IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Sure you are...
...the USSC should not have entered into the decision...on that we agree...but had they NOT...Bush would have won based upon the State SC ordered recounts.

First 3 paragraphs of the first link in the first post of this thread.

You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New So only *some* of the votes should have been counted, right?
New The ones that the FL SC said to count...correct.
Anything else would be uncivilized ;-)
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New At last! We see the difference between us.
And it is as I have suspected all along:

I support Democracy.
You do not.
New Wrong...
...you support lawlessness. The ability to change the rules on the fly to support your own objectives.

Democracy cannot work under your terms.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New So then - if an AG is behaving in a patently biased way
re individual procedural decisions - what should be the response of the observer of this behavior?

And if substantiated - would that be sufficient grounds to pass it all on to the USSC? And if the time-frame (by fiat) prevents normal adjudication? - either at the State or Fed level?

(No I don't have pat answers either - though you might) The problem with this USSC Selection is that - it won't yield to sound-bytes, as the entire milieu IS germane to any intelligent assessment - either then (obviously) or now. Even 20/20, especially assessed via slogan:

Yields little enlightenment about the complex scenario of many FL errors, the atmosphere of obvious pro-Bush bias among all state officers + the tissue of myths and fabrications - so many of which were intentional creations of both sides. The flow-chart is equally relevant - who knew or suspected what, when - and what did subsequent info reveal to clarify the events?

Are we too short of attention span, to sort this stuff out - ever? (I mean - 'we all', if indeed anyone out there actually wants to know) Here of course: it's about winning.

(We may also toss into the mix - the author's comment which I posted recently: most states have done Zip re their election apparatus - but FL has.. actually revamped lots)

Yeah it's all too complex .. lets just do the Demo<>Repub Repo Dance, Again.



Ashton
who can walk, chew gum and stick pins in a BillyDoll too - all while giving Dubya credit for extemporaneously using the words chagrin, delight in a creative sentence re the Putin events. Way to go George!
New Just wondering
What do you think of the staged riots by the Republicans? Was using the threat of violence a legitimate tactic to stop the recounts?

Jay
New you mean the demomob stopping military counts? :)
pretty much a farce in BOTH directions.
A pox on both yer houses, aides by Sen Clinton and sylph by George Bush(late stage)
thanx,
bill
tshirt front "born to die before I get old"
thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"
New That was the flaw, they (or Gore) didn't stop them.
Articles I've read said that Boies wanted to challenge the "illegally late" submitted absentee ballots, but Gore himself insisted that they not challenge those - clearly, this strategy cost him.

My BL is that all votes should count and *no* court should get its wicket into the fray. Contrary to Beep's post, I do realize the need for voting laws, particularly when it comes to a reasonable timeframe to conclude the act of voting. IMO, all states should allow voting over several days, preferably including at least one week-end. But, unlike Gore, I believe that when the deadline passes, it passes, notwithstanding one's current or past military hitch status.
New Regardless.
...in the election just passed...based upon both parties right to due process via the State SC...the outcome would have been the same.

That is the part you continually refuse to accept.

You point to alot of valid information about just how truly screwed up the FL system was...and alot of information about how it >would have come out if<...

The fact remains...based on the rules in force >at the time<, the USSC decision was a very bad precedent...but had no effect on the outcome...which would have been the same.

Hopefully, ALL states have taken this as a lesson and have changed rules, established procedures and closed loopholes in order to ensure that all votes (or as many as possible) are counted and that it is EASY for people to understand who they are really voting for.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New You're right
Based on the flawed procedures in place at the time, the wrong man was elected.
How to mangle the truth;

Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
New In this case...
...your sig has you as a media outlet.

Based upon the rules in place at the time, the correct outcome was reached.

Now, of course, the correct outcome may not have been the >right< one...but that, of course, is a value judgement.

And this is not the first time that a situation like this has happened...lets just hope its finally the last.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New correct outcome?
That would imply the rules were followed. In a state renowned for its corruption, institutional racism and political cronyism. Remotely possible I suppose. Highly unlikely though.
How to mangle the truth;

Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
New All reports..
...that have followed the guidelines and procedures set forth by the FL SC and counted the disputed ballots that were ordered recounted have all come to the same conclusion...Bush won.

Now..if you want to start questioning the way the rules were applied...and the >rightness< of the rules in play...go ahead...I don't think you'll get any argument from me.

You would get an argument from me, however, if you claim that its only screwed up in Florida or if it was only the Republicans that tapdanced along that fine line.


You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New Debatable that the rules were followed.
But not worth the effort. We have a legally appointed president who would have been elected and is not the choice of the electorate. I can live with that and hope he is voted out come next election. A much larger hope is that a candidate is offered who is remotely worthy of being elected.
How to mangle the truth;

Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
New Amen brutha!
A much larger hope is that a candidate is offered who is remotely worthy of being elected.


On that we agree.

You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New Ventura or Knowles, but they wont run
tshirt front "born to die before I get old"
thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"
New In Summary.
"In other words, you don't need a consortium to know which way the wind blew--or to know that the man in the White House is there, legitimately or not, by mistake."

And that's something >you< apparently cannot, or will not, accept: the man in the White House is there only through a combination of a thoroughly unfunny comedy of errors and a corrupt system.

Best comments I've read here: [link|http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20011203|http://www.thenatio...l?i=20011203]&s=corn

(For the McNews impaired: The Nation is the oldest news magazine in the US and can be accurately described as being a slight bit Left of center. Read it (especially Alexander Cockburn's "Beat the Devil") and you'll understand why the almost imperceptibly small minority of US citizens who can bend at the knee when they walk are greatly amused when told of a "Left bias in the medja")
New Nope. I only object to selective enforcement.
Ballot late? Is it from a Bush or Gore stronghold. Gore? tough luck. Bush? Okay, we'll count it *this* time.
New yup and the law says overcounted ballots must be thrown out
Oh mr gore both of those votes were for you? Alright just this once.
thanx,
bill
tshirt front "born to die before I get old"
thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"
New :-)
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New Of course, the law also states...
that if there isn't a post mark, the ballot isn't supposed to count.

Expand Edited by Simon_Jester Nov. 14, 2001, 03:29:04 PM EST
New And the ruling on the field was?
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New (IIRC) The appeals court overturned the law.
I do know the laws has been changed so that postmarks are no longer required.

And now, we'll have no way to determine exactly when an absentee ballot has been in the future. It opens the door for fraud in the future. (Hi, my name is Clinton, and I have 10,000,000 absentee ballots with my name on them)

Ah, it will be fun.

(Of course, the irony that the same group that argued that the elections need to be held to the letter of the law (prior to the election) and the group that argued that the law (prior to the election) shouldn't apply are one in the same is perhaps lost on you.)
New postmarks were required by fl law not by federal at time
tshirt front "born to die before I get old"
thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"
New True..but believe it or not...
It's a state election, not a Federal one. (State determines how electoral college is determined, whether or not it'll be by the people or state legislature, etc.)

Actually, I'm not sure there are ANY laws regarding ballots (and their tabulation). (Must look into this.)

US Code:

Sec. 1973ff-2. Federal write-in absentee ballot for overseas voters in general elections for Federal office

(a) In general
The Presidential designee shall prescribe a Federal write-in absentee ballot (including a secrecy envelope and mailing envelope for such ballot) for use in general elections for Federal office by overseas voters who make timely application for, and do not receive, States, absentee ballots.

(b) Submission and processing
Except as otherwise provided in this subchapter, a Federal write-in absentee ballot shall be submitted and processed in the manner provided by law for absentee ballots in the State involved. A Federal write-in absentee ballot of an overseas voter shall not be counted -
(1) if the ballot is submitted from any location in the United States;
(2) if the application of the overseas voter for a State
absentee ballot is received by the appropriate State election
official less than 30 days before the general election; or
(3) if a State absentee ballot of the overseas voter is
received by the appropriate State election official not later
than the deadline for receipt of the State absentee ballot under
State law.

(c) Special rules
The following rules shall apply with respect to Federal write-in absentee ballots:
(1) In completing the ballot, the overseas voter may designate
a candidate by writing in the name of the candidate or by writing
in the name of a political party (in which case the ballot shall
be counted for the candidate of that political party).
(2) In the case of the offices of President and Vice President,
a vote for a named candidate or a vote by writing in the name of
a political party shall be counted as a vote for the electors
supporting the candidate involved.
(3) Any abbreviation, misspelling, or other minor variation in
the form of the name of a candidate or a political party shall be
disregarded in determining the validity of the ballot, if the
intention of the voter can be ascertained.

(d) Second ballot submission; instruction to overseas voter
An overseas voter who submits a Federal write-in absentee ballot and later receives a State absentee ballot, may submit the State absentee ballot. The Presidential designee shall assure that the instructions for each Federal write-in absentee ballot clearly state that an overseas voter who submits a Federal write-in absentee ballot and later receives and submits a State absentee ballot should make every reasonable effort to inform the appropriate State election official that the voter has submitted more than one ballot.

(e) Use of approved State absentee ballot in place of Federal
write-in absentee ballot
The Federal write-in absentee ballot shall not be valid for use in a general election if the State involved provides a State absentee ballot that -
(1) at the request of the State, is approved by the
Presidential designee for use in place of the Federal write-in
absentee ballot; and
(2) is made available to overseas voters at least 60 days
before the deadline for receipt of the State ballot under State
law.

(f) Certain States exempted
A State is not required to permit use of the Federal write-in absentee ballot, if, on and after August 28, 1986, the State has in effect a law providing that -
(1) a State absentee ballot is required to be available to any
voter described in section 1973ff-6(5)(A) of this title at least
90 days before the general election involved; and
(2) a State absentee ballot is required to be available to any
voter described in section 1973ff-6(5)(B) or (C) of this title,
as soon as the official list of candidates in the general
election is complete.

Expand Edited by Simon_Jester Nov. 15, 2001, 10:50:00 AM EST
     Bush would have won anyway - (bluke) - (45)
         20/20 hindsight. The deed was done in ignorance and fear - (Ashton)
         Read further and you will see... - (mmoffitt)
         You'll notice... - (bepatient) - (33)
             re: By the standards set. - (Silverlock)
             You still don't get it, do you? -NT - (mmoffitt) - (30)
                 Sure I do... - (bepatient) - (29)
                     Don't think I'm missing anything. - (mmoffitt) - (28)
                         Mega dittoes, Rush. - (Brandioch) - (1)
                             Rush? S.O.B. is as far as I go with a joke! -NT - (mmoffitt)
                         Sure you are... - (bepatient) - (25)
                             So only *some* of the votes should have been counted, right? -NT - (mmoffitt) - (24)
                                 The ones that the FL SC said to count...correct. - (bepatient) - (23)
                                     At last! We see the difference between us. - (mmoffitt) - (22)
                                         Wrong... - (bepatient) - (21)
                                             So then - if an AG is behaving in a patently biased way - (Ashton)
                                             Just wondering - (JayMehaffey) - (11)
                                                 you mean the demomob stopping military counts? :) - (boxley) - (10)
                                                     That was the flaw, they (or Gore) didn't stop them. - (mmoffitt) - (9)
                                                         Regardless. - (bepatient) - (8)
                                                             You're right - (Silverlock) - (6)
                                                                 In this case... - (bepatient) - (5)
                                                                     correct outcome? - (Silverlock) - (4)
                                                                         All reports.. - (bepatient) - (3)
                                                                             Debatable that the rules were followed. - (Silverlock) - (2)
                                                                                 Amen brutha! - (bepatient) - (1)
                                                                                     Ventura or Knowles, but they wont run -NT - (boxley)
                                                             In Summary. - (mmoffitt)
                                             Nope. I only object to selective enforcement. - (mmoffitt) - (7)
                                                 yup and the law says overcounted ballots must be thrown out - (boxley) - (6)
                                                     :-) -NT - (bepatient)
                                                     Of course, the law also states... - (Simon_Jester) - (4)
                                                         And the ruling on the field was? -NT - (bepatient) - (3)
                                                             (IIRC) The appeals court overturned the law. - (Simon_Jester) - (2)
                                                                 postmarks were required by fl law not by federal at time -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                                                                     True..but believe it or not... - (Simon_Jester)
             Related logic: "I saw Bigfoot once". -NT - (Ashton)
         Even though more people voted for Gore. - (Silverlock) - (5)
             I don't think that point is ignored. - (bepatient) - (3)
                 Irrelevant? The twisting of rules denies peoples choice - (Silverlock) - (1)
                     You should know how to respond... - (bepatient)
                 Ah, but it was the precident - (Simon_Jester)
             But who else but the partisans can act in the courts? - (Another Scott)
         So the USSC cost Bush the election - (mhuber) - (2)
             Maybe the only obvious 'truth' to emerge yet! -NT - (Ashton)
             Well....yeah, put that way... -NT - (bepatient)

I made it through almost 20 minutes of this before coming out of my skin and destroying the TV with my mad shrieking.
251 ms