Re: Gore DID win (Was: Patriot Act against the free exchange of ideas)

"REG" <Richergar@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:ADpBf.3832$yE4.3078@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>I stopped reading after this point. The vote was 5-4 on essentially
>party lines, because it was a party decision on both sides. For you to
>think it was not disqualifies you. And by the way, as we've said
>repeatedly, EVERY vote count show the Bush won. You disqualify yourself
>from this discussion, at least in my eyes. Sorry.

Can you handle the truth?

First, when did John Paul Stevens and David Souter
become "Democrats"? Stevens was appointed by
Ford; Souter by Bush I.

Second consider reading Jeff Toobin's book,
_Too Close to Call_, where
the claim that Bush won every vote recount is
shown to be a myth. In fact, the opposite is true.

On pages 278 to 279, Toobin,
an accomplished legal commentator and lawyer, explains the results
of the recount done by the National Opinion Research Center at
the University of Chicago, the recount that was commissioned
by the consortium of newspapers led by the NYT and WP
and reported in the fall of 2001.

"[U]nder all of the standards used by the researchers,
when all of the votes were counted, the result was the
same: Gore won."

But the newspapers, instead of reporting the results
of the recount, reported on the results of a recount
that may not have occurred at all, because they
assumed that "overvotes" would not be counted,
even though the trial judge, Terry Lewis, had
indicated that he wanted overvotes to be counted
when the intent of the voters could be determined.
And, as Toobin explains, when the recounts were
halted, it had not been settled what standards were
going to be used.

In summation, Toobin reports, "In short, the Times
and the Post, as well as some other members of the
consortium, chose to emphasize a speculative result
that favored Bush as opposed to a concrete finding
that supported Gore.

He adds: "It is difficult to avoid the conclusion
that the post-September 11 atmosphere. with
its tremendous rush of support for the incumbent
president, played at least some role in the peculiar
way the results were framed."


It's not that hard to spread mythology in the U.S.
I still hear talk about Nixon graciously conceding
the 1960 election, and this myth even found its
way into a celebrated JFK biography.

Here's the more accurate version. Note the
story of Safire's role in Nixon's perennial
statements about not taking the easy way:

http://www.slate.com/id/91350/




--
A. Brain

Remove NOSPAM for email.




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Gore DID win (Was: Patriot Act against the free exchange of ideas)
    ... EVERY vote count show the Bush won. ... > of the recount done by the National Opinion Research Center at ... instead of reporting the results ...
    (rec.music.opera)
  • Re: DS Alert 12-7
    ... election to Bush on a 5-4 vote. ... Most folk forget that the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Florida's ... recount law was unconstituional; the first 5-4 vote was to halt the ... Later studies have pretty much concluded that Bush would have ...
    (rec.arts.comics.strips)
  • Re: OT Serious question regarding Obamas citizenship.
    ... that Bush lost that election? ... Clave just for you I looked up the Miami heralds recount. ... And don't think your side-stepping of Bush v Gore went unnoticed either. ... vote victory and another gave Gore a 3 vote win. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Fahrenheit 9/11 - disgusting
    ... They were not done with the complete recount, ... it was going to Bush ... is that the "popular" vote (the actual population ... headcount vote of people) did elect GORE as President. ...
    (rec.arts.movies.current-films)
  • Eastman and Murphy -- Why Nader is the only choice.
    ... Vote as if Democrats and Republicans don't exist. ... Vote Nader! ... Vote in Kerry -- and you'll have four more years of intensified Bush ...
    (sci.econ)