Hmmm interesting. Why were all of you so confident that Bush would win?
Kerry had a good chance to win and he almost did: he just needed 100.000 or so more votes in OH (which were probably stolen by Ken Blackwell ... 
).
This. I still don't know why Kerry decided not to challenge the results in OH, there would have been many reasons to do so. Don't ge me wrong: He was a TERRIBLE candidate and I would have voted for Nader in 04, but every time I watch 2004 election night coverage videos, I always hope that Kerry wins lol. (Same with 1992 for Bush, btw.) Democrats often complain about Republican voter fraud occuring today, but when it actually mattered - in 2004 - Democrats (including Kerry) were silent. Two sides of the same coin. I don't consider Bush jun. to be a legitimate president. Never did, never will. The last real Republican win was in 1988, although that was by no means a "moral victory" for the GOP considering the wicked strategy Bush and Atwater used to win.
Problem is, even if counting of uncounted provisional ballots at the wrong polling places would have made up the ~120,000 vote deficit, it would have been very close and probably would have resulted in a full recount afterward, and who knows what would have happened then? Besides, Bush would have countered the move by asking for a recount in Wisconsin, which could have flipped the result there. In the end, challenging the OH result would have resulted in a 2000-style battle culminating in a supreme court decision, and even if it had gone in Kerry's favor, he would still get tons of people calling it unjustified because of Bush's 2.5% win in the national popular vote and would probably come into office significantly underwater in his approvals and with little if any political capital.
He made the right choice.
Poll
