President Bush does have a mandate

[caught]

I just read the Talon article, "DNC Women's Group Says Bush Has No 'Mandate'"
DNC Women's Group (http://www.gopusa.com/news/2004/november/1110_dnc_bush_mandat e.shtml)

In other posts I have seen, yes, there is a mandate and, no, there is no mandate. *Just the fact that Democrat men and women say that President Bush has no mandate shows true equality of being absolutely pathetic. *The DNC Women say that President Bush "only" won by "just" 100,000 votes in Ohio. *No mention of the other 4 million votes. * * But their equality goes even further.....both sexes in the Democrat Party seem unable to define words (I used to think that this was a strictly Clinton phenomenon).

So while I somehow doubt that their feeble little minds will comprehend this, a mandate is "the commission that is given to a government and its policies through an electoral victory "
www.cogsci.princeton .edu/cgi-bin/webwn.
(And they call Republicans dumb, stupid and ignorant!!)

I'd be happy to purchase a dictionary for the Chairwoman, but I'm a bit too distantly located to teach her how to use it.

By the way, ladies, how do you define "is" again???

[JJBiener]

It seems to me as if the Democratic Party has rejected democracy itself. I can see no other explanation for their actions and comments. They are so convinced of their moral and intellectual superiority and the righteousness of their cause that they feel they no longer need to follow the "will of the people." I suppose they would be happy if we just suspend elections and allow them to run the show.

[Basheva]

Quote[/b] ]I suppose they would be happy if we just suspend elections and allow them to run the show.

When everytime they lose they question the veracity and legality of an election, that is precisely what they are doing: suspending (or trying to) the election.

When they can't win, they undermine the outcome.

I don't recall Republicans doing this when Clinton won twice.

We weren't happy about it, but we didn't question his legal claim to the office.

[MudPuppy]

Quote[/b] ]When they can't win, they undermine the outcome.

I don't recall Republicans doing this when Clinton won twice.

As I recall they also considered Clinton to have a "mandate" in one election when nearly 58% of the electorate voted for somebody else. He didn't even have a simple majority.

They're grabbing at straws. Just watch, they'll try to spin this tale into something sinister to de-legitimize the 2004 election results. I've always considered many of the tactics used by the DemocRATS to be borderline anarchy… Maybe it's not borderline anarchy anymore.