The liberal newspaper The New York Times did their own recounts in Florida and said Bush won. Why can't hippies get over it?
2007-10-02 07:48:53 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Ducky cried to me earlier about not using facts to rebut him. How am I supposed to use facts when his answer is "old news"? What a goof, thanks for the laughs, ducky. Nice name as well.
2007-10-02 07:59:08 · update #1
The reason he won folks is cause you dems had J kerry and the goof Algore, both losers. Not because Americans are stupid.
2007-10-02 08:02:15 · update #2
Because liberals don't like coming to terms with the fact that they do NOT represent the political ideals of 51% of the US population.
2007-10-02 07:52:47 · answer #1 · answered by Chad 5 · 3⤊ 11⤋
For the record:
Actually the newspapers recounted 4 ways . They did it in just the 4 counties that Gore was willing to settle for , and for the whole state . They did each of those ,twice, using different standards , strictly, i.e. counting just 3 corners detached & "hanging chads ", and again more loosely , allowing for best guesses . So there were actually 4 different counts . The odd thing was that counted as Gore asked, (4 counties, loosely , Bush won , albeit by a smaller margin (100+ votes ))
In the other 3 counts , Gore won . Counting the whole state , with the "strict " standard, as Bush wanted, if it was going to happen (didn't actually want it done) Gore won handily . There were 113,000 disputed ballots . By that method the count was Gore :85,000 , Bush : 13,000 , Indeterminite : 15,000
Don't know about "the hippies" , but the main problem I had with Florida in 2000 , was the convict list . If your name was the same, or even vaguely similar to , any convict in the US , not just Florida , you were thrown off the voting rolls. It was done close to the election to make it difficult to fix. Appeals were heard by local boards with quite varied standards . Many people had to hire lawyers . If you couldn't afford that , - t.s.! Oddly (yeah right!) there were very few Hispanics on the list .(~100?) Cuban-Americans tend to vote Republican . How many Hispanic felons are actually in Florida? Less than 100? =))))The people on the list were disproportionately from Democratic leaning districts .Your name is J. Galt?. You could have been disqualified if some guy in Idaho, named Gerry Garage was a convict . It was that bad . All in all , a great exercise in preventing actual democracy .
Other than that , the problem with Bush?(besides everything?;D) There's enough to fill a dictionary . Most of it though, are just more symptoms . The disease is that despite all the talk , when it comes to democracy in actual practice , they aren't very comfortable with it , don't trust it, and don't trust us .
2007-10-02 23:06:29 · answer #2 · answered by mikeinportc 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well because Bush didn't win against Al Gore. He lost by the popular vote, but that doesn't count. The Electoral College is who determines who gets elected. That's why voter turnout is so low, because people see things like this, and think their vote doesn't count anyway. And don't forget that Bush's baby brother was the Govinator of Florida, a key state, for both of the elections. Of course baby brother made sure to disenfranchise certain voters that he knew would not vote for Bush. And then there was Kathryn Harris, who could forget her brown nose, shoved so far up both Bush brother's butts you couldn't even see her ugly face. And as far as the re-counts go, by the time those cards were handled and stacked and re-stacked, etc... can they really be accurately re-counted? NOT! That was the biggest fiasco in US history. Florida really showed it's a*s*s to the world when that happened. Hanging chads...whatever.
It is also very apparent that the Cons are getting very nervous about Hillary, and keep dredging up all of Bill's so called mistakes. (like the little sex scandal they can not seem to let go of) It's pretty pathetic really. I can't wait till 2008 when we finally get the 1st woman president elected. It will be about freaking time we get someone with a brain and some guts in there.
It's high time we rid this country of the Electoral College. When they set it up, it was based on the fact that some states had very few voters at that time, so it was supposed to make an election more fair. Now, it does exactly what it wants, no matter what the people want. There are enough intelligent people in this country to elect a president without the help of those who think they know it all.
Hippies? Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me. :)
2007-10-02 15:11:29 · answer #3 · answered by CSmom 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I think it was the "Irrefutable Mandate" thing that got me after the second election. Such a close call should have humbled an incumbant, but didn't. Then there's the fact that he lost the popular election the first time. I don't think it's healthy for our Republic that most of us voted for Al Gore, but Bush won on an electoral technicality by Court Appointment.
Hippies?
2007-10-02 15:05:47 · answer #4 · answered by Beardog 7 · 7⤊ 0⤋
I don't know if they are really correct or not in their assertions, but I support their right to question. It is important that our elections have the appearance of being free from corruption as this is bedrock of our entire system of governance. In the end it doesn't matter how much they question though. George Bush was certified as the President and will serve 2 terms. All I really know on this issue are 2 things. I voted for George Bush twice along with many other Americans and I am now ready for a change in leadership.
2007-10-02 14:59:35 · answer #5 · answered by Bryan 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Well, simple. We can't figure out who all the MORONS are who voted for his dumbazz twice. "We want to be protected, he's great at it." Yeah, he's the perfect defender of terror. The guy has our military worn down and we haven't even caught Osama yet. I wouldn't be surprised if they tried something real soon. How long did it take in between the two WTC attacks? Oh yeah. Keep an eye out.
2007-10-02 15:08:11 · answer #6 · answered by HERE WE GO BROWNIES, BEAT PIT!! 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
It does not matter who We the People vote for, then or now. The voting system is so corrupted We no longer have a say as to who will be the next figurehead. Besides, they all play for the same team. Rep. Dem.- just divisors meant to keep the People fighting amongst themselves. Don't hate, investigate!
Power to the People!
2007-10-02 15:07:42 · answer #7 · answered by mazeman25 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I tend to be conservative and I even voted for Bush in 2000... looking at the numbers I think that Bush lost that election.
Like I said, I am not a liberal.
2007-10-02 14:56:50 · answer #8 · answered by cattledog 7 · 10⤊ 0⤋
You seem to be proud this loser has us in 2 wars with no strategy to win. Record deficit spending. An economy pumped up artificially with Fed reserve intervention. Yes, you have elected a real piece of work !!
2007-10-02 14:59:33 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 0⤋
Well, maybe because he was SELECTED by the Supreme Court in 2000 and NOT Elected by the Majority of the AMERICAN Citizens!
2007-10-02 15:08:29 · answer #10 · answered by It's Your World, Change It 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
First off I am not a hippie. Second I am over it, but before we discussed it a lot because Bush made so many blunders during his first term...it just makes no sense why he was reelected.
2007-10-02 14:56:54 · answer #11 · answered by Lindsey G 5 · 8⤊ 1⤋