PDA

View Full Version : Did the Bush administration use illegal means to win the election agains Gore?



TimH
12-15-2007, 05:10 PM
Was the election rigged? They say it could never happen here, but....

The Bigfella
12-15-2007, 05:19 PM
Isn't this a bit late in the argument?

Tanbark Spanker
12-15-2007, 05:19 PM
Do airplanes full of cocaine and leased by the CIA fall of sky?

Paul Girouard
12-15-2007, 05:22 PM
Yawn :rolleyes:

kharee
12-15-2007, 05:31 PM
Absolutely not! The DemoRats tried for a limited recount instead of a full state wide recount as required by state law. The Florida Supreme Court divided 3 to 2 that a limited recount could take place but the Repubs. appealed to the U.S Supreme Court , on the basis that state law required a state wide recount, which it did. After dithering around in state court and federal court there was not enough time for a full state wide recount. So with time running out it was either accept the first results, a Bush victory or Florida votes would not be counted in the electoral college, effectively disenfranchising all Floridians. Gore had to submit and accept defeat. Later the major networks and various Universities did a recount and Bush did win by a very slim margin, about 6000 votes if I recall. The news media being pro Gore chooses not to tell the plain truth. Look it up. Thats my take and I'm sticking to it.

Memphis Mike
12-15-2007, 05:41 PM
Absolutely not! The DemoRats tried for a limited recount instead of a full state wide recount as required by state law. The Florida Supreme Court divided 3 to 2 that a limited recount could take place but the Repubs. appealed to the U.S Supreme Court , on the basis that state law required a state wide recount, which it did. After dithering around in state court and federal court there was not enough time for a full state wide recount. So with time running out it was either accept the first results, a Bush victory or Florida votes would not be counted in the electoral college, effectively disenfranchising all Floridians. Gore had to submit and accept defeat. Later the major networks and various Universities did a recount and Bush did win by a very slim margin, about 6000 votes if I recall. The news media being pro Gore chooses not to tell the plain truth. Look it up. Thats my take and I'm sticking to it.

Are you really a Southern Black from Memphis? I bet you're the only Black Republican in Shelby County. You must be lonely.:D

Kaa
12-15-2007, 05:44 PM
As far as I remember, a coalition of major newspapers (NYTimes, WashPost, etc.) did a full Florida recount under different assumptions what's a valid vote and what's not. By my vague recollection, they used about 10 plausible scenarios and Bush won eight of them, and Gore won two. Don't have a handy link, sorry.

Kaa

Kaa
12-15-2007, 06:14 PM
The real reason was 3,000 votes in Palm Beach County for Buchannan, due to an extremely faulty ballot design (no malevolence, just incompetence).

Looks like a natural disenfranchisement of the stupid people :D :D

Kaa

Kaa
12-15-2007, 06:19 PM
I don't know about your father, Norm, but I've seen the pictures of the ballot. I stand by my opinion.

Kaa

Nicholas Carey
12-15-2007, 06:34 PM
It was either accept the first results, a Bush victory or Florida votes would not be counted in the electoral college, effectively disenfranchising all Floridians.The supreme court had no standing in the florida election (find their role in adjudicating presidential election in the constitution: it doesn't exist. the only body allowed to adjudicate whether or not an Elector(s) are "valid" is the House of Representatives. That's 1.

Two, the constitution does deal with a state, like Florida, that can't get its act together: so long as there is quorum in the Electoral College, the election of the president goes forward without them.

Florida's failure to run a competent election is the fault of the Republican (Jeb Bush) adminstration's incompetence. It's not "disenfranchisement of Floridians" nor is it a "constitutional crisis": it is exactly the process laid down in the Constitution.

The Supreme Court had no voice in the 2000 election whatsoever. It was a raw and illegal power grab on the part of the Republican-installed judges of the Supreme Court, serving their masters.

seafox
12-15-2007, 07:03 PM
Norman
I've not heard your thoughts on the screw up where the demos were hauling the people to the polls in busses and the tour guide was telling them to punch the second hole

maybe it was just gods way of saving this country

its to bad that their isn't one electorial vote in each county it would have been about 2500 for bush and 600 for gore. did you ever see the county by county map? you have to look hard to see the counties that voted for gore and even with those you have to wonder about all the voter fraud endemic in places like chicago and new orleans and baltimore and the disenfranchisement of military men in the lower rio grand valley.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
12-15-2007, 07:21 PM
"I don't know about your father, Norm, but I've seen the pictures of the ballot. I stand by my opinion."

Kaa

Well, of course you do.

Memphis Mike
12-15-2007, 07:29 PM
Bush was inserted into the office of President Of The United States by corporate America. He is nothing but their puppet. Al Gore is the REAL president of our country.

Nobody with any intelligence at all wanted that bastard in office. He was the first president in history to have eggs thrown at him on inauguration day. He was booed as he and Laura walked down Pennsylvania Ave.

Kaa
12-15-2007, 07:37 PM
Al Gore is the REAL president of our country.

LOL.

Reality check: FAIL.

Kaa

Phillip Allen
12-15-2007, 07:45 PM
Both sides stole votes...the winner (sometimes) is just the more effective thief)

Hot Air
12-15-2007, 08:54 PM
Al Gore is a fat, whinning, blowhard - not the REAL president. But you know that...

john l
12-15-2007, 09:17 PM
gore may be all those things, but he also knew what was best for the majority of the public, the country's wellbeing. rather than spend billions a week on iraq in hopes of an oil deal, he would have invested more into
emerging industries that are at the future of our country's economic
opportunity. yes he would have invested in the future and not the past.
but some other new leader will have to fix the mess and hole that junior made for us.

Kaa
12-15-2007, 09:38 PM
You'll be 79 someday, Kaa.... but I suspect your convictions will have hardened even more than your arteries. And you'll be just as confused by things you now think are obvious or simple, as my father was.... you know, the guy you called 'stupid'.

I didn't call your father stupid, and you're making a big deal out of a single-line throwaway post.

Kaa

StevenBauer
12-15-2007, 10:28 PM
Seems to me Kaa is pretty easily confused already. Have you seen some of the stuff he posts? :)

Steven

Keith Wilson
12-15-2007, 10:31 PM
It’s too bad that there isn't one electoral vote in each county. It would have been about 2500 for Bush and 600 for Gore. Did you ever see the county by county map? (corrected spelling and punctuation) Sorry Jeffery, people vote, not land. It's called democracy; government by the consent of the governed (the people, not the dirt); an imperfect system, but the best we've got.

That said, elections are sloppy, imprecise things, run by inexperienced well-intentioned amateurs . Normally the margin of victory is enough larger than the margin of error that it doesn't matter. It wasn't in this case. No fault - or at least well-distributed fault. Not a stolen election, just a very close one, with a fair amount of blundering all round. Now the 2004 election, when the Bush people were in a much better position to influence the outcome - that's another kettle of fish. As far as I can tell there was some awfully funny stuff going on in Ohio.

Mentioning the map reminded me of this excellent site:
http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/election/

Here's the map Jeffery was speaking of - looks like almost the entire country voted Republican, right?

http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/election/countymapredblue.png

However, since people vote, not land, if you make area proportional to population, you get this:

http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/election/countycartredblue.png

This is more accurate, but it tends to polarize things, Counties don't vote 100% one way or the other. If you use color gradations from red to purple to blue to correspond to the percentage of the vote going to each party, you get this, It shows a very different situation than the first map, and a far more accurate reflection of what was really going on. It shows a pretty clear rural-urban division; blue cites surrounded by purple suburbs and red countryside.

http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/election/countycartlinear.png

ljb5
12-15-2007, 10:52 PM
Both the Florida Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court agreed that they Florida election violated the law.

Although this may be shocking to some people, the responsibility for administering the Florida election does not lie with the Vice President of the USA, nor with the Democratic candidate to President of the USA, nor with the former Senator from the State of Tennessee.

The responsibility for administering the Florida election lies with the Secretary of State of Florida and, ultimiately, with the governor of the State of Florida.

Although the Florida Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court differed in their opinion of how to remedy the invalid election, they both ruled that the election was invalid.

ljb5
12-15-2007, 10:55 PM
I didn't call your father stupid, and you're making a big deal out of a single-line throwaway post.


All of your posts are throwaways. :rolleyes:

The coalition of researchers who evaluated the ballots (and whose work was opposed by the Republicans) concluded that more people intended to vote -- and did actually vote -- for Gore.

Vince Brennan
12-15-2007, 11:10 PM
It's all a moot point at this juncture. There will NEVER be any remedial action taken on it, it's eight years in the past, we have a President For Life (unless he has another heart problem and then Bush is in charge, God help us) so just put on your armbands, get into ranks and march.

TimH
12-15-2007, 11:18 PM
It may be a moot point, but we should learn from it nonetheless,

Memphis Mike
12-16-2007, 01:21 AM
It's all a moot point at this juncture. There will NEVER be any remedial action taken on it, it's eight years in the past, we have a President For Life (unless he has another heart problem and then Bush is in charge, God help us) so just put on your armbands, get into ranks and march.

Sorry Vince but we're not going to tolerate that. Something will be done.

Kaa
12-16-2007, 01:36 AM
I'm sure you meant it as a joke.... but it's a joke which has, at it's heart, the seeds of what I believe is a very serious anti-democratic impulse.

Heh. Not all my impulses are democratic :-)


The very suggestion that they were not disenfranchised by the bad ballot design suggests to me that someone really does think that the 'stupid' don't deserve to vote.....

That idea actually floats up on DailyKos with some regularity. Of course there it takes the form of not letting stupid people vote for Bush :D

Whether you think stupid people should vote somewhat depends on what do you think the point of democracy is. If it is, basically, justice -- "every people have exactly the government they deserve" -- then the stupid should vote. If it is effectiveness/optimality, then not necessarily.

Kaa

Kaa
12-16-2007, 01:37 AM
Seems to me Kaa is pretty easily confused already. Have you seen some of the stuff he posts? :)

:D In case I contradict myself, you're welcome to quote examples...

Kaa

Kaa
12-16-2007, 01:38 AM
The coalition of researchers who evaluated the ballots (and whose work was opposed by the Republicans) concluded that more people intended to vote -- and did actually vote -- for Gore.

Link, please.

Kaa

P.S. Here are a couple of links for you: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html and http://www.amstat.org/misc/PresidentialElectionBallots.pdf

Duncan Gibbs
12-16-2007, 01:49 AM
Hey Kaa me ol' mate!! You wanna vote in the next one? Huh?? Well do ya????? :D:D:D:D

Kaa
12-16-2007, 01:56 AM
Hey Kaa me ol' mate!! You wanna vote in the next one? Huh?? Well do ya????? :D:D:D:D

Not particularly, to tell you the truth, mate. I kinda don't see anyone worth voting for...

Kaa

Duncan Gibbs
12-16-2007, 02:14 AM
Not even Obama? He looks kinda like your version of our Kevin. And our Kevin is off to a flying start already... He's got the obita dicta from Bush's key negotiator Paula Dobriansky, "We will go forward and join the consensus."

I reckon if Obama get the democrats nod for the run he'll be the dude!!

PeterSibley
12-16-2007, 05:10 AM
Having read the above ....is this the version of democracy you lot were hoping to inflict on Iraq ??? :mad::(:mad: You have got to be joking !!!!

Ian McColgin
12-16-2007, 08:06 AM
The hanging chad bit was not dumb voters and was not accident. It was deliberate fraud.

A few years earlier I saw it in action but by accident, not fraud. When the primary to see who'd replace Gerry Studds appeared to go to Phil Johnston, his opponent, Bill Delahunt just did not believe it. He'd been the DA up around Quincey since Moses stepped off the Ark and could do the voter talleys from memory and the vote count did not make sense to him. I was a Johnston side autitor during the recount. What we learned in that, the reason Massachusetts got rid of those machines and went to the optical scanners, was that the older machines actually did misregister in areas where voting was fairly consistent over the years. The side of the ballot that generally had the Republican ticket was less worn out than the side that had the Democratic slate. That side had sharper punches that worked more constently. The primary really did belong to Delahunt, who I might add has represented us quite ably since.

In Florida, someone realized this and Gov Bush had the ballot sides flopped.

BETTY-B
12-16-2007, 09:12 AM
Absolutely not! The DemoRats tried for a limited recount instead of a full state wide recount as required by state law. The Florida Supreme Court divided 3 to 2 that a limited recount could take place but the Repubs. appealed to the U.S Supreme Court , on the basis that state law required a state wide recount, which it did. After dithering around in state court and federal court there was not enough time for a full state wide recount. So with time running out it was either accept the first results, a Bush victory or Florida votes would not be counted in the electoral college, effectively disenfranchising all Floridians. Gore had to submit and accept defeat. Later the major networks and various Universities did a recount and Bush did win by a very slim margin, about 6000 votes if I recall. The news media being pro Gore chooses not to tell the plain truth. Look it up. Thats my take and I'm sticking to it.

It's too late... IMF

Tylerdurden
12-16-2007, 10:07 AM
Its only a conspiracy theory if you are on the other side of an argument.

High C
12-16-2007, 11:09 AM
The hanging chad bit was not dumb voters and was not accident. It was deliberate fraud....
In Florida, someone realized this and Gov Bush had the ballot sides flopped.

Classic! :D

Ian McColgin
12-16-2007, 12:18 PM
Florida 2000 was not classic. Classic vote fraud is having voters from the cemetaries. Carl Hiassan (not just a novelest but a columnist also) has a brilliant "interview" with just voter.

The kind of punch machine that makes the hanging chad, the incomplete punch that won't be machine read, needs to be a decade or so old to do it and even then, to get the uneven wear it requires both considerable considerable voter consistancy and consistant ballots where Republican and Democratic tickets are in the same colum election after election. Even though Massachusetts has all the requisits for this to happen, it was never even noticed or understood until the Johnston/Delahunt primary.

I suppose, however, that the ballot arrangement that put the worn punches fairly consistently on the Democrat colum on the ballots could have been accident. It could be that having hit on their good luck, the R's only deliberate part was to avoid a recount.

Paul Pless
12-16-2007, 12:23 PM
currently the poll results read 24 - 3 that the election was rigged... not that ambiguities and mistakes were made (by both parties and the voting systems in more than one state) but actually that the election was rigged. And yet there's no liberal bias on the WBF!:rolleyes:

Paul Pless
12-16-2007, 12:26 PM
Where's Jimmy Carter when you really need him?

Tylerdurden
12-16-2007, 12:31 PM
currently the poll results read 24 - 3 that the election was rigged... not that ambiguities and mistakes were made (by both parties and the voting systems in more than one state) but actually that the election was rigged. And yet there's no liberal bias on the WBF!:rolleyes:

Big mistake, its not liberal bias. Thats the trap. Next time it will be the dems that are accused.

Follow the yellow brick road my friend and look for the man (or Men) behind the curtain.

http://www.the7thfire.com/images/Skull_Bones_Tomb.jpg

High C
12-16-2007, 12:38 PM
Florida 2000 was not classic. Classic vote fraud is having voters from the cemetaries. ....

No, what's classic is the spin/nonsense that you claim the governor of Florida messed with the ballot. The ballot was designed by, and that county's election run by, a career Democrat politician named Theresa LaPore.

Do you think anyone really buys this history revisionism garbage? :rolleyes:

Pathetic, Ian, truly pathetic. :(

ljb5
12-16-2007, 01:07 PM
No, what's classic is the spin/nonsense that you claim the governor of Florida messed with the ballot. The ballot was designed by, and that county's election run by, a career Democrat politician named Theresa LaPore.

Do you think anyone really buys this history revisionism garbage? :rolleyes:

Pathetic, Ian, truly pathetic. :(

Bull$hit, High C!

You are the one who is spreading revisionism garbage.

Theresa LePore was a life-long Republican who switched her party affiliation to Democrat simply to run for Supervisor of Elections.

After the election, she switched her registration again to "No affiliation."

That's reality. Deal with it.

High C
12-16-2007, 01:26 PM
Bull$hit, High C!

You are the one who is spreading revisionism garbage.

Theresa LePore was a life-long Republican who switched her party affiliation to Democrat simply to run for Supervisor of Elections.

After the election, she switched her registration again to "No affiliation."

That's reality. Deal with it.

Well, you're half right, which is batter than you usually manage.

She did leave the Democratic party after the way she was treated in the 2000 election fiasco. Who wouldn't?

She has changed party affiliation a number of times over the years for the sake of political expediency. Those Republican rascals at Salon.com put it thusly:

Democrats to LePore: Good riddance!
The Palm Beach Country elections official changes her party affiliation.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
By Anthony York

May 9, 2001

Anger management

Democrats won't have Theresa LePore to kick around anymore, according to the Palm Beach Post. LePore, of course, is the lifelong Democratic Party loyalist whose life took a turn for the Shakespearean when she approved the butterfly ballot in Palm Beach last year.....

ljb5
12-16-2007, 01:34 PM
By Anthony York

May 9, 2001

Anger management

Democrats won't have Theresa LePore to kick around anymore, according to the Palm Beach Post. LePore, of course, is the lifelong Democratic Party loyalist whose life took a turn for the Shakespearean when she approved the butterfly ballot in Palm Beach last year.....

If that's what Mr. York wrote, he was mistaken.

Perhaps there was additional information about Ms. LePore which came out after May 2001.

(It's odd, but that article you just (partially) reposted does mention the fact that she had been a Republican before the election. Did you not read the article, or were you trying to deceive us?)

I stand by my statement -- she was a Republican, changed her party affiliation to Democrat specifically to run for office -- and then changed to No Affiliation.

Anyway, you were wrong.

High C
12-16-2007, 01:41 PM
If that's what Mr. York wrote, he was mistaken.

Perhaps there was additional information about Ms. LePore which came out after May 2001.

I stand by my statement -- she was a Republican, changed her party affiliation to Democrat specifically to run for office -- and then changed to No Affiliation.

Anyway, you were wrong.

:D Classic! :D

ljb5
12-16-2007, 02:05 PM
currently the poll results read 24 - 3 that the election was rigged... ....And yet there's no liberal bias on the WBF!:rolleyes:

Reality has a liberal bias.

ljb5
12-16-2007, 02:07 PM
:D Classic! :D

You were wrong, High C. Admit it, deal with it, and try not to let it happen again.

You can't blame me for your mistake.

Research Theresa LePore as much as you like, you will see that you were wrong and I was right.

Your snide, derisive comments about me do not change the fact that you were wrong and I was right.

Paul Pless
12-16-2007, 02:11 PM
Your snide, derisive comments about me do not change the fact that you were wrong and I was right.Now that's 'classic'!

High C
12-16-2007, 02:12 PM
You were wrong, High C. Admit it, deal with it, and try not to let it happen again.

You can't blame me for your mistake.

Research Theresa LePore as much as you like, you will see that you were wrong and I was right.

Your snide, derisive comments about me do not change the fact that you were wrong and I was right.

Are you Peewee Herman?

ljb5
12-16-2007, 02:13 PM
Now that's 'classic'!


Same goes for you, Paul.

If you think I'm mistaken, you are invited to prove your point.

Since you know I am not mistaken, your snide comments only draw attention to the fact that the facts aren't on your side.

Stop digging. :)

boylesboats
12-16-2007, 02:13 PM
wow look at that poll results ....

Paul Pless
12-16-2007, 02:17 PM
Are you Peewee Herman?roflmao, that might be better than algae...

ljb5
12-16-2007, 02:17 PM
Are you Peewee Herman?

Are you a fukking idiot?

You lied, you got caught in a lie... you won't admit it --- and now you act like I should feel ashamed for it?

Bull$hit!

Be a man, acknowledge your mistake, stop digging yourself into a hole.

Give up and move on.

You are one pathetic loser, High C.

A real man would acknowledge his mistake... not lash out at the person who didn't make the mistake.

High C
12-16-2007, 02:34 PM
...Be a man, acknowledge your mistake, stop digging yourself into a hole.

Give up and move on.

You are one pathetic loser, High C.

A real man would acknowledge his mistake... not lash out at the person who didn't make the mistake.

:D I made a mistake all right, expecting you to engage on realistic terms. You can't read. You can't comprehend. You can't back up your claims. And you can't argue. But you sure can bluster. :rolleyes:

Paul Pless
12-16-2007, 02:34 PM
fukking idiot
Bull$hit!

such language:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

boylesboats
12-16-2007, 02:36 PM
Are you a fukking idiot?

You lied, you got caught in a lie... you won't admit it --- and now you act like I should feel ashamed for it?

Bull$hit!

Be a man, acknowledge your mistake, stop digging yourself into a hole.

Give up and move on.

You are one pathetic loser, High C.

A real man would acknowledge his mistake... not lash out at the person who didn't make the mistake.

Now children, children.... behave... Santa is watching you

Ian McColgin
12-16-2007, 02:41 PM
Neither High C nor ljb5 admit to error and both can be rather snide about it. The difference is, ljb5 has no errors (that I can off hand recall) to admit. On these political matters, ljb5 and Norm are the most reliable researchers we have. One longs for a conservative forum member of equal ability.

Paul Pless
12-16-2007, 02:48 PM
One longs for a conservative forum member of equal ability.speaking of being rather snide

High C
12-16-2007, 02:53 PM
Neither High C nor ljb5 admit to error and both can be rather snide about it. The difference is, ljb5 has no errors (that I can off hand recall) to admit. On these political matters, ljb5 and Norm are the most reliable researchers we have. One longs for a conservative forum member of equal ability.

Ahh, the lightweight falters, so the original conman chimes in.

Do tell, how did Jeb Bush flop those ballot sides?

High C
12-16-2007, 02:54 PM
...On these political matters, ljb5 and Norm are the most reliable researchers we have....

I can't argue with that! :D

Peter Malcolm Jardine
12-16-2007, 03:02 PM
Dubya's favorite fat man to the rescue.

ljb5
12-16-2007, 03:06 PM
You can't read. You can't comprehend. You can't back up your claims. And you can't argue. But you sure can bluster. :rolleyes:

Bull$hit again, High C!

I already backed up my claim.

You are the one who made a false claim which you can't back up!


You said:


The ballot was designed by, and that county's election run by, a career Democrat politician named Theresa LaPore.

That claim is false.

You were wrong. Admit it, correct yourself, try not to let it happen again ---

--- and for gad's sake, stop trying to act like it's my fault!

Hot Air
12-16-2007, 03:18 PM
For God's sake put him out of his misery. Admit that you are wrong. Pat him on the head and tell him he's right. Tell him Gore is really President and Kerry is the President too. He needs the affirmation.

Cuyahoga Chuck
12-16-2007, 03:20 PM
Ahh, the lightweight falters, so the original conman chimes in.

Do tell, how did Jeb Bush flop those ballot sides?

I don't recall that charge was ever made. If you have evidence now is the time to lay it out.
What some of us do know is Jeb Bush was the governor of Florida at the time and the lady, who was in charge of the state's election process, Catherine Harris, was a close allie if ol' Jeb (who just happened to be brother of one of the candidates). When questions were asked about perceived irregularities in RED counties the lady secretary was able to head off any of the demanded investigations until long after George Bush was in office.
There may have been nothing there but, Catherine Harris certainly did her best to look like she was concealing something. One thing is certain. She could get her name into the history books and make a bag full of dough, besides, if she wrote a tell-all book saying she had illegally helped deliver the election to George Bush. I gather that Ms. Harris is fairly wealthy so she may have no need to make a big score to continue in her lifestyle.

"But, one never knows do one?" ....Fats Waller

Ian McColgin
12-16-2007, 03:48 PM
In post #38 I did assert that the Bush administration was responsible for arranging the ballot to take advantage of the hanging chads. That was based on my intimate prior knowledge of that type of voting machine and something I was reading at the time. However, I cannot at this remove validate that and must concede, as I did in post #43, that the ballot layout that gave a major hanging chad advantage to the Republican ticket might have been an accident and that the real deliberation was the legerdemaine with which the R's exploited the recount issue.

I thank High C for giving me the chance to clarify for a second time this point.

botebum
12-16-2007, 07:30 PM
Now children, children.... behave... Santa is watching you

Larry, that has got to be the singlemost intelligent thing said on this entire thread, Thank-You.

Doug

Kaa
12-16-2007, 07:52 PM
I think most dictators and tyrants start off with the latter assumption.

I don't think most dictators and tyrants have voting in mind at all...

Kaa

Paul Pless
12-16-2007, 07:54 PM
However, if the last few weeks of postings prove anything, at least they prove that compared to some, I AM the moderate I claim to be! ;) (and you all know who I'm referring to! )Surely you're not referring to Bruce Hooke???:confused::confused::confused::p

TimH
12-17-2007, 11:34 AM
The real question is:
how can we prevent this from happening again?

Kaa
12-17-2007, 11:37 AM
The real question is:
how can we prevent this from happening again?

Depends on what do you mean by "this". If you have in mind George Bush's reelection, I don't think he'll be running for the presidency again...

Kaa

TimH
12-17-2007, 11:41 AM
Depends on what do you mean by "this". If you have in mind George Bush's reelection, I don't think he'll be running for the presidency again...

Kaa

You know what I mean. The ( or any) election being hijacked.

Kaa
12-17-2007, 11:47 AM
You know what I mean. The ( or any) election being hijacked.

Actually, I'm not sure of what you mean. Elections are not precise like math -- they're noisy like statistics. In the 2000 elections Florida split down the middle -- depending on the particular way to count ballots you could get either Bush or Gore on top.

It seems to me you're objecting to the outcome -- but what are your problems with the process?

Kaa

elf
12-17-2007, 11:51 AM
Grow balls on democrats?

Kaa
12-17-2007, 11:53 AM
Grow balls on democrats?

LOL. Has been tried, repeatedly, and just as repeatedly failed. It seems they have some built-in rejection mechanism for these organs... :D

Kaa

TimH
12-17-2007, 12:00 PM
Grow balls on democrats?

Grow balls on the American people more likely.

In Moores film he says the difference between other western countries and the US is that in other countries the government is afraid of the people. In the US the people are afraid of the government.

Paul Pless
12-17-2007, 12:00 PM
LOL!!!

clicky for explanation (http://www.woodenboatvb.com/vbulletin/upload/showthread.php?t=73191)