Author Topic: Dean gets ripped apart (Read 1615 times)

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #30 on:** January 13, 2004, 03:10:45 AM »

na a gerymanderd texan.

they split my district into 6 parts to break up the democrats.

there will be hell to pay.

Kieran · « **Reply #31 on:** January 13, 2004, 06:22:05 AM »

Who are you kidding LDV? The Dems have been doing it in Texas for over a hundred years! Darn right there's hell to pay, and you're paying it right now!

lazs2 · « **Reply #32 on:** January 13, 2004, 08:24:42 AM »

dorf vader... I would agree with a majority vote if women and non land owners were not allowed to vote.

lazs

Toad · « **Reply #33 on:** January 13, 2004, 09:11:57 AM »

Well, I guess there's Floridians AND Texans that still don't understand that "nationwide overall popular vote" and "Presidential Election" don't have an absolute connection on who wins the prize.

That Electoral College thing, you know.

MrCoffee · « **Reply #34 on:** January 13, 2004, 10:47:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maniac
Wes Clark indeed seems damn smart and straight forward.

I agree.

[size=10]Go Westley Clark[/size]

Gunslinger · « **Reply #35 on:** January 14, 2004, 09:08:41 AM »

Laz I still dont get this whole land owners thing. Not to create a side topic in this thread but just becaue I'm not wealthy enough to own land makes me less of a citizen than anyone else. I do agree woman should be tested or somthing be being able to vote. The dumb ones lose their right! lol

midnight Target · « **Reply #36 on:** January 14, 2004, 09:18:03 AM »

Bush's win in 2000 has less to do with the Electoral College than it does with the Supreme Court. There are very well placed legal minds in this Country who are convinced that the SC illegally handed the election to Bush. Read Vincent Bugliosi's book.

strk · « **Reply #37 on:** January 14, 2004, 09:22:05 AM »

Quote

very well placed legal minds in this Country who are convinced that the SC illegally handed the election to Bush

I thought that too but on the other hand, who do you complain to? The Supremes arent last because they are right, they are right because they are last. Noone can mess with their authority. When there are political partisans on the bench, crap happens!

strk

AKIron · « **Reply #38 on:** January 14, 2004, 09:31:48 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target
Bush's win in 2000 has less to do with the Electoral College than it does with the Supreme Court. There are very well placed legal minds in this Country who are convinced that the SC illegally handed the election to Bush. Read Vincent Bugliosi's book.

I've seen reports that Bush won every recount conducted, even long after the Supreme Court ruling that upheld Florida's ruling. So, how can you say anything would be different even if they were still counting today as so many would have had it?

Eagler · « **Reply #39 on:** January 14, 2004, 09:31:56 AM »

considering what has happened to this country since 12/2000, can you honestly say you would rather have had goron & his merry band of misfits at the controls???

Kieran · « **Reply #40 on:** January 14, 2004, 10:38:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target
Bush's win in 2000 has less to do with the Electoral College than it does with the Supreme Court. There are very well placed legal minds in this Country who are convinced that the SC illegally handed the election to Bush. Read Vincent Bugliosi's book.

Transverse is true, too. There are very well placed legal minds in this country who are convinced that the SC legally handled the case.

midnight Target · « **Reply #41 on:** January 14, 2004, 10:48:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
I've seen reports that Bush won every recount conducted, even long after the Supreme Court ruling that upheld Florida's ruling. So, how can you say anything would be different even if they were still counting today as so many would have had it?

That is irrelevent to the legality of their decision.

AKIron · « **Reply #42 on:** January 14, 2004, 10:51:39 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target
That is irrelevent to the legality of their decision.

Except that you tied it to Bush's win.

Toad · « **Reply #43 on:** January 14, 2004, 10:57:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by midnight Target
Bush's win in 2000 has less to do with the Electoral College than it does with the Supreme Court.

Agreed.

However, the continually touted "but Gore won the popular vote" whine is simply that. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with who won that election. Because Popular Vote has no independent standing in a Presidential election that is decided by a Constitutionally mandated Electoral College.

As for the Supremes, I'll defer partially to Strk

Quote

The Supremes arent last because they are right, they are right because they are last. Noone can mess with their authority.

The rest of his commentary is just that, personal opinion with a whiff of sour grapes.

All the brilliant legal minds in the country can say this or that or the other thing. However, our Constitution mandates that what the Supremes decide is the "correct" interpretation.

Note that I didn't say they are incapable of being wrong, just that when they decide, that's it, game/set/match. Until and unless a similar case reaches the Supremes and a change is made.

Munkii · « **Reply #44 on:** January 14, 2004, 02:13:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler
considering what has happened to this country since 12/2000, can you honestly say you would rather have had goron & his merry band of misfits at the controls???

This is an unanswerable question. Despite the obvious bias you hold we can treat this question as if it were asked by an undecided voter. In this situation, no one knows what would have happened if Gore had been elected instead. We cannot say with 100% certainty that the exact same courses of action that Bush has taken, would not have been taken by Gore. It's a rediculous assumption to say that you would be adamantly against Gore in office based upon his performance during the crisises after 12/2000.

Therefore, the past is in the past and cannot be changed. You can't ask someone if they would have rather, because I think everyone would have rather had gore in office, had everything play out.. then get to choose which history we live through. Otherwise, questions such as the one you pose is simply unanswerable, unless you are so deep in party rhetoric it ceases to become a question, and instead becomes the slogan for re-election. Vote Bush in '04 because he is a Republican and Democrats are smelly wusses.