Or at least they should be.

Strategic Vision has released the results of a poll in Washington, taken Monday through Wednesday earlier this week of 800 registered voters.

1. If there was to be a revote for Governor, would you vote for Dino Rossi, the Republican or Christine Gregoire, the Democrat?

   Christine Gregoire		43%
   Dino Rossi		51%
   Undecided		6%

2. Regardless of who you voted for in November’s gubernatorial election, who do you believe actually won the gubernatorial election, Democrat Christine Gregoire or Republican Dino Rossi?

   Christine Gregoire		37%
   Dino Rossi		53%
   Undecided		10%

3. Regardless of who you voted for in November’s gubernatorial election, do you view the disputed ballots in King County that gave Democrat Christine Gregoire her margin of victory as legitimate?

   Yes		33%
   No		55%
   Undecided		12%

4. Regardless of who you voted for in November’s gubernatorial election, would you favor another election for governor to resolve the election?

   Yes		53%
   No		35%
   Undecided		12%

In addition, voters don’t think the courts will allow a revote, have a decidedly unfavorable opinion of Gregoire, are evenly split on their opinion of Rossi, and have unfavorable opinions of both the Democrat and Republican parties by about the same margins.

Once again, the people know best but are gonna get screwed — and they know it.

Hat tip to ever-observant Advised by Wolves.

Liberal blogger Donkey Rising is absolutely crowing over the numbers coming from the final count in the ’04 presidential election, wherein we find that Bush won with a popular vote of just 50.74%:

So Bush’s final percentage point margin is closer to two points than three and his final vote margin is under 3 million. Hardly awe-inspiring–in fact, unprecedentedly weak as incumbent re-election victories go. And we’re supposed to believe this is a mandate?

This is a blog that is sadder than Michael Moore at a gun show catered by “Nuthin’ but Salad” (come on, emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com? Emerging where? Colorado? Or perhaps Canada?)

Let’s put this whole “mandate” in historical perspective (again!).

The electoral college was the only vote recorded before 1824, so a count of popular vote was not taken. Since then, however, there have been 46 presidential elections. Of the 45 elections previous to this one, only 58% were won by a popular vote greater than the 50.74% of the popular vote carried by W in 2004.

That means that 4 in 10 elections were won with a lower percentage of popular votes than in 2004.

If close to 51% isn’t a “mandate”, what is the magic number? 55%? 60?

Only 13 elections were won with a greater than 55% popular vote (9 Republican and 4 Democrat). Only 4 have been won with greater than 60% of the popular vote (two for each party).

In fact, 17 of these elections resulted in a president that didn’t have even a 50% majority of the popular vote. 37%! A nation “more divided than ever”? I don’t think so!

Lincoln won reelection with only 55% of the popular vote. But Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia didn’t even participate in the election. Would Lincoln have won had these southern states cast their votes? Of course not! Yet many (even many Democrats) consider this Republican to be America’s greatest president!

And let’s not forget that the liberal’s favorite presidential figure, the draft-dodging, whore-chasing, dope-smoking, intern-molesting Clinton, never reached even 50% of the popular vote. Did you hear Republicans whine about “mandate”? No.

In fact, just how may Democrats have ever won with a greater percentage of the popular vote than W took in 2004? Try nine out of twenty — less than half!

Note: for comparisons sake, 70% of the Republicans have won with greater than 50.74% of the popular vote. Does this mean that Republicans almost always carried a mandate while Democrats rarely do so?

So much for the historical perspective; let’s take a look at the current situation. To recap: On November 2nd, Americans:

1. Confidently voted the president back into office by a greater margin than four years ago in virtually every state in the union.
2. Turned out in greater numbers in almost all demographics to make W the leader of the free world, including African-Americans, Whites and Hispanics, Union members, Jews and Catholics, Republicans and — yes — even Democrats.
3. Exhibited enthusiastic support for the Compassionate Conservative agenda by sending more Senators and Representatives to Congress, leading to an astounding four-seat gain in the closely-divided Senate.
4. Clearly sent a message to the Democrat party that they are too far left by banning same sex marriage in all eleven of the states where it appeared on the ballot.
5. Clear sent a message to the Democrat party that they expected more from them than obstructionism by replacing the 24-year incumbent/minority leader, Tom Daschle.

And they did this in the face of incredibly skewed reporting (worth 15 points according to Newsweek’s Evan Thomas), liberal billionaires trying to buy the election and America’s most trusted face in journalism trying to influence the election with a late-breaking fake story.

So while Donkey Rising hugs his skewed perceptions close and dreams of a liberal world, the rest of the country will be getting on with what is important: the Global War on Islamofascism, reforming Social Security, fixing education by a method other than throwing money at the problem, putting balance back into the Supreme Court.

Do I agree with everything the president does? Of course not! Do I think that he is the president and as such has the right to act like one? Emphatically yes!

Side note: What does a president do when he doesn’t have a “mandate”? Rule by committee?

All of the absentee and provisional ballots have finally been examined, decided upon and tallied up. The result is that Bush wins Ohio by nearly 120K votes.

Of course, some people just won’t let the matter die. Libertarian Michael Badnarik and the Green Party’s David Cobb have raised the necessary $113,600 to pay the fee for a state-wide recount (and thereby costing the Ohio taxpayer $1.5 million to actually perform the recount) and are expected to file tomorrow. Why?

Recount advocates have cited numerous Election Day problems, from long lines, a shortage of voting machines in predominantly minority neighborhoods and suspicious vote totals for candidates in scattered precincts.

I would like to go on record as saying that wait for early voting often exceeded two hours in the middle of a weekday afternoon in my (predominantly white) neighborhood, and the wait in the 100% black neighborhood in which I voted* varied from less than three minutes (when I voted) to 15 minutes (when I took my wife to vote).

Yet never have I heard it said that there was an effort to disenfranchise the white vote. I wonder why?

But I digress. Getting back to the recount:

Both major parties have said they do not expect the recount to change the result of the election.

Then why do it? Why burden the taxpayer?

McAuliffe said the party is not seeking to overturn the result but to ensure that every vote is counted. He said the study will be conducted by nonpartisan experts to be announced later, with a report issued in the spring that recommends reforms to prevent such problems in the future.

Note that McAuliffe did not say that he wanted every valid vote counted. Nor did he say that he wanted to cut down on election fraud. He only expresses an interest in counting every vote, be it from a dead person, an illegal alien, a felon on parole, or a dog. He wants every vote counted, not validated.

This is 21^st century America. There is absolutely no valid reason to keep any citizen from getting a picture ID. Yet Democrats continue to argue that the phrase, “May I see your drivers license, sir?” is voter harassment.

It’s time that they reevaluate their position on this issue. If massive voter fraud continues to be perpetrated by a tiny minority of Democrats as it was in the last two presidential elections then the people will eventually give the OK to move ahead with a national ID card. And that is something Democrats will be even more opposed to (I hope).

But long-term strategic thinking seems to be outside of the Democrat box.

* Note: during early voting in Tennessee we can vote in any precinct in the county.

Two weeks ago I posted my extreme displeasure at Libertarian Michael Badnarik for joining up with Green Party’s David Cobb to force a recount in Ohio. Their cost will be $113,600. Cost to the Ohio taxpayers is about $1.5 million.

The Toledo Blade is less than happy with the recount:

Remember that if a race is close enough to trigger an automatic recount – contests within one-quarter of 1 percent – the state picks up the tab. The Libertarian/Green recount would be simply to make some obscure political point that will be lost on most people and likely soon forgotten by the rest. Even those who support the recount, including the Ohio Democratic Party and the John Kerry presidential campaign, say they don’t expect the outcome to change.

Now comes news that the recount duo is asking for recounts in two more Bush states: New Mexico and Nevada. No word on what the effect will be on the taxpayers in those states.

In other recount news, reporters for The Miami Herald reviewed ballots cast in three hand-picked Democrat counties “that fit the conspiracy theory profile: staunchly Democratic by registration, whoppingly GOP by voting.” The result: “charges of voter fraud were unfounded” and “Bush’s steamroll through North Florida was legitimate.”

One election supervisor explained why so many Democrats there voted for Bush: “People here are mostly fundamentalist Christians who work in the prisons. Do you think they’re going to vote for the liberal senator from Massachusetts?”

Indeed.

Analyzing the spending of the top 15 527s in the 2004 election cycle (courtesy of Open Secrets) one finds that liberals outspent conservatives* by a margin of over 3 to 1 ($205 million to $63 million).

Yet the most successful ads of the campaign season were produced by conservatives:

Public Opinion Strategies found that voters in six battleground states were strongly influenced by three ads – all pro-Bush or anti-Kerry. In addition to the Swift Boat ads, they included “Wolves,” a TV ad produced by the Bush campaign using the image of a wolf pack to symbolize the terrorist threat; and the “Ashley” TV ad produced by the Progress for America Voter Fund….

Despite a huge fundraising advantage, the Democratic 527s never produced an ad that was as emotionally riveting and memorable. Said Kerry campaign advisor David Thorne, “The only three ads remembered by voters were all Republican ads – and that was after we spent over $100 million on advertising.”

* You must leave out Joint Victory Campaign 2004 as it is a fundraising organization for America Coming Together and Media Fund. As these are the top three 527s, including JVC would result in double counting.

Clarence Page, a Democrat from a blue state has some interesting observations about who voted for President Bush:

• 38 percent of union members
• 40 percent of voters who have union members in their households
• 42 percent of workers who earn $15,000 to $30,000
• 44 percent of those who earn under $50,000
• 45 percent of those ages 18 to 29
• 44 percent of the Hispanic vote
• 11 percent of the black vote (up from the 2000 election, and higher gains in battleground states)
• Unmarried women voted as expected, Kerry by a 2-1 ratio, but “married women tended to vote pretty much like their husbands, overwhelmingly for Bush.”
• “Adding insult to Sen. John Kerry’s injuries, Bush also won the votes of 13 percent of self-described liberals and 11 percent of self-described Democrats!”

Mr. Page offers an opinion as to why Democrats lost ground in segments once thought secure:

All of this came to mind as I was watching one of my guilty pleasures, “The Wire,” an exceptionally realistic HBO series about Baltimore cops and drug gangsters. Like life, it’s a complicated show that produces unexpected nuggets of wisdom.

During a dinner conversation, a detective was asked by his political-consultant girlfriend whether he voted for Kerry or for Bush. Neither, he responded wearily. No matter who wins the White House, he said, nothing changes on the streets where he works. Drugs keep flowing, kids keep dying.

There was more fact than fiction in that exchange. If Democrats, the party of poor people, working people and Baltimore people, are not offering a vision of a better future to drug-ravaged neighborhoods, I wondered, who will?

Significantly, Bush has. His administration assists grass-roots, faith-based leaders like Rev. Eugene Rivers, co-founder of Boston’s Ten Point Coalition. An effort by more than 50 local churches to join forces with Boston police, courts and City Hall to combat youth violence, the coalition reduced Boston’s juvenile homicide rate to zero in the mid-1990s. It made a difference.

Exactly.

Libertarian Michael Badnarik and the Green Party’s David Cobb have raised enough money to pay the necessary fees for a state-wide recount of votes cast in Ohio.

The fee is $10 per precinct, which works out to $113,600 for the entire state. A government spokesman says that the actual cost to the various county election boards will add up to about $1.5 million.

Badnarik and Cobb said they aren’t trying to overturn President Bush’s 136,000-vote victory in Ohio, but just want to ensure that all votes were counted properly in the face of concerns about Election Day irregularities.

“Our bottom line is to stand up for the integrity of the voting process because the voting process is the heart of the democratic process,” said Blair Bobier, spokesman for Cobb.

They are spending well over a million dollars of taxpayer’s money for a principle? They are making farmers, auto workers, construction workers, single parents, programmers, burger-flippers and all the rest fund their quest to prove a point?

The count will take place after the election results are certified in December so the outcome cannot change anything. At best it will confirm that which has already been decided. At worst (admittedly a low-probability outcome) it will drive a partisan wedge between the right and left so deeply that recovery will take decades. It would engender harsh, poisonous rhetoric, perpetuate the violence exhibited by leftest extremists across this nation during the election season, and encourage, nay mandate, that the Democrats in the legislature obstruct every initiative and judicial nomination that comes out of the White House for the next four years.

It has the possibility of politically paralyzing the nation in a time of war. And for what? A principle.

Note that Badnarik and Cobb aren’t trying to ensure the integrity of the vote. They only want to count the votes that were cast. It is a recount of the votes cast. Probably a further review of many provisional ballots.

But it will not address the votes cast by legions of dead people, illegal aliens, ineligible felons and imaginary voters. It is a poor principle they wish to waste taxpayer money on proving.

You can tell the character of a man by the friends that a man keeps as well as his foes. Badnarik is partnering with the far left of the ideological spectrum. I’ve had my problems with Badnarik before at which time I said I would never again vote for a Libertarian candidate above state level. I am seriously considering extending that ban to the Libertarian party in general. Badnarik is carrying a common sense party to the level of extremism and the people are letting him. I will not be a part of it.

Wizbang notes Wikipedia’s cataloguing of conspiracy theories about the 2004 election and wonders if Wikipedia has jumped the shark:

Among their dubious evidence is that in an election with record turnout, some people actually had to wait in line to vote. (The horrors.) They call that “voter suppression.” That is right below the old “but the vote did not match the exit polls” meme.

I have friends that waited over two hours in heavy GOP neighborhoods in order to vote for George W. Yet I’ve not heard anyone suggest that the reason was because of a plot to suppress their votes.

… and Democrat’s attempts to perpetuate the practice:

“In counting the first 5,000 provisional ballots,” Fund reported, “observers turned up 53 instances of individuals voting more than once. They also found four voters who were dead and dozens of felons attempting to vote. In two cases, the same individual tried to vote three times: early, absentee and on Election Day.”

And those are just the instances that they found. Imagine all the ones that got away with it.

The issue is not likely to die a quiet death. New Mexico Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron asked the state supreme court Monday to overturn a lower court ruling allowing Republican observers into the polls in Sandoval and Dona Ana counties. Vigil-Giron, a Democrat and elected official, is also seeking permission to evict the observers the Bernalillo County clerk allowed in to watch the counting, contending that New Mexico law does not provide for observers to be part of the review process.

So sad that a party repeatedly resorts to fraud. Even more sad is the perception that “both parties do it” and they are equally to blame. Yet a quick look down the stories collected by Bill Hobbs shows that is just not the case.

Buried in a CNN article, The extraordinary triumph of President George W. Bush, is this tid-bit:

The G.O.P. knew that every last disciple would be needed because the Democrats had so much money to spend this time. The liberal 527 America Coming Together (ACT), which overall spent $125 million registering voters and turning them out, had 30,000 paid foot soldiers in Ohio alone, making ACT, for a day, the state’s biggest employer. And alongside act was an army of free-lancers and first-timers and recruits from every Democratic activist group, matching the Republican faithful step for step.

That money train isn’t stopping folks. They are already gearing up for the next election.