How Bush plans to steal the 2004 election

[Berzerker]

Sava -

the whole tyranny by majority thing is tiresome...

Tiresome or not, you and I know how you'd react if the majority did something like that to you and your family.

it's funny how people cite tyranny by majority when things don't go there way, but then never hesitate to cite public support for something they agree with.

Not me, I could care less what the majority wants or thinks except when it involves public property and elections via the Constitution. The only other times I'll mention majority rule is when I'm debating a proponent of democracy just to stick their nose in the inherent flaw with their ideology.

Harry -

Yes. Do you mean the electoral college?

Same thing, but yes. The "college" part I believe is where the electors gather together to vote, but that doesn't really happen any more since the parties have made sure electors vote the way they're supposed to. I think the last time an elector defied the party was 1980 when a Reagan elector voted for the LP candidate.

But the recounts benefitted W as well, gaining both more votes in a bipartisan counting process.

To the chagrin of Gore no doubt.

Only four counties were contested but all could have been. Gore chose those counties because they were traditional democratic strongholds.

Yes, champion of the little people.

Why didn't Bush challenge with a complete recount?

Why should he? If you win, you don't ask for recounts.

Instead, he chooses to demand the count stand regardless of any "lost" votes.

The count stood because that was what the law required. Gore and the Florida court tried to circumvent the law and the SCOTUS put an end to their nonsense. Many Democrats like to tell us it was 5 "conservative" judges that gave Bush the election, but the ruling was actually 7-2. Those 7 judges wanted the Florida court to fix the mess it created but 5 of the judges ruled all the delays caused by Gore and the Florida court endangered Florida's electors being counted in time for the lawful deadline. That's my recollection of what happened anyway...

[realpolitic]

Originally posted by Berzerker




Can't disagree with that, but my question remains unanswered -
if Hegel has been stealing elections because of voting machines that will ensure Bush's re-election, why was the 2000 election so close?

These machines were not installed in many states in 2000. They were of course in Nebraska, so votes were stolen in Florida by other means to insure "victory". They used the voter fraud in Florida to pass "The Voting Rights Act of 2000" to get these fraudulent machines in greater use to "protect" elections.

The Congressional elections of 2002 had some seats stolen too, with Diebold's machines in more common use. The theives we're a bit more blatent uploading an ftp-patch called
rob-georgia. The Republicans won an upset in Georgia too, and probably enough nation wide to make Congress go Republican.

[Verto]

[Berzerker]

Yep. Every vote counts; that's the democratic way, right? Unless it means you can lose the election.

Or win one in an underhanded way like Gore.

[Berzerker]

These machines were not installed in many states in 2000.

I'll have to check your links, we've had them here since at least '92.

They were of course in Nebraska, so votes were stolen in Florida by other means to insure "victory".

I believe Ramo has posted allegations but I haven't seen actual proof.

They used the voter fraud in Florida to pass "The Voting Rights Act of 2000" to get these fraudulent machines in greater use to "protect" elections.

Then why is the ACLU pushing these machines in California? Frankly, I've heard similar stories about these machines and I'm concerned, but we need proof and I'm wondering why the ACLU isn't going after this issue.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Sava
There are enough books, essays, investigations, and news columns on the subject. Do your own research.

And we know that if it's in a book, it must be true.

*points to bible*

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Sava
ahhh yes... it's a piece of ****... a compromise that is against the principles of Democracy.

Yes, let us ignore the constitution when it suits you.

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by Sava
There are enough books, essays, investigations, and news columns on the subject. Do your own research.

Lots of books, essays, investigations, and news columns about both UFOs and big foot too.

[Adam Smith]

Originally posted by obiwan18
How many votes did Illinois count for in the electoral college back in 1960?

IL had 27 votes, so its changing sides would not have been enough to change the 303-219 national outcome. I will pick up the bullshit flag, since the latter part of Che's statement could be interpreted to refer to this fact.

[Joseph]

Originally posted by Berzerker


Harry, ever hear of the electoral process?



No, the first recount was required by Florida law and he was still ahead after that recount. Gore then asked for manual recounts in ~4 counties which just happened to constitute his base to observe the "intent" of voters by looking for "evidence" - hanging chads, dimples, etc. That's when the Bush crowd stepped in and they should have. The Florida Supreme Court ruled in Gore's favor and that's when the matter went to the SCOTUS and they correctly ruled that Gore and the Florida court was effectively violating the equal protection clause of the Constitution by treating voters differently - voters who left hanging chads, etc., in other parts of the state would not have their votes counted while the voters in those 4 counties would have their votes counted.



Actually, it was Bush and not Gore that was protecting the election process even though they obviously shared the desire to win...

Well, here is a person that understand the law as written during the month of Nov. 2000 in the state of Fl.
The Constitution of the United State, state that the State Legislature shall determined how each State conduct election and not the State Courts.
The Florida, SC try to overturn a valid election process to elect Gore.

The same was done in New Jersey, because state law said no candid can enter the race under 60 prior to election, and no candid can drop out under 60 days prior to an election. The NJSC over-rode the current law to elect the Demo. The USSC should have stooped that one to.

[Ben Kenobi]

since Chicago didn't tip the state of Illinois.

This part of Che's statement remains questionable, considering the breakdown of votes you cited for Illinois.

Thanks for the information Adam Smith.

[Jaguar]

Re: How Bush plans to steal the 2004 election

Originally posted by realpolitic
His second general election,he "won" 83% of the vote,
largest pecentage in the state's history.

I'm sure that he was only going to get fourty some percent of the vote, and somehow managed to double his tally through fraudulent practices. He must have been awfully clever to pull that off.

[Evil Knevil]

What I don't get is how the Bush team knew in advance that Florida would be so close that a few thousand votes 'deleted' by the means described (databasing, scaring away blacks) would swing it? After all the databases were planned at least a year previously.....

[Harry Seldon]

Lots of books, essays, investigations, and news columns about both UFOs and big foot too.

UFOs are real, heretic nonbeliever.

*points to bible*

To the chagrin of Gore no doubt.

Maybe so but the point remains the same.

Why should he? If you win, you don't ask for recounts.

Why not? I would have. Why would I want that specter hanging over my term in office? If he truly felt he had won, why not demand a total recount and rub Al Gore's face in the fact that he was a four time loser?

The count stood because that was what the law required. Gore and the Florida court tried to circumvent the law and the SCOTUS put an end to their nonsense. Many Democrats like to tell us it was 5 "conservative" judges that gave Bush the election, but the ruling was actually 7-2. Those 7 judges wanted the Florida court to fix the mess it created but 5 of the judges ruled all the delays caused by Gore and the Florida court endangered Florida's electors being counted in time for the lawful deadline. That's my recollection of what happened anyway...

The Supreme Court didn't put an end to it, per se, unless you consider abstaining from a decision an end. They chose to leave it up to regional government, as they should have.

As far as the lawful deadline, I thought they had already passed that during the first recount but that's my recollection and unsupported for now.

[Harry Seldon]

What I don't get is how the Bush team knew in advance that Florida would be so close that a few thousand votes 'deleted' by the means described (databasing, scaring away blacks) would swing it? After all the databases were planned at least a year previously.....

Does it matter how close it was to use tactics like this? One has to try to be successful. The number of blacks in many municipalities pre-Civil Rights wouldn't have been enough to swing a vote but they were still prevented from exercising their right to vote.