Get over our not getting over it, OK?

[Tedster]

It’s tough when your guy loses, but thems the breaks. Statistically, Florida was a tie, basically.

You can “What if” this thing to death.

What if Al Gore had spent more time winning his home state?

What if Al Gore had spent more time trying to win West Virginia or New Hampshire, small states that would have made Florida irrelevant.

What if Al Gore had spent more time to assuage the firearm owners in the U.S. that he wasn’t going to enact more restrictions on the 2nd Amendment?

Florida was/is screwed up. The bottom line? Invalid ballots get thrown out. It’s always been that way. No election is perfect, and the Florida counties in question had thousands of ballots thrown out in years past. This wasn’t a new thing, folks. The presidential commission headed by Presidents Ford and Carter have a number of recommendations designed to help prevent problems in the future, where it counts.

[ElvisL1ves]

Wow … my first-ever Pit rant (really), and it was into Page 2 with over 1000 views in just a few hours. You like me! You really really like me!

Now to business:

*Originally posted by Scylla *
Only a dipshit could look at what occured and conlude that their weren’t irregularities going both ways that skewed results.

If you can compare anything that the Gore campaign might have done to what the Bush camp DID do, you have a seriously warped sense of proportion. But you won’t go into specifics, because you don’t dare.

When all was said and done it looked like Gore had won the popular vote and Bush the electoral. But, we’ll never know for sure.

There is no suggestion from even the most rabidly-partisan Republican that there was a national error margin greater than half a million votes. Yes, we do “know for sure” who the people’s choice was. Quit hiding.

…ever know how many votes Bush lost by the preannouncement that Gore had won Fl. while the polls were still open.

What, that Limbaugh bullshit again? The nets called Florida with 11 fucking minutes left in the Panhandle. The number of people found who claimed to have not voted because of that is exactly one (1). Yes, we know that too. Quit hiding.

We’ll never know how many votes Gore lost because of poor ballot design,

Best estimate is 20,000 in Palm Beach County. Quit hiding.

we’ll never know how many overseas ballots were unfairly discarded.

None known. Several hundreds accepted in Republican-contrlled counties that were postmarked after Election Day (any guesses why?). Quit hiding.

We’ll never know how many votes Gore lost becuase of inferior balloting practices in poor areas.

Best estimates are softer there, but still in 5 figures. Quit hiding.

For all we know there’s a box of missing votes out there that nobody ever found, and they prove it conclusively once and for all that ______ won.

Maybe so. But that’s not a fact-based statement. Quit hiding.

But we don’t fucking know. And, you don’t fucking know either.

We have a pretty good idea. If you don’t know, it’s because you dont’ WANT to know, for reasons best known to yourself but still pretty transparent to the rest of us. But see? The facts are there, but they conflict with the view you wish to have of the world, so you’re dismissing them. Sad wanker.

Now Bush is President.

You can get over it, or you can continue to be a dipshit, and argue only one side of an argument when you know the full situation quite well. That’s being dishonest.

Yes, I fucking well know who the President is, and I know much better than you want to how it got that way. As I have tried to get through your willfully-denying brain several times, that is NOT what the discussion is about. Sheesh.

Or, do you really want to start talking about trading votes for cigarettes, and bussing the homeless if they promised to vote Democratic?

Cites repeatedly asked when this was timely, and not provided. Unless you want to cite the Limbaugh Report.

Should we not get over the Nixon/Kennedy election where it seems that Kennedy won only because ballots were thrown away deliberately by partisans?

Also nonfactual, but popular folklore spread around to each other by GOP partisans. Pity that isn’t factual too.

Or, like a 7 year old who realizes all the crying in the world isn’t going to bring back his favorite broken toy, Do you get over it? **

Scylla is not just a whirlpool off Sicily, he’s imitating a river in Egypt.

[ElvisL1ves]

My concerns lay in the fact we have one day on which to vote, not weeks.

Is there any real doubt that a full or even partial hand recount of the entire state could have been completed in just a few days if given a good-faith effort to do so? No. Good faith wasn’t there. Bush went to court repeatedly to stall and stall until time ran out, for fear his brother and campaign manager might not be able to resist the revelation of fact that might have happened. He also put on a political campaign, believed by those, like yourself, who wanted to believe it, to discredit the process of hand-counting entirely in Florida (although he was for it in New Mexico). Could anything be more antidemocracy or dishonorable than that?

Your guy lost. G.W. Bush survived every recount, but of course he coudn’t survive a “re-vote” that way lies madness, my friend.

Whoever asked for a “revote” (except for the one Bush got in the Supreme Court)? All we needed was to count all the votes the first time. That didn’t get done because of Bush’s legal maneuvers and various stalling tactics, including organizing a riot in Miami, if you’ll recall.

We’re not a third world country. It doesn’t matter who votes, but it sure as hell matters who counts the votes.

Sure as hell. Thanks for admitting that.

(Your guy conceded, if you’ll recall, and then un-conceded. He blew it right there.)

Why concede something you didn’t lose? What world do YOU live in?

…rather than dragging the country through a nightmare.

I submit that it was Bush, and the Republicans’ desperate attempt to get the Presidency back at any cost, even the cost of legitimacy and honor, that was responsible. You can try dealing with that concept, too.

[andros]

And regarding Jeb and Kathy, what exactly do you expect of them? If it had been, say, Susan Kennedy-Rodham and Tony L. Gore, who would you expect them to help?

Well . . . no one, actually. I would expect them to do their jobs impartially.

[Sauron]

ElvisL1ves, a few questions. Not trying to be a smartass, just honestly curious:

1. Have you, personally, done anything to ensure that the election situation in Florida doesn’t happen again?

2. Were you eligible for the recent tax refund? If so, did you accept it?

[ElvisL1ves]

*Originally posted by Milossarian *

Would those be “inconvenient facts” like the vote totals, each of the four or five times they were counted?

False statement. Count Number One was never completed.

Or like the laws against counting overvotes? **

No such thing, no matter what Rush tells you to think. The standard was “the clear intent of the voter”, which an overvote (both checking a candidate’s box and writing his name in too) clearly is.

Do you people only talk to each other?

[ElvisL1ves]

*Originally posted by SPOOFE *
**Just for the record, I have a list of Posters Who Are Completely Irrational. If anyone wants, I can provide them a copy of that list.
…
You find a single court who will rule that the SCOTUS decision was “illegal”, and I’ll crown you Grand Czar Of Justice for the United States.

Just one court. A single one. Can’t be that hard, can it?
**

Ask your junior high school teacher how Supreme Court decisions get “declared illegal” by other courts before you talk about how hard it is. Hint: My list of Posters Who Are Completely Irrational may not coincide with yours.

[ElvisL1ves]

*Originally posted by Sauron *
**I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again – if Gore had just won his HOME STATE, all this discussion would be moot. **

The GOP partisans went on and on about how Gore was a creature of Washington, not a man of the land from Tennessee. Gore did win DC by a huge margin, more than Bush’s win in Texas. Can’t have it both ways, amigo.

And there is an endless list of ifs re the campaign, btw - but only one case of statewide election-rigging.

[erislover]

Let’s face the facts here people, vote counters need to be telepathic rather than physical. “But wait, I wasn’t thinking that!” :rolleyes:

“I think my mind was misread!” :rolleyes:

“Rubber baby buggy bumpers!”

I actually like people continuing to ramble on about how an election was legally stolen, and then complain about the candidates instead of the system, and when they do complain about the system it is only in the capacity of crying about a legally “stolen” election.

Ha!

Here’s a fucking clue: Gore didn’t win the popular vote either if we consider all the persons who could vote but didn’t. No candidate wins the popular vote that way.

If Gore can shut up, so can you. Quit using him as a horse to crusade on and consider him as a role model.

[Sauron]

*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves *
The GOP partisans went on and on about how Gore was a creature of Washington, not a man of the land from Tennessee. Gore did win DC by a huge margin, more than Bush’s win in Texas. Can’t have it both ways, amigo.

I’m not sure how that’s having it both ways. You’re saying the GOP claimed Gore was a “Washington man” vs. a “Tennessee man.” Then you note that he won DC by a huge margin. That would seem to make the GOP right. Adding that Gore won DC by a larger margin than Bush won Texas would seem to reinforce that idea. He was a Washington man, even more so than Bush was a Texas man, according to the vote totals.

But hey, I’m a simple country guy from Alabama. What do I know?

[ElvisL1ves]

Anyone who still wants to claim G.W.'s accession to the rightful throne of the House of Bush was principled, honored, or even legal, and does not simply want to keep his/her head in the sand, here goes:

http://www.thenewrepublic.com/073001/adler073001.html
Renata Adler, who may be overreaching but is hard to refute, puts the decision in the context of the Rehnquist court being the most judicially activist ever, to the point of usurping democracy itself. On the way, she leaves Scalia no shred of claim to principle remaining.

http://slate.msn.com/dialogues/01-07-02/dialogues.asp?iMsg=6
Follow links to get the full discussion - this is the first page. Intriguing debate by Judge Richard Posner, eminent prolific cnservative legal author and would-be Bush and Supreme Court apologist, and his fellow media whore Prof. Alan Dershowitz, both of whom were promoting their books. Posner finally admitted the decision was not based on any principle other than getting Bush into the White House, but tried to make a case that judges sometimes have to overlook principle and precedent and the Rule of Law in the name of what they think is the general good (!!!).
http://bn.bfast.com/booklink/click?sourceid=1381393&ISBN=0195148274
Dershowitz’s book “Supreme Injustice: How the High Court Hijacked Election 2000”
http://bn.bfast.com/booklink/click?sourceid=1381393&ISBN=0691090734
Posner’s book “Breaking the Deadlock: The 2000 Election, the Constitution, and the Courts”

Summer 2001 issue of vol. 68 of the University of Chicago Law Review
Anthology of academic analyses, with not even the most conservative partisan able to hold up the claim that the Supreme Court decision was legally justified.

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumnew23.htm
A trifle formal, but to the point analysis by Prof. David Kairys

[ElvisL1ves]

Originally posted by Sauron *
I’m not sure how that’s having it both ways. You’re saying the GOP claimed Gore was a “Washington man” vs. a “Tennessee man.” Then you note that he won DC by a huge margin. That would seem to make the GOP right.*

If you’re going to harp on how Gore lost his own home state, you at least ought to pick which home state (or district, as the case may be) you’re talking about.

[ElvisL1ves]

*Originally posted by Sauron *
**ElvisL1ves, a few questions. Not trying to be a smartass, just honestly curious:

1. Have you, personally, done anything to ensure that the election situation in Florida doesn’t happen again?

2. Were you eligible for the recent tax refund? If so, did you accept it? **

1. At least as much as you have. Perhaps more, since I do recognize there’s a problem. Constant vigilance is the price of liberty, or sumpin’ like that.

2. Yes to both, because it was for everyone. I’m no martyr if I can’t make a difference. Doesn’t make it a good idea, though - note the upcoming tapping of Social Security to balance the budget, which was in large surplus just last year. What happened, and, more to the point, who’s going to pay for it? For the answer to the last, just look in the mirror for an example.

[Sauron]

*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves *
**

*Originally posted by Sauron *
**ElvisL1ves, a few questions. Not trying to be a smartass, just honestly curious:

1. Have you, personally, done anything to ensure that the election situation in Florida doesn’t happen again?

2. Were you eligible for the recent tax refund? If so, did you accept it? **

1. At least as much as you have. Perhaps more, since I do recognize there’s a problem. Constant vigilance is the price of liberty, or sumpin’ like that.

Pull your head out of your anus, you idiot. I’ve already said that Florida was a problem that should be solved. It’s okay to crusade for change; don’t ride roughshod over folks who might be willing to help.

2. Yes to both, because it was for everyone. I’m no martyr if I can’t make a difference. Doesn’t make it a good idea, though - note the upcoming tapping of Social Security to balance the budget, which was in large surplus just last year. What happened, and, more to the point, who’s going to pay for it? For the answer to the last, just look in the mirror for an example.

See my answer to point 1, above. I agree that robbing Social Security to pay the bills right after giving most everyone a tax break is stupid. Geez, man, do you even recognize that in your shotgun approach to “democracy” you’re insulting and alienating folks who might be willing to help?

Just to sum up, though, you’ve done nothing to remedy the situation in Florida, so if it happens again in 2004, you don’t have a jack-leg to stand on. Also, you’re unprincipled enough to bitch about the man in office, but will willingly suck from the public teat when he dangles a $300 or $600 carrot in front of your nose.

Your arguments may have merit in certain circumstances. You, sir, do not.

[Milossarian]

**It’s about how the Supreme Court appointed Bush president while the results of the Florida election were still sketchy.

**
Let’s see. We’ve had counts. And recounts. And more recounts. And media recounts. And more media recounts.

When will those results not be sketchy? No, wait, don’t tell me. Let me guess … :rolleyes:

[Chance_the_Gardener]

Originally posted by Sauron, to ElvisL1ves

Just to sum up, though, you’ve done nothing to remedy the situation in Florida, so if it happens again in 2004, you don’t have a jack-leg to stand on. Also, you’re unprincipled enough to bitch about the man in office, but will willingly suck from the public teat when he dangles a $300 or $600 carrot in front of your nose.

“Suck the public teat”? Well, I guess it was just a matter of time until someone took your bait. $300 to $600 per person is a drop in the bucket; this money would have been better spent paying off the massive, largely Reagan-era debt.

For the record, I’m scheduled to get my check next week. That money’s going straight to the ACLU. Choke on it, Junior.

[Chance_the_Gardener]

*Originally posted by Milossarian *
Let’s see. We’ve had counts. And recounts. And more recounts. And media recounts. And more media recounts.

When will those results not be sketchy? No, wait, don’t tell me. Let me guess … :rolleyes: **

Is that right, now? Well, if you’ll remember the actual chronology of the events, the appointment of pResident Bush occured before any recount was conducted. Care to explain that? Or even to try?

Didn’t think so.

[DoctorJ]

Milo, I don’t feel nearly as strongly about this issue as others on this thread, but I do want to pull my hair out anytime somone parrots the Karl Rove line, “They’ve counted and counted and counted and counted and recounted and then they’ve recounted again, and…”

*It doesn’t matter how many times you count the votes if you leave out the same group of votes each time. *

The question was not about counting the votes over and over, but whether or not to count certain groups of votes. Attempts were made on both sides to include or remove votes in such a way that it would help them.

Bush got lucky because the people who had the ultimate authority over which votes were accepted and which weren’t were all clearly in his corner.

If I take a card out of a deck and count the rest, I’m going to get 51. I can keep counting them all day, and I’m still going to get 51. That doesn’t make it a full deck.

Please, enough.

Dr. J

[manhattan]

*Originally posted by Chance the Gardener *
** $300 to $600 per person is a drop in the bucket; this money would have been better spent paying off the massive, largely Reagan-era debt.

For the record, I’m scheduled to get my check next week. That money’s going straight to the ACLU. **

If you’re so convinced that the money is better used to pay the debt, why in the world would you send it anywhere other than the debt paydown fund at the Treasury Department?

Or is it even a teensy bit possible that you actually think the money would be better used by the ACLU?

I agree.

[vanilla]

Okay. What if here.
What if…They suddenly “decided” or foudn out that Gore had more votes?
Theres nothing anyone could do now.
Would George have to apologize or something?
Would he have to look guilty for 3 more years?