Think this is as divided as we've ever been?
Jennifer Nelson pokes a hole in that balloon
. In '84 Reagan v. Mondale, and in '60 Kennedy v. Nixon...we've seen this before. She even points out that Nixon lost due to obvious voter fraud in two key states, yet declined to challenge the results:
That year, John F. Kennedy beat Richard M. Nixon by 113,000 votes out of 68 million cast. The two deciding states were Texas, where Kennedy beat Nixon by 9,000 votes, and Illinois, where he won by 46,000 votes. Reports of election fraud surfaced in both states, but, despite urging by his staff and others, Nixon refused to call for a recount. In his 1962 memoir, "Six Crises," he wrote that he did not challenge the result, because he felt that the nation would be harmed by the notion that "the presidency itself could be stolen by thievery at the ballot box."
In November 2000, former Nixon White House official Pete Flanigan told John H. Taylor, executive director of the Nixon Foundation, "Within a couple days after the election, Nixon emphatically said he would not challenge the results. And he did more than that. He told all of us on the staff to have no part of any challenge, and he sent back donations, all of them unsolicited, which were sent to finance a challenge.
And was there voter fraud? Oh yes...yes there was. The irony of Democrats claiming that Bush stole the '00 election or that he will steal this one is nothing more than infuriating to anyone who thinks Bush defended and will defend a victory against fraud. The fact is, those of you who don't like to hear the truth can look away now, it is the Left that has a history of stealing elections:
"There was a cemetery where the names on the tombstones were registered and voted," Mazo told The Washington Post in 2000. "I remember a house. It was completely gutted. There was nobody there. But there were 56 votes for Kennedy in that house."
Mazo also uncovered fraud in Texas and was planning an investigative series on the episode. However, Nixon found out about it and called Mazo, and later his editors, to squash the story. Again, Nixon believed fueling the fire of what many people thought was a fraudulent election would do more harm than good for the nation.
I don't think we're seeing anything different this time around. Massive efforts at registration fraud by the left are already out there in the news. The Daly machine is humming right along, people. It might not end up being pretty but I'm not willing to let this keep going on and you shouldn't be either. Kennedy, sure lots of people were genuinely behind him but I'm just not going to buy that all of you are hot for a Kerry presidency. Bush may not set you on fire, but you know very well that Kerry is a convictionless panderer with an arrogant mean streak besides. Is this the guy you want to strangle your morals over? Think about it hard, because it's almost time to calm everyone down. You might have to make a hard decision after November 2. Are you going to support the legal challenges that are levelled to try to force the Dem's guy in? Are you going to be complicit in voter fraud ruining the legitimacy of the voting process yet again? Think hard, because it's a real possibility.
posted by M@ at 12:36 PM