# I Told You So **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 3, 2004, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850 "2004-11-03T21:20:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/361 "2004-11-08T16:33:43Z")
Ya know what, I’ll apologize for calling 'em morons. It’s been very hard for me to swallow that uninformed voters are choosing to blame other people for their own failure to paritcipate fully in our republic. I can respect repub positions on the issues. It is very hard for me to respect people who didn’t vote on the issues. Yes, the dems have to engage in memetic combat with a new ‘fighting style.’ I won’t argue that. And I’m not frustrated by people who had real reasons for voting one way and then add “oh, and I didn’t like the tone.” It’s people whose sole reason to vote (or at least a major factor) was the tone. Because, when you get right down to it, tone doesn’t sign bills into law, or get our troops into wars, etc, etc, etc… ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/362 "2004-11-08T16:52:42Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Because, when you get right down to it, tone doesn’t sign bills into law, or get our troops into wars, etc, etc, etc… But it does help win elections, which places parties in a position to sign bills into law, and get our troops into wars, etc, etc, etc… There are voters that study every issue. But the reality of the political landscape is that there are voters that vote because they just like a candidate, or because the other side pissed them off. Maybe they are not “paritcipating fully in our republic,” but they are a bloc that cannot be ignored. Unless you’d like to suggest some sort of basic qualification test before you’re permitted to vote? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/363 "2004-11-08T17:08:27Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But it does help win elections, which places parties in a position to sign bills into law, and get our troops into wars, etc, etc, etc… Yes, but if you vote on tone, then you’re not voting on which bills will be signed into law, or which wars we’ll engage in. You’re voting on tone. > [@Bricker](#): > > There are voters that study every issue. But the reality of the political landscape is that there are voters that vote because they just like a candidate, or because the other side pissed them off. Maybe they are not “paritcipating fully in our republic,” but they are a bloc that cannot be ignored. Well, that is an issue I’ll leave to politicians and democrats. Me? I plan on ranting my little heart out. > [@Bricker](#): > > Unless you’d like to suggest some sort of basic qualification test before you’re permitted to vote? No, it’s a civic and not a legal duty. People who aren’t acting as good citizens still have the right to vote, and I wouldn’t have it any other way. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/364 "2004-11-08T17:36:29Z")
> [@PunditLisa](#): > > I saw Barbra Streisand on Rosie O’Donnell where she basically said that people who supported Bush were idiots. I still get angry when I think of her smirky attitude. And you know what? It backfired, because her exclusive, elitist attitude made me want to vote FOR Bush. Attacking people because you don’t agree with their platform is fair game. Calling half of the country “stupid” or “idiots” because they don’t happen to march to the beat of your drummer, is not. Did Kerry call anyone or half the country stupid ? So you disregarded Republicans calling Democrats all sorts of “bleeding heart liberals” or “peacenicks” and took into consideration only a perceived smirky atitude ? You voted against people instead of in favor of something ? Then naturally came Osama and he called Bush stuff… and you promptly voted “against” Osama bin Laden by electing Bush… nice… Osama must be devastated now. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/365 "2004-11-08T19:23:46Z")
Two things: (1) In the quotes that **Yosemite** provided from the other thread (which I have not read), I don’t see people who were undecided, and then decided to vote for Bush based on obnoxious liberals. I see people who were going to vote for Bush, and then had that decision galvanized by what they perceived as obnoxious liberals. (2) Here is the first paragraph of Ann Coulter’s poisonous **Treason** : > [@Ann Coulter](#): > > Liberals have a preternatural gift for striking a position on the side of treason. You could be talking about Scrabble and they would instantly leap to the anti-American position. Everyone says liberals love America, too. No they don’t. Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence. The left’s obsession with the crimes of the West and their Rousseauian respect for Third World savages all flow from this subversive goal. If anyone has the gaucherie to point out the left’s nearly unblemished record of rooting against America, liberals turn around and scream “McCarthyism!” Can you find anything in the collected works or quotes of Al Franken or Michael Moore that’s even in the same LEAGUE as that? Seriously, which section of **F911** conveyed the message that red-staters are evil homophobic idiots? Did I miss it because I was in the bathroom? Where in **Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them** does Al Franken say that people who live in California are better than people who live in Alabama? Whereas, right there in the first bloody paragraph of the book, Ann Coulter says in absolute stark black and white that liberals don’t love America. ---
**Author:** ![fruitbat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/58f4c7/32.png) [@fruitbat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fruitbat)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/366 "2004-11-08T19:50:24Z")
> [@yosemite](#): > > So? Am I denying that there is obnoxiousness on the Republican side? Didn’t I already say that people should distance themselves from obnoxious personalities if they want to have credibility? As a guy who weakly supported the Democrats this election, this is one of my complaints about the GOP. They do very little to separate themselves from their nutjobs. Pat Robertson remains an important figure in the GOP, he should be an embarassment. Jesse Helms deserved a seat on the Senate Windmill Oversight Commitee, instead he is given a position of great importance. John Ashcroft gets the job of AG. Republicans in SC make appearances at Bob Jones. The GOP not only doesn’t disavow their extremists, they pander to them. How would conservatives feel if Al Sharpton was their Secretary of Health and Human Services? Is it any surprise that this tacit endorsment of radical politics scares the heck out of me? Say what you will about Michael Moore, he is a giant douchebag, but you don’t see candidates pandering to him and posing for photo ops. They recognize his radical agenda and properly distance themselves from it. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/367 "2004-11-08T20:02:12Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > If anybody based their vote on the tone of one ‘side’, they’re a moron. > > Okay? If the entire reason for their vote was based on that, they’re an idiot. I think few voted on _just_ that. I think that many of them are saying that the tone _galvanized_ their stance. Here’s what I said earlier: > [@yosemite](#): > > Also take into account that if a potential voter is\*\* undecided on an issue \*\*and most of what they get from the advocates of a particular side is static and hostility, then they’re going to be less receptive to that side. After a while, they’ll start to be distrustful of that side. Even if that side has cornered the market on truth, it’s too late. They’ve turned people away because of the shitty attitude displayed by many. It also very likely was an issue-by-issue concept. They looked for clarification on certain issues, and one side was shittier than the other at clarifying. They soon began to distrust that side. Credibility was lost. > [@](#): > > Thus, if that was the entire reason, it is the entire reason. > If there were other reasons, there were other reasons. And the crappy tone sealed the deal. The other side had a chance, but they blew it because they were so obnoxious. > [@](#): > > Citizens should not be passive consumers of information. > Campaigns should not be what ‘convinces’ citizens to vote a certain way. Keep living in that dream world. It will help you get votes. Oh wait . . . :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > Citizens should do the research, discover the facts, and make their own informed decisions. Even if it’s hard. Even if it requires sifting through lies, half truths, and bullshit. And let’s make it harder, and blame _them_ when they have trouble sifting through the shit. Yes. Let’s do that. > [@](#): > > What is there to explore? > I read the thread, people gave their reasons. > I trust that they were honest. And you think that the reason was just based on “tone” and nothing else, do you? That’s what you keep saying. > [@](#): > > John Kerry put out a message. > That message was not obnoxious or full of ‘crap’. > They could have easily done the research. > Excuses dont’ fly. > I don’t care how many screaming idiots there were, yes, I blame them for not doing the research. They were _unimpressed_ with the message, I’ll warrant. They might have been convinced that there was more to it, but, you know, sifting through crap and all that. > [@](#): > > Again. > Click on John Kerry’s website. > Problem solved. Oh really? You think that the candidate’s site offers all the information needed to make an informed decision, do you? And I’m sure you’d agree that clicking on George Bush’s site would offer all the information about _him_ right? No need to delve further for more facts, eh? > [@](#): > > So, in other words, they had other reasons, and also didn’t like the tone. > Note, they had other reasons. But you said you read the thread that I quoted, and you said that you didn’t need to look any further because they’d said what they said? _Now_ you’re saying, “Well, because they had other reasons!” What? We’re talking about the same thread, right? > [@](#): > > I’m not dodging any issue. Yeah, you are. > [@](#): > > The tone of the debate around the issues has **nothing to do with the issues**. > If people couldn’t be bothered to take the time to be good citizens, they have nobody to blame but themselves. Blah blah blah. Keep making it as hard as possible for people to get to the truth, keep making the experience as unpleasant as possible, and keep blaming people for having the natural human reaction of not _trusting_ the credibility of the side that gives a message covered in shit, and see how many votes you gain. Go ahead. See. > [@](#): > > Hoz zabout… **it isn’t my job to ask, it’s their job to state their reasons and not be dishonest**. I don’t have to quiz them on what their ‘real’ ‘deep’ reasons were. If they state that they had other reasons, then they had other reasons. If they state that they did not, they did not. I don’t think you read the thread. I have no idea what you’re talking about at this point. We’re getting nowhere. > [@](#): > > If they’re not saying that, then they’re not saying that! The thread hasn’t changed, you know. Nobody’s edited it. They said the same thing that they said the first time you read it. If you didn’t get the indication that the reasons were deeper the first time and you won’t delve further, then there’s no point pursuing this. > [@](#): > > If people couldn’t get at the dems message because of negativity, and the repubs were also negative, then by that logic, they couldn’t get at their message either. Well, obviously something different is going on. Why don’t you ask people? > [@](#): > > If someone claims they were turned off by the dems obnoxiousness, I think it’s only fair to say “hey, why then weren’t you turned off by the repubs obnoxiousness?” Why don’t you ask them? One possible answer might be that they were _undecided_ on an issue that the dems were trying to further, therefore it was the _dem’s_ job to try to sway them. And the dems sucked at it. > [@](#): > > No. > **If** one candidate is better, and they lose, the country loses. But they don’t see it that way. They see it as the asshole side lost. They’re not crying now, _you_ are. They might regret their decision later, but they aren’t now. _You_ are. And this is about how your side’s tone contributed to this whole issue. > [@](#): > > Okay, this analogy is now beyond salvaging. Sorry it didn’t go in the direction that you’d hoped. 😉 > [@](#): > > Your health, your country’s welfare, etc… are your responsibility. > You can blame whoever you want, but in the end, you have to take responsibility for the consequences. Yes, and in the case of voting, the consequences of a decision are felt by all. So let’s make these people who are at risk of making “wrong” decision feel as uncomfortable and as alienated as possible. Let’s make the odds that they’ll uncover the “truth” as remote as possible. And let’s then all lament when the predictable happens, and sit around blaming them completely for the outcome. It’s working great for you so far. > [@](#): > > The dems should also refine how they package themselves. And all we get from you is that one watered-down concession, eh? Okay. Whatever. ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/368 "2004-11-08T20:35:28Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > Ya know what, I’ll apologize for calling 'em morons. > It’s been very hard for me to swallow that uninformed voters are choosing to blame other people for their own failure to paritcipate fully in our republic. > > I can respect repub positions on the issues. > It is very hard for me to respect people who didn’t vote on the issues. > > Yes, the dems have to engage in memetic combat with a new ‘fighting style.’ > > I won’t argue that. > > And I’m not frustrated by people who had real reasons for voting one way and then add “oh, and I didn’t like the tone.” It’s people whose sole reason to vote (or at least a major factor) was the tone. > Because, when you get right down to it, tone doesn’t sign bills into law, or get our troops into wars, etc, etc, etc… Okay, obviously this changes what was said before. Sorry I spent all the time on my long-winded post before going further. :smack: I see what you’re saying. Voting _just_ on someone’s tone, or their smirk, is folly. I doubt that many people vote on just that, but some do. The smirk, or looking like Herman Munster, well, trying to fight people’s reaction to that is futile. The overall tone, however—yes, there’s something that can be done. It’s a problem and a complication that is _completely preventable_, and some people aren’t trying to prevent it, or own up to it being the element that it is. And as Bricker says, the fact is that some people _do_ vote on overall tone alone. I personally don’t think that there’s a huge chunk of them, but they are a voting bloc. So, since they exist, and since they vote, try to be pragmatic about the whole thing. You want their vote, or not? Do you want results, or not? Blaming them for being whatever they are, and not owning up to the fact that something _completely avoidable_ on your side contributed to a unwanted or unpleasant outcome—well, that is folly too, is it not? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/369 "2004-11-08T20:49:34Z")
**Yosemite** , darlin’, it won’t make any difference. If Kerry had been as sweet as pie and respectful as an altar boy, it wouldn’t have mattered, because the Forces of Darkness were perfectly willing to twist his words any way they felt like. Case in point: in the course of a discussion on creating diplomatic international coalitions to a purpose, he used the word “sensitive”. The FoD fell all over themselves to rush to the microphone: “Well, look at the “sensitive” little nancy-boy, wants to have a “sensitive” war, limp-wristed little liberal wants to make nicey-nice with the terrorists…” What difference does it make what you say or how you say it if the other guy’s gonna lie about you _anyway_? ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/370 "2004-11-08T22:10:12Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > What difference does it make what you say or how you say it if the other guy’s gonna lie about you _anyway_? Absolutely. I heard a radio commercial on the Sunday before the election stating that Kerry said terrorism was a nuisance. I assumed that this lie was foisted upon us by some ancillary group until the “I’m George W. Bush and I approved this message came on.” Has anybody compiled a list of these types of distortions and lies? It would be fairly long. The bottom line is that John Kerry is and was a good and decent man who served his country with honor and distinction. He ran a remarkably clean and positive campaign in the face of that run by his opponent. As others have observed, even Christ would be painted by these guys as a liberal and a foreigner, and that’s before they even got to lying about him! “He’s against war, yet he once said ‘blessed are the Peace Keeper missiles’!” “He wants to run some kind of federal welfare program for the meek, allowing them to inherit everything!” ---
**Author:** ![yosemite](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/3ab097/32.png) [@yosemite](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yosemite)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2004, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/371 "2004-11-08T22:38:09Z")
Elucidator, Hentor, we’re now straying into mudslinging territory. Sure, both sides mudsling. Mudslinging has been around for a _long_ time, and, unfortunately, it seems to work a lot of the time. The people in the thread that Bricker and I cited were talking about something else other than mudslinging. Read what they’re saying. I believe these people are intelligent people, not ninnies. They said that the tone from the left (some on the left) was not persuasive. Didn’t help. Hurt. That’s the issue I’ve been discussing here. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2004, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/372 "2004-11-09T01:33:00Z")
> [@yosemite](#): > > Elucidator, Hentor, we’re now straying into mudslinging territory. Sure, both sides mudsling. Mudslinging has been around for a _long_ time, and, unfortunately, it seems to work a lot of the time. Remember the good old days when mudslinging didn’t used to include bald-faced lying? Ahhh. Mister we could use a man like Richard Nixon again… ---
**Author:** ![gobear](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/8dc957/32.png) [@gobear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gobear)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2004, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/373 "2004-11-09T01:38:53Z")
“Go back to sleep, America, the government is back in control again.”—Bill Hicks ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2004, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/374 "2004-11-09T02:52:33Z")
I was going to ignore this, but then I decided that it might be important to just ignore. This accusation that we were just too darn mean and alienated people is absolutely par for the course. The Republicans say this because they don’t want a strong and forceful opposition, because in the end, that is what people want. People want to line up behind a champion - a champion for them, for their cause, for their country. Were people saying that Kerry was too darn mean? Were they saying that he was too tough, too forceful, to single minded of purpose? No, they charged that he was weak, wishy washy, flip floppy, French, sensitive, liberal, hell, they charged him with being _from Massachusetts_! Look at Rove’s strategy – attack Kerry’s strength. Kerry had actually demonstrated enormous guts, courage and strength in earlier days, while at the same time Bush did his best to stay stateside and then shirked his duty. Rove did his usual of trying to turn this to a liability, and was to some extent able to do that. This is classic Republicanism – call the Democrats all the names in the book. Do so openly and often. (Which candidates were known for calling others “major league assholes” and saying “Go fuck yourself?” Can you ever recall this kind of language from people who won elections?) Lie about them and muddy the waters about their strengths. Make them look weak and effeminate. Then in the end, charge them with being mean, demonizing, and shrill. Call upon them to stop, to be more civil, to unify. People, at their core, want to be protected, probably especially at this time. So fuck this nonsense that we alienated voters to lose the election. We did alienate them, but only by not standing up and fighting fire with fire, by proving that we were tough enough to take on the Republicans, let alone other enemies of the US. We alienated them before the campaign by rolling over and biting the pillow while Bush pushed his agenda. Don’t fall for it again. Don’t roll over. Don’t buy that we weren’t civil enough. We were, once again, too civil. Stop turning the other cheek. People aren’t respecting us for it. They are voting for the people who tell others to go fuck themselves. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2004, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/375 "2004-11-09T03:25:31Z")
Go for it. Good luck. See you in 2006 at another victory party for the GOP, which will be the only result of the strategy you propose. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2004, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/376 "2004-11-09T03:32:31Z")
Thanks for your concern. Every time. You say it. Over and over. **Bricker**. Seriously, folks, we don’t win by allowing others to tell us what we should be saying. Especially when they have made clear they would vote for Bush if he were found in bed with a dead girl and a live boy and Karl Rove’s butt plug in his mouth. With videotape and a signed receipt and a book called “This Sort of Thing is My Bag, Baby!” Who wants to bet that Bricker will be back to say that we’ll lose again? ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2004, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/377 "2004-11-09T03:38:52Z")
Hentor, I have to agree. The Democrats have to get mad enough to stand up and yell “That’s bullshit” whenever they can. They have to stop being so “nice and sportsmanlike” in their campaigns and debates. They have to go for blood, just like their opponents. Look at the whole Swifties thing. Kerry should have got in their faces, and said “You’re damn liars”. When he had Bush cornered on the many everchanging reasons for going to war, he should have closed in like a shark, but he never did. He could have brought up the many reports that said NO WEAPONS, and Bush’s total failure to find any; he never did. When Bush talked about steadfast resoluteness, he should have hammered on that, comparing it to a mental case who constantly bangs his head against the wall even though it hurts like hell. When Bush talked about religion, he should have asked why religion was not important until it became “useful”. He should have had his own “unafilliated goon squads” (Swifties like). He should have put the pressure on and turned the screws, but he never did. He should have pounced on Bush’s version of “triumph of the will” but didn’t. The Republicans didn’t win the election, the Democrats lost it. Politics is a dirty game. You have to get dirty to win. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2004, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/378 "2004-11-09T03:41:17Z")
Let me propose a thought experiment for you, if you can take a moment’s respite from trying to answer arguments with gloating. Suppose you’re in an auditorium, seats 1,000, all seats are full: 520 blue eyed, 480 brown eyed people. You are blindfolded. At a certain moment, all the blue eyed persons cheer, a moment later all the brown-eyed persons cheer. You are supposed to determine the difference. And you, you will say “Wow! The blue eyed people are, like, totally in the majority, their voices entirely swamp the browns.” Or would you more likely say “Could you do that again, I’m not _quite_ sure…” ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2004, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/379 "2004-11-09T03:42:54Z")
Previous, if not clear, a _billy doo_ for **Bricker** … ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2004, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850/380 "2004-11-09T03:44:18Z")
You must mean that 51 or 52 percent “landslide” folks are so proud of. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-told-you-so/272850.md?page=20)