Posted on 08/11/2004 12:45:43 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln
We've all been there.....a relative that insists some sacredly held leftist point is correct. In this case, it is my brother - who has far more conservative views than he knows. Well, in this case, he is convinced that Bush stole the election in Florida. Anyone who can direct me to a factual summary of those painfully long events, it would be greatly appreciated. I believe my brother to be intellectually honest and the "pesky facts" may sway him.
I only on the rarest occasion post vanities. Any help is appreciated.
Lando 
NOT!
sw
Nov. 5, 2002:
Florida voters - Republican and Democrat - elected:
Jeb Bush - Governor (R)
Katherine Harris - Congress (R)
Florida Cabinet - 100% Republican win.
Florida House - majority Republican win.
Florida voters - Republican and Democrat - did not elect:
Bob Butterworth (D - Fla AG - Fla. Gore 2000 DNC campaign manager)
Carol Roberts (D - Palm Beach)
(Election 2000, Florida - case closed.)
A few election 2000 facts:
All 67 counties in Florida recounted - at least once, as required by Florida's constitution for an election this close.
Florida's 20 or so smallest counties (# registered voters) - are all Dem. counties, and all recounted - with mostly single-digit changes - and all but one voted for Pres. Bush. As one friend said, her Democrat neighbors were family-values Democrats and didn't trust Gore.
Oh, and Gore did exceptionally better than Bush - # ballots cast from own party vs. # of registered voters from own party - in counties with Votomatic, punch card machines.
Also, the 5-4 Supreme Court vote is a myth. There were two votes. The important one was whether or not the ever-changing criteria for what constituted a valid ballot violated the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The vote was 7-2 in favor of yes (it was a violation). However, two of the 'Rat-appointed "justices" decided that that violation of the Constitution was not enough to stop the endless and fraudulent re-counts. The second vote, whether the re-counts should be stopped, was yes, 5-4.
Finally, the only reason the Florida vote was so close is because thousands of people in the Panhandle (heavily Republican) decided not to vote when the networks called the state for Gore, in spite of Bush leading at the time and the fact that the Panhandle was still voting due to its being in a different time zone. The state won't be so close this time, as they won't make that mistake again and will be sure to vote.
Here is a sports analogy of the Florida election-
Dallas Cowboys play the Atlanta Falcons (my two favorite teams)
Atlanta wins 28-27.
Dallas complains that they played a better game and should have won. Atlanta says "look at the scoreboard"
Dallas shows they had more first downs, total yards, and completions. Atlanta says "look at the scoreboard"
Dallas says if only they had not fumbled the ball a few times or had as many penalites, they would have won the game. Atlanta says "look at the scoreboard"
Dallas asks NFL to change the rules after the game has been played and make touchdowns over 40 yards count as 10 points, instead of 6 and also to disallow one of Atlanta's touchdowns because their reciever was lucky to make the catch. But Dallas does not want Atlanta to change the rules that would favor their side.
Dallas shows that they beat Green Bay but Atlanta lost to Green Bay - therefore Dallas was really the better team.
Dallas says that playing in Atlanta was hard because of the dome environment and they surely would have beaten Atlanta if the game was in Dallas.
Atlanta says "SCOREBOARD".
Hey Democrats - "SCOREBOARD - WE WON, YOU LOST"
Only in overvotes... which are ILLEGAL to count... illegal, zilch, zip. Even if you vote for Gore and write Gore's name in the write-in space, it's illegal--period. Bush gained in the undervotes, he lost if (illegal) overvotes were counted.
Yes, there were undoubtedly more total ballots that were "meant" for Gore, if you factor in the braindead overvotes and also the Palm Beach ballots (yes, at least some of them were mis-cast for Pat Buchanan... Democrats are stupid... this fact we all know).
However, Bush "tops" morally if you subtract the felons and the illegals and the ballot stuffers, and if you include those who didn't cast their vote because of the Panhandle call.
But there is no question that Bush got more LEGAL votes than Gore. To suggest otherwise is liberal revisionist history in the making.
In short... it's Franken-spew. And here's the original source which clearly says all ballots were examined:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/568802/posts
See #107, Skinner is being a dummy...
Not good. You misunderstand Florida election law (which is similar to election law in all the other states), and the relationship between state and federal courts. You also oversimplify the issue of "standards" as such were developed during the course of the issue.
All elections have two phases, separated by certification. Gore got the FLorida Supreme court to move the statutory certification deadline. This shortened the amount of time available for court-supervised recounts (the post-certification period was shortened at Gore's demand). Reliable recount standards were developed in counties that used marker-style ballots. All of the contested ballots were punch-cards. (not counting the contests of absentee and military ballots, where the Gore team denied votes, "disenfranchised voters").
The US Supreme Court case is pretty short, and is not all that legalistic in its terms. I encourage you to read it to see how the 7-2 decision that the Florida Supreme Court was wrong, was reached.
"The important one was whether or not the ever-changing criteria for what constituted a valid ballot violated the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The vote was 7-2 in favor of yes (it was a violation). However, two of the 'Rat-appointed "justices" decided that that violation of the Constitution was not enough to stop the endless and fraudulent re-counts. The second vote, whether the re-counts should be stopped, was yes, 5-4."
This second vote amazed me! In essence they are saying - yes we know that we are changing the rules AFTER THE VOTE - but oh well. It's amazing that 4 justices would let each county just make their decisions ON THE FLY with no standard whatsoever. (Hey Bob - this chad is dimpled, let's just assume that the person meant to push it all the way through). Like I said - when the government starts determing the voter's "intent" - we might as well raise the hammer and sickle.
Actually, I believe you'll find that the 7-2 vote was on the question of whether the Florida Supreme Court had acted in a Constitutional manner in injecting itself into the dispute (for lack of a better term); they did not, as the USSC so ruled. Of the seven justices concurring, only five agreed that stopping the recount was the proper remedy.
It's never ceased to amaze that the goofball Left still yammers on about the ''5-4 selection of the president''. This decision just was not very complex. In any case, the only other remedy available to the USSC was a 12th Amendment ruling, throwing the question where it really belonged -- into the Florida Legislature. The result would have been the same, certainly; both houses were Republican-majority at the time.
I am married to a Dem and live in Florida. Corrine Brown's district meanders around my neighborhood on three sides within a mile of my house. The Dems are delusional...they blame Katherine Harris for "disenfranchising" the military vote.
There are only two responses,
1. Even the US Commission on Civil Rights could not find a way to twist the circumstances of "too stupid to vote correctly" into "disenfranchisement," otherwise, there would be court cases still going on today.
2. Give up- only a fool argues with a fool.
I prefer "He got the most votes, as verified by the EFFING NEW YORK TIMES."
One of the best interviews I saw during the recount was between Tony Snow and some "Civil Rights" leader - (which basically means he didn't have a real job).
This guy started rambling about the usual cr@p about how people were disenfranchised and there vote for Al Gore was disqualified. And Tony Snow simply replied back to him "How do you know that?"
The guy was stunned for about 5 seconds and then started back on the same cr@p about how the chads at the bottom of the voting machine were preventing a voter from pushing the chad on his card all the way through.
EXACTLY - HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT?!! How do you know what a person with an overvote, hanging chad, dimpled chad, vote for Buchanon, ...MEANT TO DO? Are you all mind readers and can read a ballot like a tarot card. IDIOTS!
Ergot! Nanny! Nanny! Booh! Booh!
Long day, sorry.
I guess there must be a precedent for this in one of those foreign laws Ruth Bader Ginsberg has been babbling about.
heaven forbid we let the law play apart in this...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.