901:
897:
892:
888:
887:
886:
882:
878:
877:Fat&Happy
873:
872:
871:
867:
863:
859:
858:
857:
853:
849:
845:
844:
843:
842:
838:
834:
828:
825:
821:
817:
811:
799:
798:
794:
790:
786:
782:
781:
774:
770:
767:
763:
760:
756:
755:
754:
752:
745:
744:
743:
739:
735:
731:
728:
724:
723:
717:
715:
714:
710:
706:
701:
698:
695:
693:
688:
682:
680:
679:
675:
671:
667:
659:
657:
656:
652:
648:
644:
643:Dick Gephardt
637:Dick Gephardt
636:
634:
633:
629:
625:
621:
617:
615:
610:
609:
604:
600:
593:
591:
590:
586:
582:
573:
571:
570:
566:
562:
557:
555:
551:
547:
543:
538:
534:
525:
523:
519:
515:
514:98.221.22.238
511:
501:
497:
494:
489:
484:
478:
477:
476:
474:
470:
466:
465:70.53.150.214
462:
452:
442:
438:
434:
430:
429:
428:
427:
426:
425:
424:
423:
414:
410:
407:
403:
398:
397:
396:
395:
394:
393:
392:
391:
384:
380:
376:
371:
367:
365:
361:
357:
353:
349:
348:
347:
343:
339:
334:
331:
327:
323:
319:
318:
317:
314:
309:
304:
297:
296:
295:
294:
290:
286:
278:
277:
276:
270:
269:
268:
266:
262:
254:
250:
246:
245:
244:
238:
236:
231:
228:
223:
217:
216:
215:
214:
210:
206:
197:
195:
189:
187:
186:
182:
178:
170:
168:
166:
162:
158:
154:
141:
139:
138:
134:
130:
126:
122:
119:
111:
109:
106:
105:
101:
97:
96:65.101.231.48
93:
87:
80:
76:
74:
71:
69:
66:
63:
61:
58:
57:
49:
45:
41:
40:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1887:. Retrieved
1876:
1858:
1843:
1823:
1779:— Preceding
1776:
1773:
1769:
1765:
1762:
1747:
1746:
1734:
1710:
1708:
1703:
1701:
1696:
1694:
1692:
1671:
1665:
1637:
1613:
1611:
1599:
1592:
1568:
1566:
1544:
1541:
1516:source check
1495:
1489:
1476:
1472:
1468:
1466:
1439:
1436:
1413:
1388:source check
1367:
1361:
1356:
1352:
1350:
1311:
1308:
1285:
1260:source check
1239:
1233:
1228:
1224:
1222:
1183:
1180:
1132:WP:NOT#STATS
1074:Close states
1053:— Preceding
1021:
1001:
980:24.0.133.234
937:
914:24.13.213.40
896:24.13.213.40
830:
813:
809:
784:
783:
777:
750:
749:
741:
702:
699:
696:
689:
686:
663:
640:
622:
618:
611:
605:
601:
597:
577:
561:Highground79
558:
546:82.16.113.24
536:
535:
531:
505:
456:
369:
351:
321:
282:
274:
258:
242:
234:
201:
193:
174:
157:66.92.144.73
145:
115:
112:Clark County
107:
94:
91:
78:
43:
37:
1748:Paper Luigi
1689:Image sizes
1680:move review
1605:move review
1483:Sourcecheck
824:Howard Dean
751:Don't panic
705:CountMacula
581:M.jefferton
540:—Preceding
508:—Preceding
459:—Preceding
330:Obama's win
320:Ah, but it
261:User:Timmeh
253:Howard Dean
151:—Preceding
36:This is an
1889:2008-11-03
1847:Builder018
1804:Merckill95
1763:Hi there,
1553:Report bug
1151:Inqvisitor
1112:Inqvisitor
1097:Inqvisitor
1045:Inqvisitor
974:John Kerry
862:Jonathanfu
402:JamesMLane
123:Resources
1898:cite news
1777:Thanks.
1676:talk page
1536:this tool
1529:this tool
1408:this tool
1401:this tool
1280:this tool
1273:this tool
955:Thryduulf
822:Chairman
670:WilliamKF
647:Soxrock24
620:defined.
453:Minnesoda
433:Mdiamante
375:Mdiamante
338:Mdiamante
285:Mdiamante
251:Chairman
198:Vandalism
79:Archive 6
73:Archive 5
68:Archive 4
60:Archive 1
1781:unsigned
1697:Nixinova
1678:or in a
1542:Cheers.—
1414:Cheers.—
1324:cbignore
1286:Cheers.—
1196:cbignore
1136:Frietjes
1128:WP:Color
1093:WP:Color
1078:Frietjes
1070:WP:Color
1025:Frietjes
1005:Laboxter
759:non-free
624:Nightkey
542:unsigned
510:unsigned
461:unsigned
177:Levineps
153:unsigned
118:Guardian
1573:GoodDay
1469:checked
1446:my edit
1424::Online
1353:checked
1318:my edit
1296::Online
1225:checked
1190:my edit
1055:undated
848:Jim1138
833:Jim1138
703:Thanks.
356:GoodDay
265:article
190:Debates
142:Dubious
129:Stroika
39:archive
1907:|date=
1651:B dash
1619:Number
1614:moved.
1477:failed
1332:nobots
1204:nobots
1820:Swing
221:Versa
88:Polls
16:<
1918:link
1911:help
1865:talk
1851:talk
1831:talk
1808:talk
1789:talk
1655:talk
1577:talk
1473:true
1357:true
1229:true
1155:talk
1140:talk
1126:per
1116:talk
1101:talk
1082:talk
1049:talk
1029:talk
1009:talk
984:talk
959:talk
918:talk
900:talk
881:talk
866:talk
852:talk
837:talk
816:Ohio
793:talk
709:talk
674:talk
651:talk
628:talk
585:talk
565:talk
550:talk
518:talk
469:talk
437:talk
379:talk
370:make
360:talk
342:talk
326:1960
322:does
289:talk
226:geek
209:talk
181:talk
161:talk
133:talk
125:here
100:talk
1510:RfC
1487:).
1475:or
1460:to
1382:RfC
1344:to
1254:RfC
1216:to
487:meh
482:Tim
307:meh
302:Tim
1902::
1900:}}
1896:{{
1867:)
1853:)
1833:)
1810:)
1791:)
1670:.
1657:)
1649:.
1641:→
1597:.
1579:)
1523:.
1518:}}
1514:{{
1485:}}
1481:{{
1395:.
1390:}}
1386:{{
1330:{{
1326:}}
1322:{{
1267:.
1262:}}
1258:{{
1202:{{
1198:}}
1194:{{
1157:)
1142:)
1118:)
1103:)
1095:.
1084:)
1051:)
1031:)
1011:)
986:)
961:)
920:)
902:)
883:)
868:)
854:)
839:)
795:)
787:--
711:)
676:)
668:.
653:)
630:)
616:.
587:)
567:)
552:)
520:)
471:)
439:)
381:)
362:)
344:)
291:)
267::
211:)
183:)
163:)
135:)
102:)
64:←
1920:)
1913:)
1909:(
1892:.
1863:(
1849:(
1829:(
1806:(
1787:(
1711:C
1704:T
1653:(
1629:7
1624:5
1575:(
1569:5
1555:)
1551:(
1538:.
1531:.
1410:.
1403:.
1282:.
1275:.
1153:(
1138:(
1114:(
1099:(
1080:(
1047:(
1027:(
1007:(
982:(
957:(
916:(
898:(
879:(
864:(
850:(
835:(
791:(
707:(
672:(
649:(
626:(
583:(
563:(
548:(
516:(
492:!
467:(
435:(
409:c
406:t
377:(
358:(
340:(
312:!
287:(
207:(
179:(
159:(
131:(
98:(
50:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.