mandate - my ass!

facts:

1. bush won by a margin of 51%-49%. this does NOT sound like a mandate to me. nor was it a "spanking," as was alluded to in a comment to a previous post. it was a close election - and voting errors are starting to surface with the electronic voting machines. some places were told that the hard drives could hold ~10,000 votes when they could actually only hold ~3,500. in at least one recorded incident so far, a machine that registered some 4,000 votes only had around 700 signed to use the machine. those numbers are not exact, but they're in the ballpark. i'll have to research it later.

2. bush may have received the most (numerical) votes for president in history, but keep in mind that kerry received the second most in history. this is partially a function of the fact that there are far more people in america than ever before. this may also be reversed pending any exposed voter fraud.

3. bush's victory is the narrowest for a sitting president since WW I president woodrow wilson in 1916. exposure of election hijinks may tighten or even flip this over.

4. polls show that around 65% of americans think the president should explore bipartisan opportunities, while only around 30% think he truly has a "mandate."

last time i checked, these numbers don't exactly add up to a mandate. neo-kons may be gloating, but plans are being set in motion all over this country to make sure this is the last time they will be able to bask in such ill-gotten gains.

revolt!