W said he was a uniter. However, because of his war and many other
issues, the country was greatly divided. It didn't seem like he would be
able to keep his promise to unite the country.

However, he finally did keep his promise.

* He united the country to put Obama in office in a *landslide*.

* He united the country to give the Republican Party its biggest
spanking in history.

Truly and sincerely, Heck of a job, Georgie!

"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
* He united the country to put Obama in office in a *landslide*.

I wouldn't call it a "landslide". A solid majority yes, but not a
landslide. A true landslide was Reagan's 1984 win. 49 states. The only
state to go Democratic was Mondale's home state of Minnesota, which he
barely won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_1984

Or Nixon's in 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1972

These are true landslides.

Carrying 29 states and winning by a 5% margin is not my idea of a landslide.

On Nov 6, 6:42*pm, "Bob Campbell" wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message

...

* He united the country to put Obama in office in a *landslide*.

I wouldn't call it a "landslide". * A solid majority yes, but not a
landslide. * A true landslide was Reagan's 1984 win. *49 states. * The only
state to go Democratic was Mondale's home state of Minnesota, which he
barely won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_1984

Or Nixon's in 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1972

These are true landslides.

Carrying 29 states and winning by a 5% margin is not my idea of a landslide.

ACORN FRAUD!

Bob Campbell wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
* He united the country to put Obama in office in a *landslide*.

I wouldn't call it a "landslide". A solid majority yes, but not a
landslide. A true landslide was Reagan's 1984 win. 49 states. The
only state to go Democratic was Mondale's home state of Minnesota, which
he barely won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_1984

Or Nixon's in 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1972

These are true landslides.

Carrying 29 states and winning by a 5% margin is not my idea of a
landslide.

I was referring to the electoral votes, which as you know, is how
presidents are elected.

Obama (364) to McCain (162)*. Some would call this a landslide. Your
mileage may vary.

*Approximate figures as of 11/06/08 from:
http://news.yahoo.com/election/2008/dashboard

"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
Bob Campbell wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
* He united the country to put Obama in office in a *landslide*.

I wouldn't call it a "landslide". A solid majority yes, but not a
landslide. A true landslide was Reagan's 1984 win. 49 states. The
only state to go Democratic was Mondale's home state of Minnesota, which
he barely won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_1984

Or Nixon's in 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1972

These are true landslides.

Carrying 29 states and winning by a 5% margin is not my idea of a
landslide.

I was referring to the electoral votes, which as you know, is how
presidents are elected.

An electoral landslide is 525 to 13 (Reagan over Mondale).

Obama (364) to McCain (162)*. Some would call this a landslide. Your
mileage may vary.

Some would call Obama a "Marxist". Your mileage may vary. See how easy
that is?

You can say a rock is a tree. Calling a rock a tree does not make it a
tree.

This election was not a landslide, unless we are redefining "landslide" to
mean "win".

"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
Bob Campbell wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
* He united the country to put Obama in office in a *landslide*.

I wouldn't call it a "landslide". A solid majority yes, but not a
landslide. A true landslide was Reagan's 1984 win. 49 states.
The only state to go Democratic was Mondale's home state of
Minnesota, which he barely won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_1984

Or Nixon's in 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1972

These are true landslides.

Carrying 29 states and winning by a 5% margin is not my idea of a
landslide.

I was referring to the electoral votes, which as you know, is how
presidents are elected.

Bob Campbell wrote:

An electoral landslide is 525 to 13 (Reagan over Mondale).

Obama (364) to McCain (162)*. Some would call this a landslide. Your
mileage may vary.

Some would call Obama a "Marxist".

But then, they would probably be called kooktards.

This election was not a landslide, unless we are redefining "landslide"
to mean "win".

No, you are playing a game of semantics. Just because Reagan/Mondale was
a bigger landslide doesn't mean this election -wasn't- also a landslide.
Most people would define getting more than double the votes of the
runner-up as a landslide, albeit not as dramatic as your Ronnie example,
but a landslide none the less.

In any event, you miss the -main- point of the original post. It wasn't
to play semantics, it -was- to point out the irony of how W united the
country -- just not in the way that he planned.

In article ,
Billy Burpelson wrote:


"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
Bob Campbell wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
* He united the country to put Obama in office in a *landslide*.

I wouldn't call it a "landslide". A solid majority yes, but not a
landslide. A true landslide was Reagan's 1984 win. 49 states.
The only state to go Democratic was Mondale's home state of
Minnesota, which he barely won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_1984

Or Nixon's in 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1972

These are true landslides.

Carrying 29 states and winning by a 5% margin is not my idea of a
landslide.

I was referring to the electoral votes, which as you know, is how
presidents are elected.

Bob Campbell wrote:

An electoral landslide is 525 to 13 (Reagan over Mondale).

Obama (364) to McCain (162)*. Some would call this a landslide. Your
mileage may vary.

Some would call Obama a "Marxist".

But then, they would probably be called kooktards.

SNIP

He is a marxist you twit.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

In article ,
Billy Burpelson wrote:

Bob Campbell wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
* He united the country to put Obama in office in a *landslide*.

I wouldn't call it a "landslide". A solid majority yes, but not a
landslide. A true landslide was Reagan's 1984 win. 49 states. The
only state to go Democratic was Mondale's home state of Minnesota, which
he barely won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_1984

Or Nixon's in 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1972

These are true landslides.

Carrying 29 states and winning by a 5% margin is not my idea of a
landslide.

I was referring to the electoral votes, which as you know, is how
presidents are elected.

Obama (364) to McCain (162)*. Some would call this a landslide. Your
mileage may vary.

*Approximate figures as of 11/06/08 from:
http://news.yahoo.com/election/2008/dashboard

It's not right to look at electoral votes this way using words like
landslide.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Comrade Barak Obama is not America's next president.
www.newswithviews.com/Devvy/kidd411.htm

B HO!
cuhulin

In article ,
Billy Burpelson wrote:

Bob Campbell wrote:
"Billy Burpelson" wrote in message
...
* He united the country to put Obama in office in a *landslide*.
I wouldn't call it a "landslide". A solid majority yes, but not a
landslide. A true landslide was Reagan's 1984 win. 49 states. The
only state to go Democratic was Mondale's home state of Minnesota, which
he barely won.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._pr...election,_1984

Or Nixon's in 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_...election,_1972

These are true landslides.

Carrying 29 states and winning by a 5% margin is not my idea of a
landslide.
I was referring to the electoral votes, which as you know, is how
presidents are elected.

Obama (364) to McCain (162)*. Some would call this a landslide. Your
mileage may vary.

*Approximate figures as of 11/06/08 from:
http://news.yahoo.com/election/2008/dashboard

Telamon wrote:

It's not right to look at electoral votes this way using words like
landslide.

And why not, pray tell?

Electoral votes are -exactly- what is used to determine the winner. And
if the winner gets -more than double- the votes of the runner-up, most
*intelligent* people would consider that a landslide. However, it's
certainly your prerogative to call it whatever you wish.

In any event, you miss the -main- point of the original post. It wasn't
to play semantics, it -was- to point out the irony of how W united the
country -- just not in the way that he planned.

But then, I shouldn't be surprised. Your specialty is spinning, dodging
and doing everything -but- addressing the original topics.