Bush Won 2000 Fair and Square

[jbg]

The "Michael Moore Sicko" thread has been, to an extent, degenerated into a discussion of the fairness of Bush's 2000 election victory over Al Gore (link). I did not want to post a lengthy rebuttal there, and further sidetrack a discussion about a movie, "Sicko" into a general roundtable on George W. Bush.

Those not familiar with the intracies of both U.S. federalism and election law do not understand that Bush won that election, fair and square. Excerpts from the post I am referring to are as follows:

I wasn't going to respond to you anymore, but you sure know how to press the right button: Elections. If you will recall, in the year 2000, your boy was appointed to the presidency AFTER the Supreme Court stopped the counting of votes in Florida. (Their conclusion had an amusing passage about it causing irreparable harm to the plaintiff - Shrub - if the vote was to continue....The votes, as you must know, were later tallied up and - surprise, surprise - Mr. Gore, in truth, won Florida, despite a whole lot of monkey business with the voting machines and overt voter disenfranchisement. Fast forward to 2004. For the first time in history all the exit polls turned out the be "wrong."

The U.S. Constitution squarely vests the choice of U.S. Presidential Electors in the State Legislatures, not in the people of the State:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

In turn, Florida's legislature has delegated the initial selection process to the people of the State, as have all 50 states,

Electors of President and Vice President, known as presidential electors, shall be elected on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each year the number of which is a multiple of 4. Votes cast for the actual candidates for President and Vice President shall be counted as votes cast for the presidential electors supporting such candidates. The Department of State shall certify as elected the presidential electors of the candidates for President and Vice President who receive the highest number of votes.

Normally, the Secretary of State's task is ministerial. However, when the margin of victory is under 1000, out of a population of over 16,500,000 (of which probably 10,000,000 were elible to vote and 5,000,000 probably voted), that task is difficult, and fraught with significance. The fact remains, however, that the Florida Secretary of State had the unfettered power to declare the winner of the election.

What the U.S. Supreme Court did was to stop selective hand recounts in certain counties. All that the Court did was state that the rules could not be changed in the middle of the game, even when the going became sloppy. What the Court also did was to avert a serious Constitutional crisis if, as was likely, the Florida Secretary of State unilaterally declared Bush the winner. She had the right to do so, if she determined that the "recounts" weren't conclusive. The result would have been a legal migraine headache for years to come.

Thus, Bush won the election, fair and square, and, I emphasize, over my vote for Gore.

As far as 2004 goes, last I checked, even in Ohio, exit polls hae no binding value in an election.

Edited July 15, 2007 by jbg

[bush_cheney2004]

What the U.S. Supreme Court did was to stop selective hand recounts in certain counties. All that the Court did was state that the rules could not be changed in the middle of the game, even when the going became sloppy.

I guess this bears repeating, although I thought it off-topic for Canadian Politics. Analysis by several organizations confirm that George W. Bush would have won won the state of Florida even more with a recount of votes.

I don't know if MLW existed in November 2000, but it would have been fascinating to read the cross border chatter for an election in a foreign country.

Edited July 15, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[jbg]

I guess this bears repeating, although I thought it off-topic for Canadian Politics. Analysis by several organizations confirm that George W. Bush would have won won the state of Florida even more with a recount of votes.

You're in part right. Remember, no one sought a full-state recount, which might have pushed the GOP totals up in counties other than Palm Beach, Duval and Miami-Dade.

I don't know if MLW existed in November 2000, but it would have been fascinating to read the cross border chatter for an election in a foreign country.

MLW did not exist. The only Canadian forum that I know of that did exist was www.cbc.ca/forums, which I had the privilege of, together with a Peterborough, ON realtor, pulling the plug on. I will e-mail anyone a PDF of the National Post article, in the March 10, 2004 edition, detailing this operation. Edited July 15, 2007 by jbg

[KO2]

"Bush won 2000 fair and square"

Maybe, but he's been loosing ever since.......

[bush_cheney2004]

You're in part right. Remember, no one sought a full-state recount, which might have pushed the GOP totals up in counties other than Palm Beach, Duval and Miami-Dade.

Recounts and analysis by researchers and journalists hoping to win that next Pulitzer have never found in favor of Gore. It was an exciting time in American politics and quite a constitutional lesson. I have no idea what the interest was in Canada or the degree to which Canadians tracked the court battles.

While usually dismissing Canadian interest or relevance in such things, I am aware that several hundred thousand Americans and dual citizens resided in Canada at the time, and still do. There is anecdotal evidence that the 2000 election spurred many Canadian celebs eeking out a living in Babylon to become US citizens so they could vote.

[bush_cheney2004]

MLW did not exist. The only Canadian forum that I know of that did exist was www.cbc.ca/forums, which I had the privilege of, together with a Peterborough, ON realtor, pulling the plug on. I will e-mail anyone a PDF of the National Post article, in the March 10, 2004 edition, detailing this operation.

Of course...I recall your membership quite well at the CBC Forum...I posted as "Big Maksutov" starting in late 2002 during the run-up to the Iraq invasion. I managed to post a JPEG photo of Popeye the Sailorman in the Arts section, to the amazement of members who thought such a thing was "impossible" and "prevented" for obvious reasons.

Edited July 15, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[bush_cheney2004]

"Bush won 2000 fair and square"

Maybe, but he's been loosing ever since.......

Actually, he won again in 2004. No lawsuit required.

[jbg]

"Bush won 2000 fair and square"Maybe, but he's been loosing ever since.......

Are you saying his pants are too loose? His tie?

[jbg]

Of course...I recall your membership quite well at the CBC Forum...I posted as "Big Maksutov" starting in late 2002 during the run-up to the Iraq invasion. I managed to post a JPEG photo of Popeye the Sailorman in the Arts section, to the amazement of members who thought such a thing was "impossible" and "prevented" for obvious reasons.

I was there from April 2002 until it closed on April 3, 2004. For a while I was on the "inside" group, OPAL. We had a noisy parting of the ways around American Thanksgiving, 2002.

PM or e-mail me your address (mine being [email protected] ), for sending the PDF of the article covering our putting the CBC Forum out of its misery.

Edited July 15, 2007 by jbg

[Liam]

My G_d. Will all of you just LET GO.

[jbg]

My G_d. Will all of you just LET GO.

LET GO of what?

[B. Max]

"Bush won 2000 fair and square"

Maybe, but he's been loosing ever since.......

Actually, he won again in 2004. No lawsuit required.

By an even bigger margin if I remember correctly. The radical left have been foaming at the mouth ever since.

[bush_cheney2004]

My G_d. Will all of you just LET GO.

LET GO of what?

Let go of the memory that causes so much depression (I guess). For me, 2004 was far sweeter, laying it on the line over at the now defunct Politics Canada site. It was a precursor to the Libranos getting turfed....the shock was palpable.

[SkyhookJackson]

I didn't intend for my response to become a thread unto itself, but have at it. I've discussed and investigated this topic so much since 2004, I'll probably remain on the sideline. The evidence has been overwhelming that machines were tampered with, voters were "caged" (including soldiers serving in Iraq, believe it or not) and other dirty tricks were employed to depress the likely Democratic vote. Anyone who is happy Mr. Bush pulled this off twice needs a psychiatrist. He has done more harm to the United States than anyone could have imagined. God only knows how many years it will take to repair the damage. And that, as Forrest Gump would say, is all I have to say about that.

[jbg]

I didn't intend for my response to become a thread unto itself, but have at it. I've discussed and investigated this topic so much since 2004, I'll probably remain on the sideline. The evidence has been overwhelming that machines were tampered with, voters were "caged" (including soldiers serving in Iraq, believe it or not) and other dirty tricks were employed to depress the likely Democratic vote. Anyone who is happy Mr. Bush pulled this off twice needs a psychiatrist. He has done more harm to the United States than anyone could have imagined. God only knows how many years it will take to repair the damage. And that, as Forrest Gump would say, is all I have to say about that.

Voting is controlled by counties in Florida. Thus, the opportunity for "tricks" goes both ways. Also, did your "research" extend to a reading of the Supreme Court decision? One can debate the result, but the layout of the allocation of election jurisdiction is pretty good. Edited July 15, 2007 by jbg

[Guest American Woman]

My button for the 2004 election said it all: "Re-Defeat Bush in 2004!"

[jbg]

My button for the 2004 election said it all: "Re-Defeat Bush in 2004!"

BDR perhaps?

[Guest American Woman]

My button for the 2004 election said it all: "Re-Defeat Bush in 2004!"

BDR perhaps?

Can't say, as I don't know what "BDR" means.

[SkyhookJackson]

I didn't intend for my response to become a thread unto itself, but have at it. I've discussed and investigated this topic so much since 2004, I'll probably remain on the sideline. The evidence has been overwhelming that machines were tampered with, voters were "caged" (including soldiers serving in Iraq, believe it or not) and other dirty tricks were employed to depress the likely Democratic vote. Anyone who is happy Mr. Bush pulled this off twice needs a psychiatrist. He has done more harm to the United States than anyone could have imagined. God only knows how many years it will take to repair the damage. And that, as Forrest Gump would say, is all I have to say about that.

Voting is controlled by counties in Florida. Thus, the opportunity for "tricks" goes both ways. Also, did your "research" extend to a reading of the Supreme Court decision? One can debate the result, but the layout of the allocation of election jurisdiction is pretty good.

If the counting of votes in Florida had been allowed to continue, Gore would have won Florida and would have won the election. Everyone knows that. As for 2004, it's frightening to think that after the previous 4 years, a bona fide majority of Americans would enter a voting booth and cast their ballot for Bush. I'm one of the tinfoil-hatted lefties who believes it was stolen, but we'll probably never know for sure. The U.S. is overflowing with people who follow Paris Hilton's every move, but are hard pressed to name the Vice President. They seem to be easy targets for right wing scare tactics and will vote against their own best interests just to fend off the gays who are somehow threatening their marriage.

[bush_cheney2004]

If the counting of votes in Florida had been allowed to continue, Gore would have won Florida and would have won the election. Everyone knows that. As for 2004, it's frightening to think that after the previous 4 years, a bona fide majority of Americans would enter a voting booth and cast their ballot for Bush. I'm one of the tinfoil-hatted lefties who believes it was stolen, but we'll probably never know for sure.

"Everyone" doesn't "know that". Every election has undervotes, overvotes, and otherwise spoiled ballots... it only became an issue because Gore lost by such a close margin. Had he simply won his home state of Arkansas we could have avoided all the whining.

The American voters also elected Nixon and Reagan, rejecting the left quite resoundingly. I was embarrassed for George McGovern in '72, so great was the political humiliation.

2008 is just another election....our constitutional republic has them like clockwork. Like the "natural" party of Canada (Grits), the Democrats are uneasy when handed defeat by the voters.

[B. Max]

If the counting of votes in Florida had been allowed to continue,

The fact is they weren't counting votes, they were trying to decide how people voted from spoiled ballots. That's why it was stopped, and rightfully so.

[jbg]

Can't say, as I don't know what "BDR" means.

Bush Derangement Syndrome. Harper incites the same passions.

[jbg]

Had he simply won his home state of Arkansas we could have avoided all the whining.

Tennessee, not Arkansas. And the Gore political family was quite venerable. Both Al Sr. and Al Jr. served as Senators from Tennessee. That loss took some doing.

2008 is just another election....our constitutional republic has them like clockwork. Like the "natural" party of Canada (Grits), the Democrats are uneasy when handed defeat by the voters.

Perfect analysis.

[bush_cheney2004]

Had he simply won his home state of Arkansas we could have avoided all the whining.

Tennessee, not Arkansas. And the Gore political family was quite venerable. Both Al Sr. and Al Jr. served as Senators from Tennessee. That loss took some doing.

2008 is just another election....our constitutional republic has them like clockwork. Like the "natural" party of Canada (Grits), the Democrats are uneasy when handed defeat by the voters.

Perfect analysis.

Thanks for the correction....I was thinking of Slick Willy by mistake. But to the point, I have always wondered why conservatives accepted defeat without nearly as much angst. Had Bush lost in 2000, it was really no big deal. Must be the way that Bush won instead.

[SkyhookJackson]

The sheeple will never be convinced King George isn't legit. It's a topic no longer worth the rise in blood pressure to discuss. We just have to hope to get to the end of his term without bombs being dropped on Tehran. 2008 will be different because we're onto the tricks and the voting machines have gotten more than a cursory look. Just last week a California judge ordered a new election because a voting machine had mysteriously "lost" the votes for a recount. In addition, as shown in the 2006 election, people are pissed off and will vote for change in such an overwhelming number it will be impossible to manipulate the software without it being very, very obvious.