A Question for all you Lib's who think Gore won in 2000....?

Question

Please read the following written in the NYT
On Nov. 12, 2001, The New York Times ran a front page article that began: "A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward." Another Times article that day by Richard L. Berke said that the "comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots solidifies George W. Bush's legal claim on the White House because it concludes that he would have won under the ground rules prescribed by the Democrats." On Nov. 18, 2001, Linda Greenhouse wrote in the Times that the media consortium's count of all the disputed Florida ballots — in which the Times participated — concluded "that George W. Bush would have won the 2000 presidential election even had the court not cut the final recount short."

So, any Comments?

Answer 1

Stop screwing up perfectly good fantasies with the facts ...

Ha...I love it when the libs say, "Old News"...they bring it up every day, and when you call them on it it's "old news..." LOL

Answer 2

Bush would have won the popular vote in Florida, but still would have lost the national popular vote by almost 2 million voters. The reason he is president is because the electoral college votes were interpreted by the Supreme Court as making him the winner. Electoral College votes do not equate to the popular vote. For example, if 10 people were voting in an election in the state of "X", and one candidate got 5 votes, another 4 and the third 1 vote, all the votes would be counted as going to the candidate with 5, even though 5 does not represent 100%. That candidate merely got 1/2 of the popular vote but all of the electoral college votes. As long as the Electoral College is the electing method, your vote will not be counted as one vote, but only a fraction of one vote. Also, the Electoral College 'electors' are predicated on the last complete census, in this case, the one completed in 1990 and not 2000. In population shift in those 10 years was unrecognized by the Electoral College. Florida's population was the same, California and New York populations increased in those 10 years. The number of Electoral College votes of those two states would have increased enough to have given Gore the election if the census were done before the counting of the votes. I could go on for days about why W was not really elected, but I think by now I have lost your attention.

Answer 3

Although Florida got a lot of the attention in the 2000 election, I think the basis for most liberals' frustration was that Gore won the popular vote nationwide, even though he lost in the Electoral College.

But the more important question is why are you asking this question? It's easy to play "what might have been" looking back, but really, what's the point? All we can do is focus on today. The past can't be changed, and the future is uncertain. All we are certain of is today. Stop living in 2000, and join the rest of your countrymen and women in figuring out how to make things better.

Answer 4

Believe it or not, democracy during a general election for Presidency does not perfectly exist. If one shall research, then that particular person would discover that the Electoral College votes elect the President and not popular, individual votes. I would have much rather have given Al Gore (2000) and John Kerry (2004) the Presidency over Bush, who avoids questions and cannot orate when giving public addresses.

Referring to previous statements, I agree with Iraq not wanting a Western, especially United States democracy, when it does not exist. The only vote counting for individuals is the primary. Therefore what was the purpose of recounting the chads when the popular, individual votes do not count instead the important votes are those of the Electoral College. Americans who believed that the recount of the chads could have determined the Presidency do not understand that it is not the popular votes instead it is the Electoral College.

Off task, if Republican, since I am a Democrat who disagree with both political parties, please do research on the Northwoods Operation or Operation Northwoods of 1960 to go to war with Cuba. Sounds too similar on how Bush went to Iraq, in my opinion foolishly and illegal, after 9/11.

Another question for Republican, Bush supporters who critize Bill Clinton. If this is a true War on Terrorism, then why did Bush state in 2004 that he does not care where bin Laden is, I don't care where bin Laden is, and bin Laden is not my top priority. He also mentioned that same about education as one of his priority.

Bush wiped his as* with the Constitution and no longer allowed freedom of expression, opinion, and speech. Refer to Ward Churchill. George is the only president to use the phrase "Chief in Command". Sounds like dictator. Bring on your martial law Dictator Bush. People just need to use a shotgun in the American society to defend themselves from a military state. Just tell them you are from Tenn. and you will be let free. America is a joke to the world.

Answer 5

Liberals think that the elections were stolen only when they lost. so elections in 1980, 1984, 1988, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2002, 2004 were all stolen by GOP.

Answer 6

I think the above is correct but america needs to have machines which are 100% tamper proof - or paper ballots so there is never any confusion like this again -

Answer 7

It sure does make all of that ballot counting until their eyes were falling out looking for "pregnant" dimples and voter intent seem really pointless, doesn't it?

Answer 8

I have a few comments (and I am not a Liberal)

-Elections are flawed for many reasons (electronic voting is easily compromised and inaccessibility issues to name a couple)

-I find it alarming that so many Americans are oblivious to the illegality of George W. Bush's Administration (not talking about elections, just his presidency)

-What has Bush's Administration done to resolve Election problems?

Answer 9

I still blame it on that meglomaniac Ralph Nader. Without him in the race (or if he had acted responsibly and told his supporters to vote for Gore), Gore wins Florida and New Hampshire, saving us from the embarassment (in more ways than one) of the 2000 election.

Answer 10

They weren't the only one. All the liberals newspapers and media network's independant studies showed Bush won.

Answer 11

Your BOY Bush might have won the election. But the world as a whole LOST. Especially when he chose SATAN himself as his running mate.
Libs rule. It's our time now. Don't you just hate paybacks?