Stupid Americans! -- Stupid... Stupid... STUPID!!! __________==___ utivro

"ccr" slurred in incohernt rage:

> MARGIN--IE THE DIFFERENCE IN PERCENT BETWEEN THE WINNER AND THE NEXT
> NEAREST
OPPONENT. Get it now?>

Oh, of course we get it: You're a frigging dumbass. (BTW, you don't improve
your state of worsening humiliation by shouting.)

"ccr" foolishly continued his ludicrous defense of the limp-wristed, thug
loving, homo-promoting Democrats utter humiliation at the polls by
petulantly snapping:

> What part of "percentage" don't you understand nitwit?>

The part where your idiot, traitor candidate won by getting 48%, versus his
opponents 51%.

Do yourself a favor, Soreloserman, and go back to the porn sites where you
came from.

Again your examples are not for elections when those mentioned were
incumbents. Two of them didn't get to serve a second term and according to
whitehouse.gov "In his 1972 bid for office, Nixon defeated Democratic
candidate George McGovern by one of the widest margins on record." So when
Nixon was running as an incumbent it was apparently quite a beating for
McGovern.
In response to Bob C why should I reread that definition? And even though he
didn't say re-elected it was implied.

"SoK66" > wrote in message
...
>
> "ccr" spewed in leftist rage:
>
> ".... Bush's percentage margin was pathetic. It has nothing to do with a
> majority. "
>
> Well, lasttime we looker 51% was more than 48%, and 60 million+ votes is
> more than 56 million.
>
> G.W. Bush's 3% margin was greater than that of Kenedy 1960 (.17%), Nixon
> 1968 (.7%), and Carter 1976 (2.06%).
>
> Do you have a point to make, ****head, or are simply you content to prove
> yourself just another Soreloserman dumbass?
>

Don't worry ccr. The rest of the world can understand what you are saying.
Apparently the OP was meant to apply to the people that don't understand
what you are saying that voted for Dubya.
"ccr" > wrote in message
...
> MARGIN--IE THE DIFFERENCE IN PERCENT BETWEEN THE WINNER AND THE NEXT
> NEAREST OPPONENT. Get it now?
>
> --
> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
> land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
> adorned by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
>
>
> "Bob Casanova" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 22:09:47 -0600, the following appeared
>> in rec.autos.makers.jeep+willys, posted by "ccr"
>> >:
>>
>>>"Bob Casanova" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>> On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 15:37:42 -0600, the following appeared
>>>> in rec.autos.makers.jeep+willys, posted by "ccr"
>>>> >:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>>That Bush had the largest number of votes AGAINST him in US history
>>>>>also
>>>>>is
>>>>>telling. His percentage margin of votes was lowest in history for an
>>>>>incumbent.
>>>>
>>>> Really? I could have sworn that his father's percentage was
>>>> lower, as were Carter's and Ford's. And probably numerous
>>>> others.
>>>
>>>For an incumbent reelected, Bush had the smallest percentage margin of
>>>victory. In other words, he just barely squeaked a win.
>>
>> Even if you change your claim to restrict it to an incumbent
>> *who was re-elected* it's incorrect. Clinton was re-elected
>> in '96 with less than 45% of the popular vote. Bush's margin
>> was no landslide, but it was far from the smallest.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Bob C.
>>
>> Reply to Bob-Casanova @ worldnet.att.net
>> (without the spaces, of course)
>>
>> "The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
>> the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
>> 'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
>> - Isaac Asimov
>
>

"ccr" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Charles Fregeau" > wrote in message
> ...
>> >
>>> --
>>> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
>>> land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
>>> adorned by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken. How true.
>>>
>> Yes, we had Bill Clinton in office for 8 years.
>
>
> If Clinton is a moron, then Bush is a turnip. Rhodes scholar versus Ivy
> League legacy slacker. Self made man versus silver spoon failure.
>
> Clinton gave us a booming economy, peace, budget surplusses,
rising
> standards of living across all income groups, plenty of jobs, restrained
> medical costs, low inflation, the respect of the world, hope for the
> future, safety of Social Security, etc, etc, etc.
>
> Bush has given us lies, war, devastation, a badly strained military,
> death, debt, falling living standards, zooming medical costs, zooming
> local taxes, zooming insurance costs, third world child mortality, an
> environment under siege, the contempt of the world, and a hotly divided
> country. He's been a real prize.
>
> --
> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
> land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
> adorned by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
>
>

Are you running for the White House then?

Bill Clinton was EVIL, and we have been paying for it ever since. Why do
you think we were attacked in 2001? Everything Clinton did was a lie or
some sort of chicanery. He's like that high school boy dating your daughter
that will say anything to you and her, but basically just wants to get into
her pants. Why do you think those of us who endured his governorship in
Arkansas call him Slick Willie?

Charles of Kankakee

Actually, the rest of the world doesn't care who is in power, so long
as you take it out of motor related related newsgroups.

How many different ways are there of understanding "PLEASE SHUT THE **** UP"
??
If you don't like Americans being called stupid (which they aren't) then
stop letting your side down !


Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

"Charles Fregeau" > wrote in message
...
>
> "ccr" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Charles Fregeau" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> >
> >>> --
> >>> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of
the
> >>> land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will
be
> >>> adorned by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken. How true.
> >>>
> >> Yes, we had Bill Clinton in office for 8 years.
> >
> >
> > If Clinton is a moron, then Bush is a turnip. Rhodes scholar versus Ivy
> > League legacy slacker. Self made man versus silver spoon failure.
> >
> > Clinton gave us a booming economy, peace, budget surplusses,
> rising
> > standards of living across all income groups, plenty of jobs, restrained
> > medical costs, low inflation, the respect of the world, hope for the
> > future, safety of Social Security, etc, etc, etc.
> >
> > Bush has given us lies, war, devastation, a badly strained military,
> > death, debt, falling living standards, zooming medical costs, zooming
> > local taxes, zooming insurance costs, third world child mortality, an
> > environment under siege, the contempt of the world, and a hotly divided
> > country. He's been a real prize.
> >
> > --
> > Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
> > land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
> > adorned by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
> >
> >
>
> Are you running for the White House then?
>
> Bill Clinton was EVIL, and we have been paying for it ever since. Why do
> you think we were attacked in 2001? Everything Clinton did was a lie or
> some sort of chicanery. He's like that high school boy dating your
daughter
> that will say anything to you and her, but basically just wants to get
into
> her pants. Why do you think those of us who endured his governorship in
> Arkansas call him Slick Willie?
>
> Charles of Kankakee
>
>

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 14:08:43 GMT, the following appeared in
rec.autos.makers.jeep+willys, posted by "Dave Milne"
>:

>Actually, the rest of the world doesn't care who is in power, so long
>as you take it out of motor related related newsgroups.

Sorry for my OT posts; it won't happen again.

<snip>

--

Bob C.

Reply to Bob-Casanova @ worldnet.att.net
(without the spaces, of course)

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov

Wrong! Yusef,
There were plenty of ties found between Hussein, Al Quaeda, and Bin Laden.
There were no ties found which coupled Hussein to 9/11.
"David Gravereaux" > wrote in message
...
> Brian Talley > wrote:
>
>>3) We know Hussein hated the U.S., that he had ties with terrorists
>>in general and al Qaeda in particular.
>>
>>Do the math.
>
> Untrue. No ties to Bin Ladden were found.
>
> All in all the specifics for WMDs that Bush told the public were false.
> He has yet to make good on those mistakes.
> --
> David Gravereaux >
> [species: human; planet: earth,milkyway(western spiral arm),alpha sector]

Congratulations! Your post once again proves beyond a shadow of a doubt the
correctness of the subject line! Keep it up.

--
Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land
will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken


"SoK66" > wrote in message
...
> "ccr" foolishly continued his ludicrous defense of the limp-wristed, thug
> loving, homo-promoting Democrats utter humiliation at the polls by
> petulantly snapping:
>
>> What part of "percentage" don't you understand nitwit?>
>
> The part where your idiot, traitor candidate won by getting 48%, versus
> his opponents 51%.
>
> Do yourself a favor, Soreloserman, and go back to the porn sites where you
> came from.

and yours by continuing the conversation. Please act with dignity and drop
the thread.

Dave Milne, Scotland
'91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ

"ccr" > wrote in message
...
> Congratulations! Your post once again proves beyond a shadow of a doubt
the
> correctness of the subject line! Keep it up.
>
> --
> Prophetic Words: "On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the
land
> will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be
adorned
> by a downright moron." - H.L. Mencken
>
>
> "SoK66" > wrote in message
> ...
> > "ccr" foolishly continued his ludicrous defense of the limp-wristed,
thug
> > loving, homo-promoting Democrats utter humiliation at the polls by
> > petulantly snapping:
> >
> >> What part of "percentage" don't you understand nitwit?>
> >
> > The part where your idiot, traitor candidate won by getting 48%, versus
> > his opponents 51%.
> >
> > Do yourself a favor, Soreloserman, and go back to the porn sites where
you
> > came from.
>
>