Not urban legend, but hard and proven fact. The wrongful disenfranchisement of a large number of black voters whose votes would almost all have been cast for Gore was the most crucial factor that tipped the Florida vote count in Bush’s favour.
Not urban legend, but hard and proven fact. The wrongful disenfranchisement of a large number of black voters whose votes would almost all have been cast for Gore was the most crucial factor that tipped the Florida vote count in Bush’s favour.[/quote]
If it were, the major media would have had it in our faces day and night, but that seems always to be only what fringe leftists say. It is sort of another one of the DOZENS of conspiracy theories. Look, I’m not saying it isn’t true. I’d like to think it isn’t true, because I know Bush perosnally would distance himself FAR from that kind of thing. But if you can truly show me some hard evidence, maybe I’ll vote for Kerry. But so far, this is heavily related to the kind of Moore-style-kind of evidence that is ruling the left.
[quote=“pinesay”]
Bush simply won. But that will never matter. It is now urban legend that “Bush stole the election.”[/quote]
There were more valid votes for Bush, sure.
But can you explain to me why Bush didn’t want to count them? He had no way of knowing, when the Supreme Court granted his request to stop the counting, that he had won. Why not count them just to see, before declaring a winner?
A boy finds a baseball mitt in his parents’ closet. He takes it and hides it at his friend’s house. He goes home and his parents say, “Have you seen a baseball mitt? It was a present for you, but now we can’t find it.” The mitt would have been his anyway. But did the boy steal it? Yes, he did. What would have happened if he hadn’t is irrelevant.
The fact that a democratic process WOULD HAVE put Bush in the White House does not mean a democratic process DID put him in. He chose the straightest path to victory, though he had to trample on our nation’s principles to walk it.
[quote=“jplowman”][quote=“pinesay”]
Bush simply won. But that will never matter. It is now urban legend that “Bush stole the election.”[/quote]
There were more valid votes for Bush, sure.
But can you explain to me why Bush didn’t want to count them? He had no way of knowing, when the Supreme Court granted his request to stop the counting, that he had won. Why not count them just to see, before declaring a winner?
A boy finds a baseball mitt in his parents’ closet. He takes it and hides it at his friend’s house. He goes home and his parents say, “Have you seen a baseball mitt? It was a present for you, but now we can’t find it.” The mitt would have been his anyway. But did the boy steal it? Yes, he did. What would have happened if he hadn’t is irrelevant.
The fact that a democratic process WOULD HAVE put Bush in the White House does not mean a democratic process DID put him in. He chose the straightest path to victory, though he had to trample on our nation’s principles to walk it.[/quote]
Excuse me?? WHO was trampling on the nation’s principles???
Florida’s Supreme Court attempted to usurp the power of the Florida Legislature to certify the election. The FSC repeatedly violated the Florida Constitution in order to issue rulings favorable to Al Gore – because the FSC was, at the time, composed of four Democrats and three Republicans, and their votes were along party lines.
Or did you just happen to forget all about that little debacle?
As far as WHY Bush and his team would attempt to prevent such shenanigans, who wouldn’t? Al Gore was trying to stack the deck every way that he could. First Gore conceded, then retracted the concession. Then he tried to get military ballots thrown out on technicalities. Then he tried to get “hanging chads” and “dimpled chads” counted for his votes (but not for Bush’s). Gore only wanted the three most heavily Democratic counties to be recounted.
And you’re bitching about BUSH trying to prevent his win from being stolen??
No, just bitching that he didn’t want to know the count.
The recount was biased? Since then the votes have been truly recounted, by the same rules they were being recounted according to then, and Bush’s slim margin of victory was never erased.
So if the recount method was so biased and partisan, why didn’t it move votes from Bush to Gore?
The FSC changed the legislature’s deadline to allow the recount to be finished. Counting the votes the machines couldn’t read was the right thing to do. I see no problem with their “usurpation of power.”
I can’t be bothered to defend Gore’s selfish conduct in the affair, and his attempt to disenfranchise military voters was reprehensible. But I believe Bush could have been elected president rather than appointed, if he had been willing to gamble his win on a recount. He wasn’t willing to take that risk, and consequently, he wasn’t elected. Fair’s fair.
that the election was stolen was reported overseas. why it wasn’t picked up by the US media is another story. the guy who broke the story was greg palast. his columns have been adjusted and now appear in book form under the name " the best democracy money can buy". happy reading.
BS.
I live in Florida and I didn’t see any “disenfranchisement” going on. What I did see was people of all colors who were too lazy or indifferent to vote. I also saw people of all colors who were simply uneducated enough to read the directions or even ask poll workers how to vote properly if they didn’t understand something. The polling booth is not the place to get an elementary education, and that is the voters fault!
PS: I’m a Republican who voted for Gore. 
yeah, if you didn’t see it it must not of happened.
Not urban legend, but hard and proven fact. The wrongful disenfranchisement of a large number of black voters whose votes would almost all have been cast for Gore was the most crucial factor that tipped the Florida vote count in Bush’s favour.[/quote]
But in order for Bush to steal the election, it has to have been a deliberate act, no? I mean, we can stipulate that large numbers of people were wrongly disenfranchised, but if it was simply a mistake, then its not a stolen election, is it?
I have read all the stuff about people being mistaken for felons and no one has yet shown any intent on the part of the state to disenfranchise anyone for any other reason than they were felons.
shin-gua: So, those black voters should have anticipated that Republicans were going to “mistakenly” put their names on the felon list and ensure that they were ineligible to vote? In your view, I suppose it was all their fault when they showed up on election day and hadn’t gone to the trouble to prove that they were not some other guy from the Texas felon lists that Florida used?
MaPoSquid, I routinely teach all four of the Supreme Court cases (two Florida and two US Supreme Court) in my classes. Your comments (e.g. Florida’s Supreme Court attempted to usurp the power of the Florida Legislature to certify the election. The FSC repeatedly violated the Florida Constitution in order to issue rulings favorable to Al Gore – because the FSC was, at the time, composed of four Democrats and three Republicans, and their votes were along party lines) show you don’t know what the hell you are talking about. Since I get paid to teach the law and you ain’t paying then I will leave it at that.
Bush got lucky just like Greaseball (I mean our beloved A-Bian) did here. Neither of them had a plan to steal their respective elections; the demons which control the chaotic aspects of worldwide politics simply saw fit to get both of those pieces of shit the win. In Bush’s case that piece of demonic luck cost the entire world dearly and in Greasball’s case it simply kept Taiwan’s downward slide going.
I know now why the old Daoist sages simply retired from the world to their hermit huts.
Lao Tzu Brian
Brian Kennedy:
My understanding is that the Florida Supreme Court is made up of 9 judges and all were Democrats. Is that incorrect? Might be. I am just asking.
Also, how is it that the Florida Supreme Court could issue a recount in all four counties where Gore requested one rather than for the state as a whole? Please clarify. I would be most interested in finding out more about this.
freddie
[quote=“Shin-Gua”]BS.
I also saw people of all colors who were simply uneducated enough to read the directions
[/quote]
You make an interesting point, by mistake. In one Florida county, following the directions was indeed enough to invalidate your ballot.
Then there’s the butterfly ballot, where votes for two facing pages of names had to be recorded on a single column in the middle. Thus to vote for Al Gore, the second name on the left page, you punched, of course, the third hole down.
We do have a crippling lack of education, but in a great many cases that wasn’t the problem. The federal government should make the states use a standard ballot.
[quote=“brianlkennedy”]MaPoSquid, I routinely teach all four of the Supreme Court cases (two Florida and two US Supreme Court) in my classes. Your comments (e.g. Florida’s Supreme Court attempted to usurp the power of the Florida Legislature to certify the election. The FSC repeatedly violated the Florida Constitution in order to issue rulings favorable to Al Gore – because the FSC was, at the time, composed of four Democrats and three Republicans, and their votes were along party lines) show you don’t know what the hell you are talking about. Since I get paid to teach the law and you ain’t paying then I will leave it at that.
Bush got lucky just like Greaseball (I mean our beloved A-Bian) did here. Neither of them had a plan to steal their respective elections; the demons which control the chaotic aspects of worldwide politics simply saw fit to get both of those pieces of shit the win. In Bush’s case that piece of demonic luck cost the entire world dearly and in Greasball’s case it simply kept Taiwan’s downward slide going.[/quote]
Ah yes, the old “proof by assertion”. Either explain WHY I am incorrect or go stuff your degree and your classes.
You remind me of the poli-sci professor I had in college who, after I asked about the similarity of Ayn Rand’s “Anthem” to Plato’s “Republic”, said “We are not discussing Ayn Rand in this class,” and lowered my grades for the rest of the semester.
brianlkennedy: Don’t worry about mopasquid, he doesn’t worry about niceties of debate like facts or reasoned argument. Your explanation of those court decisions would be wasted on him … and it would probably remind him of yet another humiliating period in his life in which some other professors had lowered his marks.
(Likely the professor who was teaching the poli-sci class had already taken in about all he could stand of Anthem-Republic comparisons. If maposquid had mentioned Huxley’s Brave New World, Orwell’s 1984, or More’s Utopia, he’d probably have been sent for corporal punishment.)
Still, it would be fun if you could quickly (perhaps in a paragraph of two) comment on your read of the Florida sup. ct. decisions.
a big ol bump for this oldie of a thread.
the GAO (government accounting office) has come out with its report of the 2004 election. pretty much says in governmentese that the election was stolen.
in every district in Arizona (or was it NM?) that had touchscreen voting, regardless of ethnic/economic composition Kerry lost. every one.
miers is gone.
hopefully some treasonous soul(s) will get it tomorrow
and it feels like spring time in america
[quote=“skeptic yank”]the GAO (government accounting office) has come out with its report of the 2004 election. pretty much says in governmentese that the election was stolen.
[/quote]
“Got links”? 
[quote]… in every district in Arizona (or was it NM?) that had touchscreen voting, regardless of ethnic/economic composition Kerry lost. every one.
[/quote]
SY, just want to see if I understand … are you saying that the report alleges that the touchscreen voting process was tainted such that Bush got votes he should never have received?
Can’t Soros find a better use for his money?
All one of them? Wow! That’s terrible. I can’t believe the sixth precinct in Scottsdale went for Bush!
I couldn’t find the report. I think it’s this one.
[quote]The nonpartisan U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) in its September 2005 report "ELECTIONS –
Federal Efforts to Improve Security and Reliability of Electronic Voting Systems Are Under Way,
but Key Activities Need to Be Completed"59 on page 38 said,
"…there is evidence that some of these concerns [with voting systems]