Bush won? Yes. I didn't want him to, but he did. Nevertheless it is important, particularly with all the new voting concepts floating around (e.g. electronic and internet voting) that is taking place to see when errors occured in the process. Kerry knows he wont win, but it is important that every single legal voter has their vote counted, because it is an essential part of democracy. I personally have great concerns with the fact that people in Florida and Ohio were waiting in lines for hours to cast their votes, many of which cast provisional ballots because the polls closed before they could vote despite waiting, and if this is the case, these areas need to clearly add more polling places in the next election to meet needs. This fact needs to be established in this year's election results.

___________________
Download My Spring '08 Mix Here

Thurs May 15: Influence @ Tini Martini w/ Kris B. vs. Nosmo, Rikler & Mike Palmeri
Thurs June 5: Under the Influence @ Tini Martini w/Mathias Matthew, Jack Kim & more TBA

quote:

Originally posted by speedracer_mec I can see it now: "I actually was for the recount...before I was against it!"

Classic!

Good I know alot of people that said they voted a straight democrat ticket and when they went to recheck their votes all the democrats were checked except for Kerry. So they had to go and manually change it from Bush to Kerry and this is with electronic touch screen voting. I think in an election like the one we just had that thats a bunch of bullshit, not that I support Kerry.

"Bill, its just the taking over of democracy by a totalitarian government, let it go."

So you have a problem with double-checking for accuracy? There have been documented accounts of voter problems, like the county that didn't count what 4,000 votes for Kerry? Kerry knows he lost and that Ohio was likely in favor of Bush, but this process does in fact contribute to future voting issues in the future.

Let's put an alternative scenario in place, one that a great many folks, including nearly all conservatives feared might have happened. Let's say Ohio went to Kerry instead of Bush by a slim margin. You realize how many lawyers Bush and Rove sent down to Ohio for just this particular hypothetical scenario which fortunately never happened? By most accounts it wasn't just a hundred or so - it was in the thousands (strange how the Conservatives have a such a crusade against lawyers, until they need them). They were all lined up in place, ready to go. Now, for the sake of argument, let's just throw in the hypothetical that Kerry won the popular vote as well. So ask yourself, do you honestly think Bush and Rove would have responded any differently than Kerry here? You wanna place a bet as to when or even Bush would have even conceded a loss at this point in time given this hypothetical?

I'll bet a six-pack of your finest beer that Bush and Rove's cries of "foul!" would have made Gore's episode look like a whisper.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 You realize how many lawyers Bush and Rove sent down to Ohio for just this particular hypothetical scenario which fortunately never happened?

I believe this was largely in response to the actions of the Kerry campaign when they made it ever so clear that they would have pre-emptive legal officials in place in the event of a 2000 rerun. In any event, both sides made such preparations.

quote:

I'll bet a six-pack of your finest beer that Bush and Rove's cries of "foul!" would have made Gore's episode look like a whisper.

In all seriousness, I don't think it's popular to make the Gore episode look smaller than it was. Here we are, 4 years after the fact, and Gore still preaches like a drunken buffoon that he is the rightful winner of the 2000 election. After all, it was his political birthright. IMO, Bush has a lot more class than to act as childish as Gore. However, I'll concede that if it was close, Bush would probably say something like, "Let's just count all of the votes so that there is no question of the outcome." But I don't think he'd stomp his feet and demand recount after recount until he got favorable results.

I think the humor of this whole situation is that Kerry conceded defeat and said he wanted to help heal the nation, yet here we are, a month after the fact and he seems to have flipflopped yet again. Or in the very least, he has created the appearance of yet another flopping.

im ready for 4 more years of Dubya, but if by some fluke Kerry actually wins this recount......HALLELUJAH!!!!\o/
just like they did in 2000

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka I believe this was largely in response to the actions of the Kerry campaign when they made it ever so clear that they would have pre-emptive legal officials in place in the event of a 2000 rerun. In any event, both sides made such preparations.

Granted.

quote:

In all seriousness, I don't think it's popular to make the Gore episode look smaller than it was. Here we are, 4 years after the fact, and Gore still preaches like a drunken buffoon that he is the rightful winner of the 2000 election. After all, it was his political birthright.

Well according to some exit polls in this election, which unfortunately I can't Google ATM, something like 51% of folks felt that the 2000 election should have gone to Gore. So if Gore still whines about it, it's only supported by a great many folks in the public.

And BTW, just to rehash and not mince words, Gore SHOULD have won. A study by the National Opinion Research Center clearly demonstrated that in at least 4 different recount scenarios, Gore would have won. The study was sponsored by the Associated Press, The New York Times, CNN, Washington Post, Co., Tribune Publishing (which owns the Chicago Tribune, Orlando Sentinel, and South Florida Sun-Sentinel), and The Wall Street Journal itself:

http://www.norc.uchicago.edu/fl/

According to a November 12, 2001, Washington Post article on NORC's findings,

quote:

"[I]f Gore had found a way to trigger a statewide recount of all disputed ballots, or if the courts had required it, the result likely would have been different. An examination of uncounted ballots throughout Florida found enough where voter intent was clear to give Gore the narrowest of margins." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2001Nov11.html

If anything, Gore's just still pissed at himself for not speaking up louder about the whole damn thing.

quote:

IMO, Bush has a lot more class than to act as childish as Gore.

If Bush was in the position that Gore was, I'm willing to bet you another 6 pack of your favorite beer that his response would have been similar, if not worse than Gore's.

Meh, I'm sick of hypotheticals, nevermind.

quote:

However, I'll concede that if it was close, Bush would probably say something like, "Let's just count all of the votes so that there is no question of the outcome." But I don't think he'd stomp his feet and demand recount after recount until he got favorable results.

Didn't realize that's what Kerry's doing - he's simply asking that all votes be counted, and counted correctly. Let's not paint a picture that's not reality, alrighty?

quote:

I think the humor of this whole situation is that Kerry conceded defeat and said he wanted to help heal the nation, yet here we are, a month after the fact and he seems to have flipflopped yet again. Or in the very least, he has created the appearance of yet another flopping.

Again, that's a cute way to depict him, but I see nothing wrong with him wanting the votes to be recounted in such a close state, esp. one that could swing his way. I can't imagine ANY candidate acting differently in Kerry's case.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

Do you realize what kind of beer I drink???

will we have a Ukraine going on in Ohio?

___________________