Woman jailed after threatening to kill WA Gov

[Guest MikeSC]

I don't object to the word "won".  I object to the word "clearly".

 

There was nothing clear about that election.

Bush won more electoral votes.

 

Close --- but clear.

 

There were not substantive problems in FL (the US Civil Rights Commission found one person who claimed he was prevented from voting --- and even HIS story was suspect).

So how are they going to stop the same thing from happening? They still haven't changed the system which allowed such a thing to happen. They need a real solution to the problem of voter fraud before they can move forward getting the proper count on the election.

How you fix the problems is to COMPLETELY purge the lists and make EVERYBODY re-register to vote at least 90 days before the election. After that point, nobody else is added --- period.

 

Put in a database so when somebody dies, they can be removed immediately. Ditto if they move.

 

Make sure all states voter list databases are linked, to prevent voters from being able to vote in multiple states.

-=Mike

And ditto if they get their first felony conviction.

Absolutely. But, people don't realize just how haphazard most states are with their voter rolls.

 

I'd also FORBID judges from adding people to voting lists late.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

The outcome of the 2000 vote in Florida was many things, but "clear" was not one of them.

[Guest MikeSC]

The outcome of the 2000 vote in Florida was many things, but "clear" was not one of them.

It was absolutely clear. Bush won the first vote and the recount.

Story over.

-=Mike

...Do I even need to mention the newspaper consortium who ALSO said Bush won?

[SuperJerk 0]

The outcome of the 2000 vote in Florida was many things, but "clear" was not one of them.

It was absolutely clear.

Which is why there was so much controversy, and the Supreme Court had to step in and stop the recounts.

 

Yes, it was VERY clear who won.

[Guest MikeSC]

The outcome of the 2000 vote in Florida was many things, but "clear" was not one of them.

It was absolutely clear.

Which is why there was so much controversy, and the Supreme Court had to step in and stop the recounts.

 

Yes, it was VERY clear who won.

Nah. The controversy was when you had election boards trying to decide voter "intent", rather than, you know, votes.

 

That, and once again, a newspaper consortium financed their own recount --- and Bush still won.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

The outcome of the 2000 vote in Florida was many things, but "clear" was not one of them.

It was absolutely clear.

Which is why there was so much controversy, and the Supreme Court had to step in and stop the recounts.

 

Yes, it was VERY clear who won.

Nah. The controversy was when you had election boards trying to decide voter "intent", rather than, you know, votes.

I'm still not seeing the "clear" part.

[Guest MikeSC]

The outcome of the 2000 vote in Florida was many things, but "clear" was not one of them.

It was absolutely clear.

Which is why there was so much controversy, and the Supreme Court had to step in and stop the recounts.

 

Yes, it was VERY clear who won.

Nah. The controversy was when you had election boards trying to decide voter "intent", rather than, you know, votes.

I'm still not seeing the "clear" part.

The clear part is that Bush won two recounts.

 

Nobody can find any irregularities in the system.

 

Nobody can find anybody who abused their authority.

 

Nobody has recounted it in a way to have Bush lose.

 

Hell, if the networks didn't call the state for FL early --- after having a memo sent out that day reminding them that FL polls are open until 8, not 7 --- it wouldn't have even been terribly close.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

Welcome to Fanatasy Land, population: Mike.

[Guest MikeSC]

Welcome to Fanatasy Land, population: Mike.

No. You can ignore reality and hold on to some frenzied conspiracy theories that have been shot down over the last 5 years if you so desire.

 

It's your right.

 

Hey, some folks think we faked the moon landings, too --- so you wouldn't be the only one with an insane theory.

-=Mike

[Guest Smues]

Welcome to Fanatasy Land, population: Mike.

Doesn't he at least get a midget that yells DA PLANE BOSS DA PLANE?

[SuperJerk 0]

I never said Bush didn't win. I just said the outcome wasn't clear. I alledged no conspiracy, just the uncertainty which hung over our country for an entire month after the election over who the next president was going to be.

[Guest MikeSC]

I never said Bush didn't win. I just said the outcome wasn't clear. I alledged no conspiracy, just the uncertainty which hung over our country for an entire month after the election over who the next president was going to be.

It was close --- but it was clear.

 

In Washington, it was close --- and not even remotely clear.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

I never said Bush didn't win.  I just said the outcome wasn't clear.  I alledged no conspiracy, just the uncertainty which hung over our country for an entire month after the election over who the next president was going to be.

It was close --- but it was clear.

 

In Washington, it was close --- and not even remotely clear.

-=Mike

**cough**double standard**cough**

[Guest MikeSC]

I never said Bush didn't win.  I just said the outcome wasn't clear.  I alledged no conspiracy, just the uncertainty which hung over our country for an entire month after the election over who the next president was going to be.

It was close --- but it was clear.

 

In Washington, it was close --- and not even remotely clear.

-=Mike

**cough**double standard**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't win only after losing 2 recounts**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't have a Republican stronghold with more votes than voters than the overall margin of victory**cough**

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

I never said Bush didn't win.  I just said the outcome wasn't clear.  I alledged no conspiracy, just the uncertainty which hung over our country for an entire month after the election over who the next president was going to be.

It was close --- but it was clear.

 

In Washington, it was close --- and not even remotely clear.

-=Mike

**cough**double standard**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't win only after losing 2 recounts**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't have a Republican stronghold with more votes than voters than the overall margin of victory**cough**

-=Mike

**cough**ballot irregularities that favored Bush in Florida**cough**

**cough**having the secretary of state of Florida as one of his campaign chairs**cough**

[Guest MikeSC]

I never said Bush didn't win.  I just said the outcome wasn't clear.  I alledged no conspiracy, just the uncertainty which hung over our country for an entire month after the election over who the next president was going to be.

It was close --- but it was clear.

 

In Washington, it was close --- and not even remotely clear.

-=Mike

**cough**double standard**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't win only after losing 2 recounts**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't have a Republican stronghold with more votes than voters than the overall margin of victory**cough**

-=Mike

**cough**ballot irregularities that favored Bush in Florida**cough**

**cough**ballot approved by both parties before the election and designed by a Democrat**cough**

**cough**having the secretary of state of Florida as one of his campaign chairs**cough**

**cough**The state attorney general was involved with the recount and was a Gore campaigner.**cough**

**cough**And I suppose a mention of anything Harris did wrong will be forthcoming**cough**

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

I never said Bush didn't win.  I just said the outcome wasn't clear.  I alledged no conspiracy, just the uncertainty which hung over our country for an entire month after the election over who the next president was going to be.

It was close --- but it was clear.

 

In Washington, it was close --- and not even remotely clear.

-=Mike

**cough**double standard**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't win only after losing 2 recounts**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't have a Republican stronghold with more votes than voters than the overall margin of victory**cough**

-=Mike

**cough**ballot irregularities that favored Bush in Florida**cough**

**cough**ballot approved by both parties before the election and designed by a Democrat**cough**

**cough**having the secretary of state of Florida as one of his campaign chairs**cough**

**cough**The state attorney general was involved with the recount and was a Gore campaigner.**cough**

**cough**And I suppose a mention of anything Harris did wrong will be forthcoming**cough**

-=Mike

**cough**your just proving my point for me that the outcome wasn't clear because there were multiple irregulaties on both sides**cough**

[Guest MikeSC]

I never said Bush didn't win.  I just said the outcome wasn't clear.  I alledged no conspiracy, just the uncertainty which hung over our country for an entire month after the election over who the next president was going to be.

It was close --- but it was clear.

 

In Washington, it was close --- and not even remotely clear.

-=Mike

**cough**double standard**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't win only after losing 2 recounts**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't have a Republican stronghold with more votes than voters than the overall margin of victory**cough**

-=Mike

**cough**ballot irregularities that favored Bush in Florida**cough**

**cough**ballot approved by both parties before the election and designed by a Democrat**cough**

**cough**having the secretary of state of Florida as one of his campaign chairs**cough**

**cough**The state attorney general was involved with the recount and was a Gore campaigner.**cough**

**cough**And I suppose a mention of anything Harris did wrong will be forthcoming**cough**

-=Mike

**cough**your just proving my point for me that the outcome wasn't clear because there were multiple irregulaties on both sides**cough**

**cough**Except no irregularities actually occurred**cough**

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

I never said Bush didn't win.  I just said the outcome wasn't clear.  I alledged no conspiracy, just the uncertainty which hung over our country for an entire month after the election over who the next president was going to be.

It was close --- but it was clear.

 

In Washington, it was close --- and not even remotely clear.

-=Mike

**cough**double standard**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't win only after losing 2 recounts**cough**

**cough**Bush didn't have a Republican stronghold with more votes than voters than the overall margin of victory**cough**

-=Mike

**cough**ballot irregularities that favored Bush in Florida**cough**

**cough**ballot approved by both parties before the election and designed by a Democrat**cough**

**cough**having the secretary of state of Florida as one of his campaign chairs**cough**

**cough**The state attorney general was involved with the recount and was a Gore campaigner.**cough**

**cough**And I suppose a mention of anything Harris did wrong will be forthcoming**cough**

-=Mike

**cough**your just proving my point for me that the outcome wasn't clear because there were multiple irregulaties on both sides**cough**

**cough**Except no irregularities actually occurred**cough**

-=Mike

**cough**but you just named like 5 on your own**cough**

 

 

edit: This has now become the world's most unproductive doctor's exam.

Edited March 30, 2005 by RobotJerk

[Guest MikeSC]

Actually, no, I didn't.

 

The ballot was fine. Nobody broke any laws or rules. Nobody abused their power. The votes were counted. They were recounted. I'm saying Harris did nothing wrong or inappropriate.

 

The only irregularity was the behavior of the FL courts --- but they seem to do that a lot.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

Actually, no, I didn't.

 

The ballot was fine. Nobody broke any laws or rules. Nobody abused their power. The votes were counted. They were recounted. I'm saying Harris did nothing wrong or inappropriate.

 

The only irregularity was the behavior of the FL courts --- but they seem to do that a lot.

-=Mike

So there WERE irregularities in Florida that put the outcome in question, thus making it less clear!

 

I knew it!

[Guest MikeSC]

Actually, no, I didn't.

 

The ballot was fine. Nobody broke any laws or rules. Nobody abused their power. The votes were counted. They were recounted. I'm saying Harris did nothing wrong or inappropriate.

 

The only irregularity was the behavior of the FL courts --- but they seem to do that a lot.

      -=Mike

So there WERE irregularities in Florida that put the outcome in question, thus making it less clear!

 

I knew it!

No, there really weren't. Just because one side tries to make a claim does not make it an irregularity.

 

An irregularity would be "more people voted for Bush than there were registered voters".

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

Mike, you and the Bush Administration were the only people who the results of that election were clear to.

[Guest MikeSC]

Mike, you and the Bush Administration were the only people who the results of that election were clear to.

Well, the papers who recounted.

And anybody who studied it.

 

Hell, anybody outside of crackpot leftists...

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

Mike, you and the Bush Administration were the only people who the results of that election were clear to.

Well, the papers who recounted.

And anybody who studied it.

If it was so clear what happened, why did the papers do recounts? Why did others even bother studying it? Hmmm?????

[Guest Smues]

Mike, you and the Bush Administration were the only people who the results of that election were clear to.

Well, the papers who recounted.

And anybody who studied it.

If it was so clear what happened, why did the papers do recounts? Why did others even bother studying it? Hmmm?????

They needed something to spend their time on since Elian Gonzalez was back in Cuba.

[Guest MikeSC]

Mike, you and the Bush Administration were the only people who the results of that election were clear to.

Well, the papers who recounted.

And anybody who studied it.

If it was so clear what happened, why did the papers do recounts? Why did others even bother studying it? Hmmm?????

Because people have a habit of studying elections.

 

Clinton's wins ALSO got studied.

 

It's called history.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

Mike, you and the Bush Administration were the only people who the results of that election were clear to.

Well, the papers who recounted.

And anybody who studied it.

If it was so clear what happened, why did the papers do recounts? Why did others even bother studying it? Hmmm?????

Because people have a habit of studying elections.

 

Clinton's wins ALSO got studied.

 

It's called history.

-=Mike

No, they studied it because the outcome was controversial. Newspapers did not do recounts of the states Clinton won.

 

They studied it results of the election were not clear.

 

When Theodore White wrote the "Making of the President" books back in the 60s and 70s, he wasn't going to Florida and examining dimpled chads. He was doing it for history. The studies by the press were done to CLARIFY what happened during the election because the outcome wasn't CLEAR. The recounts were done because the outcome wasn't CLEAR.

[Guest MikeSC]

No, they recounted it because some on the left bitched and moaned that dimples were votes.

 

So, they counted them as votes AS IF ELECTORAL LAW DID NOT EXIST.

 

It's no different than playing "What if?"

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

No, they recounted it because some on the left bitched and moaned that dimples were votes.

 

So, they counted them as votes AS IF ELECTORAL LAW DID NOT EXIST.

 

It's no different than playing "What if?"

      -=Mike

 

They recounted the votes to see who would get Florida's electoral votes. That's hardly acting as if electoral law did not exist.

 

So you're saying that the whole month we sat waiting to find out the result of the recount, it was absolutely clear to everyone what the outcome was going to be? And that when the recount was stopped, there was no controversy over it?