I.e., if he had gotten the recount he was asking for, on his proposed terms, who would have won the election?
This is actually NOT a trick question, two separate newspaper consortia conducted "recounts" under this and various other methodologies to determine if the election had in fact "been stolen."
This is a settled matter - it's NOT the case that "nobody knows" what would have happened - the votes WERE counted - - just testing your knowledge here, and yes, feel free to look it up.
2007-03-27 12:23:24 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
http://www.janda.org/b20/News%20articles/bushwon.htm
2007-03-27 12:30:16 · update #1
Bush.
All the recounts even the NY Times cave to admit that Bush won FL.
My question is why Gore was so concern about all votes to be counted wanted all the military votes tossed out.
2007-03-27 12:30:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
What newspapers were those? You didn't mention their names. I wonder why those "newspaper consortia" came up with the conclusion that the election had been stolen when the New York Times, among others, the ACLU, and several other liberal organizations couldn't come up with that result no matter how many ways they recounted the votes. I wonder why we never heard a bit about these "newspaper consortia" when Dan Rather to say the least wouldn't have had to resort to lies to get rid of Bush and lose his job over it, not to mention credibility.
Nonetheless, as you so, it is a closed matter. You just keep telling yourself that it was proven. You just keep crying over your spilt milk.
2007-03-27 19:31:44 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I remember at the time that there were reports Bush would have won doing the recount the way Gore wanted and Gore would have won if they did the alternate recount argued by Bush, though the court avoided that question by certifying count.
2007-03-27 19:28:50 · answer #3 · answered by Jason W 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
What matters is that Bush won in an unbelievably close election. The only thing proven is that Bush has been the most incompetent president in history.
2007-03-27 19:41:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Bush
2007-03-27 19:51:12 · answer #5 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the vfact is that the tree man did not win his own home state. had he done that he would have won and osama bin laden would be running america now because gore would have surrendered on Sept 11th
2007-03-27 19:29:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not spending the time to look it up.it matters only to the losers.
I'll leave all the arguing and investigation to academics who make a living doing this crap.
I'm going to spend my efforts to try to elect the candidates i want in the next election.
2007-03-27 19:29:48 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋