 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Ugh ...the recount
|
|
|
Subject: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 05 Apr 01 - 12:10 AM I'm surprised no one has reported the Florida recount showing Bush was definitely winner of the Presidential election if the count was made the way Gore wanted to do it. Was that report only in Arizona newspapers? DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Margo Date: 05 Apr 01 - 12:11 AM No, it was on National news tonight. Gore wouldn't comment. Of course not, what on earth could he say? Margo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Troll Date: 05 Apr 01 - 12:18 AM They know Doug. They know. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 05 Apr 01 - 12:36 AM Well, Troll, I just wanted to be sure everybody got the news. I'm reltively sure, however, the final count won't be acceptable for whatever reason. I know! The Miami Times,and USA Today are Right Wing propaganda tools! Part of a huge Right Wing conspiracy! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Troll Date: 05 Apr 01 - 12:39 AM Don't forget the Knight Ridder newspaper syndicate. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: CarolC Date: 05 Apr 01 - 12:44 AM So with this adjustment, does he get the popular vote as well, or just the electoral college? (Not that it matters for the outcome. Just curious.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 05 Apr 01 - 12:49 AM Well, in reality, Carol C., the popular vote, as you well know, has little to do with who is elected President. I would support your efforts, however, to do whatever you can to change the system. I wouldn't support your effort, but you should do whatever you can, legally, to change the system if you don't approve of it. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: mousethief Date: 05 Apr 01 - 12:54 AM He lost the popular vote. Which doesn't matter a bit when you're talking about who gets to be president, but it matters a huge deal when you talk about things like "mandate." He's not acting with the humility you would expect from somebody who lost the popular vote. Perhaps he's too stupid to realize that humility is called for? Nah, couldn't be. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 05 Apr 01 - 01:12 AM Gee, I don't know, Alex, but perhaps you're right. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: mousethief Date: 05 Apr 01 - 01:23 AM I don't mind arrogant people who are smart, or stupid people who are humble, or even smart people who are humble. But stupid and arrogant people are really hard to take. Hence my dislike for W. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: CarolC Date: 05 Apr 01 - 01:25 AM Just a little recap here, DougR, since it appears that you didn't read my post very carefully. Here's what I said... "So with this adjustment, does he get the popular vote as well, or just the electoral college? (Not that it matters for the outcome. Just curious.") Here's what you said...
"Well, in reality, Carol C., the popular vote, as you well know, has little to do with who is elected President. I would support your efforts, however, to do whatever you can to change the system. I wouldn't support your effort, but you should do whatever you can, legally, to change the system if you don't approve of it."
DougR
I'm having a difficult time remembering at what point in this discussion, or in any discussion here in the Mudcat, I have ever stated what my opinions are about whether or not I want to change the system.
Perhaps you're thinking of someone else? Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: CarolC Date: 05 Apr 01 - 01:27 AM Sorry about the unclosed underline. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Joe Offer Date: 05 Apr 01 - 01:32 AM Well, maybe it was a wee bit consoling to hear that perhaps Bush stole the election fair and square. I thought his manipulation was outright cheating, but maybe it didn't make a difference. I'm still not happy with the election results, but maybe the guy actually was elected according to proper procedures. I wasn't thrilled by Gore, but I intensely dislike Bush. I hope one party or the other comes up with a really remarkable candidate next time. Maybe both Bush and Gore are capable of doing the job - but wouldn't it be wonderful if the U.S. could have a president that people could actually admire? -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: katlaughing Date: 05 Apr 01 - 01:35 AM I like Sorcha's idea or maybe it was someone else asked if we could impeach the Resident for Terminal Stupidity. He would do well to remember he did not win the popular vote. Still luvyaDougeR!**BG** kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: CarolC Date: 05 Apr 01 - 01:36 AM Thanks, Joe and/or Clone! (You guys are great!) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 05 Apr 01 - 01:45 AM Sorry, Carol C., I evidently offended you, and I didn't intend to. I read my post again, as you repeated it, and it sounds pretty pompous. I didn't intend it to be. Merely was trying to express my opinion that anyone who did want to change the system should try to do it. Kat, still love you too! Joe: well, some people must admire George W. He's President, isn't he? I do understand where you are coming from though. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Ebbie Date: 05 Apr 01 - 02:15 AM Hey, guys, let's read beyond the simplistic headlines. Here is what it says: Bush's margin of victory in Florida would have as much as tripled had the Supreme Court allowed a hand recount of the undervotes to be completed (He would have expanded his 537-vote victory to a 1,6565 margin.) OK- now read further: Bush's 1665 vote margin was based on the assumption those numbers would stand but that in all the rest of the state the most generous standards would be applied. The newspapers also gave Bush the advantage under two more restrictive standards.
But the Herald reported the balance would have tipped to Al Gore if a recount of the undervotes had been started from scratch in all 67 Florida counties using the most inclusive standards. Under that hypothetical recount, free from the the fragnmented chronology of the post-election contest Gore would have won the the White House by 393 votes.
The USA Today's analysis focused exclusively on what might have happened if the recount had been allowed to continue. The way I read that is that if the whole state had been hand recounted by the same standards, Gore would have won. What this paper did was to start in the middle- only those counties that were already counted and at issue. But frankly, who the divil cares. Doesn't change the fact we got Bush! rah, rah, rah. Ebbie
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 05 Apr 01 - 02:20 AM Yep, Ebbie, that's the way I read it too. What you didn't mention though, is that in the story I read, it stated that Gore would have won the hand count by three votes. A rousing victory, right? A real mandate! As you say, though, it ..."doesn't change the fact that we got Bush! rah, rah, rah." DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Ebbie Date: 05 Apr 01 - 02:37 AM Mandate, Doug? Mandate? What in the world do you think Bush has? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: CarolC Date: 05 Apr 01 - 02:52 AM Thanks, DougR. I'm not offended. I just prefer to have my posts stand on their own merit and not be misconstrued or lumped in with anyone else's.
Most of the time I prefer to keep my opinions about politics to myself around here. Makes for a more peaceful existance overall. And I agree, political activism is best accomplished at home and in our communities. A music forum doesn't seem like the most effective place to try to make changes in the political system. That's how it looks to me, anyway.
Thanks for clarifying your intentions for me, though.
Take care, Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: GUEST,SeanM, poking his nose in Date: 05 Apr 01 - 02:56 AM And none of this also reflects the fact that the margin of votes one way or the other is still WELL within the 'margin for error' of even the most precise of recounts possible, given the system used. Which leaves us with: An election that can NEVER be settled to everyone's liking, no matter WHAT system of counting is used. A president selected by the Supreme Court, which honestly I now believe would have been the outcome no matter who took Florida. ~and~ A still further increased margin of voter apathy, from the "great, the guy I voted for won, but still lost? Huh?" crowd. Of course, it's debatable if they (or for that matter, pretty much the vast majority of all voters) qualify as the original idea of "an informed electorate". But, hey. What can you do? M |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Brian Hoskin Date: 05 Apr 01 - 04:28 AM I don't suppose any of these recounts and calculations take into account the views of all those people from minority groups who were (illegally) disenfranchised? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Troll Date: 05 Apr 01 - 09:48 AM Brian, can you state specifics please? The hearings in Tallahassee held by the Voting Rights Commission did not turn up a single qualified voter who was denied the right to vote. There were problems with the purge lists, true, and the investigations there are ongoing. In my county, the Supervisor of Elections threw the purge list out when she found HER name on it as a convicted felon. Purge lists are, nevertheless, legal and their use does not constitute prima facie evidence of illegal disenfranchisment. They are very useful in screening out people who have no right to vote in a county or precinct because they have moved, are convicted felons, or are dead, to name a few. Doug, I thought you were gonna stay out of these political threads. *BG* troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: kendall Date: 05 Apr 01 - 10:13 AM This is hard for me to say, but, apparently, the shrub won the election. No matter what we think, we are stuck with this smirking doofus for 4 years. Living in a state with a small population, I am a supporter of the electoral college. If not for that little archaic quirk in the system, the big cities would dominate every election, and we in the outback would be "sucking hind tit". The fact is, Bush is president, and, it is time to move on. I, for one, am willing to place the blame where it REALLY belongs...on the democrats. We put up the wrong man, a man who has trouble with the truth, a man who couldn't even carry his own home state! We posted a loser, and he lost. That's the long and the short of it. All else is pointless commentary. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 05 Apr 01 - 04:09 PM I like the Electoral College also, Kendall. You are absoulutely right, the less populated states would have little say in national elections were we to scrap it. Troll: I kept waiting for someone to post the story on the recount, and when it appeared no one was going to, I I opened the gate. I enjoy political discussions, but I have found these types of discussions on the Mudcat usually end up with somebody yelling at somebody else. What's the fun in that? Maybe fun for the yellor, but little fun for the yelle. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 05 Apr 01 - 05:20 PM "Some people must admire George W. He's President, isn't he?"
Now that just doesn't follow, Doug. The fact that you might vote for someone in no way implies that you in any shape or form admire them.
And that isn't a party political point I'm making, it's a logical quibble. There are people in all parties, in all countries, who have been elected, in respect of whom the concept that someone actually admires them simply beggars belief.
One point's been puzzling me in all this - as I understand it, the final clinching argument for that Supreme Court of yours was that having the votes counted in a different way in different places would offend against natural justice, and so couldn't be allowed. But that should surely have implied that the whole election across the United States was null and void in any case.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Bill D Date: 05 Apr 01 - 05:47 PM I suspect that many simply voted 'Republican'...I doubt that they all 'liked Bush'. I'm convinced that in that very close election, Bush won the majority of votes as cast...and, by the rules, is entitled to be where he is.... I am NOT convinced that a majority of the people in Florida favored him. The system, including old voting machines, ballot procedures...etc., made it hard to know. But the system obviously needs some work, and I understand that next time, mant things will be different. For now, we need to concentrate on living with Bush and keeping him honest...he hardly has a mandate though he acts like it. At least Reagan looked cheerful and fatherly and didn't smirk and demand when HE dismantled federal programs and catered to business interests. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 05 Apr 01 - 06:54 PM I guess the election never will really be settled to everyone's satisfaction. Oh well. The Diamondbacks beat Los Angeles last night! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Matt_R Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:11 PM And the Phillies are 3-0 for the first time since 1915! YES! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: kendall Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:14 PM Who did they play Matt? the St. Louis Browns? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Matt_R Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:17 PM The Florida Marlins. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 05 Apr 01 - 07:22 PM "Bush won the majority of votes as cast..." No he didn't - a majority means that most of the people who voted vote for you. What he at best might have got would have been a plurality - ie more votes than any other individual candidate.
To illustrate the difference - if you had ten candidates, and nine of them got 10,000 votes, and the other got 10,001 votes, that'd be the winner, with a plurality, and the votes of one in ten voters. Which is not "a majority." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 05 Apr 01 - 08:24 PM McGrath: sigh. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Bill D Date: 05 Apr 01 - 08:50 PM I am convinced that a majority got my point..*grin*...perhaps a plurality might agree that the distinction needed making. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Art Thieme Date: 05 Apr 01 - 10:28 PM In the new tally, have we counted the disenfranchised Afro-Americans of Florida who were not allowed to vote at all? Have we forgotten that the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court perpetrated a coup and decided the election in flagrant contempt of the people? Have we forgotten already that the accepted valid re-counting system of Florida was abandoned in order to simply hand over the presidency to Bush at the behest of the man's brother and his cohort? Have we forgotten the hatchet job done on Bill Clinton all through his presidency by Limbaugh and all the other hate-mongers only culminating in his impeachment? And now---we are trying to use the national soma/xanax/valium of baseball to placate the masses into forgetting everything else I may have forgotten to bring up here !? Maybe we deserve what we get---- We truly do need to be brave in order to live in this Alice-In-Wonderland new world. But if only for our own health and exercise, we also sometimes need to leave civility and politeness way on the back burner just to get a few inches closer to the truth of it and possibly hold the blue meanies responsible for their actions. Art Thieme
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Skeptic Date: 05 Apr 01 - 11:17 PM Troll, As a point of correction, it wasn't our supervisor who found her name on the purge list as a felon but the supervisor in (I think) de Soto county. Our Supervisor starting verifying the list and found it to be so full of errors as to be useless. Even so, 41 out of the 65,000+ ballots cast in our county were illegal. These were ones where poll workers didn't call in to verify a voter who claimed he/she had lost their card. Harking back to a much earlier thread, the Fla Association of Supervisor's of Elections (as a test) did a hand count of ballots in one of the smaller counties, to see if it was more accurate than the punch/machine count system. They re-counted four times. They got four different answers each time. None of which agreed with the machine recounts (Which were the same 3 out of 4). Which would seem to indicate that hand counting isn't a reliable or viable option. What the Civil Rights Commission found in Florida was that people were, in fact, denied the right to vote, that the fiasco of the company that purged the lists did disenfranchise people but there was no evidence of intent. Which brings us back to Hansen's Maxim: Why attibute to malice......... Nonetheless, people will continue to believe that there was a plot to disenfranchise voters, facts nonewithstanding. But then, there are those who think W's a competent president and administrator, facts notwithstanding. Regards John
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Troll Date: 06 Apr 01 - 12:09 AM And there are those who think that you...but why go on. troll *I could swear you told me it was Bev. Time to check the medication again.* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Walter Corey Date: 06 Apr 01 - 11:06 AM Completing the partial recount favors Bush; doing a complete recount favors Gore. (click and scroll down several entries to Hattaway). How that validates this bastard presidency is beyond me. It is as tainted today as it was a week ago. Still, as several have pointed out, it doesn't matter and we have to make sure four years doesn't become eight. Already, Bush has mastered the Reagan trick of screwing the hell out of us and making us beg for more. We need to lean on the Democratic leadership (which unfortunately has become an oxymoron) and urge them to start acting like the loyal opposition that they're supposed to be. Barbara Streisand made a good start along this line. And I don't think the Move On site can be posted often enough, so here it is again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: LR Mole Date: 06 Apr 01 - 11:19 AM On the other hand Canada, refusing to log off their western rainforests, have saved the Spirit Bear.(This is not a code: they really did. And there's more nobility in an inch of this saved forest and a hair of this beast than this whole damn-the-planet, sell-life-by-the-pound regime. Spirit Bear comin' for the Bush-man's tuchus.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Walter Corey Date: 07 Apr 01 - 01:07 PM Someone on NPR today gave the definitive take on the recounts: If you examine all the ballots and count all the pricks, then Bush wins! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 07 Apr 01 - 02:25 PM Golly, Walter. Using that method of measurement, I'm shocked that Gore didn't win! Maybe if they had included the hanging chad ... DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 07 Apr 01 - 03:08 PM Are there any other democratic countries that take the vote away from people, even after they have served their sentence? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Walter Corey Date: 07 Apr 01 - 04:32 PM Actually, when you consider how the environment and the poor and working people are being systematically raped by this gang, that little joke doesn't seem so funny anymore. Thank God some of the Democrats and mainstream Republicans in Congress are getting their hackles up a little. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 07 Apr 01 - 10:57 PM You mean by NOT givng back the money the government took from the people that the government didn't need, Walter? Yes, a few radical Republicans joined the Democratic leadership and thwarted the President's tax plan. Oh well, that's the way it goes sometime. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Walter Corey Date: 08 Apr 01 - 09:53 AM Money the government didn't need? The national debt now stands at $5,741,809,284,540.41. People need to stop sleeping through economics classes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 08 Apr 01 - 06:39 PM Well, Walter, if you think the Democrats REALLY want to pay down the national debt, one created primarily by Democratic administrations, by the way, I've got some water front property I'd like to show you out here in Arizona. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 Apr 01 - 09:06 PM When the sea starts rising and drowning out the low parts, that waterfront property might just become real...Maybe that's what all Kyoto stuff with Bush is all about. When it comes to pulling tricks to make money, I gather he is not as thick as he presents himself as being. Well, he couldn't very well be... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: Walter Corey Date: 09 Apr 01 - 07:39 AM One small ray of hope is that when the seas start rising, Daddy Bush's palace in Kennebunkport will be the first under the waves. Maybe when he realizes this he'll put some pressure on Junior. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: kendall Date: 09 Apr 01 - 08:13 AM Doug, my friend, I must take exception to your statement that the huge debt was mostly the fault of democratic administrations. The fact is, "The Actor" spent more money than all the previous administrations combined.It's a big step from billions to trillions. I read somewhere a few years ago, that there was only a bit less than 3 trillion dollars in circulation in all the countries of the world, (including their own money). Raygun spent more than that in 8 years. I also believe that one of the reasons that the republicans were so pissed at Clinton, was because he was more fiscally responsible than most republicans! remember what happened to Prometheus? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: DougR Date: 09 Apr 01 - 04:19 PM I won't challenge your statement, Kendall. I'm sure if you're right, though, Ronnie spent it wisely. :>) DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: MAV Date: 09 Apr 01 - 10:59 PM Thief, I don't mind arrogant people who are smart, or stupid people who are humble, or even smart people who are humble. But stupid and arrogant people are really hard to take. You are self-hating!
mav out
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: mousethief Date: 10 Apr 01 - 03:57 AM I love you too, MAV. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Ugh ...the recount From: GUEST,Claymore Date: 10 Apr 01 - 05:09 PM "Dogs Bark, But The Caravan Moves On" (DBBTCMO) |