Dr. Pinky:
Re: growing up:
Ahhh, thank you. I’ve vowed to confine my debates to grown ups/and or those who seek continuing growth and knowledge.
Adios.
IIRC- Under Florida law a candidate had the right to demand a recount in only three counties. If this is correct ( and I’m sure someone will be along to tell me if I am mistaken ) then it is a bit unfair to criticize Gore for choosing those three he thought would help him most and even more so to criticize him for not asking for a statewide recount.
Asmodean:
I won’t blame you as long as you don’t live in Florida.
**
You admit the possibility that those counties do not have the funds to upgrade their system but then ignore it in your conclusion. If this possibility represents reality, how are these Democratic officials responsible for not having the money to spend on voting machinery? These are urban counties. It has been my experience that city taxes are higher than those in the suburbs. It seems to me that the cities are getting as much from the tax base as they can.
Should Democrats be happy that those counties are too poor to afford accurate election results?
Should Republicans?
**
Who voted for the Electoral Collage again?
Oh that’s right, dead people.
Hi! I’m a Weenie
What’s your sign?
Good point…Nixon needed more than just Illinois to win. However, I guess some argue that Johnson’s Texas may also have been won by fraud…Don’t know how much validity there is to this claim. (My impression is that the existence of fraud in Texas in at least some elections involving Johnson is well-documented, but whether there was enough fraud in this one to change the result, I don’t know.) If Nixon had won both of those states, then he would have won.
I agree with this advice, although it seems likely that I will have to spend most of my time just fighting regress rather than working for actual progress. We shall see.
Advice to all…It’s worth the trip! That was great! Thanks, Stoidela.
And what does this have to do with anything? My objection is to your implication, which exists in the present, that if the Dems lost in FL because their voters didn’t follow instructions, it was the fault of those voters. I’ve provided evidence that that’s a faulty implication; it might’ve had legitimacy if voters for both parties had had equal opportunity to fuck up, but they didn’t. How it came to pass that this disparity existed is a whole 'nother story which is irrelevant to the point I’m making.
Yes. As provided for in Florida law.
No, he simply requested recounts. No suit filing required. Unless you are counting the fact that BUSH had filed suit to have the LEGAL recounts STOPPED. Yes, Gore filed suit THEN.
None of us were able to observe Gore’s demeanor, but apparantly you DID miss the part where Bush filed a lawsuit to stop recounts that were mandated by state law, since that is precisely what he did. Ok, not “mandated”, “provided for”.
Well, Dubya is so busy “uniting” by picking the most polarizingly right-wing people he can, I don’t think we need to worry about that. :rolleyes:
Poor dubya, thinking he had anything to do with Texas government, thinking he is now capable of dealing with Washington. Idiot.
Gore contested the election first. However, it would have made no sense for Bush to contest the election first, last, or ever. He won the initial results and mandatory recount.
FTR, Bush filed suit first. He went to the Southern District of Florida on, IIRC, 11/12/00 to stop the hand recounts (which were proceeding, but not as a result of any lawsuit).
You are mistaken. Nothing in Florida law limited the right to a recount to only three counties. In fact, Gore later asked Bush to join him in seeking a recount in all counties.
Sua
Gore did indeed request manual recounts first. While these were not mandated by law, he was entitled to them under Florida law. (I believe that still was true, after all was said and done. Sua Sponte will hopefully correct me if I’m wrong.)
Bush, however, was the first to go to court, for the purpose of blocking those recounts.
And while Gore didn’t petition for a statewide manual recount, I can’t see the problem with that, given that (a) there’s always a certain logic for seeking the minimum relief that will suffice to correct the injustice one believes one has suffered, and (b) he repeatedly informed the Bush camp that he would be willing to join them in requesting a statewide recount.
Needless to say, neither candidate was very ‘Buddha-like’ in all this. I don’t think either man is very open to his essential Buddha-nature. 
Noted and withdrawn, Sua.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by SuaSponte *
**
The last time I checked, the Federalist Papers were not the law of the land. The Senate has the power to vote thumbs down on unsuitable candidates; the Dems can filibuster and block a nomination unless there are 60 votes against them. They’re not about to do it, in part for the reason that some of them hope to get a Cabinet gig under a future Demo president and don’t want to jeopardize their chances. The environmental, civil rights and other issues that energize the rank and file on the SDMB mean very little to career Democratic (or Republican) politicos, when measured against possible personal gain.
RTFirefly:"And while Gore didn’t petition for a statewide manual recount, I can’t see the problem with that, given that (a) there’s always a certain logic for seeking the minimum relief that will suffice to correct the injustice one believes one has suffered, and (b) he repeatedly informed the Bush camp that he would be willing to join them in requesting a statewide recount.
Needless to say, neither candidate was very ‘Buddha-like’ in all this. I don’t think either man is very open to his essential Buddha-nature."
I think that instead of asking to recount 4 counties over and over and over again he should have tried to get a state re-count.
That was what many saw as the problem. He was trying to force multiple recounts in democratic counties and forgetting the rest of Florida. Sure he offered for Bush to ask for a state recount but I think that he knew that Bush would refuse and made the offer only so that he could say that he did. He knew that Bush wanted to end it.
Dr.Pinky
Well, if being declared dead is the same as being dead, then obviously being declared the legitimate winner of the election is the same as being the legitimate winner of the election.
Whether someone is able to afford to take a day off of work to vote is statistically dependent on race on class. Is this a violation of equal prootection?
WTF are you talking about? No one “set” these hurdles; they are natural results of capitalism.
That’s because it doesn’t exist. “Equal protection of laws” means “equal protection of laws”. It does not mean “equal protection of economic forces”. There is no law which caused the disparity; therefore, there is no constutional issue.
2sense
But it is incredibly hypocritical to criticize Bush for taking advantage of the legal avenues to which he was entitled, when Gore did exactly the same thing.
So?
Well, “over and over” is not exactly right, that’s the spin of the Bushites.
And why ask for counties to be recounted when they showed no significant difference betweent he first count and the second? Just because?
A) There was no logical need or reason to recount all of Florida, because all of Florida did not have noticable discrepoencies between counts.
B) Gore offered several times to go along with a statewide recount, as did the Florida Supreme Court, for all intents and purposes. Bush refused. That pretty much cuts the legs out from under this complaint.
Ya know, Bush was inaugurated today, guys. Can’t you be satisfied with that?
Hail to the Thief!
stoid
Agreed but what does this have to do with my words you quoted?
I haven’t criticized Bush for going to court.
And anyways it turns out that I wasn’t correct, so I withdrew it.
So the Electoral Collage isn’t a good example for showing that democracy isn’t dead.
( Was my point so hard to understand? I was going for lighthearted not obscure. )
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Milossarian *
**
Great debates, & all you guys can come up with is attacks on my sexual orientation? Attacks on my lack of maturity?
If to grow up is to be a humorless duck, I’ll have none of it, thanks. If to be imature is to not hew to your web spewed wisdom instantaneously, excuse me.
You’re annoyed, or not.
How did you celebrate the ascenscion of Junior?
Stoid:“Well, “over and over” is not exactly right, that’s the spin of the Bushites.”
No that is what happened. They counted, didn’t get a different outcome, counted again, same. Manually recounted the 4 most democratic counties in Florida same result. Threw out several thousand Military absentee ballots. Arent they supposed to be fighting for all the votes?
Recounted the counties again when they were given more time and tried to get the courts to allow even more recounts so that all of the chads that were falling to the floor could be counted as well. No bias there! :rolleyes:
Stoid:“And why ask for counties to be recounted when they showed no significant difference betweent he first count and the second? Just because?”
Why? Because the ones that they counted showed no significant change either! They picked the 4 that would get them votes if they looked at dimples and hanging chads.
Stoid:“A) There was no logical need or reason to recount all of Florida, because all of Florida did not have noticable discrepoencies between counts.”
Actualy none of Florida had noticible differences.
Stoid:“B) Gore offered several times to go along with a statewide recount, as did the Florida Supreme Court, for all intents and purposes. Bush refused. That pretty much cuts the legs out from under this complaint.”
The Florida Supreme Court offered to do it? It isn’t even their position to offer recounts. And while we are BSing it isn’t Al Gore place to say either. If Gore wanted a statewide recount then why didn’t he ask for it?
A: Because he would have lost by even more votes.
Stoid:“Ya know, Bush was inaugurated today, guys. Can’t you be satisfied with that?”
He’s not my guy but he is better than Gore.
Dr. Pinky: (and other various/sundry Bush-bashers)
First off, I’m slightly blotto on some really cheap Burgundy-in-a-box, courtesy of a “Residence Inn” happy hour, so please bear with. My standards are generally higher, but it was “one of those days”, and free booze won out over the somewhat knowledgeable palate
Believe it or not, I do understand your disappointment/disalusionment, if for different reasons.,
I’ve made no bones on this message board about my support of the “traditional” 2nd Ad. and the individual right to keep and arm bears.
So I feel a very similar sense of disillusionment/betrayal when I hear various Congress-types advocating/proposing more gun control.
You may very well say “Apples and Oranges” and dismiss my plaintive, but my feeling on this issue may very well run just as deep, if not deeper, as your feelings on the recent election fiasco.
For a good while, I too was too cynical to give a rat’s ass and participate in “the system” to enact change, but I came to see the light: If you give up, then {“they’ve” already won.
Whoever “they” are depending on your cause.
SO drop the rhetoric, drop back in and give hoot. Never surrender, never say die, and make the bastards pry your cold, dead fingers from their bruised throats.,
I/we/they may not like you, or your message, but BY-FUCKING-GOD the will respect you and acknowledge you!
I hope I’m not too ofensive in my opinion, but this is the way I just feel.’
Bitch and moan all you want and I/we/they wuill just ignore you as a crank.
Show me a petition with 10,000 signatures and you can surely bet that I will sit up and take notice.
(I proofread this pst several times, and I think I corrected all the typos; aplogies if I missed anything)
He certainly is!
[sub] This assumes, of course, that you prefer right-wing, freedom-stealing, people-killin’, environment-destroyin’, elitist, moronic corporate whores that can’t manage to get through more than a sentence or two without saying something stupid. [/sub]