»US Election 2000 jokes and facts«
|
|||
 Here are some pics regarding the USA presidential election between Al Gore and George W. Bush... The vote count in Florida went on and on... Electile dysfunction 
It is interesting: Both candidates watched television to get the latest election numbers (and an official source). Gore called Bush to congratulate him, but then had to take it back. An interesting talk took place: Gore: "The circumstances have changed...I need withdraw my concession until the situation is clear"
Bush: "Let me make sure I understand, you're calling me back to retract your concession?" Gore: "Well, you don't have to get snippy." Bush: "Jeb Bush [the brother of Bush] assured me I have won". Gore: "Your little brother is not the final authority on this." The Butterfly ballots were invented by ... a woman. She is called "Madame Butterfly" now She was a Democrat.
The Supreme court (Republican majority) decided, that it's unfair to recount votes, because to be fair ALL votes in all counties would have to be recounted. This decision is one of the most controversial decisions (amongst liberal and conservative law experts) and could be considered WRONG. Since when is recounting unfair? [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] posted by knn |
|||
|
|
|||
| in-my-opinion.orgPoliticsBush, Kerry, IraqUS Election 2000 jokes and facts |
|
|||
 The punch card system is still used in the US presidential election 2004 [CLICK HERE TO VIEW THIS PICTURE] posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 flor-idiots indeed...too many retirees with severe arthritis and alzheimers to punch those cards correctly 
posted by The ONEder Man |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 knn: The punch card system is still used in the US presidential election 2004 So for the benefit of those of us who have never done this.. What's the deal with the candidate and party votes? Is that for people who want the party in but can't bring themselves to vote for the sleazebag at the helm? And what is "Write In"? posted by Marl64 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Marl64: knn: The punch card system is still used in the US presidential election 2004 So for the benefit of those of us who have never done this.. What's the deal with the candidate and party votes? Is that for people who want the party in but can't bring themselves to vote for the sleazebag at the helm? ok, in america you vote for candidates, not parties. candidates are members of parties (usually. sometimes people run as independants, but not very often) but when you vote, you vote for the person. for a party to get in power, a majority of their candidates must win. the closest you can come to voting for a party is choosing the "vote all" option where it just automatically votes for all members of a single party. this is very different from the system many countries have, where people vote for a party, and based on the breakdown of the votes candidates are selected. Quote: And what is "Write In"? "write in" is where you write in the name of a candidate who is not on the ballot. you see, each state has it's own set of rules about getting on the ballot. for example, many states require either a certain number of signatures on petitions or nomination from a party that has recieved a certain percentage of the vote in previous elections. this is necessary to keep the ballot at a reasonable size. if you remember the recall craziness in california, you'll understand why it kinda sucks to have over 2000 names on a single ballot. however, it's not uncommon for people to run as write in candidates in small elections, where they have a theoretical chance of winning, or in extreme cases (like the time when one congressional candidate murdered the other, and it was too late to change the ballot) does that help? posted by 4thedefender |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
knn: The Supreme court (Republican majority) decided, that it's unfair to recount votes, because to be fair ALL votes in all counties would have to be recounted. This decision is one of the most controversial decisions (amongst liberal and conservative law experts) and could be considered WRONG. Since when is recounting unfair? first, it is not a republican court. it is split 3/3/3. 3 conservatives, 3 liberals, and 3 swingers. and second, I think maybe I should explain why it is unfair to recount some votes and not others. you see, the voting system used in florida (like any system) is flawed. it spits out roughly 1 in every 10,000 (legal) votes. this is actually not a big deal, because the votes are split proportionally between republicans and democrats. unless an election comes down to single digits, it is highly unlikely that these votes could change the results. and since close elections are automatically recounted, it is virtually impossible to have results that are off by hundreds of votes in the same direction in 2 separate counts. however, with a manual count, not only will all the nice clean legal votes be counted, but also, the normally unacceptable votes. this means that new votes will pop up with a manual recount. so, what happens if you use a manual recount? well, not a whole hell of a lot, because the votes you find will closely mirror the results of the automatic counts. it's your basic law of averages thing. however, if you only recount areas with a specific political slant (maybe some democrat controlled counties) and don't recount the rest of the state, you will recover a disproportionate number of votes for one candidate. it would be no different than giving an extra day for people to vote in democrat areas and only half a day to vote in republican areas. you are changing the rules to benefit one side, and in doing so, altering the outcome of an election. that's why the recounts were unfair. they were only recounting gore territory, and screwing over everyone else. if they had gone for a statewide manual recount, than it wouldnt have been unfair (of course, gore would have lost, so that wasnt really an option) posted by 4thedefender |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 4thedefenderr: that's why the recounts were unfair. they were only recounting gore territory, and screwing over everyone else. if they had gone for a statewide manual recount, than it wouldnt have been unfair (of course, gore would have lost, so that wasnt really an option) Gore would have lost the florida-wide recount? Says who? 4thedefenderr: first, it is not a republican court. it is split 3/3/3. 3 conservatives, 3 liberals, and 3 swingers Hmm, doesn't seem to be correct: 7 said the count was unconstitutional 2 said it was not. 5 said that there was no fix. 1 said the problem was fixable & purposed a fix 1 said he did not know what the fix was but they should spend more time & find one. 2 said they should never have taken the case on. William Rehnquist Chief Justice Placed on court by President Nixon (Rep) , Nom. as CJ by President Reagan (Rep) John Paul Stevens Placed on court by President Ford (Rep) Sandra Day O'Connor Placed on court by President Reagan (Rep) Antonin Scalia Placed on court by President Reagan (Rep) Anthony Kennedy Placed on court by President Reagan (Rep) David Souter Placed on court by President GHW Bush (Rep) Clarence Thomas Placed on court by President GHW Bush (Rep) Ruth Bader Ginsburg Placed on court by President Clinton (Dem) Stephen Breyer Placed on court by President Clinton (Dem) "supreme court" "along partisan lines" election 2000 recount ♣ posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
just because they were appointed by republicans doesnt make them conservative, and it most definately doesnt make them party loyalists. That would be a huge, HUGE violation of judicial ethics. the court is evenly split on most issues. that's part of why appointments were such a big issue. many controversial decisions come down to a single vote. posted by 4thedefender |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
4thedefenderr: just because they were appointed by republicans doesnt make them conservative
As if Bush would choose a pro-abortionist. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
It all happened in my home state and hometown of Tallahassee...it was strange. There were Japanese newscrews near the Florida Capitol. I saw Byron Pitts from CNN walking in front of the same building. I had the feeling that a great evil (I don't use that word often) had come upon us. Comets appeared and the crops failed. A flock of crows were silhouetted against the full moon. W had become president. Gosh, aren't we better off for it? 
posted by holy_of_holies |
|||
|
|||
 Register Log in |
The time now is 7 January 2009, 18:37 php B.B. |