Generation Terrorists » Forum
Sign up   |   Start new thread   |   Lost password?   |   Edit profile   |   Member List   |   myGT   |   Blog
Keyword
From
To
 

Katherine Harris
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 16:36:30 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  http://www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html


 
casper Posted: Wed Jun 9 17:00:57 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>http://www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html

Yeah...55000 people were barred from voting for no real reason and it just now came out....it could happen...really...


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 17:26:16 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  casper said:
>Yeah...55000 people were barred from voting for no real reason and it just now came out....it could happen...really...

It didn't just come out now - however, when I found out about it it was rather early in the morning and I later thought that I'd heard about it from this forum. Recently I realized I hadn't and posted it. I do believe the Washington Post had a story on it several months after the 2000 elections, though they were advised to write it way before that.

And I think the total numbers may be somewhat exaggerated, but then again, even one thousand would've been a Gore win.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Jun 9 18:18:45 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
but then again, even one thousand would've been a Gore win.
>
god, what a horrible thought !


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 18:24:11 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Zacq said:
>but then again, even one thousand would've been a Gore win.
>>
>god, what a horrible thought !

Yes, who knows what horrors would be unleashed by a smart person handling the war on terror.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Jun 9 18:30:24 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>Zacq said:
>>but then again, even one thousand would've been a Gore win.
>>>
>>god, what a horrible thought !
>
>Yes, who knows what horrors would be unleashed by a smart person handling the war on terror.
>
Yeah, I can see it now from the great appeaser.
"please mr. taliban, we're sorry, please don't bomb us again. We must have been really bad to piss you off like that."


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 18:38:08 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Or better yet - "A report about terrorist attacks on U.S. soil? I'll actually do something about it!"


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 18:38:42 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Or better yet - "A report about terrorist attacks on U.S. soil? I'll actually do something about it!"

I meant to say possible terrorist attacks.


 
Mesh Posted: Wed Jun 9 18:39:21 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  or how about this one.


"Me likey cheesecake."


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Jun 9 18:42:45 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Zacq said:
>>Or better yet - "A report about terrorist attacks on U.S. soil? I'll actually do something about it!"
>
>I meant to say possible terrorist attacks.
>
Hmmm, during the Clinton administration, America was hit several times by terrorist and absolutely nothing was done about them.

Since Dubya launched the war on terror, we haven't been hit one time.


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 19:02:34 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Hmmm, during the Clinton administration, America was hit several times by terrorist and absolutely nothing was done about them.
>
>Since Dubya launched the war on terror, we haven't been hit one time.

That's the spirit! Distract the thread from the fact that Bush didn't really win from Florida, and from the humorous exchange about Gore and Bush talking, and bring up Clinton. Good job!


 
Mesh Posted: Wed Jun 9 19:08:33 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I bet Katherine Harris was hot back twenty or so years ago.

I would'a hit that.


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 19:31:54 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  meshuggah said:
>I bet Katherine Harris was hot back twenty or so years ago.
>
>I would'a hit that.

You're saying she's not hot now?

I disgust me sometimes.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Jun 9 19:54:01 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>ifihadahif said:
>That's the spirit! Distract the thread from the fact that Bush didn't really win from Florida, and from the humorous exchange about Gore and Bush talking, and bring up Clinton. Good job!
>
I didn't bring up Clinton. I brought up his administration, wich coincidentally Gore was a big part of. And once again you failed to make any counterpoint to my post, instead you chose to just bitch and moan.
My point was that Mr. Gore has no record to indicate that he would be tough against terrorism, instead it would appear that he would be quite the opposite.


 
Christian Posted: Wed Jun 9 20:03:05 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  thank God for it! I say...


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 20:12:10 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Zacq said:
>>ifihadahif said:
>>That's the spirit! Distract the thread from the fact that Bush didn't really win from Florida, and from the humorous exchange about Gore and Bush talking, and bring up Clinton. Good job!
>>
>I didn't bring up Clinton. I brought up his administration, wich coincidentally Gore was a big part of. And once again you failed to make any counterpoint to my post, instead you chose to just bitch and moan.
>My point was that Mr. Gore has no record to indicate that he would be tough against terrorism, instead it would appear that he would be quite the opposite.

How do you not see the hypocrisy in saying I failed to make a counterpoint to your post? You even have the part where I 'bitch and moan' about you ignoring the fact that Bush didn't really win Florida in your quote of me!


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 20:13:45 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  And before I talk about terrorism in the Clinton administration name some examples for discussion. (and admit your hypocrisy)


 
Mesh Posted: Wed Jun 9 20:13:57 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>meshuggah said:
>>I bet Katherine Harris was hot back twenty or so years ago.
>>
>>I would'a hit that.
>
>You're saying she's not hot now?
>
youre right.

id still hit that.













WITH A TWO-BY-FOUR!!!!!!


 
Mouse Posted: Wed Jun 9 20:15:56 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  We will never know if Gore would have handled things 'better' than Bush because he did not get that chance. What is important is that something must be done to make sure that people who have done nothing wrong are allowed to make their choice, what ever it may be. If that's not going to happen then we may as well start from scratch.
And hif, for shame, I don't care if he was running against a ferret, if the ferret gets more votes that ferret bloody well better get the office.
Mouse


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 20:25:46 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  That's not that great of an example, Mouse, because a ferret, like Al Gore, is much smarter than George Bush. : )


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Jun 9 21:22:58 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  So we should just throw the electoral college out the window, just to make the liberals happy ?
Bush won . . .period.
Admittedly by the slimmest margin in history, but he did win.
Gore couldn't even win his home state.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed Jun 9 21:32:43 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>
>How do you not see the hypocrisy in saying I failed to make a counterpoint to your post? You even have the part where I 'bitch and moan' about you ignoring the fact that Bush didn't really win Florida in your quote of me!
>
hypocrisy ?
Now you're putting words in my mouth and reading things that aren't there.
I didn't say you were bitching and moaning about Bush not winning Florida (even though he did). My point was that you changed the subject and failed to address my previous point that Gore has no record against terrorism, just the opposite.


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 21:54:34 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>So we should just throw the electoral college out the window, just to make the liberals happy ?
>Bush won . . .period.
>Admittedly by the slimmest margin in history, but he did win.
>Gore couldn't even win his home state.

The whole point of this thread was to show how Bush didn't even really win Florida because the Republicans cheated. I don't know if I can make that any clearer.

Hint: To make a point, you need to somehow disprove that Bush actually lost Florida.


 
Zacq Posted: Wed Jun 9 21:57:03 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>hypocrisy ?
>Now you're putting words in my mouth and reading things that aren't there.
>I didn't say you were bitching and moaning about Bush not winning Florida (even though he did). My point was that you changed the subject and failed to address my previous point that Gore has no record against terrorism, just the opposite.

I started the thread, and therefore didn't change the subject of the thread. I know your point was that I didn't address Gore's record and whatnot because for one, the hypothetical Gore dialogue was a joke, and two, I was saying he would've payed attention before 9/11, I never said anything about the eventual 'war on terror.

It IS hyprocrisy to change the subject and then try to prevent someone from changing it back.


 
Mouse Posted: Wed Jun 9 23:40:24 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>So we should just throw the electoral college out the window, just to make the liberals happy ?
Certainly not, but if people who had every right to vote were not allowed to because they shared the same surname or birthdate of someone who wasn't then it can't be said that he did win. We don't know what those votes would have been, Bush very well might have won anyway if they had been cast. Then you and I and everyone else would be spared this and I could easily side with you.
Right now, what happened happened and we can't turn it back, all we can do is make sure it doesn't happen again, in anyone's favor.
Mouse


 
DanSRose Posted: Thu Jun 10 01:07:04 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  The excluded areas of Florida were ethnically black and elderly Jewish, folks who historically vote Democrat. Also, the system of exclusion changed from anyone who committed a felony in the last year to anyone who committed a misdemeanor in the last year.


 
DanSRose Posted: Thu Jun 10 01:09:56 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Also, this isn't 'new' news. British reporter Greg Palast (he's from the States but left, and now is back) reported on this in 2000.
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=55&row=2


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 06:51:43 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Mouse said:
>Certainly not, but if people who had every right to vote were not allowed to because they shared the same surname or birthdate of someone who wasn't then it can't be said that he did win.
>
that never happened.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 06:55:18 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Hint: To make a point, you need to somehow disprove that Bush actually lost Florida.
>
Not too difficult to do - he's the president now isn't he ?


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 06:57:22 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>It IS hyprocrisy to change the subject and then try to prevent someone from changing it back.
>
I didn't change the subject, you mentioned Gore first, and I just followed suit.
You might want to get out your dictionary and look up hypocrisy.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 10:48:00 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Look, hif, this is getting ridiculous. I'm gonna start this whole thing over and cuz you seem to enjoy validating the "Common sense is not so common" quote.

http://www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html

Hey everyone - check out this link and see how the Republican Party cheated to win the 2000 Presidential election.

(Note: arguing this requires showing somehow that it isn't true.)


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 10:48:54 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  DanSRose said:
>Also, this isn't 'new' news. British reporter Greg Palast (he's from the States but left, and now is back) reported on this in 2000.
>http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=55&row=2

I know it's not new news, but less than one percent of the polulation of the country knows about it.


 
addi Posted: Thu Jun 10 11:08:29 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:

>Hey everyone - check out this link and see how the Republican Party cheated to win the 2000 Presidential election.

interesting, zacq

reminds me of a bumper sticker i saw this week driving home

"Let's not elect Bush again"


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 13:31:16 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Look, hif, this is getting ridiculous. I'm gonna start this whole thing over and cuz you seem to enjoy validating the "Common sense is not so common" quote.
>
>http://www.ericblumrich.com/gta.html
>
>Hey everyone - check out this link and see how the Republican Party cheated to win the 2000 Presidential election.
>
>(Note: arguing this requires showing somehow that it isn't true.)
>
How about some evidence other than Eric Blumrich says so.
You've been watching too much wrassling dude.


 
FN Posted: Thu Jun 10 13:37:10 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>How about some evidence other than Eric Blumrich says so.
>You've been watching too much wrassling dude.


Isn't it so that in the US you are guilty untill proven innocent? (Guantanamo Bay anyone?)


 
DanSRose Posted: Thu Jun 10 14:02:42 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Hey, how about Greg Palast? He and his good reporting skills found out about it in Britain.

Eric Blumrich took all of Palast's data and made that well done video.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 14:39:03 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  DanSRose said:
>Hey, how about Greg Palast? He and his good reporting skills found out about it in Britain.
>
>Eric Blumrich took all of Palast's data and made that well done video.

Yes, the reason I put the link to that particular source was because it was more interesting to watcha video that to read an article.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 14:46:27 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  The Divider

By David Horowitz
November 23, 2000

ONE INDISPUTABLE RESULT of the unconcluded presidential race is to confirm that Al Gore is Bill Clinton’s authentic heir. In his eight years as president, William Jefferson Clinton divided the nation, sullied the White House and diminished the authority of the Oval Office. In an ill-advised and reckless post-election coup, Clinton’s would-be successor has now done comparable damage to the electoral process itself.
By refusing to concede an election he had lost, and by dispatching - within hours -- a small army of political operatives to four Florida counties to subvert the result, Al Gore has thrown the nation into electoral chaos and unleashed an unprecedented campaign to de-legitimize the process by which Americans elect their president. Starting with a series of inflammatory protests over alleged voter “disenfranchisement,” and ending with a series of legal sophistries, after-the-fact rule changes and dimpled ballot pirouettes, an armada of Gore operatives invaded heavily controlled Democrat enclaves to make a mockery of the system. They have turned the fate of an entire nation over to the chicaneries of a Chicago-style political ward.

It is indicative of the sheer arrogance of this campaign that Democrats supplied both the pretext - the infamous “butterfly ballots” - and the protest that gave initial traction to their efforts to reduce what began as a national referendum to a small patch in the electoral forest where Democrats would effectively be counters and counted. Only two years ago, in Miami’s Dade County - the largest trolling pool for the elusive votes in this disgraceful endeavor - authorities had removed an elected Democrat mayor because the county Democrat machine had elected him with the votes of the dead. The Miami Herald estimates that, in the post-election fiasco, more than 1,000 military votes have been disqualified by mainly Democrat Florida officials, but 2,000 felons - some recruited by Democrat trolling operations of the county jails -- have had their illegal ballots counted just the same.

As a result of Gore’s political fragmentation bomb, whatever happens, whoever wins, whatever vote counts under whatever rules -- the next presidency will be fundamentally diminished. Its legitimacy and authority has already been profoundly subverted by the reckless decisions of one unprincipled individual. The electoral morass is now on display for America and the world to see. How will public reverence for the elections process -- or even respect for that process -- be restored? What Al Gore has accomplished in a few short weeks is the impeachment not only of the integrity of local precincts, but of the entire machinery of American elections. Not just for now, but into the foreseeable future.
To fully appreciate the sewer of cynicism into which Al Gore has plunged a stupefied nation, one has only to look to the systematic effort by his legal mob to deprive overseas military personnel of their votes. These were not rogue raids into the enemy camp, but a calculated effort by the campaign itself. Gore lawyers fanned out across the Florida counties and descended on the precincts where the votes were begin taken. Armed with a campaign legal memo, they set about browbeating ordinary citizens who were attempting to count the incoming votes into believing - falsely -- that the law disallowed military ballots without postmarks. Here were men and women who had put themselves in harm’s way to defend every citizen’s right to vote, disqualified by an action of their own government (which failed to postmark the ballots it delivered). To add hypocrisy to the insult, the entire Gore effort was predicated on the idea of defending the “will of the people” and guaranteeing that “every citizen’s vote would count.” Not, apparently, if the people intended to cast a Republican vote.

When the dust had partially settled, the Gore team managed to get 1527 of 3733 overseas absentee ballots thrown into the trash. However, in the handful of Democrat-controlled counties, which Gore had targeted for his plans to overturn the national election, the percentage was astronomical. In Democrat-run Broward - where the Gore team began its subversive effort by making a federal case out of “butterfly ballots” that allegedly disenfranchised minority voters, the same Gore crew was able to get 304 overseas ballots rejected out of a total of 396 cast. (To make a percentage comparison: the 19,000 votes thrown out in Palm Beach County out of 450,000 cast, comprised less than 5% of the total, as opposed to the roughly 75% of the military votes that the Gore’s minions were able to throw out.)

Confronted with a potential public relations nightmare, should the people discover what they had done, Democrats like Joe Lieberman attempted to sidestep their responsibility, invoking Gore’s own signature alibi of “no controlling legal authority.” Interviewing Lieberman on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” Tim Russert confronted the would-be vice-president with the following question: “Will you today, as a representative of the Gore campaign, ask every county to re-look at those ballots that came from armed services people and waive any so-called irregularities or technicalities which would disqualify them?” Lieberman whose boss had dispatched the team that organized this result replied: “I don't know that I have that authority. I don't believe I do legally or in any other way.” (NBC's Meet the Press, 11/19/00)

Democrats like Senator Bob Kerrey, a military hero trotted out by Gore to defend the indefensible deed, explained that of course Democrats did not approve the disenfranchising of military personnel. When it was pointed out by MSNBC’s Chris Matthews that of course they had done just that, Kerrey replied: “I haven’t accused Republicans of being anti-Semitic or anti-African American,” because African-American and Jewish votes were disqualified in Broward and Palm Beach counties. But of course it was Democrat election workers and judges who threw out those ballots, not Republicans.

Kerrey’s comment was either a back-handed way of accusing Republicans of being anti-Semitic and anti-black or a Freudian slip which amounted to the same thing. Racial McCarthyism, it could be said, was the most potent theme of Al Gore’s Florida electoral success story. During the campaign, million-dollar Democrat ads painted George Bush as a supporter of racial lynch mobs and (as was not-so-subtly implied) personally responsible for a series of legal lynchings of convicted black prisoners. Kind of Willie Horton in reverse. The success of this reprehensible campaign could be measured in the 50% increase in the black vote in Florida over the previous presidential election, with an otherwise inexplicable 93% of that vote going to Gore. It was a fitting climax to a campaign that had begun with Gore’s embrace of Al Sharpton and his insinuation that left-leaning Senator Bill Bradley was a closet racist.

Since all this still wasn’t quite enough, the nation’s most tolerated racial arsonist, Jesse Jackson, was let loose on Palm Beach and Broward counties where he proclaimed: “Once again, sons and daughters of slavery and Holocaust survivors are bound together with a shared agenda, bound by their hopes and their fears about national public policy.” Get it? Bush Republicans are crypto-slavers and Nazis. The election must be won by any means necessary.

Al Gore, the man responsible for these serial atrocities against America’s democracy, appeared before the television cameras hours after a Democrat-handpicked Supreme Court which had invited itself -- unasked - into the dispute, voted 7-0, to give the scorched earth party another 5 days to rig the election. Al Gore - the man who had divided the races, the parties and the nation during his campaign for the White House -- now convinced that victory was in his grasp -- stepped up to the microphones and said: “I once again urge that Governor Bush and I meet to demonstrate the essential unity that keeps America strong and free….Our guiding principle must be what is good for our country.” The devil himself couldn’t have said it better.




 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 15:03:05 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Almost every sentence in this article in some way is just reiterating the fact that Gore was 'stopping the democratic process. HELLO!!! You're saying that Gore demanding that the person with the most votes in Florida should win it isn't Democratic? How is he possibly harming democracy when it's Bush and his brother Jeb that rigged it?

The article should include, "Gore harmed the democratic process by running an election campaign."

Here's the best part of the article:

ifihadahif said:

>When the dust had partially settled, the Gore team managed to get 1527 of 3733 overseas absentee ballots thrown into the trash. However, in the handful of Democrat-controlled counties, which Gore had targeted for his plans to overturn the national election, the percentage was astronomical. In Democrat-run Broward - where the Gore team began its subversive effort by making a federal case out of “butterfly ballots” that allegedly disenfranchised minority voters, the same Gore crew was able to get 304 overseas ballots rejected out of a total of 396 cast. (To make a percentage comparison: the 19,000 votes thrown out in Palm Beach County out of 450,000 cast, comprised less than 5% of the total, as opposed to the roughly 75% of the military votes that the Gore’s minions were able to throw out.)

In an election which is worse - Republicans causing 19,000 votes to be thrown out or Gore doing the same with 304?

And the Bush people got many more thousands of votes thrown out - your only defense, hif, is that you only bothered to find out about one person who said it.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 15:13:11 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Everything in the Mr. Horowitz's article is documented.
Where is your documentation.
During the election, I saw all kinds of fantastic claims of voter disenfranchisation reported on the evening news as fact, but as it turned out, there was no credible evidence that it actually happened.
Where is your evidence ?


 
Mesh Posted: Thu Jun 10 15:19:02 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Well there is clearley only one solution to this whole mess.


In 2004, no voting. Meshuggah just takes control of everything. I promise, I wont be too bad......most of the time.......


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 15:19:34 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Screw documentation - your article says that 19,000 butterfly were discounted! If you claim he's well-documented (which I don't even fully agree with) then you're proving your own point wrong.

Gore tried to discount a few hundred votes on a technicality - Bush did it to many thousands.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 15:35:29 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Screw documentation - your article says that 19,000 butterfly were discounted! If you claim he's well-documented (which I don't even fully agree with) then you're proving your own point wrong.
>

>Gore tried to discount a few hundred votes on a technicality - Bush did it to many thousands.
>
You don't make any sense, how did I prove myself wrong ?

Screw documentation ? you made an accusation and I asked for evidence.
Where is it ?


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 15:37:40 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Hif - that article was about how Gore tried to cheat the democratic system by discounting overseas ballots on technicalities. Bush's people cause many, many, many more by the butterfly ballot technicality.

Where do I get my documentation? Your article.


 
Mesh Posted: Thu Jun 10 15:39:03 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/ccrdraft060401.htm

READ IT!


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 16:03:07 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Hif - that article was about how Gore tried to cheat the democratic system by discounting overseas ballots on technicalities. Bush's people cause many, many, many more by the butterfly ballot technicality.
>
>Where do I get my documentation? Your article.
>
Duh ?
Where is your documentation that Bush and his team conspired to steal the election ?


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 16:06:00 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  First, hif, please explain the point of pasting in that article.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 16:14:03 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>First, hif, please explain the point of pasting in that article.
>
It was a rebuttal to your assertion that Bush tried to steal the election, showing that in fact, it was Gore that tried to steal the election.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 16:16:07 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  But do you concede that that same article shows how 19,000 votes were discounted on technicalities, which is the same thing you claim Gore did?


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 16:39:58 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>But do you concede that that same article shows how 19,000 votes were discounted on technicalities, which is the same thing you claim Gore did?
>
No, those 19000 ballots were kicked out by the machine.
Here is an exerpt from Larry Elder's article "Election Crisis" on Nov 17, 2000 :

But no, again, the networks now declare Florida too close to call. So tight remains the race that some Florida voters claim they mistakenly voted for Pat Buchanan while using the allegedly confusing "butterfly" ballot. And in Palm Beach County, a machine kicked out 19,000 ballots, sparking demands for a "manual recount" to determine the intent of voters with rejected ballots.

But how to determine the voters’ intent? Well, you examine the chad, a piece of paper the voter punched out. If the "chad" did not fall, or is swinging, or pregnant, or dimpled, then that chad may or may not be counted. Kind of.

Never mind that the official sample ballot for Florida contains a page marked "Voting Instructions." It clearly says, "Note: If you make a mistake return your ballot card and obtain another." And in bold, capital letters, set in a large typeface, this sample ballot says, "AFTER VOTING, CHECK YOUR BALLOT CARD TO BE SURE YOUR VOTING SELECTIONS ARE CLEARLY AND CLEANLY PUNCHED AND THERE ARE NO CHIPS LEFT HANGING ON THE BACK OF THE CARD."

Let's simplify. The state of Florida held an election. Voters received instructions. A machine -- possessing no emotions, no partisanship -- counted the votes. The machine recounted the votes. If the machine kicked out the ballot, the ballot shouldn't get counted. Something that happens at every election. It's that simple



 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 16:42:56 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
> sparking demands for a "manual recount" to determine the intent of voters with rejected ballots.

Really.

And also, if 19,000 people that voted in Florida are too stupid to deserve their votes to be counted, then clearly no election ever held in America has meant anything.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Thu Jun 10 16:54:46 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>ifihadahif said:
>> sparking demands for a "manual recount" to determine the intent of voters with rejected ballots.
>
>Really.
>
>And also, if 19,000 people that voted in Florida are too stupid to deserve their votes to be counted, then clearly no election ever held in America has meant anything.
>
If you fuck up your ballot and cast it anyway the machine kicks it out, plain and simple. Those are the rules. Gore wanted to divine the voters intent by manually counting the ballots that were kicked out.


 
Zacq Posted: Thu Jun 10 17:02:48 2004 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>If you fuck up your ballot and cast it anyway the machine kicks it out, plain and simple. Those are the rules. Gore wanted to divine the voters intent by manually counting the ballots that were kicked out.

How dare that sick, sick, America-hating bastard try to let people's votes count! What country does he think we're living in!

Also, the votes he was trying to remove were supposed to be removed.


 



[ Reply to this thread ] [ Start new thread ]