Would you pay $100,000 for Obama's 2005 Chrysler 300C?

Then what exactly ARE you doing? Obama hasn't even taken
office yet. Why are all the conservatives continuing to take shots
at him when the election is over? He's not making the big decisions
yet, Bush is. I could understand Obama-critics before the election,
everyone wants to do what they can for their preferred candidate to
win. But once the election is over, at least wait until the guy has taken
office in January before criticizing him. Geeze! Get over it!!

Because there have been multiple analyses done on the ballots in
Florida for the 2000 election, and the ones done by Bush supporters
claim the votes were there to elect Bush, while the ones done by
Gore supporters claim the votes were there to elect Gore. In short,
the voting process was fuzzy enough that it isn't possible to know for
sure either way - if you go by the electoral college votes. And now
we never will know for sure because the ballots have been handled
so much.

This also sets aside the fact that the US Supreme Court interfered
when the Constitution clearly states that the States have sole authority
to determine vote totals.

If you go by the popular votes, Gore won.

The only good thing to come out of it was that Bush has been so
throughly discredited, and has done such a through job of wrecking
his own party's credibility, that if the cooler heads in the Republican
Party seize the chance, they can eject the right-wing religious
fundamentalists
that Ronald Reagan brought in to the party and begin the process
of healing the Republican party.

The political process in the US is not served by having one healthy
party, and one that is seriously sick due to infiltration by religious
nutjobs. It would be nice if in 4 years the Republicans could actually
field some serious candidates instead of people like that fruitcake Palin.

Ted

 

If McCain brought in the US Supreme Court to override States Rights
and force a state to end consideration of an election count total that
would just happen to give him the win, then you bet the liberals would
be accusing McCain of stealing the election.

I actually do think that McCain has enough personal honor that he would
not have done that if it came to that. Bush certainly didn't. I think
McCain
would have told the party that either they honor their own code of ethics
and support States Rights and allow the state to work the vote total out on
it's own, or he would immediately concede to his opponent.

Even if it had played out that way, it would not have done a lot of good
for the country. The fact is the US today does not have a good enough
election system that it can be trusted to produce an accurate vote total
in a close election, and that is shameful. It's much better to have a solid
win such as happened this time.

Ted

 

Certainly not what you said we're doing.

What is it we're supposed to be getting over?

I thought you wanted them handled even more - make up your mind. Can't
have it both ways.

And Democrat officials were the ones running the elections and allowing
(in some cases creating) the problems.

Did they not kick it back to the state? Who in FL pushed it to the S.C.
in the first place? You want to answer that?

And therefore what? Like it or not, that's not how our elections are
decided. On average, the system doesn't inherently favor either party -
as if many years ago the rules were set up like they were in
anticipation of the Bush elections like you seem to want to think.
You're like a teenager whose reasoning ability has not fully developed
yet and is going to complain regardless of what you do to try to help
them. Complaining just to be complaining.

Counted the votes too many times . . . didn't count the votes enough.
Every time they recounted, it looked worse and worse for Gore.
Something like 1 out of 16 recounts came out in his favor - so you want
to let that one stand and discount all others. Yeah that's logical.

But one thing that we'll *not* do is have two sets of rules (electoral
vs. popular) and choose which set of rules we go by to decide the
winners and loosers in any given election after the fact, which
apparently is what some would do if they could. Did Clinton win the
popular vote? Did you bitch about that?

Yeah - who can argue with that logic.

 

If you read anything other than KOS and moveon.org you would know
where to look... I have posted links to the $millions$ in bribes he
paid to superdelegates to get the nomination.... and how much money
was back-channeled from his campaign to moveon.org.

Stop listening to NPR and stop watching al-jazeera amerika (cnn), CBS,
NBC, ABC, etc.... They "love' the "messiah" and wouldn't rat him out
if he was screwing a 6 year old... wait that's the founder of his
"muslim faith"

 

Becuase he's a lying piece of shit that doesn't give a shit about any
one but himself and how much graft he can corner!

If he gave a shit about even his family... grams is still waiting to
be buried, His homeless brother is still living on the streets, his
auntie is still living in a "rezko": like slum!

Face it, you morons elected the "slum lord" president!

damn, I may start refering to the "messiah" as Lord Slum!

 

And I guess that Larry Sinclair got some Lord Slum sludge on him and
the car!

 

Wow Bill, what a rant! As if it makes any difference now who won the
2000 election. The 2 terms were served out, pretty horribly, by Bush.
My observation was mainly that it was unsurprising that a presidency
that began in such controversy would turn out badly. Your reaction
mainly proves that you Republicans feel compelled to defend to the
death the 2000 election that put your buddy in office. Most likely because
he botched the job he did so badly that you are now scared to death that
historical analysis will show that he never deserved the office in the
first place, thus cementing his crown as the worst US President in
history.

I suppose you are unaware of The Florida Ballot Project:

http://www2.norc.org/fl

Contrary to your wild-assed assertions that every time they
recounted it looked worse for Gore, in actual fact the opposite
was true. The conclusion NORC arrived at was that if all votes
in Florida had been counted either under Florida law (which
prescribes "intent of the voter), under the rules requested by Bush,
or under the request by Gore within a week of the election to
count all the Florida votes, Gore would have won the election.

Ironically, the actual recount requested by Gore (including just
the 4 counties but not the entire state) gave Bush Florida. Kind
of one of those things where if Gore hadn't tried cherry-picking
Florida and just let the grunts there do their jobs and recount the
entire state, he would have got it.

Of course, that's NORC's findings. Doubtless there are others,
although I'm sure they aren't anywhere near the quality of that one.

Now's your cue to claim NORC is
partisan (which is another lie) and just dismiss the historical
research because it doesen't neatly fit into a 5-second Republican
talking-point.

Yes, Bill, despite your conservative-driven bent to shove every
problem into a neat little package, the truth is more complex
than you make it out to be.

Typical engineer thinking - your brain can't handle anything with
multiple solutions. Personally, I'm highly satisfied with the way
things turned out. If Bush was half the President that any other
US President was, he would have been greatly concerned with
acknowleging the problems with 2000 and bully-pulpiting during
the rest of his term for better elections - rather than what they
actually did, which was shoving some of their rich friends into
the states (ie: Diebold) to make a lot of money selling junk e-voting
systems that could be hacked into in the future to make the election totals
say what they want.

Even Jeb Bush was disgusted over the mess Florida made of the 2004
election - but you conservative party types like to forget that.

But what ended up happening was better than anything since it
reminded the public that when you put a jerk in office, that the
resultant presidency you get out him will be garbage. So until
this generation dies off, we should be seeing better quality
candidates for a while. (like Obama) We may have had to
pay for it with 8 years of pure crap - but we now should be good
for at least another 30 years or more of decent people in
office. Who knows, by the time I die, the US Presidency might
even be respectable again! Imagine that!

Ted

 

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote a bunch of bullshit that he suckered me into
getting involved in arguing:

OK, Ted - so you suckered me into a discussion on a topic that no one
was discussing. I swallowed the bait to allow you to say the crap that
was on your mind in the first place that you wanted an opportunity to
say but that there was no existing opportunity for, so you had to create it.

You got what you want. Congratulations.