2007-10-07 06:56:09 · 12 answers · asked by realitycheck 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
democrats keep bring it up, or else it
would long be over and done with!
2007-10-07 07:16:35 · update #1
No, it's because he had no choice but to accept he LOST!
2007-10-07 07:27:30 · answer #1 · answered by xenypoo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Al Gore was being gracious after hearing erroneous election results on the news.
On Tuesday, November 7, 2000, a presidential election was held featuring Democratic candidate, Vice President Al Gore, versus Republican candidate, George W. Bush. After the polls closed, it became apparent that the outcome of the very tight race would hinge on the results in Florida. At 2:16 a.m. early Wednesday morning, TV networks began declaring "Bush wins" based on their own Florida polling data and on each other's predictions. At 2:30 a.m., Al Gore telephoned Bush and offered his congratulations, conceding the election.
However, within the next hour, Gore's political advisors determined that the TV networks had made an error in deciding the super-close Florida results in favor of Bush. An extraordinary event then occurred as Al Gore telephoned Bush once more and this time 'un-conceded.' Following this, the TV networks retracted their earlier statements that Bush had won. Thus, Americans awoke on Wednesday morning without a clear victor in the 2000 presidential election.
Thirty six days of political and legal turmoil followed in which lawyers for Bush and Gore fought each other bitterly in the Florida courts over the subsequent recount, filing dozens of lawsuits. The main issue involved thousands of questionable votes cast by Democratic voters who may have been confused by the balloting method. To vote for the candidate of their choice, each voter needed to puncture a computer punch card at the correct spot, using a small metal hole puncher. Many Democrats later claimed they had been confused by the placement of names on the ballot and had voted for the wrong candidate, punching a hole for conservative fringe candidate, Pat Buchanan, instead of Al Gore. Numerous voters also voted for more than one presidential candidate or failed to make a hole in the punch card and only indented their choice. All of this served to fuel the storm of controversy surrounding the various localized recounts throughout Florida.
http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/gore-concedes.htm
Metaphysical....what a bunch of crap!
2007-10-07 14:13:04 · answer #2 · answered by zes2_zdk 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Florida courts said that they had counted enough and they decided it for Gore. I think you are thinking of Kerry who conceded without any argument or further verification of votes in Ohio. I wish he wouldn't have done that. I think the voting machine problem should have been tested in this manner so that people would have had more confidence in them or the states could have made a decision on whether they are reliable based on the scrutiny that would have resulted from his contesting it.
2007-10-07 14:06:13 · answer #3 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not to mention the ever widening gap between the votes he received and those of Bush. Don't hear much about that anymore. He clearly lost without question.
Why is this question here now? Old old news.
2007-10-07 14:06:39 · answer #4 · answered by Robert S 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
He knew he lost and was starting pre-production on his "movie". He must have got the title, An Inconvenient Truth, from the decision in Florida.
2007-10-07 14:12:18 · answer #5 · answered by sam simeon 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes but that certain group of people fail and will always fail to understand it. They've never gotten over the fact that they lost nor how lucky we dodged that bullet!
2007-10-07 14:07:04 · answer #6 · answered by Brianne 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think the metaphysical proof he didn't deserve it was when he entered the thrd debates wearing lip-stick and blush.
For shame!!!!!!
2007-10-07 14:00:40 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
No... it was a legal statement of concession. If he didn't volunteer it would have been effectively made for him.
2007-10-07 14:15:09 · answer #8 · answered by lordkelvin 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
its proof that America felt he didn't deserve it at that time. but whether its a fact that he didn't deserve it is beyond me.
2007-10-07 14:01:21 · answer #9 · answered by Razgriz01 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Metaphysics is philosophy...there's no such thing as proof.
2007-10-07 13:59:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋