Question for George Bush supporters : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

The Florida election is held. It is closer than 1/2 percent. State law dictates that a recount be done. The recount, witnessed and adjuticated by Republican observers, uncovers irregularities (it "finds" 1500 new votes for Gore).

So now, contrary to the legislation that he signed in Texas to guarantee that close state elections be tallied by hand count, Bush officials file suit in federal court to block the state of Florida from performing a hand count.

What's wrong with this picture?

-- 2000 (questions@to.ask), November 12, 2000


Nothing. They provided for a hand recount of the original votes - one time. There has been a recount of the original votes in Florida and they chose to do a machine count, not a hand count. They have had a hand recount of the recount in some precincts and Bush is still ahead. Now they want a hand count of the recount. Come on folks and be honest - do you really think they are not padding the votes? If you do I have a bridge and some real estate I would like to sell you.

The election was stolen by Daley's father in 1960. I know because I voted in that election. I could quote you chapter and verse about other elections that were stolen by the democrats over the years but you don't want to listen and believe so I won't waste my time. "There is none so blind as him who will not see". If Gore did not intend to steal this election, explain to me why he chose Daley as his compaign manger? No doubt they will steal this one also but with the internet they at least will be exposed.

At one time I was a democrat. I only became and independent when I could no longer stomach their sleaze and slime.

-- Nadine (, November 12, 2000.

What's wrong is the EC must go. Longer this goes on, the more evidence will flow in supporting this stance.

Yes I know it is too late to help this Election(mess), but let us assure it is the last Election, please.

Think the voting is screwed? The registration TO VOTE is as bad if not worse. How many voted who had not the right to vote? Voted twice? Hell half the eligible didn't even vote, where is their say in all this??? They don't deserve one? Can we just live with that as a Nation? HALF the people folks, not a mere 10% who maybe just irresponsible.

This IS a Constitutional CRISIS. Anyone saying otherwise is plain blind.

-- Doc Paulie (, November 12, 2000.


In my post, I gave facts. You responded with pure, unsubstantiated innuendo (such as Daley's dad was once accused of rigging an election, therefore his son rigged this election).

Learn some decent debate tactics otherwise don't waste my time whining.

-- 2000 (questions@to.ask), November 12, 2000.

I am not debating, I am stating a fact. It has been all over the TV about Daley's father and democrats have admitted it. Like father, like son.

-- Nadine (, November 12, 2000.

What's wrong with this picture?

Quite simple really. The problem is not how the votes are being recounted but how many times. Shall we go around the country and count certain areas over and over? The minority groups are so dependant on federal handouts that they will stop at nothing to insure the Democrats stay in power. They have no concern for America or the rest of the population. The mortal fear of earning an honest living has motivated this group to a new level. Lies and outright distortions have become the norm. If you are satisfied to let this group control your future then God help you, for your government wont.

-- Wizard (, November 12, 2000.

One of the concerns is the selective nature of the manual recount, to be held in Deomcratic strongholds only. It's evident now that "irregularities" in the voting procedure exsist not only in counties like Palm Beach, but in Duval and parts of Little Havanna, where a near combined 30,000 Republican leaning voters are supposedly "disenfranchised."

The point is, we heard from the Gore camp that we need to "accurately guage the will of the people of Florida." But their cries for that reflection stops at the county lines of their choosing.

The Gore camp isn't interested in the will of the people of Florida. They want the presidency. And if it means becoming the first court-appointed president of our time, Al Gore will go after jus

-- Buster Collins (, November 12, 2000.

Hell half the eligible didn't even vote, where is their say in all this?


Are you saying that the half that did not vote was prevented from voting? I would bet that most chose not to vote. So, quite appropriately, they have no say in this.

-- Lars (, November 12, 2000.

It's the hope to avoid having to open up "a hole can of worms". PLease..entertain this notion. Florida county recounts by hand. It find Gore won. Then Bush has HIS counties recount by hand, he wins, then GORE has MORE counties recount by hand, until HE wins, then BUsh asks for recounts in Close hand, then GORE does...the question is simply...WHERE DOES IT END? At some point, SOMEONE has to be declared, and SOMEONE has to concede...this is what was trying to be avoided by the REpublicans...because ALL that handcounting leaves A LOT OF ROOM for people to subject their personal choices on some empty ballots or confusing ballots and it will NEVER END.

-- kritter (, November 12, 2000.

I am not a Bush supporter per se, I am more of an anti-Gore. I voted for Harry Browne, hoping to build a viable alternative party. Anyway, what is wrong with this picture is this: Desperation.

I seriously believe that Bush thinks this is his ONE shot at the Presidency. I do not think he will be the Republican nominee in 2004, and I think that he believes that too. That is just a guess, but my thought is that John McCain will get the nod in 2004 if Bush loses this one. Yes, I understand that McCain will have a tough time with the far right wing in getting nominated, but if Bush does not win this one the Republicans will make a deal with a 'centrist devil' if they believe that he can win them back the White House. All IMHO of course, but if I am right you read it here first.

PS, how did you get Dieter's old email address? He gets kind of pissy about that sort of thing, unless..... maybe he saw to it that you were POdDEd?

-- Uncle Deedah (, November 12, 2000.


No I am not saying the Half who don't vote were denied, just bored to high heaven with the whole voting deal. No accident IMHO.

-- Doc Paulie (, November 12, 2000.


"Hell half the eligible didn't even vote, where is their say in all this???"

WTF?????? They have no say,period.

"They don't deserve one?" Hell No!!!"

Good God Doc,is someone supposed to vote for'em,ultimate lazy bastards,FUCK'EM.

"Can we just live with that as a Nation?"

They have no say,so it doesn't matter.

"This IS a Constitutional CRISIS. Anyone saying otherwise is plain blind."

THIS AIN'T no such thang,it's all about exercising a little patience and letting the proscribed methods work to fruition.IMO,a Constitutional crisis would be Gore or Bush calling the election void and themselves THE winner and trying to assume power with military force.

I guess I'm just plain blind Doc but Ronnie Milsap could see that this post has either you or me smokin' some shit like we ain't seen the likes of in years.Surely your pullin' my leg??????

-- capnfun (, November 12, 2000.

Gore will become the next POTUS unless Slick Willie stays on for a third term...

-- dinosaur (, November 12, 2000.

The republicans have a right to request handcounts in any county they damn well please. They like machine counts. Trust the machines, not the people! Never mind that Bush ran on a slogan of trusting the people, and not Washington. Now he's running to Washington for help to usurp the will of the people! (Daddeeee! It's not fair! Get your fed friends to help me, Dadddeee!

What a sour, boil-ridden, hunched over, mumbling hypocrite.

After Republicans requested yet another machine count Friday, which are notoriously inaccurate, the machines gave a net gain to Gore in Palm Beach! Way to go, 'publicans!

Anyway, they haven't requested hand counts in any counties, probably because they're afraid of the results. Fact is, the machines are giving Gore votes, and the manual count is giving Gore votes, at least at this moment.

The Republicans could still win the election if they just let people count the damn votes. No one knows who has won this yet -- because -- Guess what? The votes haven't all been counted, because machines miss a lot of 'em!

It's perfectly within the law to request a manual recount, and Bush signed such a law in 1997. They applied the law in New Mexico to their advantage. If Republicans want to abide by the law, they can. If they want to take it to federal court and whine about it there, and tie up the process in the courts, that's their right as well.

In any case, they don't look very good at this moment. I think a lot of republicans are probably feeling a bit ashamed right now of their vote.

Maria, staunch Publican, for example, has been notably silent. I wonder how she feels now about her AWOL, triple-arrested, multi- millionaire, dry-drunk, former cokehead guy?

-- Democracy blocked (, November 12, 2000.

[AWOL, triple-arrested, multi- millionaire, dry-drunk, former cokehead guy]

Yep, HERE is an objective (but anonymous) soul purely interested in seeing the will of the people be done. Whoever they might choose. It's *process* that matters to old blockhead here, NOT personality. Oh no. Hee hee hee.

-- Flint (, November 12, 2000.

"Various factors can cause people to be predisposed to boils, including exposure to certain industrial chemicals; overuse of corticosteroids; treatment of skin lesions with petroleum-based products; and general poor health, hygiene, or nutrition."

-- (shrub@unhealthy.scum), November 12, 2000.

1. Bush went AWOL in the military -- he was missing for over a year.

2. He has been arrested three -- count 'em, THREE -- times.

3. He is worth over $20 million.

4. He says he had a drinking problem, doesn't drink, but isn't in treatment. That's called "dry drunk."

5. He used cocaine in his youth.

Have a problem with the facts, Flint?

-- Democracy blocked (, November 12, 2000.


Not at all. Bush is not my idea of a qualified candidate. Gore, of course tells lies just for fun, and became quite famous for doing so during the campaign. Funny you don't mention that. Gore is probably a better candidate even so, although he needs more practice preserving more deniability when he lies.

In general, I prefer a lousy candidate doing a half-assed job of leading the country in the right direction, than a dishonest candidate doing a half-assed job of leading us in the wrong direction. Face it, we had some damn lousy choices this election and more people voted *against* one candidate than *for* another. This is sad.

-- Flint (, November 12, 2000.

Yes, Flint has a big problem accepting facts if he can't work them into his self-deluded reality. He also thinks that because he is a college grad and he voted for Shrub, everybody who voted for Shrub is well-educated. He is an exception to the norm, primarily because he failed to do his homework in advance and find out who he was voting for.

-- (Shrub@dim.bulb), November 12, 2000.

Dim Bulb Buffoon, are you seriously suggesting that Bush is somehow inadequate for the job of President of the U.S? I doubt that your immature whining will convince anyone of your sincerity so I ask you to clarify your position. Are you in any way privileged to information that the rest of us normal people have no access? I suspect that you are a life long loser that will look to blame someone of achievement to mask your inadequacies. You are the type that embraces the Democratic Party in the hope that they will support you at the expense of the winners of the world. Maybe so, but in the end you are still what you always were- not very much. You and the Democratic party are a perfect match.

-- Wizard (, November 12, 2000.

"are you seriously suggesting that Bush is somehow inadequate for the job of President of the U.S?"

Why no! Of COURSE not. What gives you the idea I would do something like THAT??

-- Shrub will be a great president. (Bwaaahaaa@haa.haahaaa!!), November 13, 2000.


You need to learn to ignore Hawk's ranting. People respond to him, but few if any of the posters here take him seriously. He uses a new name for every post, that way when he says something outrageously stupid he can always claim it wasn't him. But we know who it is, usually the dumber the statement the more likely that Hawk is behind it. And, if the post has "Shrub" or "Shrubby" in it, and is really dumb, it is Hawk.

-- Uncle Deedah (, November 13, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ