Al Gore challenged the 2000 election, leading to nasty feelings that survive to this day

[Blackrook]

Al Gore challenged the 2000 election, leading to nasty feelings that survive to this day.

The problem started when the networks started calling Florida for Al Gore, based on polls closing in the eastern seaboard part of the state. But the panhandle is in Central Time, and the polls were still open. The Bush team called the networks and told them their predictions of a Florida victory for Gore were premature.

And then it turned out that Bush won Florida, by a wafer-thin margin of some 600 votes. And that decided the election.

Al Gore insisted that he had won the popular vote, and therefore Bush should concede the election. I watched him do this on national TV and the reporter looked at him with disgust. Gore was being a sore loser, a man who knew the Electoral College was the way the Constitution set up the Presidential election, but then demanded a rule change when he didn't win that way.

Al Gore, refusing to concede an election he had lost fair and square, challenged the count in four prescincts, all controlled by the Democratic Party, where he knew the Democratic Party could control the recount. A farcical process followed, whereby paper ballots were analyzed for "hanging chads" and other proof that the ballots had been counted wrong.

The Florida Supreme Court got involved. Bush asked them to put an end to the recount so that a winner could be declared but they refused. So then the United States Supreme Court stepped in, and put an end to it.

Democrats since then have insisted that Bush "stole the election" and this created a toxic atmosphere in Washington that lasted throughout the Bush administration.

The media paid for another recount, but when they finally counted up the votes and found out Bush did actually win the election, they buried the results to perpetuate the lie that Bush did not actually win the election.

For Democrats to attack Trump NOW, for saying he might challenge this election if he loses, as some sort of threat to the American Way of Life, Mom, and Apple Pie, is the height of hypocrisy. They obviously expect the media to NOT remind the American people that the Democrats did this just 16 years ago, and maybe they think the American people are too stupid to remember.

 

[Mac1958]

If Trump challenges it, it may be on perfectly reasonable grounds.

Or it may because he has the temperament and personality of a spoiled, petulant 15-year old boy.

And he is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime about whom I can say that.
.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Al Gore challenged the 2000 election, leading to nasty feelings that survive to this day.

The problem started when the networks started calling Florida for Al Gore, based on polls closing in the eastern seaboard part of the state. But the panhandle is in Central Time, and the polls were still open. The Bush team called the networks and told them their predictions of a Florida victory for Gore were premature.

And then it turned out that Bush won Florida, by a wafer-thin margin of some 600 votes. And that decided the election.

Al Gore insisted that he had won the popular vote, and therefore Bush should concede the election. I watched him do this on national TV and the reporter looked at him with disgust. Gore was being a sore loser, a man who knew the Electoral College was the way the Constitution set up the Presidential election, but then demanded a rule change when he didn't win that way.

Al Gore, refusing to concede an election he had lost fair and square, challenged the count in four prescincts, all controlled by the Democratic Party, where he knew the Democratic Party could control the recount. A farcical process followed, whereby paper ballots were analyzed for "hanging chads" and other proof that the ballots had been counted wrong.

The Florida Supreme Court got involved. Bush asked them to put an end to the recount so that a winner could be declared but they refused. So then the United States Supreme Court stepped in, and put an end to it.

Democrats since then have insisted that Bush "stole the election" and this created a toxic atmosphere in Washington that lasted throughout the Bush administration.

The media paid for another recount, but when they finally counted up the votes and found out Bush did actually win the election, they buried the results to perpetuate the lie that Bush did not actually win the election.

For Democrats to attack Trump NOW, for saying he might challenge this election if he loses, as some sort of threat to the American Way of Life, Mom, and Apple Pie, is the height of hypocrisy. They obviously expect the media to NOT remind the American people that the Democrats did this just 16 years ago, and maybe they think the American people are too stupid to remember.

Indeed. After that, the Democrats removed their American masks.

 

[Blackrook]

If Trump challenges it, it may be on perfectly reasonable grounds.

Or it may because he has the temperament and personality of a spoiled, petulant 15-year old boy.

And he is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime about whom I can say that.
.

No, you could say the same about Al Gore. I remember his childish antics during the debates, where his trick would be to sneak up behind someone and stand very close to them. He tried this on Bush, and it backfired:

 

[Mac1958]

If Trump challenges it, it may be on perfectly reasonable grounds.

Or it may because he has the temperament and personality of a spoiled, petulant 15-year old boy.

And he is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime about whom I can say that.
.

No, you could say the same about Al Gore. I remember his childish antics during the debates, where his trick would be to sneak up behind someone and stand very close to them. He tried this on Bush, and it backfired:

Well sure, that was certainly on par with Trump talking about the size of his dick during a nationally-televised presidential debate.

The Comprehensive Guide To Trump's Most Outrageous Statements | Huffington Post
.

 

[Pogo]

Al Gore insisted that he had won the popular vote, and therefore Bush should concede the election. I watched him do this on national TV and the reporter looked at him with disgust. Gore was being a sore loser, a man who knew the Electoral College was the way the Constitution set up the Presidential election, but then demanded a rule change when he didn't win that way.

Izzat so.

Link?

Are you aware that Al Gore, as the still-sitting vice-president, squashed a protest attempt in the House to award him the Presidency when it came time to certify the vote? Apparently not.

Al Gore, refusing to concede an election he had lost fair and square, challenged the count in four prescincts, all controlled by the Democratic Party, where he knew the Democratic Party could control the recount. A farcical process followed, whereby paper ballots were analyzed for "hanging chads" and other proof that the ballots had been counted wrong.

Actually the state laws of Florida required a recount because of the narrow margin. It's routine.

The Florida Supreme Court got involved. Bush asked them to put an end to the recount so that a winner could be declared but they refused.

You ah, can't declare a winner if you haven't counted the votes. Think about it. Linear time.

So then the United States Supreme Court stepped in, and put an end to it.

Oh yes, the Court with two justices carrying Bush-related conflict-of-interest baggage. Yup I do remember that.

Democrats since then have insisted that Bush "stole the election" and this created a toxic atmosphere in Washington that lasted throughout the Bush administration.

Ever hear of "Iraq"?

For Democrats to attack Trump NOW, for saying he might challenge this election if he loses, as some sort of threat to the American Way of Life, Mom, and Apple Pie, is the height of hypocrisy.

Actually it's the height if illiteracy because Rump never referred to "challenging" an election result. You can't "challenge" a vote that hasn't happened yet (again -- linear time). What he called into question was whether he would accept the decision of the electorate. Which in no way refers to challenging a vote count. In order to challenge a vote count (as in Bush v. Gore), you kinda have to first HAVE a vote --- and THEN it has to be a close one. Neither is the case today.

Now if Al Gore had gone "OK I know the Electoral College voted in the other guy but I don't accept it and I should be President" --- then you'd have (the beginnings of) a valid comparison.

Amirite, President Gore?

 

[TooTall]

If Trump challenges it, it may be on perfectly reasonable grounds.

Or it may because he has the temperament and personality of a spoiled, petulant 15-year old boy.

And he is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime about whom I can say that.
.

You weren't paying attention to Obama and his whining about everything that went wrong was George Bush's fault. And that went on for at least 4 years.

 

[Mac1958]

If Trump challenges it, it may be on perfectly reasonable grounds.

Or it may because he has the temperament and personality of a spoiled, petulant 15-year old boy.

And he is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime about whom I can say that.
.

You weren't paying attention to Obama and his whining about everything that went wrong was George Bush's fault. And that went on for at least 4 years.

Comparing the public behaviors of those two men couldn't provide a clearer contrast.

Trump's fans love his behavior - the attacks, the insults, the name-calling, the non-stop hyperbole.

Obama is the opposite of that, and I think we all know it.
.

 

[TooTall]

If Trump challenges it, it may be on perfectly reasonable grounds.

Or it may because he has the temperament and personality of a spoiled, petulant 15-year old boy.

And he is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime about whom I can say that.
.

You weren't paying attention to Obama and his whining about everything that went wrong was George Bush's fault. And that went on for at least 4 years.

Comparing the public behaviors of those two men couldn't provide a clearer contrast.

Trump's fans love his behavior - the attacks, the insults, the name-calling, the non-stop hyperbole.

Obama is the opposite of that, and I think we all know it.
.

Obama is like a petulant child. Google "Obama being petulant" and read it for yourself.

 

[MarathonMike]

Contrast what Gore did in 2000 to the class that Nixon showed in the 1960 elections when he was presented with clear evidence of voter tampering. He chose not to challenge the results as opposed to Al Gore who raised all kinds of stink but who thankfully lost. He later proved what a total dick he is with his fraudulent movie and ultimate sellout to Al-Jazeera.

 

[Mac1958]

If Trump challenges it, it may be on perfectly reasonable grounds.

Or it may because he has the temperament and personality of a spoiled, petulant 15-year old boy.

And he is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime about whom I can say that.
.

You weren't paying attention to Obama and his whining about everything that went wrong was George Bush's fault. And that went on for at least 4 years.

Comparing the public behaviors of those two men couldn't provide a clearer contrast.

Trump's fans love his behavior - the attacks, the insults, the name-calling, the non-stop hyperbole.

Obama is the opposite of that, and I think we all know it.
.

Obama is like a petulant child.

Indeed, Barack Obama could only aspire to the mature, even-tempered, stable, intellectually elastic, elegant, refined, stately, somber, dignified, articulate, reserved, distinguished, presidential and inspirational public image of Donald Trump.

Ya got me there.
.

 

[AntonToo]

If Trump challenges it, it may be on perfectly reasonable grounds.

Or it may because he has the temperament and personality of a spoiled, petulant 15-year old boy.

And he is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime about whom I can say that.
.

You weren't paying attention to Obama and his whining about everything that went wrong was George Bush's fault. And that went on for at least 4 years.

The egregious whining I've seen was from Republicans who refuse to accept that Bush was a president for 8 years and affected the world beyond his stay in office. According to them the clock rewinded back to 2000 at midnight on Jan 21 2009.

Great Recession on Jan 22 2009 ? OBAMA-DID-IT DONCHA-KNOW!!!

 

[tinydancer]

Don't forget those that claimed that Kerry won and had his election stolen.

But now boo hoo they slam Trump. Hypocrisy thy name is liberal.

Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall
In 2006, Marshall accused the Ohio secretary of State of helping to steal the 2004 election in favor of Bush. Now, he says Trump’s claims of election-rigging are “disgusting.”


Trump's wholesale effort to discredit the US election process is truly unprecedented and frankly disgusting, an assault on who we are.

— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) October 18, 2016

8 Times Liberals Claimed An Election Was Stolen Or Rigged

 

[L.K.Eder]

Al Gore challenged the 2000 election, leading to nasty feelings that survive to this day.

The problem started when the networks started calling Florida for Al Gore, based on polls closing in the eastern seaboard part of the state. But the panhandle is in Central Time, and the polls were still open. The Bush team called the networks and told them their predictions of a Florida victory for Gore were premature.

And then it turned out that Bush won Florida, by a wafer-thin margin of some 600 votes. And that decided the election.

Al Gore insisted that he had won the popular vote, and therefore Bush should concede the election. I watched him do this on national TV and the reporter looked at him with disgust. Gore was being a sore loser, a man who knew the Electoral College was the way the Constitution set up the Presidential election, but then demanded a rule change when he didn't win that way.

Al Gore, refusing to concede an election he had lost fair and square, challenged the count in four prescincts, all controlled by the Democratic Party, where he knew the Democratic Party could control the recount. A farcical process followed, whereby paper ballots were analyzed for "hanging chads" and other proof that the ballots had been counted wrong.

The Florida Supreme Court got involved. Bush asked them to put an end to the recount so that a winner could be declared but they refused. So then the United States Supreme Court stepped in, and put an end to it.

Democrats since then have insisted that Bush "stole the election" and this created a toxic atmosphere in Washington that lasted throughout the Bush administration.

The media paid for another recount, but when they finally counted up the votes and found out Bush did actually win the election, they buried the results to perpetuate the lie that Bush did not actually win the election.

For Democrats to attack Trump NOW, for saying he might challenge this election if he loses, as some sort of threat to the American Way of Life, Mom, and Apple Pie, is the height of hypocrisy. They obviously expect the media to NOT remind the American people that the Democrats did this just 16 years ago, and maybe they think the American people are too stupid to remember.

i somehow doubt the veracity of your tale, i am afraid, guvnor.

you need to support your lore with at least factoids.

 

[Pogo]

Contrast what Gore did in 2000 to the class that Nixon showed in the 1960 elections when he was presented with clear evidence of voter tampering. He chose not to challenge the results as opposed to Al Gore who raised all kinds of stink but who thankfully lost.

The issue in 2000 was what the actual vote count was --- not whether the result would be accepted.

Are y'all deliberately playing stupid? Is that what today's briefing dictated?

He later proved what a total dick he is with his fraudulent movie and ultimate sellout to Al-Jazeera.

So you're against capitalism huh?

What should he have done --- just give the network away?

 

[Pogo]

Don't forget those that claimed that Kerry won and had his election stolen.

Link to John Kerry declaring he would not accept the outcome is ..... where?


Hello?


Guess not.

 

[TooTall]

If Trump challenges it, it may be on perfectly reasonable grounds.

Or it may because he has the temperament and personality of a spoiled, petulant 15-year old boy.

And he is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime about whom I can say that.
.

You weren't paying attention to Obama and his whining about everything that went wrong was George Bush's fault. And that went on for at least 4 years.

The egregious whining I've seen was from Republicans who refuse to accept that Bush was a president for 8 years and affected the world beyond his stay in office. According to them the clock rewinded back to 2000 at midnight on Jan 21 2009.

Great Recession on Jan 22 2009 ? OBAMA-DID-IT DONCHA-KNOW!!!

Bush continued the housing policies that were put in place by Clinton and that was his mistake. He then gave Obama TARP to fix the problem and Obama pissed it away on green energy programs and then laughed when asked about all of those shovel ready jobs that weren't there.

 

[Avatar4321]

We should not even be talking about this until there is evidence of voting impropriety and the votes are counted.

 

[Pogo]

We should not even be talking about this until there is evidence of voting impropriety and the votes are counted.

Evidently the marching orders for today are to pretend not to understand the difference between challenging the final close count of a vote that has taken place, and petulantly declaring one won't accept a future result if one doesn't win.

It's called "playing stupid".

 

[AntonToo]

Bush continued the housing policies that were put in place by Clinton and that was his mistake. He then gave Obama TARP to fix the problem and Obama pissed it away on green energy programs and then laughed when asked about all of those shovel ready jobs that weren't there.

Much ignorance there.

1. CRA was put in place in 1977, revised during Clinton and was way down in scope before real estate exploded. It was looked into and the link wan't found, meaning in areas covered by program there were not more foreclosures than non-CRA mortgages.

Most economists attribute GR first and foremost to market exuberance and widespread risk management failures. In English that means real estate was commonly thought of fool-proof investment to be leveraged to no end by fancy financial instruments...and then reality proved that it wasn't.

2. TARP worked more or less as intended, likely preventing widespread financial sector collapse and in the end cost the tax payers. Original 700 billion price tag turned out to be actually around ~30 billion dollar net expense to Federal government after financial institutions have repaid most of it (with interest)

3. The "Green programs" were not part of TARP they were part ARRA aka. Stimulus. The fact that some projects had some delay in implementation (referred to as "not shovel ready") , doesn't mean they didn't happen. They did, even if half a year or year later, in 2011-2012.