Phydeaux
Posts: 4828
Joined: 1/4/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
quote:
ORIGINAL: Nnanji
quote:
ORIGINAL: AtUrCervix
quote:
ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
quote:
ORIGINAL: AtUrCervix
Obama's biggest mistake, was also America's.
(It happened in November, 2007).
So you would prefer Romney ?
I would have preferred Anderson in 1980, Perot in 1988, Gore in 2000 (because he won, not because I voted for him), Ron Paul in 2008 and Kasich in 2016.
There are still quite a few people who think Gore won. I actually get a kick out of that. Here, in the U.S. we have the electoral college that elects presidents. Whether you liked him or not, Bush won the electoral college. Keep in mind that, for instance, Bush did not campaign once in California because he knew he'd never win any electoral college votes there. So why waste the time and money. But, had pure vote count been the criteria for a win, there would have been a lot of places Bush could have mined enough votes to win that way.
The SCOTUS in a very partisan, very political decision, ruled that it would 'do irreparable harm' to the Florida presidential election process to continue to re-count all of the votes and stopped the re-counting. When ALL of the votes were counted afterwards, which included many military votes not counted a first time, Gore would have had won Florida and thus had they continued, would have won the white house.
No. it was not a partisan decision. The decision was a per curiam decision which meant the court acting unanimously. While the earlier decision handed down stopping the recount was 5-4, 7 justices were opposed to the recount, for various reasons. And the vote regarding the Equal protection clause was 7-2.
In essence, the rules that were in play specified a procedure for the counting of votes, as well as how to challenge.
Gore, hoping to maximize his chances, chose to challenge the vote in a few specific counties. That was his free challenge, according to the rules. When those recounts did not yield a victory for him - he then went to the florida supreme court and demanded extra recounts.
The florida supreme court - 12 democrats - sided with him, and another recount occured. Which he also lost.
Bush appealed the infinite recounts to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court spanked the florida supreme court and told them to reconsider their decision. The florida supreme court - all democrats, at the time, persisted. At which point the supreme court over ruled them, and said
a). The procedures in place at the time of the election had to be followed.
b). There was no way to apply a uniform vote count to all votes in the remaining time. Safe harbor had to be observed. The victory certified by Harris stood.
It was, in fact the correct decision.
Under the Florida Supreme Court decision, various democrat bastions were in the process of manufacturing a win for Gore. In Miami Dade, the canvassing board chose to recount ballots without any observers present, which was, of course, illegal. It was only when a riot started that they recanted their decision.
The Miami Herald - a leftist rag of the first order - and other newspapers later did a count of the ballots and said that Gore won. But it is important to note that their recount did not conform to actual recount standards - ie., observers from both parties had the right to challenge ambiguous ballots.
Hence the hanging chad controversy and the democrat disqalification of up to 25,000 military ballots.
Had Gore chosen to count all the ballots - he might have won. But we'll never know. He made a political choice, and lost.
|
RE: Obama admits Libya was his biggest mistake - 
Profile
RE: Obama admits Libya was his biggest mistake - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread