We Decide, you Shut Up

[RandFan]

2. The publishing consortium found Bush to be the winner in only one scenario. If the recount were done as outlined under Florida law (states rights?!??) Gore would have been the winner. It is clearly stated in the findings of the consortium.

For my sake please stop repeating things that are factually inaccurate. It was a coup.

Oh for christ sake, how many times does one have to correct the record?

http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&postid=327226#post327226

coup d'é·tat ( P ) Pronunciation Key (k d-tä)
n. pl. coups d'état (k) or coup d'états (d-täz)
The sudden overthrow of a government by a usually small group of persons in or previously in positions of authority.

I can't see how the events of the last election could even be argued to constitute a sudden overthrow of government. We were in an election. Clinton was termed out and the Supreme court made it's decision before the end of his term as president.

Ok, so that's a distinction without a difference perhaps.

After all of the counts and recounts and analysis of the outcome, had a full hand count been allowed to continue Bush would have won according to the NYTimes and others. Yes, there are arguments that had the ballots been counted using certain methods Gore would have won in more instances than Bush. However it is unlikely that those methods would have been used IIRC. (see below) Apparently the method that Bush preferred would have given the election to Gore, again IIRC. The best argument I think is that since the Supreme Court denied those questioning the outcome to continue with the hand count (for arguably specious reasons) we will never really know what method would have been chosen and who would have actually won.

There is an argument that the issue was for the State of Florida to decide and that the Supreme Court was out of its jurisdiction. Giving us another one of those little ironies. Republicans are usually for States rights while Democrats usually favor Federal superiority (forgive my wording, you get the gist).

In any event, one cannot say categorically that had the Supreme Court not intervened that Gore would have won. Absent that fact it is at best specious to argue that Bush with help from a conservative majority of the Supreme Court overthrew the government.

Let me also say that scientifically the vote was a statistical tie. No hand count could overcome anomalies and variance in verfying that many votes. Human error alone would have a factor greater than the differences of most of the outcomes.

Nova Land provided the following in this thread.

"Gore wins in 6 of 9 scenarios: <http://www.gopbi.com/partners/pbpos...e_wins6of9.html>

If the U.S. Supreme Court hadn’t stopped the counting

Dec. 9 count/Counties' own standards -- Bush by 493

If the four counties Gore wanted to count had finished

Gore's four-county strategy -- Bush by 225

If all counties agreed to use the standard acceptable to most

Statewide count/Prevailing standards -- Gore by 60

If the 63 counties ordered to count had used one standard Dec. 9

Dec. 9 count/Uniform standard-- Bush by 430

If the 63 counties ordered to count had used their own standards

Statewide count/Custom standard -- Gore by 171

If all counties had used the Gore standard

Statewide count/ Most inclusive standard -- Gore by 107

If all counties had used the toughest standard

Statewide count/ Most restrictive standard -- Gore by 115

If all counties had used the Bush standard

Statewide count/Bush standard -- Gore by 105

 

[dingler44]

O'Reilly is a loser

I can't believe the way people are jumping to O'Reilly's defense here. It doesn't matter how farfetched the interviewee's beliefs are... any interviewer with any integrity whatsoever would allow the subject to respond to his questions.

O'Reilly didn't like what Glick had to say... and he starting crying and pouting like a child... kicking and screaming! It's absolutely pathetic. And some of you think he did the right thing? haha! He disgraced all of you by showing that he couldn't hold up his own opinion with reason... he could only fall back on rage and temper tantrums!

How did O'Reilly get a TV spot anyway? Any idiot off the street could interview/argue the way he did here.

*note* I assumed the posted interview was quoted accurately

 

[daredelvis]

Oh for christ sake, how many times does one have to correct the record?


Let me also say that scientifically the vote was a statistical tie. No hand count could overcome anomalies and variance in verfying that many votes. Human error alone would have a factor greater than the differences of most of the outcomes.

Nova Land provided the following in this thread.

"Gore wins in 6 of 9 scenarios: <http://www.gopbi.com/partners/pbpos...e_wins6of9.html>

If the U.S. Supreme Court hadn’t stopped the counting

Dec. 9 count/Counties' own standards -- Bush by 493

If the four counties Gore wanted to count had finished

Gore's four-county strategy -- Bush by 225

If all counties agreed to use the standard acceptable to most

Statewide count/Prevailing standards -- Gore by 60

If the 63 counties ordered to count had used one standard Dec. 9

Dec. 9 count/Uniform standard-- Bush by 430

If the 63 counties ordered to count had used their own standards

Statewide count/Custom standard -- Gore by 171

If all counties had used the Gore standard

Statewide count/ Most inclusive standard -- Gore by 107

If all counties had used the toughest standard

Statewide count/ Most restrictive standard -- Gore by 115

If all counties had used the Bush standard

Statewide count/Bush standard -- Gore by 105

The simple fact of the matter is that the Bush team prevented the recount that should have occurred under Florida law. I agree that it was a statistical tie. What I object to is the statement that the “votes were counted and recounted”. This is a bald faced lie repeated over and over by the Bush team. I does not matter how often it is repeated it is still a lie (like the need to eliminate the inheritance tax to save family farms).

The count by the papers may be open to interpretation, but under the standards that prevailed at the time in Florida Gore would have won.

The intervention by the federal court was disgusting. The equal protection argument was unbelievably offensive.

You have corrected no record.

Daredelvis

 

[Baker]

This story is mostly unknown because the media echo chamber is almost exclusively reserved for conservative voices and views. If you doubt the veracity of this transcript, then pick up the May issue of Harper's Magazine (which I read personally). I only accessed the story from Oreillysucks.com/ because... a google search showed that this "hate page" had it. Tom Tomorrow's page also carried a portion of the transcript (which he said he got off lexis). It's real.

Oh great the mainstream media has no problem attacking other conservatives why would Oreilly be any different until you can provide a better source then oreilly-sucks.com I’m not going to take the story at face value.

 

[Baker]

The simple fact of the matter is that the Bush team prevented the recount that should have occurred under Florida law. I agree that it was a statistical tie. What I object to is the statement that the “votes were counted and recounted”. This is a bald faced lie repeated over and over by the Bush team. I does not matter how often it is repeated it is still a lie (like the need to eliminate the inheritance tax to save family farms).

The count by the papers may be open to interpretation, but under the standards that prevailed at the time in Florida Gore would have won.

The intervention by the federal court was disgusting. The equal protection argument was unbelievably offensive.

You have corrected no record.

Daredelvis

Can you provide any evidence that Bush prevented the recount?
And that the votes were not recounted?

 

[corplinx]

The simple fact of the matter is that the Bush team prevented the recount that should have occurred under Florida law. \

You mean the recount of only 3 heavily democrat counties with standards lowered to levels low enough to get false positives? Yes, shame on his legal team for challenging that.

 

[RandFan]

The simple fact of the matter is that the Bush team prevented the recount that should have occurred under Florida law. I agree that it was a statistical tie. What I object to is the statement that the “votes were counted and recounted”. This is a bald faced lie repeated over and over by the Bush team. I does not matter how often it is repeated it is still a lie (like the need to eliminate the inheritance tax to save family farms).

The votes were counted and recounted, that is no lie. There was a machine recount as is required by Florida law.

The count by the papers may be open to interpretation, but under the standards that prevailed at the time in Florida Gore would have won.

Based on what? The NY Times and other papers don't think so. I don't think so. As I said, there is no objective evidence that he categorically would have won. It's all well and good to have an opinion but it's not fact. All of the scenarios rely on methods that are subject to human error. Regardless of what would have happened we would not know the exact outcome. It is not knowable.

The intervention by the federal court was disgusting. The equal protection argument was unbelievably offensive.

Disgusting to you. You are entitled to your opinion. I respect it but I don't share it.

At some point people are going to have to get over this.

You have corrected no record.

Not in your mind of course not. But I have stated the facts and others are capable of deducing for themselves what would have happened had the hand count would have continued.

And finaly there is no basis for calling what happened a coup.

 

[Thanz]

Oh great the mainstream media has no problem attacking other conservatives why would Oreilly be any different until you can provide a better source then oreilly-sucks.com I’m not going to take the story at face value.

Uh, he did provide a better source than oreilley-sucks.com - Harper's Magazine. Available at better newstands and bookstores everywhere. The table of contents for the issue is here.

 

[Frank Newgent]

Oh great the mainstream media has no problem attacking other conservatives why would Oreilly be any different until you can provide a better source then oreilly-sucks.com I’m not going to take the story at face value.

Harper's doesn't have a full-content website. Here's the cover of the May 2003 edition, though. The story in question is listed under Readings.

Perhaps you might borrow Daddy's copy. Or buy it yourself. You might learn something.

 

[daredelvis]

The votes were counted and recounted, that is no lie. There was a machine recount as is required by Florida law.


At some point people are going to have to get over this.

Not in your mind of course not. But I have stated the facts and others are capable of deducing for themselves what would have happened had the hand count would have continued.

And finaly there is no basis for calling what happened a coup.

There are sources that question the assertion that the full machine recount happened. I have listed two below.
What about the full manual recount called for under Florida law?
This is not something I will forget.

From press release for Jeffrey Toobin’s book http://www.randomhouse.com/features/toobin/press.html

“TOO CLOSE TO CALL also raises new questions about the conduct of the vote-counting in Florida. During the recount, spokesmen for the Bush campaign often said that the votes in Florida had been "counted and recounted." Florida law called for an "automatic" machine recount of votes in all elections decided by less than one-half percent, but Toobin reveals that more than a quarter of the six million votes in the state have never been recounted. Eighteen of Florida's sixty-five counties did not recount their votes because Katherine Harris, the Florida Secretary of State, did not instruct them to do so -- even though her office had previously insisted that all counties recount their votes in "automatic" recounts.”

At least one case I can find on the net where the second set of machine numbers did not match the first so the original tally was submitted.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/2520704.htm
“George W. Bush overwhelmingly won Nassau, a quiet, picturesque county on Florida's northeastern coast best known for the lush golf and tennis resorts of Amelia Island and the historic port city of Fernandina Beach. But Gore filed suit and accused the county canvassing board members of misconduct after they decided to submit an original election night tally instead of a machine recount performed the next day that was 218 votes short.”
It goes on.

“Bush won the election night tally by 6,453 votes. But when workers did a machine recount the next day, as the law requires when the statewide result was so close, 218 votes vanished. The net effect was to shrink Bush's lead by 51 votes.”

Daredelvis

 

[Baker]

Perhaps you might borrow Daddy's copy. Or buy it yourself. You might learn something.

Can you try discussing the topic instead of resorting to adolescent insults?

 

[RandFan]

This is not something I will forget.

Oh I am sure it will keep you up nights for years to come. And I'm sure you are just mad as hell that the Gore team sought to have oversees ballots disqualified (the ballots were eventually allowed in) or that Gore did not want to recount all counties only those that would benefit him. I'm sorry but the whole affair is over and there is no way to know if Gore won. There is plenty of evidence for you to find conspiracies and machinations if that is what you want. I'm sure that it can all be linked back to the tri-lateral commission or the protocols.

And I'm sure that you are still burning over the fact that there are lingering questions as to whether Kennedy beat Nixon in 1960. Of that elections Nixon said to those who urged him to challenge the results, "Then, too, the bitterness that would have been engendered by such a maneuver on my part would have done incalculable and lasting damage throughout the country."

For some there is some benefit to find truth were there is none. The election was a statistical tie and the final outcome cannot be known at a level that is greater than the anomalies and variances caused by human error and other variables. The simple fact that there are at least 9 different ways to count the votes and that they all produce different and contradictory results is evidence of this fact alone.

I understand your passion, I hope you can channel it into the next presidential election. It has already started and there are some candidates on the field. I personally thing John Edward has the best chance to unseat Bush. He has raised allot of money.

 

[Frank Newgent]

Harper's doesn't have a full-content website. Here's the cover of the May 2003 edition, though. The story in question is listed under Readings.

Perhaps you might borrow Daddy's copy. Or buy it yourself. You might learn something.

Can you try discussing the topic instead of resorting to adolescent insults?

I apologize, Baker. Ironic that I do so when the subject is Bill O'Reilly's ethics. I feel certain he would have said "Mommy's copy".

And even if your new subscription to Harper's is now already in the mail, I would still recommend bookmarking http://www.harpers.org/harpers-index/listing.php3

 

[Baker]

I apologize, Baker. Ironic that I do so when the subject is Bill O'Reilly's ethics. I feel certain he would have said "Mommy's copy".

And even if your new subscription to Harper's is now already in the mail, I would still recommend bookmarking http://www.harpers.org/harpers-index/listing.php3

I order a copy of the transcript from fox it should be in my e-mail tomorrow.
Not that I don't trust Harper but I plan on looking at both sides of the story.

 

[Smalso]

RandFan:

I personally thing John Edward has the best chance to unseat Bush.

Interesting. Edward may be a rookie, but it has already been shown that he is not a lightweight. Raising money is a good indicator of how he is taken within his own party, and Bush is certainly vulnerable on several fronts. The '04 election is shaping up to be anything but dull.

 

[Mr Manifesto]

I order a copy of the transcript from fox it should be in my e-mail tomorrow.
Not that I don't trust Harper but I plan on looking at both sides of the story.

Please be sure to post the full transcript. I too do not want to use a transcript that is innacurate.