|
Edited on Thu Dec-23-04 07:06 PM by shiina
The right-wing says the press is liberal. Yet the press call us wackos. If they wrote their stories with the "liberal bias" that they supposedly have, wouldn't it look more like this?
Despite the mountains of evidence to the contrary, a small minority of "coincidence theorists" insist on perpetuating the notion that Bush won the election fairly.
They ignore the hard numbers that show that it was statistically impossible, based on the exit polls, for Bush to win. They have even gone so far as to allege, with no proof, that the exit polls themselves were incorrect. They have no explaination, of course, as to how this could have been done.
Bush's validity as President has been in question since he was elected in 2000 despite having lost both the popular vote and, as was later revealed, the electoral college vote. His policies have been widely unpopular, spurring millions around the world to demonstrate against his radical right-wing agenda and militaristic agressiveness...
Anyone want to continue the story?
|