Did Bush Steal the 2000 election.

[°Leprechaun]

I have created this poll because I want to see what people are thinking.

My answer is option 2 "We may never know for sure."

I haven't really heard the side of Bush supporters, so here is your chance to refute the claim that he stole the election.

The fact that this is still being debated is troubling, because it goes to the very heart of what it means to be an American.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Who won the election (what your poll asks) and did Bush steal the election (your subject) are not at all the same thing. I voted the obvious. Bush won; he is president today.

Good point. The question is whether this election was fair.
Technically you are right; he won. But, he seems to have one by only one vote. That of the deciding Supreme Court Justice.

Actually, the SCOTUS agreed 7-2 that the recount was unconstitutional.  The 5-4 decision to abide by the Dec 12th deadline was in agreement with the Florida Supreme Court's (FLSC) interpretation of Florida law.  

Any remedy beyond Dec 12th would have forced the SCOTUS to overrule the FLSC's interpretation of Florida law.  Such action would have been most extreme since the SCOTUS defers to the state courts to interpret state law.

Not to mention that under almost every scenario, Bush would have won a recount.

Face it: your side lost Florida because of the butterfly-ballot designed by a Democrat and approved by both parties.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

and all those "felons" wiped off the voting rolls when all they had were similar names to felons and were mostly black.

[7,052,770]

We'll never know because of the butterfly ballot.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

...but the question of whether people were denied their right to vote in a suspicious manner is also part of the debate...not just who would have won a recount because you can't count votes that were never allowed.

What were the number of Dems unlawfully denied the right to vote compared to the number of Reps?  If the difference is greater than 527, then you have a point.  If you don't know the number, then you have nothing to complain about.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

they were mostly black, so they obviously mostly Dems.

come on people, even your fellow Republican RightWingNut admits Bush stole Florida.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

they were mostly black, so they obviously mostly Dems.

come on people, even your fellow Republican RightWingNut admits Bush stole Florida.

Even if we conclude that most of the wrongly identified felons were black, that does NOT mean they went to the polls and attempted to vote.

How many Dems tried to vote but were illegally denied?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Isn't this entire thing a little pointless now? We can rehash all the crap from both sides but what difference does it make now? How about this: was OJ Simpson really innocent? It doesn't matter now. Let's move on.

To the contrary, I think the sanity of Bush v. Gore is very instructive.  Listening to the media, you would never know how extreme a decision it would have been if the SCOTUS bypassed the Dec 12th deadline, ignoring the FLSC's interpretation of Florida law.

[KEmperor]

they were mostly black, so they obviously mostly Dems.

come on people, even your fellow Republican RightWingNut admits Bush stole Florida.

That is a very racist statement.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

they were mostly black, so they obviously mostly Dems.

come on people, even your fellow Republican RightWingNut admits Bush stole Florida.

That is a very racist statement.

no it's a statement of fact. the vast majority of blacks are Democrats, fact.

[angus]

Who won the election (what your poll asks) and did Bush steal the election (your subject) are not at all the same thing. I voted the obvious. Bush won; he is president today.

Good point. The question is whether this election was fair.
Technically you are right; he won. But, he seems to have one by only one vote. That of the deciding Supreme Court Justice.

Actually, the SCOTUS agreed 7-2 that the recount was unconstitutional.  The 5-4 decision to abide by the Dec 12th deadline was in agreement with the Florida Supreme Court's (FLSC) interpretation of Florida law.  

Any remedy beyond Dec 12th would have forced the SCOTUS to overrule the FLSC's interpretation of Florida law.  Such action would have been most extreme since the SCOTUS defers to the state courts to interpret state law.

Not to mention that under almost every scenario, Bush would have won a recount.

Face it: your side lost Florida because of the butterfly-ballot designed by a Democrat and approved by both parties.

Does anyone remember a time when it was not fashionable to brag about how stupid you are?  I do.  But by 2000, you had all these ninnies claiming that they meant vote for Gore but accidentally voted for Buchanan on the ballot.  My, the times are a'changin'  And otherwise intelligent Democrats all claiming, "oh yeah that was a confusing ballot."  Now, I've read your posts jmfcst and I'd be very surprised to learn that you genuinely felt, after having seen images of the ballot in question, that it would have confused you.

And yes it is a racist statement that blacks are less educated than whites.  But it is also a true one, statistically.  I hope political correctness (avoidance of reality when reality is offensive) is not making a comeback.  Sometimes there are statistical differences between demographics.  That's just the way it is.  The worst thing you can say about something is that it is false.  Can you say it is false that the overwhelming majority of blacks are poor and undereducated, and thus therefore more easily manipulated by democrats?  No, you cannot, so shut the  up.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Now, I've read your posts jmfcst and I'd be very surprised to learn that you genuinely felt, after having seen images of the ballot in question, that it would have confused you.

I'm not saying that I myself couldn't have figured it out, I'm just saying I believe Gore would have won Florida if it hadn't been for the confusion over the ballot.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

And yes it is a racist statement that blacks are less educated than whites.  But it is also a true one, statistically.  I hope political correctness (avoidance of reality when reality is offensive) is not making a comeback.  Sometimes there are statistical differences between demographics.  That's just the way it is.  The worst thing you can say about something is that it is false.  Can you say it is false that the overwhelming majority of blacks are poor and undereducated, and thus therefore more easily manipulated by democrats?  No, you cannot, so shut the f**ck up.

I wasn't part of that conversation.  So I am assuming your comments are directed at the "others".

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I just know that it was one of the issues addressed by the television show which is being shown over and over and over. If the show is false, then Bush and his supporters should be concerned about setting the record straight.

If you see the show they point out the Harris and Jeb Bush declined to be interviewed. Also Clayton Roberts walked off the interview. It appears to me that Roberts, J Bush, and Harris have something to hide. Is that not a logical conclusion?

1) I think the logical conclusion is without knowing the facts of how many non-felons attempting but denied to vote, you're just jumping to conclusion.
2) It would be silly for the Bush gang to try to reason with the unreasonable.
3) It is time for these whiners to present evidence of the number of non-felons unfairly denied the right to vote, else they need to stop polluting the air with baseless innuendo.
4) It is the Dem party that needs to start taking blame for Gore's loss in Florida.  It was the Dems that crafted a confusing ballot, didn't educate their voters, and staffed heavily democratic precincts with incompetent workers.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Here is a quote from the website which I linked to early which addresses your first talking point:

"One of the first indications that something was wrong came early on election day. Thousands of African-Americans who had voted in previous elections discovered that their names were missing from the voter rolls. Investigators later uncovered irrefutable evidence that exposed an elaborate strategy where thousands of Democratic voters were purged from the rolls. These voters were disproportionately African-American.

The evidence shows that Governor Jeb Bush, Secretary of State, Katherine Harris, and other Republican state officials ordered the manipulation of a list of former felons to include thousands of legitimate voters who had no criminal history. In Florida, ex-felony offenders lose their right to vote for life. But the manipulation of this list denied thousands of legitimate voters their franchise. In an election that was determined by 537 votes, these purged voters would have reversed the outcome."

Answer one question for me, please.

Have you seen the documentary on cable to which I am referring?

No, I haven't seen the documentary.  

But since you have seen it: Was is the number of voters incorrectly removed the list?  How many of those attempted to vote?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I have the documentary on tape. When I review it I will look for the exact quote, however, the website does indicate that there were enough votes to make the difference (as already cited):

"Thousands of African-Americans who had voted in previous elections discovered that their names were missing from the voter rolls."

What does "thousands" mean?  Does it mean roughly 2000 or does it mean as much as 9000?

Also, note that 445 felons in Palm Beach and Duval counties were allowed to vote because those counties refused to use the list of named felons that you are questioning.  Other counties also refused to use the list.

So, although we don't know number (and probably will never know) of those mistakenly denied the right to vote.  We do know of hundred of felons that were illegally allowed to vote.  

It cuts both ways.  Like you said, the system isn't perfect.

But one thing is for certain:  the confusion over the butterfly ballot swung a very close contest for Florida away from Gore and to Bush.  And for that error, you only have your own party to blame.  And that error was far more damaging to Gore's chances than the faulty felon list.

Also, you should thank Bill Clinton (and probably Hillary) for the Monica affair.  Gore would have won by at least 5 points if it hadn't been for that little episode.

[Schmitz in 1972]

Well Bush won it of course, just go to this own websites page of election 2000 and it's clear to see: Bush 271, Gore 266. The election is long over, get over it dems.  Anyone who still believes Gore won it, or even someone who thinks we may never know should read 'At Any Cost: How Al Gore Tried To Steal The Election' by Bill Sammon, it's an eye-opening book which is sure to set you straight on who was always (and always will be) the winner of election 2000

[??????????]

This horse has been beat to death so badly it is less then dust now.

[JohnFKennedy]

Bush won, in case any of you haven't noticed, he is the one who lives in the big white building in DC and does all those jobs that the president normally does.

Whether Bush stole Florida is a totally different question, maybe he did, maybe he didn't, there are arguments from both sides about this. Each as convincing as the other (depending on who you are of course).

Let's be fair, both sides cheat in Presidential elections.

Gore probably reeled in the dead vote nicely and had a load of students voting for him a few times and Bush probably had someone scrubbing voters and not counting votes.

The two probably cheat equally so it about balances it out.

My conclusion. Bush won the 2000 election, hence his residence in the White House and it being him up for re-election in November and not Gore.

[Florida]

I live in Florida and was working from home at the time, so I was tuned in (with avid interest) to the election developments every day, all day long.  It is due to the twisting of laws and arbitrary decisions (which happened to seem VERY partisan) as well as whole blocks of voters that were prevented or impaired from voting (poor, black most notably, and elderly also) that my confidence in the election process plummeted.  Even the Supreme Court of the United States voted along partisan lines.  It became a game, which was not about truth, not about the will of the american people, but a game to see which party could bend the process in their favor.  I do not look upon this president with confidence as to his legitimacy, because being at ground zero I saw a lot of details, many or which were quite ugly.  I wish Bush had won an untained victory, or else that Gore had won decisively.  People were very divided due to this election.  It brought out the worst in some.  It revealed just how partisan people are, even (I thought) open-minded people.  It made me realize that it's not really about truth or fairness or justice, it's just about winning.  I thought I was on another sort of planet than this until the election of 2000.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I live in Florida and was working from home at the time, so I was tuned in (with avid interest) to the election developments every day, all day long.  It is due to the twisting of laws and arbitrary decisions (which happened to seem VERY partisan) as well as whole blocks of voters that were prevented or impaired from voting (poor, black most notably, and elderly also) that my confidence in the election process plummeted.  Even the Supreme Court of the United States voted along partisan lines.  It became a game, which was not about truth, not about the will of the american people, but a game to see which party could bend the process in their favor.  I do not look upon this president with confidence as to his legitimacy, because being at ground zero I saw a lot of details, many or which were quite ugly.  I wish Bush had won an untained victory, or else that Gore had won decisively.  People were very divided due to this election.  It brought out the worst in some.  It revealed just how partisan people are, even (I thought) open-minded people.  It made me realize that it's not really about truth or fairness or justice, it's just about winning.  I thought I was on another sort of planet than this until the election of 2000.

TROLL ALERT!

[Florida]

Thank you for the charming label.  What does it mean?  Is it an acronym?  Yea, I suppose continually seeking fairness, defence of the underdog, Truth, due process and Justice don't seem very Republican THESE days since the party's leadership has pulled it way to the right (which I certainly DO disapprove of).  But I hold out the hope that my party WILL return to the more moderate values it had at the time of Lincoln and I have met several Republicans who also do.  I could never bring myself to register as a democrat, don't want to be excluded from voting in the primaries by being an independant.  So I'm staying Republican primarily because I am firmly for fiscal and personal responsibility, and against the government's interference in my life and my choices.  I'm not afraid to stand up for what I believe in, whatever label you choose to put upon me.  I hope I never crystallize to the point that I toe ANY political ideology wholesale, to the denigration of other points of view.  Or, is that what this game is about?  If so, I don't want to play it.

You see, jmfcst, if you cannot look at your own value system and shine light upon its flaws, it owns YOU, you do not own IT.  As for me, I will continue to examine what I see and hear and even believe.  I will continue to be irreverant when people take their ideologies so seriously that they try to impose them upon me, whether democrat, republican, green, libertarian, or any others.  AND I will make my own choices, regardless of what people try to tell me to believe.....it's what America was founded on.  Nonetheless, in order to avoid labels and engage in MEANINGFUL AND UNDISTRACTED DIALOG with the right, left and center, I will change, for this forum, my status to 'independent' since that is, after all, the mindset I have.  There's enough contentiousness here and everywhere without people engaging in knee-jerk name-calling, for ANY reason.

[JohnFKennedy]

Thank you for the charming label.  What does it mean?  Is it an acronym?  Yea, I suppose continually seeking fairness, defence of the underdog, Truth, due process and Justice don't seem very Republican THESE days since the party's leadership has pulled it way to the right (which I certainly DO disapprove of).  But I hold out the hope that my party WILL return to the more moderate values it had at the time of Lincoln and I have met several Republicans who also do.  I could never bring myself to register as a democrat, don't want to be excluded from voting in the primaries by being an independant.  So I'm staying Republican primarily because I am firmly for fiscal and personal responsibility, and against the government's interference in my life and my choices.  I'm not afraid to stand up for what I believe in, whatever label you choose to put upon me.  I hope I never crystallize to the point that I toe ANY political ideology wholesale, to the denigration of other points of view.  Or, is that what this game is about?  If so, I don't want to play it.

You see, jmfcst, if you cannot look at your own value system and shine light upon its flaws, it owns YOU, you do not own IT.  As for me, I will continue to examine what I see and hear and even believe.  I will continue to be irreverant when people take their ideologies so seriously that they try to impose them upon me, whether democrat, republican, green, libertarian, or any others.  AND I will make my own choices, regardless of what people try to tell me to believe.....it's what America was founded on.  Nonetheless, in order to avoid labels and engage in MEANINGFUL AND UNDISTRACTED DIALOG with the right, left and center, I will change, for this forum, my status to 'independent' since that is, after all, the mindset I have.  There's enough contentiousness here and everywhere without people engaging in knee-jerk name-calling, for ANY reason.

Trolls are generally people who come to a forum to engage in less civil discussions shall we say.

People who come along to make stupid partisan comments or make a mockery of the place.

You Florida, are not a troll.

[© tweed]

I don't think Florida is a troll

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Thank you for the charming label.  

Your state moniker is now green, it was blue when I made that comment.