We live in a Kakistocracy

I would like you to go back and look at how many times you attempted to insult me by calling me too stupid to understand the information?

Then realise I never did the same.
 
If the election had NOT disenfranchised thousand of voters with a fake felons list which was designed to knock off black voters ,if the butterfly ballot had been designed correctly(it would only take one of these things corrected) Gore would have won the election.

Now what standerd do you wat to stand by?

True democracy without foul play

or

An election were LEGAL voters were kept from voting with intent?

What party officials designed, approved and used the ballots you are claiming caused the problem?
 
The Florida Supreme Court did order a recount for the entire state.

The usa supreme court illegally stopped that recount according to our Constitution and most all legal scholars and Constitutionalists out there.

As the quote above says, Gore would have won this recount according to those same people that are being used to say that Bush won the recount or elcetion in the 3 chosen Gore counties....

There were over 60,000 PEOPLE eliminated from voting THAT WERE NOT FELONS I think I have read, but their names were close to the names on this extensive list of felon names and "near miss" felon names.

katherine harris paid a company from texas $4 million dollars to come up with this extensive felon list....when it had only cost the state $200,000 to pay for this "felon" list from a different information gathering company the previous election....that should bring some inquisitiveness to the average joe, don't you think?

I have read that the list was over 120,000 names long and that even the supervisor of elections (R) in one district was bannished from voting because her name was on the list....that is when she threw this felon list out for her district and complained to Katherine harris about it....nothing was done...even when the company supplying this extensive list with many, many names that were not those of convicted felons on it TOLD Katherine Harris that there were many FALSE positives of felons that were still on the list....K Harris still used this mostly fake list.

Many legal voters were disenfranchised, there is no question on this from all the studies and reports that I have read on it.

One could assume if they were felons, as Gunny has said, that they would probably be voting more Democratic than for Republicans, HOWEVER, these were regular citizens that had the same name as a felon, even if the middle initial differed, or people that had names that were similar to a felon's name that were prevented from voting and we can't necessarily presume that they would have voted more for Gore over Bush imo....

though I would Imagine if Florida's felon's list is similar to their prison population as far as race is concerned, there were probably many more black Americans disproportionately disenfranchised because their names were familiar or similar to their felon list.

Care

When was the Supreme Court capable of acting unconstitutionally? I missed that one. Sure the ruling can be set aside in the future, but has not been. If and when it is, still won't be considered unconstitutional, just made moot by new precedent or something along those lines.
 
Reread the link it does not say they can show Gore would have won, they said if certain standards had been used he would have won based on a count of only 60000 ballots.
 
What party officials designed, approved and used the ballots you are claiming caused the problem?


the felons list was engineered to disenfranchise.

The man who developed the list for Harris warned her that the list was way to broad ad would illiminate alot of lega voters and she said it was what she wanted.

It was all in the links I gave you but you refused to read them.
 
If the election had NOT disenfranchised thousand of voters with a fake felons list which was designed to knock off black voters ,if the butterfly ballot had been designed correctly(it would only take one of these things corrected) Gore would have won the election.

Now what standerd do you wat to stand by?

True democracy without foul play

or

An election were LEGAL voters were kept from voting with intent?

Truly I'm beginning to think you are just a silly troll, wanting to argue an election decided over 6 years ago.
 
When was the Supreme Court capable of acting unconstitutionally? I missed that one. Sure the ruling can be set aside in the future, but has not been. If and when it is, still won't be considered unconstitutional, just made moot by new precedent or something along those lines.



when they go against the constitution
 
The full quote would be as follows ...

Following the election, recounts conducted by various United States news media organizations indicated that Bush would have won if certain recounting methods had been used (including the one favored by Gore at the time of the Supreme Court decision) but that Gore would have won had a full state-wide recount been conducted. [14]

from http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cach...ing&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us&client=firefox-a

This does not say what Care is implying it says. A full recount with uniform acceptable standards would not have resulted ina Gore win. Only by allowing loose standards that allow illegal votes to count would he have won.

It also is JUST an opinion, no link to actual numbers, not even a claim that these "organizations" actually recounted every ballot.
 
When was the Supreme Court capable of acting unconstitutionally? I missed that one. Sure the ruling can be set aside in the future, but has not been. If and when it is, still won't be considered unconstitutional, just made moot by new precedent or something along those lines.

The Supreme Court IS NOT above the Constitution, since when were they EVER above the constitution?

Their actions on this matter was unconstitutional in every manner and as I have said, Constitutional Scholars have said such....even some of the justices have said such....

This was a States Issue and the Florida Supreme Court was the final arbitrator according to our constitution when it involves an election, and yes, even a federal election.

There are provisions writen in to our constitution that tell us exactly what we are suppose to do in a disputed federal election and the Republicans did everything they could to subvert them, and they succeeded.

Again, this is just another touchy issue that has lead to the divisiveness among us fellow Americans...imo.

Also, Supreme court Justices can also be impeached.....they do not have MORE power than any of the other two branches of government.
 
The Supreme Court IS NOT above the Constitution, since when were they EVER above the constitution?

Their actions on this matter was unconstitutional in every manner and as I have said, Constitutional Scholars have said such....even some of the justices have said such....

This was a States Issue and the Florida Supreme Court was the final arbitrator according to our constitution when it involves an election, and yes, even a federal election.

There are provisions writen in to our constitution that tell us exactly what we are suppose to do in a disputed federal election and the Republicans did everything they could to subvert them, and they succeeded.

Again, this is just another touchy issue that has lead to the divisiveness among us fellow Americans...imo.

Also, Supreme court Justices can also be impeached.....they do not have MORE power than any of the other two branches of government.

I repeat the Supreme Court is the final arbitor as to what is and is not Constitutional. This makes it IMPOSSIBLE for them to do anything Unconstitutional.

You don't like this? Work to create an amendment to the Constitution that specifically says this is not true.
 
The Supreme Court IS NOT above the Constitution, since when were they EVER above the constitution?

Their actions on this matter was unconstitutional in every manner and as I have said, Constitutional Scholars have said such....even some of the justices have said such....

This was a States Issue and the Florida Supreme Court was the final arbitrator according to our constitution when it involves an election, and yes, even a federal election.

There are provisions writen in to our constitution that tell us exactly what we are suppose to do in a disputed federal election and the Republicans did everything they could to subvert them, and they succeeded.

Again, this is just another touchy issue that has lead to the divisiveness among us fellow Americans...imo.

Also, Supreme court Justices can also be impeached.....they do not have MORE power than any of the other two branches of government.

Please explain this post to me and how the reasoning works? Where in the US Constitution is the mechanism for doing this? I mean judicial review allows the court to render law passed by Congress unconstitutional, but not itself.
 
Actually Gore NOT Bush tried to subvert Florida law. He was granted all recourse under the laws of Florida, he got a mandatory recount and he got to ask for and receive a hand recount where he wanted. He lost on both recounts.

Florida law was upheld. The Supreme Court of Florida chose to ignore Florida law for a partisan decision on party lines to allow more recounts and to allow those recounts to be influenced by personal opinion not law.

Read the SCOTUS decision. 7 of 9 Justices agreed it violated the 14th amendment to the Constitution. 5 of them understood there was no more time to recount. To continue would have ensured Florida was in its ENTIRETY disenfranchised because of federal law.
 

Forum List

Back
Top