How did he cheat exactly?  Can't find that in the Supreme Court decision anywhere ...

The ole butterfly ballot  trick

Posted by mlent on 5/19/2015 6:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pinotfan on 5/19/2015 4:43:00 AM (view original):

Posted by italyprof on 5/18/2015 12:42:00 PM (view original):
About what? Letting the five Republicans on the Supreme Court decide an election he won by half a million votes?

Just a few salient points:

1. Actually it was seven Justices who voted that Florida violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution in how they pursued the recounts; two dissented on other issues.

2. The nut of the Court's decision was that Florida could not change the election laws after the election. The recounts could continue but only if they followed established Florida law. We don't really want States changing how votes are counted AFTER elections do we?

3. Every recount since the election has resulted in a Bush victory, not a single one gave Florida to Gore. Irrelevant to the Court's decision, but underscores the fact that the Supreme Court in no way, shape, or form, "gave" Florida to Bush.

They were both lousy candidates.  Gore lost his home state, and Bush had to cheat in a state where his brother was governor.  They should have had another vote and let McCain run against bill bradley.

What the Supreme Court could not and did not rule on was how several counties deployed extra sheriff presence around polling stations, which as we all know scares older people of color down south (for valid reasons), nor does it cover the absolutely horrid voter purging that went on in FL prior to the election.

Florida was fraudulent, and Jeb gifted the election to his brother. 

I love how people (not you, ojo; you are relating what you heard/read; I always read your posts and respect your opinions) claim "oh, I was  intimidated" or "oh, my rights were violated" AFTER the fact.  Go to the media by all means!  We have laws that address voter intimidation and other election-related issues; go to the authorities, follow the law, and if you're right the election may be challenged.

As for purging the voter rolls, that goes on all the time.  People without the right to vote should not vote (just ask Richard Nixon about Chicago in 1960).  Those who culled went through the rolls; identified people who had issues with voting rights; the incidents were investigated; and those who were ineligible were removed from the voter rolls.  As in any human endeavor, I'm sure there were few - very, very few - errors, far fewer than those who were legitimately removed.

Bush won the election fair and square; nobody 'gave' it to him - not the Supreme Court, not Jeb, nobody (except maybe the Gore campaign for running such a bad race).  Now please, don't ask me to defend everything that happened during the Bush administration ...

Well lets get back to 154 vs 162,  some of us feel that doubleheaders is the way to go, so how would gore or bush handle the making of scorecards for these events if they became the commish of MLB.

Posted by pinotfan on 5/20/2015 5:59:00 PM (view original):
I love how people (not you, ojo; you are relating what you heard/read; I always read your posts and respect your opinions) claim "oh, I was  intimidated" or "oh, my rights were violated" AFTER the fact.  Go to the media by all means!  We have laws that address voter intimidation and other election-related issues; go to the authorities, follow the law, and if you're right the election may be challenged.

As for purging the voter rolls, that goes on all the time.  People without the right to vote should not vote (just ask Richard Nixon about Chicago in 1960).  Those who culled went through the rolls; identified people who had issues with voting rights; the incidents were investigated; and those who were ineligible were removed from the voter rolls.  As in any human endeavor, I'm sure there were few - very, very few - errors, far fewer than those who were legitimately removed.

Bush won the election fair and square; nobody 'gave' it to him - not the Supreme Court, not Jeb, nobody (except maybe the Gore campaign for running such a bad race).  Now please, don't ask me to defend everything that happened during the Bush administration ...

You say Bush won "fair and square", yet he won FL by 537 votes. That, when 88% of the purge list were African Americans. Same African Americans that make up 11% of the electorate in FL.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Central_Voter_File


They even went so far as to include in the purge people who had their voting rights restored in their home states. Federal courts had ruled in '98 that you can't subsequently deny someone the right to vote once their rights had been restored (in the state in which their crime had occurred).

This was all a brazen middle finger to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which became necessary because of how the south routinely made it hard for blacks to vote. 

All in all, at least 1100 voters were denied the right to vote at the polling stations. The #s who were disenfranchised? Far higher.

There's zero chance Bush wins the Presidency had FL actually behaved like it was bound by law to do.

Lastly, I'd scream bloody murder too if my right to vote was being denied. But I'm not black. I don't understand being black. I therefore won't place my own values upon that situation. I will say though, there was a reason the Voters Rights Act came about and passed in 1965. It was to stop the BS that FL so brazenly pulled.

Oh, and now we have ISIS to thank for that. (drops mic)

I'd choose something other than ISIS for my dramatic walk-off.  ISIS is a direct result of Obama's discontinuing the surge and other policies that were actually working; telling our enemies when  we were going to leave; telling our allies and those who depended on us to help them survive the mess WE created that we're leaving, you're on your own; and alienating just about EVERYONE who has the slightest chance of making a positive difference in the Middle East.  There are plenty of things to blame Bush for; ISIS is decidedly not one of them.

Actually, ISIS's recruiting got a huge, HUGE boost in terms of personnel, weapons and military intelligence when Bush disbanded the Iraqi military without pay. ISIS was going to have its day, be it yesterday, today or tomorrow. And that's because of the legacy Bush left.

I understand that Obama got our boys out of dodge as fast as possible (and according to the plan that Bush had set in motion (though admittedly, Bush was hardly a man of his word, so he probably would've found a reason to keep them in Iraq). Obama's decision may have put an exclamation point on the folly that was Bush's Iraq war, but it was, in actuality, an extra exclamation point. There were already a few of them on that sentence, anyway.

Posted by pinotfan on 5/20/2015 9:47:00 PM (view original):
I'd choose something other than ISIS for my dramatic walk-off.  ISIS is a direct result of Obama's discontinuing the surge and other policies that were actually working; telling our enemies when  we were going to leave; telling our allies and those who depended on us to help them survive the mess WE created that we're leaving, you're on your own; and alienating just about EVERYONE who has the slightest chance of making a positive difference in the Middle East.  There are plenty of things to blame Bush for; ISIS is decidedly not one of them.

True That!

redwingscup - Babcock coaching Toronto?  What's up with that?