A blast from the past: Who still thinks Gore won? - Page 2 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-17-2004, 02:48 PM   #16
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:24 AM
I personally support the abolition of the Electoral College. I understand many here do not agree, and that's OK. I think it should be strictly by popular vote, and in that sense yes, I think Gore won. But who cares now? Not me. It's four years too late.
__________________

__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 11-17-2004, 02:57 PM   #17
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Macfistowannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 4,129
Local Time: 09:24 PM
I'm impressed with the honesty in this thread.
__________________

__________________
Macfistowannabe is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 01:16 AM   #18
Refugee
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: LA, California, USA
Posts: 1,349
Local Time: 01:24 AM
the country will never go for abolishing one of the core doctrines in the constitution - not that the constitution is perfect, many just hold it to be, well, holy. I say a proportionate distribution of electoral college votes is the way to modify it.
__________________
blueyedpoet is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 04:39 AM   #19
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 459
Local Time: 01:24 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by blueyedpoet
the country will never go for abolishing one of the core doctrines in the constitution - not that the constitution is perfect, many just hold it to be, well, holy. I say a proportionate distribution of electoral college votes is the way to modify it.
But to be honest as a brit, you electoral system is a bit of a joke. Not for the electoral college but for the simple fact that you have partisan elected officials at the state and local level in charge of your election.

Put simply, in a close race such as Florida in 2000, you had a republican candidate win by a tiny margin, with the election handled by a partisan republican offical in a state governed by the victors brother. A third world country could manage a fairer system.
__________________
popshopper is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 05:12 AM   #20
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:24 AM
I agree popshopper, that's why there was so much controversy over the 2000 election and why we all hoped to hell it didn't happen again. I'm relieved that we didn't have another recount controversy on the scale of that one. The Founding Fathers made it tough to amend the constitution for a reason, though. They didn't want some kook to be able to put a law on the books without the people's votes, and that was very wise. If you ask me Prohibition was a bit kooky, and that actually became law! That was the dumbest political act in U.S. history in my opinion. I'm sorry, I just don't approve of Prohibition, it's very silly.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 09:07 AM   #21
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by popshopper
Put simply, in a close race such as Florida in 2000, you had a republican candidate win by a tiny margin, with the election handled by a partisan republican offical in a state governed by the victors brother. A third world country could manage a fairer system.
Unlike a third world country, we have a billion lawyers who will pounce on any perceived unfairness. Any close election gets scrutiny and allowances for automatic recounts are built into the system.

The idea of having non-partisan officials is mostly illusory. Everyone brings their biases with them. If they violate the law, they pay the price.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 10:32 AM   #22
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 459
Local Time: 01:24 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


The idea of having non-partisan officials is mostly illusory. Everyone brings their biases with them. If they violate the law, they pay the price.
it works here. it works in france. Germany too. We have a civil service which is pretty apolitical.

You have people directly controlling elections in which they are standing. That is a conflict of interest, and something which some of the most dubious african dictators would be proud of.

The idea that lawyers can solve anything is pretty naive. At the end of the day your supreme court is pretty much partisan too.
__________________
popshopper is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 10:39 AM   #23
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by popshopper
The idea that lawyers can solve anything is pretty naive. At the end of the day your supreme court is pretty much partisan too.
As a lawyer, my suggestion was a bit sarcastic.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 11:47 AM   #24
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 06:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
Historians will say the results of the 2000 election did not reflect the will of the people

There will be a consensus that Bush got onto the Whitehouse on a busted election process.
Yep.
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 01:39 PM   #25
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 08:24 PM
History will say that election 2000 rightly went to Bush...
__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 01:52 PM   #26
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 459
Local Time: 01:24 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


As a lawyer, my suggestion was a bit sarcastic.
I love lawyers.....please don't sue me
__________________
popshopper is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 03:34 PM   #27
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:24 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Flying FuManchu
History will say that election 2000 rightly went to Bush...
History will say that it was a very closely contested, and excruciatingly close election. That's all.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 03:35 PM   #28
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76


History will say that it was a very closely contested, and excruciatingly close election. That's all.
The closeness and legal challenges will become a smaller and smaller asterisk as the years go by.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 11-18-2004, 03:44 PM   #29
New Yorker
 
Flying FuManchu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Used to live in Chambana. For now the Mid-South.
Posts: 3,149
Local Time: 08:24 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by verte76


History will say that it was a very closely contested, and excruciatingly close election. That's all.
Yes, it will say that too...
__________________

__________________
Flying FuManchu is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com