2007-10-29 14:34:09 · 24 answers · asked by narcissexual 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Are you kidding? A 13% exit poll disparity, as happened in Ohio in 2004, has never happened before. Og course it was stolen, both times. Wake up folks, if you lose fair elections you lose your democracy. Republicans ought to care about that too.
2007-10-29 14:45:02 · answer #1 · answered by douglas l 5 · 7⤊ 4⤋
He carried the most Electoral College votes and that is what counts NOT the popular vote. He beat Gore by a narrow margin. 271-266 and Ralph Nader got 1. I don't know the outcome of the second one. I don't think he got them legitimately either time. They just made that margin narrow enough not to arouse suspicion.
There are people that actually determine who becomes president. These people are called electors and there are 538 of them. That is 435 for the House of Rep., 100 for Congress and an extra 3 for Washington D.C. To find out the number you have take the number of Representatives for your state and add two (with the exception of Washington D.C. of course). To win, you need the majority or 270 to win. These electors usually vote according to the popular vote (which explains most elections), but they can vote against the popular vote. These people are called "faithless electors". If you are prosecuted (you must sign a document saying you will vote a certain person), you can receive jail time and a fine. So, some states have a significant number of electors such as California(55), Texas(38) and Iowa(21) (which is why politicians make visits to certain states) and can win you the election. The ones I mentioned can get you around 42% of the necessary votes. So to make a long story short, this system can be abused if you play your cards right.
2007-10-29 21:43:37 · answer #2 · answered by Damasta AM inductee 5 · 3⤊ 4⤋
rigging in politics is the done thing no one can ever say well he has had a whale of a time
2007-11-02 14:06:33 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
George never wanted the job, he said so before the election. He agreed that if those guys ( led by Ron Raygun's SecState George Schultz) and their lawyers could do what they said they could he'd go along for the ride. He thought it'd be fun moving around the country in security parades and drinking beer. In 2004 he kept the gang together 'cause losing meant some woulda gone to prison. Plus, it's ez money.
2007-10-29 21:43:16 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 3⤊ 7⤋
As a wise man once said "any man that wouldn't cheat to get a poke don't really deserve one"
So I reckon any man that wouldn't cheat to win the Presidential election don't really deserve to win.
WAAAANNGGHH
HA HA HA HA
2007-10-29 22:02:01 · answer #5 · answered by CFB 5 · 2⤊ 3⤋
No. His only qualification was being a rich man's son. he never accomplished anything on his own, and was put up o be the president/fall guy for the real power trippers.
2007-10-29 21:48:42 · answer #6 · answered by MrNeutral 6 · 5⤊ 4⤋
Yes he was elected both times legitimately. if money would have won the democrates would have had it. they have all the money you know its called TAX the working class to death and spend it on what ever so you can get trash votes.
2007-10-29 21:43:29 · answer #7 · answered by spiveyracing 5 · 3⤊ 6⤋
no
The electoral voting system was developed to make it more fair when there were slave states. Now it's just a tool that works against democracy. So the popular vote in 2000 was stolen by that antiquated tool.
The 2004 election was stolen by the administration with fraudulent vote counting systems, especially in the key battleground state of Ohio.
2007-10-29 21:38:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 7⤋
I think that the left side of our country has become paranoid
I cant even keep up with all the conspiracy theories any more
2007-10-29 22:24:52 · answer #9 · answered by hmm 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
Not the first time...but yes the second time.
2007-10-29 21:40:54 · answer #10 · answered by KERMIT M 6 · 0⤊ 6⤋