In spite of the fact that an army of newspapers, including The Miami Herald and USA Today as well as the ultra-liberal New York Times all staged independent recounts after the election and determined that... *drumroll please* ...
BUSH WON!
***The Herald used broad liberal standards, including counting every dimple, pinprick and hanging chad identified in the section for presidential votes on the ballots.
"There were many people who expected there was a bonanza of votes here for Al Gore, and it turns out there was not," Herald executive editor Martin Baron said.***
http://www.nytimes.com/specials/election...
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/media_watch/jan-june01/recount_4-3.html
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/04/04/florida.recount.01/index.html
2006-09-18 08:11:12 · 13 answers · asked by Simon Templar 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
More: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html
The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago conducted the six-month study for a consortium of eight news media companies, including CNN.
the media consortium examined what might have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not intervened. The Florida high court had ordered a recount of all undervotes that had not been counted by hand to that point. If that recount had proceeded under the standard that most local election officials said they would have used, the study found that Bush would have emerged with 493 more votes than Gore.
Suppose that Gore got what he originally wanted -- a hand recount in heavily Democratic Broward, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade and Volusia counties. The study indicates that Gore would have picked up some additional support but still would have lost the election -- by a 225-vote margin statewide.
2006-09-18 08:18:46 · update #1
The Popular Vote is not how we elect the President. If we go by the Popular Vote, Clinton would have lost the presidency -- TWICE.
2006-09-18 08:20:39 · update #2
the conspiracy theorists in this country constitute the base of the democratic party
"everyone is out to get me" "no one has anything accept rich white man".
"wah!!!!!!!"
2006-09-18 08:13:58 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Liberals believe they are entitled to power. They have been out of power for a while. They believe they are the ruling class and the rest of us are stupid.
They wanted to recount 3 heavily Democratic districts in FL. Is that fair? Why not count the entire state?
Democrats say that Republicans steal elections. How about the WA governor's race? Republican Dino Rossi won 2 counts and lost the third, when some missing Seattle votes were found. The problem is there were more votes cast than registered voters. How about the fact that many Democrats refuse to support requiring photo ID to vote? They know that they cannot steal elections with the ID requirements.
Or how about that most of the districts that the Democrats call fraudulent are run by Democrats. Most of the inner cities are run by Democrats.
Where there is a victim and a supposed wrong, there is a Democrat stating that there needs to be more government intervention.
2006-09-18 12:45:11 · answer #2 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There were quite a few irregularities and I have heard analysis on both sides saying they would have won had x, y or z been done.
The other issues here are that Jeb is Bush's bro and the Sec. State (I think--Karen somebody) not only validated/ran the election but was Bush's Campaign Chairman in FL. That's clearly a conflict of interest.
At the end of the day- its 2006, not 2000 so let's get over it now.
2006-09-18 08:22:21 · answer #3 · answered by dapixelator 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Did you ever notice that we've had no problems with an election till Bush came to town in both 2000 and 2004 ?
The event of electronic voting machines and Diebold promising to "deliver " the votes to Bush, and the fact that they can't give a voter a receipt, are all highly suspicious.
2006-09-18 09:01:08 · answer #4 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If votes were counted by popular vote (like most of countries do) Al Gore would won.
2006-09-18 08:19:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is hard to accept you lost the election by less than .5% of the vote.
I voted for Bush, and now I wish Gore had won.
2006-09-18 08:18:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, there were a lot of electoral irregularities in Florida, they all worked for Bush, and Bush's brother just hap penned to be the Governor of that state. Gee, if that were to happen in the Third World, we'd see it as conclusive proof of corruption; why is it different here?
2006-09-18 08:17:13 · answer #7 · answered by The Armchair Explorer 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Gore won the popular vote!
2006-09-18 08:15:05 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
poor losers i think every single vote should be count'd not points per state
2006-09-21 11:05:05 · answer #9 · answered by cjrebel 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Democrat's are ignorant idiots who are just disappointed that they didn't get another opportunity to screw up our nation.
2006-09-18 13:13:18 · answer #10 · answered by Eli V 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ignorance..
Stupidity.
Denial...
Lack of common sense..
Sour Grapes...
There is no explaining the mindless prattle of a liberal...
2006-09-18 08:19:42 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋