[
Americans responded to elections being stolen.....
Must be a reason that situation hits a nerve with you, ErroneousJoe.....
YOu mean like when that scumwad George W. Bush stole the election in 2000?
That kind of stealing of an election?
So let's review. A bunch of drunks didn't like being rousted. They ran an alternative slate. When the election didn't go their way, they used guns and violence, until state officials stepped in and let them have their way. (I'm really sure the drunks took good care of those ballots).
When the drunks sobered up, they found they didn't have jack diddly squat of a clue how to actually run a government. The professionals found jobs elsewhere, and the drunks went home.
Wow. Awesome. This is like the Teabagger fantasy, isn't it.
I love making you look like a fool....
"YOu mean like when that scumwad George W. Bush stole the election in 2000?"
Let's just see to whom that appellation truly belongs....
1. "In the first full study of Florida's ballots since the election ended,
The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin if the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court would have been allowed to continue, using standards that would have allowed even faintly dimpled "undervotes" -- ballots the voter has noticeably indented but had not punched all the way through -- to be counted.
Redirect
That was pbs.
2. The lead of an April 4, 2001 USA Today story headlined, Newspapers' recount shows
Bush prevailed, by reporter Dennis Cauchon:
George W. Bush would have won a hand count of Florida's disputed ballots if the standard advocated by Al Gore had been used, the first full study of the ballots reveals. Bush would have won by 1,665 votes -- more than triple his official 537-vote margin -- if every dimple, hanging chad and mark on the ballots had been counted as votes, a USA TODAY/Miami Herald/Knight Ridder study shows. The study is the first comprehensive review of the 61,195 "undervote" ballots that were at the center of Florida's disputed presidential election....
That was USAToday....
3.
New York Times headline clearly stated, "Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote,
Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote - NYTimes.com
NYTimes.
4. "An exhaustive review of last year's disputed presidential election in Florida indicates that
George W. Bush still would have defeated Al Gore even if Mr. Gore had been granted the limited vote recounts he was seeking. Several U.S. news organizations consider the study the final word on the 2000 presidential election.
The study found that even if Al Gore had won the right to limited recounts in Florida, he still
would have lost to Mr. Bush by at least 200 votes. The official results gave Mr. Bush a 537 vote victory."
http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2001-11/a-2001-11-12-4-Newspaper.cfm?moddate=2001-11-12
That was Voice of America.
This must be why you are known as ErroneousJoe.
Now...since I don't use the same language that you do.....could I simply call you a moron?
Should I really reach down and use 'syphilitic idiot'?
What?
What are you yelling?
"Uncle"?
Is that it...you're yelling uncle?