Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: capt. apathy on September 15, 2003, 12:27:40 PM
-
just caught a news story that a Sacremento judge has blocked the recall election.
edit, aperently because of using punch card ballots. I guess their afraid of another florida situation.
-
Calif. recall blocked
Court postpones gubernatorial election
Federal appeals court rules historic vote cannot proceed as scheduled because some votes would be cast using outmoded punch-card ballot machines.
http://www.msnbc.com/news/default.asp?0ct=-34o
-
Aren't those the same voting machines Davis got elected with? Who wants to bet the judge is a Democrat?
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals :rolleyes:
-
How ****ing lame!
They where good enough for years.
-
It's Bushes fault again!!
LOL
-
And the DNC once again turns to judicial "activism" to get around state election laws. Here's hoping they get their crank slammed in the door like they did in 2000.
-
Originally posted by ra
Aren't those the same voting machines Davis got elected with? Who wants to bet the judge is a Democrat?
U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals :rolleyes:
exactly what I was going to say.
-
Justice prevails again!!!!
In 2000, the ACLU filed suit not only on behalf of Florida voters but also those in other states, including California. The state then agreed to update its voting machines by the March 2004 presidential primary.
"If the October election goes forward, we can predict with absolute certainty that every Californian's vote will not count," Mark Rosenbaum, legal director of the ACLU of Southern California, said in a statement. "Democracy in California should not hang by a chad."
-
At least the democrats there aren't running away to avoid doing their job.
Maybe being stuck with Davis for a while longer will help them to choose more wisely next time.
-
Ha!!! Double Ha!!!! I already voted!!!! (absentee ballot) DO you think they are going to count it?????? He!! no. Screw it, I am out of here Nov 14th, you liberal, left wing extreamist can have this state and all its pregnant Chads, and I'm not talking about the ballots! (Bay area) Good bye and good riddance to the left coast, aka the laughing stalk of the country.
-
The whole recall process is unconstitutional anyway.
-
I just skimmed over the ruling, which cites Bush v. Gore as precedent. That's amusing on so many levels.
-
Originally posted by Erlkonig
I just skimmed over the ruling, which cites Bush v. Gore as precedent. That's amusing on so many levels.
It's amusing on none, what the flect is happening to our country, is anyone concerned about the road we are going down.
Our leagle system is so out of control and partasin it really is broken.
-
Originally posted by Erlkonig
I just skimmed over the ruling, which cites Bush v. Gore as precedent. That's amusing on so many levels.
I heard that too. They are saying that if the SC overrules the 9th Circuit it will in essense be overturning the decision it made on the 2000 election.. LOL.
-
Originally posted by Erlkonig
I just skimmed over the ruling, which cites Bush v. Gore as precedent. That's amusing on so many levels.
it's amusing as there wasn't ever anything found wrong with the punch card machines except stupid voters and liberal whining
the machines had been used for years without issue - just a slick lib pulled a fast one in '00 and now pulling another one in CA...
-
I think the 9th knows exactly what they're doing... they've tossed this one up to the SC, the same court that made this mess.
-
Originally posted by medicboy
Ha!!! Double Ha!!!! I already voted!!!! (absentee ballot) DO you think they are going to count it?????? He!! no. Screw it, I am out of here Nov 14th, you liberal, left wing extreamist can have this state and all its pregnant Chads, and I'm not talking about the ballots! (Bay area) Good bye and good riddance to the left coast, aka the laughing stalk of the country.
Did you mean extremist and laughing stock?:lol
-
Erlkonig:
two things
1)why is it unconsitutional? (I assume you mean US Const.)
2)can you link to the ruling?
-
Originally posted by majic
Erlkonig:
two things
1)why is it unconsitutional? (I assume you mean US Const.)
2)can you link to the ruling?
I don't have a link, but IIRC, it's something about each vote having the same odds of being counted as any other vote.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
I heard that too. They are saying that if the SC overrules the 9th Circuit it will in essense be overturning the decision it made on the 2000 election.. LOL.
Nonsense. In both case the SC would tell the the lower court to stay the f* out of the election process. It is not their f* business. Not in Florida and not in CA.
-
Originally posted by rpm371
Did you mean extremist and laughing stock?:lol
Yes that's it! I never was that good at the english/lit stuff, I was a Science/math guy.:D
-
why are you surprised? the dems run the state... they allow us to vote for everything.... recalls, elections, propositions.... if they don't like the outcome tho.....
In this case... they weren't even gonna wait to be outvoted....it's the new trend in democratic politics.
lazs
-
It's politics...all of it.
If Californians want Davis to remain as their Gov...let them sleep in that bed...in the meantime, the rest of the country will simply watch.
My hope, was for a real leader to emerge as Californias economy has a direct effect on the nation.
Oh well....guess it's all about power and not about us...imagine that.
-
ra: Aren't those the same voting machines Davis got elected with?
As much as I would sympathise with the California Recall if it was any of my business and not their private state matter, the lies and misrepresentation the conservative mouthpieces pile up about the court's decision are embarrasing.
The court ruling was not that that the "punchcard" machines are too inaccurate.
The court ruling was that some counties will vote on (allegedely) much more accurate voting machines while others would use less accurate ones and their votes would not be equally counted - thus violating the Equal Protection clause.
When that scoundrel Davis was elected for his second term, all californians used the same machines and eqial protection principle was not violated.
I am surprised that nobody raised another issue.
The cali government undertook to replace all the old voting machines over the period of two years to be ready by the spring 2004 elections.
They could have supplied the new machines to all the counties and only then removed the old ones. Instead, they chose tp phase them out gradually.
If using machines of differing accuracy is unconstitutional, it means that California government seriously violated californians' constitution rights by denying them an ability to hold elections untill the machines were replaced.
If that government choses to delay the re-equipment indefinitely, no elections will be possible in the state of California and the government stays in power forever. Also, the governour will have to appoint the cali senators (but not house reps. - those are voted for within counties, so there will be the same machines used in each electoral district).
The government that cannot be re-elected is not a democratic government. The government that violated the Constitution to cause such situation - which equals to a coup - cannot be recognised as a legitimate government.
Could there be a clearer case for a federal government taking direct control of California untill their constitutional issues are sorted out?
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d
ra: Aren't those the same voting machines Davis got elected with?
Could there be a clearer case for a federal government taking direct control of California untill their constitutional issues are sorted out?
miko
How about involuntary secession instead?
-
Originally posted by miko2d
ra: Aren't those the same voting machines Davis got elected with?
I am surprised that nobody raised another issue.
The cali government undertook to replace all the old voting machines over the period of two years to be ready by the spring 2004 elections.
They could have supplied the new machines to all the counties and only then removed the old ones. Instead, they chose tp phase them out gradually.
If using machines of differing accuracy is unconstitutional, it means that California government seriously violated californians' constitution rights by denying them an ability to hold elections untill the machines were replaced.
If that government choses to delay the re-equipment indefinitely, no elections will be possible in the state of California and the government stays in power forever. Also, the governour will have to appoint the cali senators (but not house reps. - those are voted for within counties, so there will be the same machines used in each electoral district).
The government that cannot be re-elected is not a democratic government. The government that violated the Constitution to cause such situation - which equals to a coup - cannot be recognised as a legitimate government.
Could there be a clearer case for a federal government taking direct control of California untill their constitutional issues are sorted out?
miko
Good point, the Dems in charge must not want a fair vote, or the want an excuse is it doesent go their way.
Its not about whats good for the people , only about power. this seems to pe getting worse over the years.
The Dems used to be for the little guy years ago, sure not any more, they are loosing folks left and right.
They have compleately lost touch with the heart and soul of America, IMHO and a lot of others.
Sad really, we need a strong two party system.
-
if davis was elected by counting votes on inaccurat machines, maybe he wasn't elected after all...
i want a recount...