Gore comes out of hiding

[Clutch]

Guess they haven't been able to slip as many forged votes in there as they need, so lame duck VP Al Gore has surfaced from the hole in the ground he's been hiding in to save our democracy.

Gore actually had the balls to say this was not about "the contest, but our democracy."

Huh?

Right.

------------------
NOTHING BUT .NET
CLUTCHCITY.NET (http://www.clutchcity.net)

[mrpaige]

Now comes the part where the Gore PR machine crucifies Katherine Harris. They know the law isn't on their side, so they'll engage in personal attacks against the person enforcing the law. Every political talk show tonight will have a Gore Operative taking shots at Harris and calling her intergrity into question simply because she read the law and wants to follow what the law says.

Interesting that when the question is about the partisanship of the County Canvassing Commission and their decisions, the answer is "so what if they're all Democrats". When the question becomes about the Secretary of State enforcing the law, it becomes a big deal that she's a Republican.

------------------
Houston Sports Board (http://www.houstonsportsboard.com)
The Anti-Bud Adams Page (http://www.antibud.com)


[This message has been edited by mrpaige (edited November 13, 2000).]

[Achebe]

Honestly though mrpaige, this lady is more than just a sec. of state. She made herself a pundit as soon as she started ardently campaigning for Al Gore in N.H., etc.

------------------
"Everyone I know has a big but...

come on Simone, let's talk about your but."

[mrpaige]

And, as it has been noted, the County Canvassing Commission in Palm Beach County is more than just a County Canvassing Commission.

If the only people who can make honest judegments based on the facts and the law are people who don't hold political office and hold no political opinions, then we need to throw out nearly every election official.

But apparently only Republicans cannot be trusted to separate their campaigning from their jobs. They're crucifying her because she followed the law as she and others understand it. The fact that she campaigned for Bush or that she has desires for higher office have no bearing on what the law says just as the fact that the Democrats that run Palm Beach County (some of whom aspire to higher office and may make decisions based on their biases) has no bearing on whether they followed the law or not.

They shouldn't resort to personal attacks just because they don't like the way the law is written.

------------------
Houston Sports Board (http://www.houstonsportsboard.com)
The Anti-Bud Adams Page (http://www.antibud.com)

[RocketMan Tex]

Relax, Clutch.

Bush & Gore are both pretty sloppy at trying to fix an election. Neither of them are sly and stealthy about it. They both use carpet-bombing, overkill techniques. It sure isn't like the old days.

If either of them was half as good as Lyndon Johnson or Richard Nixon were at fixing elections, the election would have been fixed, a winner would have been declared, and nobody would have heard a single thing about the election being rigged! http://bbs.clutchcity.net/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
I am the bastard son of LHutz.

Huh?

Right!

[Major]

Guess they haven't been able to slip as many forged votes in there as they need, so lame duck VP Al Gore has surfaced from the hole in the ground he's been hiding in to save our democracy.

As opposed to Bush constantly throwing around political rhetoric... Bush had the nerve to say hand counts are not accurate when he passed a law stating otherwise.

Both campaigns are serving their own interests. They are both doing it for personal gain. If you refuse to acknowledge that, then you're fooling yourself.

When the question becomes about the Secretary of State enforcing the law, it becomes a big deal that she's a Republican.

It's not that she's a Republican. It's that she's a personal friend of GW & Jeb Bush, head of the Florida GW Bush campaign, and may be in line for an ambassadorship under a Bush administration (this last part is unconfirmed at this point). Not coincidentally, every decision she has made thus far favors the Republican side. You don't think there's reason to at least suspect bias here?

------------------
Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

I didnt think so!!!!

[Major]

Interesting that when the question is about the partisanship of the County Canvassing Commission and their decisions, the answer is "so what if they're all Democrats".

Where did this come from? Republicans have accused one Democratic Canvass board member of switching votes and committing fraud. What do you call this? This is not a one-way street, as much as you might like it to be.

------------------
Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

I didnt think so!!!!

[SamCassell]

I think both candidates have come out smelling like turds on this one. Gore for challenging the results in select democratic counties only, and for the lawsuits/legal challenges. But Bush isn't showing presidential mettle either, because it looks like the Repubs are trying to quash the counting process by fixing too-early deadlines. And, by filing lawsuits themselves.

Both parties need to decide on a compromise, designed to ensure accuracy, and then live by it. How will Bush or Gore function for 4 years as a president when they can't even resolve this Florida fiasco?

------------------

[mrpaige]

Originally posted by shanna:
Interesting that when the question is about the partisanship of the County Canvassing Commission and their decisions, the answer is "so what if they're all Democrats".

Where did this come from? Republicans have accused one Democratic Canvass board member of switching votes and committing fraud. What do you call this? This is not a one-way street, as much as you might like it to be.



It was a comment on the answer from Democrats when the question is brought up. The Democrats defend one group as being able to do their job without letting their political bias interfere and then attacks a Republican essentially saying that it is impossble for her to do her job without letting her political bias interfere.

I didn't make a comment that it didn't go the other way. Why is that always a defense, by the way? The Democrats are allowed to be hypocritical because the Republicans are hypocritical? How about one side or the other steps out above the fray and holds a consistent position? Wouldn't that be nice for a change?

My specific statement was that the Democrats answer to the charge that the County Canvassing Commission were all Democrats was "so what?" yet now they want to crucify the Secretary of State because she is a Republican. Where is the "so what?" for her political position? The answer to that seems to be "But the other side does it, too", and to me, that's not an answer. If the other side jumped off a bridge......

------------------
Houston Sports Board (http://www.houstonsportsboard.com)
The Anti-Bud Adams Page (http://www.antibud.com)

[TraJ]

The deadlines were already in place. No ones trying to fix them; they're already there. The Republicans are however trying to uphold them. Are they doing so from completely pure motives? I doubt it. But I believe they do have the law on their side.

------------------

[mrpaige]

Originally posted by SamCassell:
But Bush isn't showing presidential mettle either, because it looks like the Repubs are trying to quash the counting process by fixing too-early deadlines.

Shouldn't the Florida State Legislature get the blame on this one. They did set the deadline by passing the law. Adhering to the process written into the law is not trying to quash the process. Trying to quash the process is more along the lines of going to court to get said law overturned.

The judge has clarified the law for everyone, but before he ruled, a reasonable person could've read that law and interpreted the deadline to be firm. The Secretary of State and her legal advisers did just that. It can't be trying to quash the process if you're trying to follow what you understand the process to be under the law.

The Federal lawsuit filed by Bush, on the other hand, would be more along the lines of trying to stop the process.

------------------
Houston Sports Board (http://www.houstonsportsboard.com)
The Anti-Bud Adams Page (http://www.antibud.com)

[mrpaige]

One thing is for sure, if the deadline for results is extended in Florida, the Bush campaign will likely ask for recounts in Wisconsin and Iowa (along with the already asked for recounts in New Mexico and Oregon).

It is more and more likely that the outcome of the election won't be known for 100% certainty until well into December (of course, December 13th is the Federal deadline, but I assume that one or the other campaign will argue that deadlines, rules and laws shouldn't matter in regard to that deadline).

------------------
Houston Sports Board (http://www.houstonsportsboard.com)
The Anti-Bud Adams Page (http://www.antibud.com)

[This message has been edited by mrpaige (edited November 15, 2000).]

[Pole]

yawn

------------------
stop posting my damn signature

[SamCassell]

"The deadlines were already in place."

"The Florida State Legislature set the deadline."

Yes! But you guys are missing a crucial point: these deadlines may be enforced, waived, or extended by the Florida Secretary of State (a republican). She's got discretion. Now for her to refuse to extend the deadline, she would be selectively choosing in this case to enforce the rule.

Do I think she's going to act impartially? No. I can think of no reason why she would ask the Florida Supreme Court to delay the hand-counting (which would ultimately end up making the process take even longer) other than partisan politics. If you have one, please share.

------------------

[mrpaige]

Originally posted by SamCassell:
"The deadlines were already in place."

"The Florida State Legislature set the deadline."

Yes! But you guys are missing a crucial point: these deadlines may be enforced, waived, or extended by the Florida Secretary of State (a republican). She's got discretion. Now for her to refuse to extend the deadline, she would be selectively choosing in this case to enforce the rule.

Do I think she's going to act impartially? No. I can think of no reason why she would ask the Florida Supreme Court to delay the hand-counting (which would ultimately end up making the process take even longer) other than partisan politics. If you have one, please share.



She's got discretion now, but no one knew whether she did or not until yesterday, and her legal advisers told her she didn't have discretion. The court ruling established her discretion. Appealing that ruling to the State Supreme Court sets that ruling in stone. If we're following the process, allowing for an appeal to make sure the law is completely clarified is just a further part of the process (she also wanted all the lawsuits consolidated, which makes sense).

------------------
Houston Sports Board (http://www.houstonsportsboard.com)
The Anti-Bud Adams Page (http://www.antibud.com)