Bush Lead Counts

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Mojoed

Diamond Member
Jul 20, 2004
4,473
1
81
Heh, NM lead down to 3k votes for GWB with 98% reporting. That lead evaporated quickly.
 

cmdavid

Diamond Member
May 23, 2001
4,114
0
0
Originally posted by: Mojoed
Heh, NM lead down to 3k votes for GWB with 98% reporting. That lead evaporated quickly.

i get about 3600 with 99% reporting..
either way, NM's 5 votes are worthless now...

well, maybe not for bush, but they are worthless for Kerry...
Without Ohio, Kerry can't win...

Bush needs both WI and IA to guarantee a win without Ohio, or WI and NM to guarantee a tie without Ohio...
 

Piano Man

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2000
3,370
0
76
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Abraxas
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Piano Man
He'll probably get NM. HE won't get IA.

How big is Montgomery county? Looking at county by county results -- the only way Bush loses Iowa is if Montgomery County has a good bit of residents and is 60-70% Kerry.

A tremendous number of absentee ballots were cast and on the local news it was leaked that they gave Kerry a lead measured in tens of thousands going into tonight. I hav eno idea how the person who leaked it arrived at that conclusion, but that's what they said.

Right, but they would have been counted already. They are counted when the regular ballots are counted minus the military ballots. Are you saying absentee, or does Iowa have provisonal as well? I don't know of a state that doesn't count absentee with their regular boxes...

The absentees have NOT been counted yet in Iowa.
 

bunnyfubbles

Lifer
Sep 3, 2001
12,248
3
0
with 100% in Ohio, Bush's lead has only increased (to 3 points and 145,098 votes ahead of Kerry) back from when the might have been more hope for a come back, I think it is pretty much over, even if it is a dead tie (which doesn't look that way with, IA, NM, and NV) @ 269 Bush will win. But Ohio's provisional votes pretty much need to be all counted as good and they all need to be for Kerry in order for Bush to lose the state, I don't think we're going to be waiting too long to find out final results, we'll know in the next few days at most I'd think.
 

Piano Man

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2000
3,370
0
76
Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
with 100% in Ohio, Bush's lead has only increased (to 3 points and 145,098 votes ahead of Kerry) back from when the might have been more hope for a come back, I think it is pretty much over, even if it is a dead tie (which doesn't look that way with, IA, NM, and NV) @ 269 Bush will win. But Ohio's provisional votes pretty much need to be all counted as good and they all need to be for Kerry in order for Bush to lose the state, I don't think we're going to be waiting too long to find out final results, we'll know in the next few days at most I'd think.

I agree. There would have to be literally about 400,000 provisional ballots for Kerry to have a shot.
 

Mill

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
28,558
3
81
Originally posted by: Piano Man
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Abraxas
Originally posted by: Mill
Originally posted by: Piano Man
He'll probably get NM. HE won't get IA.

How big is Montgomery county? Looking at county by county results -- the only way Bush loses Iowa is if Montgomery County has a good bit of residents and is 60-70% Kerry.

A tremendous number of absentee ballots were cast and on the local news it was leaked that they gave Kerry a lead measured in tens of thousands going into tonight. I hav eno idea how the person who leaked it arrived at that conclusion, but that's what they said.

Right, but they would have been counted already. They are counted when the regular ballots are counted minus the military ballots. Are you saying absentee, or does Iowa have provisonal as well? I don't know of a state that doesn't count absentee with their regular boxes...

The absentees have NOT been counted yet in Iowa.

Proof please....