posted on November 11, 2000 06:49:27 PM new
He is afraid of the Democrats like we all should be. Gore is a loser, is he ever going to give up these recounts after recounts after recounts. How many times do you need to do that? What a moron...
posted on November 11, 2000 06:52:43 PM new
Chococake, Bush will be hard to live with??
PLEASEEEEEE!!!!!!
I should remind you, the Gore people filed a
lawsuit also. In my opinion, Gore is just another Clinton without a zipper problem
posted on November 11, 2000 06:55:37 PM new
CleverGirl
t doesn't sound like you're much of a Democratic supporter to start with, Shelly.
Well, you see, I am not a Democrat, I am a Republican. I do believe in Democracy though.
GW or Dubya I came to the conclusion that Gore will be President, because he, after the mandated first recount in the state of Florida, then demanding a 2nd count, and now a hand count, well he is bound and determined to BE President.
Which Cabinet members has Gov. Bush appointed? Which ones has he announced, I haven't heard yet?
posted on November 11, 2000 07:05:00 PM new
GWBush----Been watching the news up here---CNN reports say that Gore 'VOTERS' filed the law suits because they are unhappy with the ballot and some black students were also not able to vote ---but it was the BUSH camp that filed their suit---is there a difference or is the same thing???.
posted on November 11, 2000 07:09:19 PM new
CleverGirl,
Where did you hear this
"No no no -- the Gore campaign did NOT criticize Bush for PLANNING his cabinet and transition, but for
starting to name cabinet appointees and STARTING the transition (or trying to) before actually becoming
the victor. Even were there no *irregularities* in Florida (and possibly other states) to wade through and
even without the FL REcounts, the final absentee vote still isn't in. Can we say "cart before the
horse"?Planning is one thing, DOING an entirely different one. "
I'm sure Gore is doing the same. Or are you in touch with him personaly
posted on November 11, 2000 07:15:25 PM new
Bush has hinted all along that Colin Powell will be his Secretary of State. No big surprise there, if Powell accepts the post.
It's only prudent to begin making some of these crucial decisions right away. Clinton was just about ready to start his re-election campaign before his cabinet was complete. There weren't enough White House interns available at the time I suppose.
posted on November 11, 2000 07:20:45 PM new
Without clouding the issue of who will be our next president, the fact remains that there are irregularities in this election.
Buchanan received 1/3 of all his votes from the county in question and even he stated that he believed it was erroneous. 19,000 people made error to the point that it invalidates their vote. Obviously there is a problem.
I thought the election was all about the people choosing who we wanted to represent us. I think the only fair answer is to allow only those who cast their votes in this election to vote again. Expensive, yes, but what is it going to cost this country to put a candidate in with such a cloud of suspicion hanging over his head.
And as far as the recount seems like with automatic counters and such that the votes could have been double counted in some manner to verify them prior to having ever been declared.
And then there is the issue of the electorial vote. . The electorial vote was suppose to be representive of the people so how is it that one person can have the popular vote and another the electorial vote? Seems to be fair that if a state has 10 electorial votes and a candidate gets 10% of the popular vote he should get 10% of electorial vote and so on and so forth.
Besides the electorial college was actually enacted because our forefathers saw it as protection against those who vote and are uneducated. And also to ensure that even small states receive attention from canidates. Should this continue to date?
posted on November 12, 2000 06:08:23 AM new
I wish everyone would quit worrying about the Supreme Court. Unfortunately, I'm not at liberty to discuss why I wish that, so you have to trust me.
________
I never had one, and I didn't want one, and I don't, so now I do...
posted on November 12, 2000 06:55:57 AM new"Seems to be fair that if a state has 10 electorial votes and a candidate gets 10% of the popular vote he should get 10% of electorial vote and so on and so forth".
Don't think so. It's a majority rule. If the majority of voters in a state vote for a candidate, that state's electors are expected to carry that majority to Washington.
"Besides the electorial college was actually enacted because our forefathers saw it as protection against those who vote and are uneducated".
NOT! States devised nefarious means to keep uneducated voters from the polls, most of which have eventually been outlawed or overturned in federal courts.Such an idea flies in the face of all the the country has stood for. The electoral college is just a way for each state's preference, by majority, to be expressed without the entire populace having to travel to Washington to do so.
I keep seeing the idea that the electoral college is a means to force candidates to 'pay attention' to low population areas. Does that really make sense? Why would there be a presumption that a candidate would attend to a small number of electoral votes but not to a proportionally small number of voters?
posted on November 12, 2000 07:25:25 AM new
Some of both, I think.
I think that were it not for being the sons of that ex-president, all three of the Bush brothers would be in prison, or have completed prison sentences.
It would have been so easy to beat Al Gore if the Republican party had brought forth a proven effective and viable candidate. It's not as if there are none. Sen. Dan Rickles (R-Ok) (does his name hold him back?), for example, has every bit as much experience in finance, environmental, budget, ansd social benefit as does Al Gore. I'm sure there are many more very able people who could bring a wide national level expertise to the table.
So why this clown?
The Republican party has a poor conception,or no concern for what the country wants. They offer up people like GW and believe that they can sell them to the country, and by doing that I think they express the disregard, even contempt, of their party for the people of the United States of America.
posted on November 12, 2000 07:41:55 AM new
[i]CleverGirl,
Where did you hear this
"No no no -- the Gore campaign did NOT criticize Bush for PLANNING his cabinet and transition, but for
starting to name cabinet appointees and STARTING the transition (or trying to) before actually becoming
the victor. Even were there no *irregularities* in Florida (and possibly other states) to wade through and
even without the FL REcounts, the final absentee vote still isn't in. Can we say "cart before the
horse"?Planning is one thing, DOING an entirely different one. "
I'm sure Gore is doing the same. Or are you in touch with him personaly[/i]
Where did I hear it? All over the news. Immediately after the election Bush was making moves toward ANNOUNCING some of his cabinet choices and starting the transition. This is beyond planning, and it was premature. Due to the backlash (mostly in the press), he backed off and is now only talking about planning "because that's the *responsible* thing to do" and no one's objecting to that. I repeat: planning is one thing, doing is another.
posted on November 12, 2000 08:01:07 AM new
About the vote counts.
The first recount was mandated by FL law because the final vote came in 1/2 of 1% difference between the two major candidates. No one requested it or needed to.
Then the Gore campaign asked for a hand recount in Palm Beach County. This they're allowed to do by FL law. They were granted a 1% recount, to be followed by a full recount if the election folks determined that they'd found enough change in the numbers. The Gore campaign chose 3 precincts which didn't fully meet the 1% figure, so a 4th was added. This hand recount is still going on. Despite the Republicans' (James Baker, et. al.) claim that there are no objective guidelines on conducting such a hand recount, there are, and they're codified in FL law.
There was a 2nd machine recount in Palm Beach County and that was requested BY THE REPUBLICANS.
There were recounts requested by the Gore campaign in the other 3 counties, including Volusia, because there were anomalies or irregularities in the vote in those counties. Again, all within FL law.
The Buch campaign has filed the ONLY lawsuit in all of this -- none whatsoever have been filed by the Gore campaign. There are 8 lawsuits in Palm Beach County filed by VOTERS. This is their right.
Does the Gore campaign *support* those suits? So far, in no other way than philosophically. Are either the DNC or the state Democratic party joining in or aiding and abetting these individual voters' efforts? There's been nothing in the press about it, but if they did, that would be their right.
Look, folks, this is about voters' rights to have their votes counted. It's about electing a President through an ACCURATE count of what voters tried to express as their will.
I was just watching James Carville on Meet the Press and I couldn't agree with him more: "I can't figure out for the life of me why anyone wouldn't want an accurate vote count."
Well, actually, I can figure it out (and so can Carville), it's just not very flattering to the Governor and his supporters.
posted on November 12, 2000 08:46:16 AM new
Powel as State?
- yuch
His publicly stated opinions on how reluctant the US should be to commit to anything overseas would have Iraq still in Kuwait.
posted on November 12, 2000 10:02:04 AM newPowel as State?
If Bush wins, you can count on it. And you can also count on quick, almost unanimous confirmation by the Senate. Any Senator voting against him will be a dead duck come the next election.
I came to the conclusion that Gore will be President, because he, after the mandated first recount in the state of Florida, then demanding a 2nd count, and now a hand count, well he is bound and determined to BE President.