DEAD issue, I know. But...

[Scourge]

Anyone understand the whole electoral college vs popular vote thing?
And the Supreme court's ability to mediate/intervene?
Basically the Bush/Gore/Florida/Jeb/Katharine Harris/CHAD fiasco.

 

[wonderwench]

Sore Loserman.

End of Story.

 

[5stringJeff]

There's a book out there called "36 Days." It's all of the New York Times coverage of the election/recount fiasco. I recommend reading it. It will answer all your questions about what happened, when, and usually why. It also has the bonus of being written at the time, as it happened, which cuts down on the spin.

But, in short, the SCOTUS halted the recounts that the FLSC ordered, because it found those recounts to be against Florida state law.

 

[Zhukov]

We have a federal government. This federal government is an agreement between states. Therefore states have rights. The number of representatives in a state are based a state's population, and the number of votes a state can submit in an election is based on its population. Each state decides for itself which candidate it wants to send to the Federal Government. It elects its own senators independent of other states, and it makes it's decision about which presidential candidate it wishes to support independent of other states. This ensures that the wishes of smaller states are not ignored in favor of larger states. Afterall, in a popular contest, a presidential candidate could concentrate on three cities, in the three more populous states. How fair would that be to the 47 other states?

 

[Zhukov]

As far as the Supreme Courts role to mediate. I believe that that was unprecedented.

There was a vote in Florida and Bush won. It was within a 1% margin to require a recount. Bush won that. The opposition did not like that result and sued. The Supreme Court decided, as I understand it, to involve themselves as little as possible, as they felt it was a matter left to that individual state. I haven't read the whole Supreme Court decision, but they more or less agreed to just uphold the returns they received and not allow an unhealthy precedent to be set wherein every loser in every election would try to sue forever after.

 

[MtnBiker]

Originally posted by Zhukov
This ensures that the wishes of smaller states are not ignored in favor of larger states. Afterall, in a popular contest, a presidential candidate could concentrate on three cities, in the three more populous states. How fair would that be to the 47 other states?

Thank you Zhukov, well put.

 

[William Joyce]

Bush v. Gore was a lawsuit filed by George W. Bush against Al Gore for a recount of votes in the state of Florida.

Now, those out there who actually understand the Constitution - which is about 6 percent of liberals and maybe 8 percent of conservatives, if I'm being generous - might wonder: how does a federal court have jurisdiction over Florida's business?

Answer: It doesn't.

So Team Bush had to think of some way to get the case into federal court, instead of state court, where it belonged. Hmmm. What to do, what to do? Getting into federal court requires that you plead a federal cause of action. To do that, one place to look is ol' Curly, our Constitution.

Team Bush said, "equal protection, in the 14th Amendment." Huh? An amendment ostensibly created for racial stuff? Yeah. See, the idea was that because some counties might have counted right and others wrong, the voters of Florida were "denied equal protection."

"But wait, William. That's absurd. I mean, I realize you're a racist guy and all that, but doesn't it strike you as odd that a white candidate would sue using THAT as his complaint?"

And, yes, you'd be right. The irony is, well, pretty iron.

But it worked.

Constitutional freebie: NOTHING IN THE CONSTITUTION GUARANTEES YOU THE RIGHT TO VOTE. OK, it's kind of a trick, but it's true. Anyone feel lucky enough to challenge me on that one?

 

[Zhukov]

On November 27, Vice President Gore, pursuant to Florida’s contest provisions, filed a complaint in Leon County Circuit Court contesting the certification.

http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-949.ZPC.html

I just want it stated that it was Gore who originally brought the courts into it.

The Circuit Court denied relief, stating that Vice President Gore failed to meet his burden of proof. He appealed to the First District Court of Appeal, which certified the matter to the Florida Supreme Court.

 

[William Joyce]

Yes, correct. Sorry. But "equal protection" was the claim that Bush stood on.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by William Joyce
But "equal protection" was the claim that Bush stood on.

I would think you would appreciate a white man using the jew's tool against them. But of course Bush is just another jew puppet right?

However, wouldn't he be the lesser-jewish-puppet of the two? After all the other guy had a jew one heart beat away. That whole period must have scared the bejesus out of you.

 

[Avatar4321]

Im so glad we had the electorial college. If we didnt our nation would have been destroyed in 2000. There would have been recount after recount in ever precinct in every state trying to find votes for either side.

I still havent bought the argument that Gore won the popular vote because all of the popular vote wasnt counted. The Election was close enough that the uncounted absentee ballots that wouldnt have mattered in making a state swtich its votes could have easily pushed the popular vote in either directions.

Thats why its so nice that our Founders were so inspired.

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
I still havent bought the argument that Gore won the popular vote

Neither have I as the difference in popular vote counts was, I believe, about 1% and there was a 3% margin of error.

That's a damn close election between 100 million people.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I would like to see Joe Lieberman question on this election 2000 issue. I wonder if he would look into the camera and lie. Poor Joe Lieberman, the only decent democrat left, and he's ridiculed by his party. I'll never forget "Joementum".

 

[William Joyce]

"That whole period must have scared the bejesus out of you."

The tribe ain't worried, Zook. Both parties are under control; doesn't matter who wins.

 

[Zhukov]

Zhook

 

[William Joyce]

Zhook, very well.

 

[Scourge]

Originally posted by Zhukov
We have a federal government. This federal government is an agreement between states. Therefore states have rights. The number of representatives in a state are based a state's population, and the number of votes a state can submit in an election is based on its population. Each state decides for itself which candidate it wants to send to the Federal Government. It elects its own senators independent of other states, and it makes it's decision about which presidential candidate it wishes to support independent of other states. This ensures that the wishes of smaller states are not ignored in favor of larger states. Afterall, in a popular contest, a presidential candidate could concentrate on three cities, in the three more populous states. How fair would that be to the 47 other states?

I kind of understand... each state has one vote? or is it more for more populous states? And really, every single person gets affected by the outcome, no matter what state they live in, so just having a popular vote would actually be MORE representative. Otherwise, people in less populated states have votes that are worth more than votes from huge states...

 

[MtnBiker]

Scourge
Check out this thread maybe it will help answer some of your questions.

BTW, just curious, why did you pose your question in the anti-usa section?

 

[Zhukov]

Originally posted by Scourge
I kind of understand... each state has one vote? or is it more for more populous states? And really, every single person gets affected by the outcome, no matter what state they live in, so just having a popular vote would actually be MORE representative. Otherwise, people in less populated states have votes that are worth more than votes from huge states...

We don't live in a full democracy. We live in a republic that is a federation of states. States submit a number of votes proportional to their populations, and each state is a winner take all. It actually makes each individual vote more important. Instead of my vote just being one in around 100 million it's actually one in maybe 4 million to give one candidate 21 (i think) electoral votes.

Again the point is the States are voting for President, not individual people.

 

[Zhukov]

Incidentally, this is why presidential election polls are not neccesarily representative of reality unless they are a collection of 50 constituent polls, one in each state.