# Geroge Bush ahead in the pols again: HOW? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 9, 2000, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255 "2000-10-09T13:47:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Danielinthewolvesden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ce7236/32.png) [@Danielinthewolvesden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Danielinthewolvesden)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2000, 6:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255/41 "2000-10-11T06:42:59Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Freedom2 \* > **Prediction:** Bush by a landslide. Maaaaybe Clinton slips by in NY. > **LANDSLIDE** > \*\* I do hope this “person” is not a typical Bush supporter, if so, God save America. It’s GORE you \, and Bush has already, for all intentt & purposes 'conceded" California. With the 2 biggest states, as locked as states can be, there cannot be a Bush landslide. ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2000, 8:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255/42 "2000-10-11T08:52:35Z")
> [@](#): > > With the 2 biggest states, as locked as states can be, there cannot be a Bush landslide. Are you suggesting that Gore has the two biggest states locked? Last I checked (and the last time the boys over at [census.gov](http://census.gov) checked), the number 2 state was Texas. And the last time I checked, Texas was Dubya’s state. ---
**Author:** ![Danielinthewolvesden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ce7236/32.png) [@Danielinthewolvesden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Danielinthewolvesden)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2000, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255/43 "2000-10-11T10:08:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by SPOOFE Bo Diddly \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > With the 2 biggest states, as locked as states can be, there cannot be a Bush landslide. > > Are you suggesting that Gore has the two biggest states locked? Last I checked (and the last time the boys over at [census.gov](http://census.gov) checked), the number 2 state was Texas. And the last time I checked, Texas was Dubya’s state. \*\* Umm, NY has 33 electoral votes in this election, Texas 32. I will concede bush has #3 locked even tighter than Gore has #1 & #2. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Corrado](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/a88e4f/32.png) [@John\_Corrado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Corrado)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2000, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255/44 "2000-10-11T12:29:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Danielinthewolvesden \* > I do hope this “person” is not a typical Bush supporter, if so, God save America. It’s GORE you \, and Bush has already, for all intentt & purposes 'conceded" California. With the 2 biggest states, as locked as states can be, there cannot be a Bush landslide. \*\* Dan, stop talking out of your ass with absolute statements like that. If a candidate wins California and New York, he can still lose 413-80, which most people would consider “landslide”. Hell, Dukakis did better than that in '88 and Bush Sr. was still considered to have won in a landslide. You’re being insulting and obtuse. Personally, I think most of the race will be decided tonight during the second debate. The results of the first debate have been out there for a while, and the question is, have the candidates learned and changed? Can Bush appear more intelligent, competent, and comfortable in the new format now that the expectations for him have been raised (we know he can survive the debate; now, can he do well)? Can Gore keep his condescencion and arrogance in check? Can either candidate make an actual argument without resorting to a stock phrase we want to beat them over the head with? ---
**Author:** ![SPOOFE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c5a1d2/32.png) [@SPOOFE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SPOOFE)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2000, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255/45 "2000-10-11T23:11:14Z")
> [@](#): > > NY has 33 electoral votes in this election, Texas 32. Ooh, that’s right. Texas just has a larger population, that’s what I thought you were originally referring to. ---
**Author:** ![Danielinthewolvesden](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ce7236/32.png) [@Danielinthewolvesden](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Danielinthewolvesden)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2000, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255/46 "2000-10-12T01:38:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Corrado \* > Dan, stop talking out of your ass with absolute statements like that. If a candidate wins California and New York, he can still lose 413-80, which most people would consider “landslide”. Hell, Dukakis did better than that in '88 and Bush Sr. was still considered to have won in a landslide. You’re being insulting and obtuse. \*\* Imprimus: No personal attacks here in GD, and oddly enuf, that applies to the “Great & Powerful” John Corrado, also. Secundus: No-one wins the 2 biggest states without winning a lot more. Never, has CA & NY been won in an election, all by themself. If anyone wins both CA & NY, they still could lose, but never by a “landslide”. Every political expert is talking “very close election”, and I agree. The only dissenters are the far right Bush fans, who think if they say “landslide” often enuf, it will become a self-fulfilling prophesy. 3rd- Your math is wrong. Add up CA & NY again. ---
**Author:** ![bj0rn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/a88e57/32.png) [@bj0rn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bj0rn)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2000, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255/47 "2000-10-12T12:12:24Z")
why dont just everybody vote for some other party than democrats or republicans? i find this 2 way road a bit narrow minded, but thats just me… bj0rn - … ---
**Author:** ![JustAnotherGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/278dde/32.png) [@JustAnotherGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JustAnotherGuy)\ **Post date:** [October 12, 2000, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255/48 "2000-10-12T13:21:37Z")
That almost happened once… If Perot hadn’t turned out to be a nutbar, dropping out of the race because of a conspiracy to wreck his daughter’s wedding, a third party would exist today, strong enough to potentially win elections. However, after his supporters were smacked in the face by his withdrawal, it will probably be awhile before a third party poses a true challenge again. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/geroge-bush-ahead-in-the-pols-again-how/36255.md?page=2)