Arbor Update

Ann Arbor Area Community News

Kerry Concedes

3. November 2004 • Murph
Email this article

The Associated Press reports that Kerry has called Bush to concede. From Salon.com’s copy of the story:

President Bush won a second term from a divided and anxious nation, his promise of steady, strong wartime leadership trumping John Kerry’s fresh-start approach to Iraq and joblessness. After a long, tense night of vote counting, the Democrat called Bush Wednesday to concede Ohio and the presidency, The Associated Press learned.

Kerry ended his quest, concluding one of the most expensive and bitterly contested races on record, with a call to the president shortly after 11 a.m. EST, according to two officials familiar with the conversation.



  1. Kerry’s speech was very good. Very dignified.

    I am a very happy man today. The American public spoke yesterday. They said to the leftists that we aren’t interested in buying your brand of crazy.

    I am proud to be an American today. Morality and honesty won.
       —T.J.    Nov. 3 '04 - 08:51AM    #
  2. TJ,

    Long time…
       —Murph    Nov. 3 '04 - 10:16AM    #
  3. Just flew in from D.C. Was at Capitol Hilton (“16th and K Street”) last nite for the Democratic National Committee party (Eleanor Holmes Norton spoke); wow did it get somber after a couple hours. People saying that the party’s head was handed to them on a plate, Democrats swearing at each other and arguing about whether Terry McAuliffe should be sacked, etc. Ugh.
    And it didn’t help that the hotel staff got REAL surly, even offensively aggressive and confrontational, and kicked us out of the party room after 1 a.m., saying we had to leave immediately etc. Jeez.

    Enough anecdotes.—The provisional ballot count could STILL (maybe maybe) be close enough so that an automatic recount could be triggered or triggerable in Ohio. (Kos at DailyKos.com said something in this vein today, I think) About as likely as Elvis being found alive, I know, but still…stranger things have happened.
    And then Kerry can de-concede. If he doesn’t, I’ll be happy to hop next flite to Boston and call him a coward to his face, etc.

    “Keep hope alive”—-Jesse Jackson
       —David Boyle    Nov. 3 '04 - 01:26PM    #
  4. The american people stood up and said we embrace freedom. let’s restrict gays – clearly that’s the MOST important issue in our day to day lives. Unless it’s stem cell research.
       —V    Nov. 3 '04 - 03:37PM    #
  5. “BUSH WON!!!!
    Chew on that, liberals!!!”

    Very dignified.

    you fucking wanker.
       —anon    Nov. 4 '04 - 01:22AM    #
  6. I had to put up with liberal BS at UM for my entire time there. This year, when I went to vote, I was called a “Nazi,” a “fascist,” and a “homosexual” for wearing a Bush sticker.

    I have been physically assaulted for being a conservative, and I have seen my grades suffer at the hands of liberal professors because of my political viewpoint.

    After going through all that, yes, I am happy to see liberals so pissed off and upset. You deserve it. Your political ideology is an exercise in immorality. The American people are not interested in what you are selling. They made that abundantly clear on Tuesday.
       —T.J.    Nov. 4 '04 - 07:40AM    #
  7. TJ, while I think it’s awfully funny that somebody called you a homosexual for voting for Bush (and I’m laughing at the person who was so clueless as to call you that, not at you), I’d like to ask you—do you believe that violence against conservatives for their political beliefs is more prevalent than, say, violence by conservatives against homosexuals because of the conservatives’ beliefs?

    And, when you’re talking about being physically assaulted for your views, are you still talking about that time you were shoved while crossing the Borders picket line?
       —Murph    Nov. 4 '04 - 08:49AM    #
  8. murph,
    yes, t.j. was trounced, pounced, chewed up and spit out by the latte-sipping, new york times reading, post-modernist vegan who works at borders…

    t.j.,
    i think what is abundently clear is that there is culture war raging in america, one that has been raging since the civil war…the south (and the west by extension) view liberals and those in cities as foreign cosmopolitians with little interest in god and more interest in telling them that they have to like gay people (just like the confedercy was pissed at the north when it told them that they had to stop having slaves)...on the other end of the culture war is the half of america that lives in places like new york, chicago, california, ann arbor, boston, you get the idea…people who live in dense communities, thus have access to foreign ideas and have more of a sense of togetherness than those who live in more isolated communities, and thus have a more go-it alone individualist outlook…

    the difference between the culture war today and that of yesteryear is that the confederacy has won, by handing a mandate to bush…40 percent of americans believe in evangeltical chrisitianity…the other thing that has changed is party affiliation…

    the democrats lost because people in the red states view liberals as people from the east who go to big universities and eat sushi and are telling hard working americans that they have to live be a new moral standard…i can see why they think that is unfair…this means that the democrats are going to have to really re-do their image if they want to survive as a party…

    but it also means that with this new mandate the other half of america is going to have to suffer the erosion of church and state and live under a emerging theocracy of sorts, one that was mandated by the slight majority…

    and thus, the culture war rages on…

    which side are you on,
    ari p.
       —Ari P.    Nov. 4 '04 - 09:36AM    #
  9. by the way t.j., i thought you didn’t even like bush all that much???

    -ari p.
       —Ari P.    Nov. 4 '04 - 09:37AM    #
  10. Shut the fuck up, TJ. You whine about liberals at the drop of a hat, and now are rejoicing in the country voting for fear instead of hope. Shouldn’t you be off consoling Alan Keyes or something? You and he share a lot of views.
    ps. You’re fucking retarded, and so is just over half the country. Congratulations.
       —js    Nov. 4 '04 - 02:19PM    #
  11. Ari,

    Read “Redneck Nation.” Hard to argue with his thesis. I picked up the last copy (I think) at Borders, but they might have more in. Worth the read for sure. Read the first chapter at the store, then decide if you want to buy it. I would suggest you read the 3rd chapter as well, it is pretty good and touches on what you discussed. It’s not an us vs. them, GOP vs. the world book, don’t worry.

    You are right, the Democrats are going to have to change if they want to regain control. This means that they will need to abandon the leftist thought that dominates their party.

    The thing is, liberals are saying that it was a small majority that elected Bush. GOP people will be quick to tell you that Bush was the first president to win by a majority since 1988, that he got more votes than anyone in history, yadda yadda yadda. Whatever.

    The important part to remember is that Bush was and is very unpopular. Lots of people voted for Kerry because he isn’t Bush. Their vote wasn’t an endorsement of the left, it was a condemnation of Bush. Thus, the conservative majority in the US is even bigger than you think. This manifested itself in the senate and house elections.

    As for an emerging theocracy, well… Morality is normative. Morals change as the opinions of society change. This election indicated the trend of morality in the nation. It’s not religious, it’s moral. It’s not that America is trying to establish a state religion, it’s that we’re trying to establish a code of morals.

    As a society, we are allowed to do that. Every society does. This election was a giant step toward reversing the erosion of morality that had been running rampant in the US over the last 30 years.
       —T.J.    Nov. 8 '04 - 05:59AM    #
  12. Murph,

    It was funny that he called me a homosexual. It was actually two people who did it, and it has happened several times leading up to this election. It really is an absurd thing to say from any angle.

    Assaulted for my political views…well, the Borders thing is the most visible. I mean, it made the newspaper. But it’s happened a few times. People are intense here.

    Violence against conservatives, I would say, is more prevalent than violence by conservatives against homosexuals. I think that the violence that whacked out extremist conservatives commit against homosexuals is more extreme and more violent, but nowhere near as prevalent. And the violence against conservatives tends to be weaker and more property damage-related.
       —T.J.    Nov. 8 '04 - 06:13AM    #
  13. TJ, while I’ll acknowledge that your average whacked-out leftie is not above swiping “Bush/Cheney 04” signs out of somebody’s yard, and that it probably happens pretty often, I think it’s in an entirely different realm than physical assault or murder. I’m not going to endorse keying Hummers or pouring sugar in gas tanks (if only because you’re likely to get shot for diong it), but I think it’s a much less severe wrong than personal injury. Stone-throwing BAMNers aside, I think most violent lefties are likely to avoid any risk of personal injury.
       —Murph    Nov. 8 '04 - 06:49AM    #
  14. Murph,

    I would suggest you watch what the leftists do to the conservative protestors at the next rally. Being a conservative and attending those rallies, I have seen a lot of it. I have never once seen a conservative physically attack a liberal. I have seen the opposite at least a dozen times.
       —T.J.    Nov. 8 '04 - 07:47AM    #
  15. At the next which rally? Klan? I already included that as a point to you. Bush? No, liberals aren’t allowed to attend those. Kerry? I haven’t heard any accounts of violence at those—have any documentation?
       —Murph    Nov. 8 '04 - 08:37AM    #
  16. “liberals aren’t allowed to attend those”

    As if things were any different at the DNC for Conservatives. They had them in cages.

    As for documentation, I don’t know, it’s probably out there. I know some dude got punched and it was on video.

    I am talking about at actual rallies that I have been to. Sometimes it is as simple as the fact that liberals cannot have a discussion without raising their voice when the conservative speaks up (such as the case where a Columbus liberal was escorted away by the Police and threatened arrest for DTP when he refused to argue in a reasonable tone, and a professor called the police on him).

    Sometimes, it is actual fisticuffs.

    The very nature of the two political philosophies dictates that conservatives would not physically attack liberals. It’s just not a conservative thing to do, since it has never been considered “OK” to attack someone over a disagreement.

    But whatever. If you want to think that conservatives do it as much as liberals do, you’re wrong, but knock yourself out. I am not going to argue about it anymore, I am neglecting my paper.
       —T.J.    Nov. 8 '04 - 03:56PM    #
  17. “Fisticuffs” is such a great word…
       —Murph    Nov. 8 '04 - 05:47PM    #
  18. “I have never once seen a conservative physically attack a liberal.” -t.j.

    i have, many times…in more than one country i might add…you just need to get out more…

    that is all,
    ari p.
       —Ari P.    Nov. 9 '04 - 04:57AM    #
  19. http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15855
       —T.J.    Nov. 10 '04 - 03:26AM    #
  20. posting something from david horowitiz’s e-mag is like if i posted a story from the online edition of the revoltionary worker…still a reviting read, in the end…

    -a biased ari p.
       —Ari P.    Nov. 10 '04 - 03:35AM    #
  21. I guess it’s not fair though…those were Palestinians, not necessarily liberals per se.
       —T.J.    Nov. 10 '04 - 06:47AM    #
  22. Gee, Teej, seems like you missed the conservative kicking the shit out of the woman at the RNC.
    Let’s see: The Conservative movement is bigger than it seems because conservatives were voting for Kerry because he’s not Bush? That doesn’t seem to follow at all, especially from wat we know about the voting demographics. Aside from a few Buchannan-ates, conservatives voted for Bush in record numbers (despite him being a radical reactionary).
    Let’s see: There is more violence by liberals against conservatives because you felt picked on by some dude at Borders? Where are your numbers coming from Teej? An appeal to anecdotel evidence? “Fisticuffs”? Did Jeeves get called in to deal with ruffians?
    And Let’s see: Violence isn’t a conservative value, but it is a liberal one? Ah, now it makes sense. Rumsfeld is a liberal! And John Birch never happened! Is this beamed into your brain or do you actually have to consult the rest of the world for your ludicrous bullshit?
    See, this is the problem. All this talk about “What could Kerry have done to win?” Well, he would have needed to convince people like TJ. Who is batshit loony.
    Inmates are running the asylum, folks.
       —js    Nov. 10 '04 - 07:02AM    #