Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And Gore decided not to push it any further and accepted the result. A very key tradition in our democracy. So very different from what Trump is saying. (And virtually every self-respecting Republican also sees the difference).
Not push any further? The country was in limbo for 5 weeks and the ONLY reason he stopped was the highest court of the land told him to stop. He COULDN'T push any further. Gore lost multiple recounts. Then after the whole thing ended D's questioned the legitimacy of the SCOTUS. If anything damaged our republic it was that whole shameful episode, which to THIS DAY has people thinking that the election was "stolen". The difference there was this idea that somehow Ds had moral high ground.
Not push any further? The country was in limbo for 5 weeks and the ONLY reason he stopped was the highest court of the land told him to stop. He COULDN'T push any further. Gore lost multiple recounts. Then after the whole thing ended D's questioned the legitimacy of the SCOTUS. If anything damaged our republic it was that whole shameful episode, which to THIS DAY has people thinking that the election was "stolen". The difference there was this idea that somehow Ds had moral high ground.
You have been studying history via Trump. Do you seriously not see the difference? It's crystal clear to all of the top folks in the GOP.
And Gore decided not to push it any further and accepted the result. A very key tradition in our democracy. So very different from what Trump is saying. (And virtually every self-respecting Republican also sees the difference).
I believe the issue was with discarded votes that had accidentally double voted for Put Buchannon as well as Gore. Law at the time stated the intent of the voter should be used to determine counting of vote- i.e. if rest of ballot was down ballot Dem line than Gore would be issued vote. Due to crappy ballots in some districts this happened to literally thousands of Gore votes. Considering Gore lost by ~500 votes this could have swung the election. The Bush campaign pressed to certify the count and exclude these votes to give bush the state.
State politicians under Bush's brother (Katherine Harris) pushed to do same. Gore took to courts to have law followed and the excluded ballots reviewed. This was the crux of the dispute. Gore in no way called for "armed rebellion" in the streets or took to calling the whole game fixed. When the Supreme Court decided on a straight party line to invalidate the lower courts ruling (so much for no activist judges) and ordered a halt to the process, Gore conceded and democracy won. This is a far cry from the crap Trump is hinting at....Left or Right, Dem or Republican, the irresponsible inflammatory rhetoric by him and his surrogates is reprehensible....There's a reason it's the lead story all over the news, even on Fox News...
I believe the issue was with discarded votes that had accidentally double voted for Put Buchannon as well as Gore. Law at the time stated the intent of the voter should be used to determine counting of vote- i.e. if rest of ballot was down ballot Dem line than Gore would be issued vote. Due to crappy ballots in some districts this happened to literally thousands of Gore votes. Considering Gore lost by ~500 votes this could have swung the election. The Bush campaign pressed to certify the count and exclude these votes to give bush the state.
State politicians under Bush's brother (Katherine Harris) pushed to do same. Gore took to courts to have law followed and the excluded ballots reviewed. This was the crux of the dispute. Gore in no way called for "armed rebellion" in the streets or took to calling the whole game fixed. When the Supreme Court decided on a straight party line to invalidate the lower courts ruling (so much for no activist judges) and ordered a halt to the process, Gore conceded and democracy won. This is a far cry from the crap Trump is hinting at....Left or Right, Dem or Republican, the irresponsible inflammatory rhetoric by him and his surrogates is reprehensible....There's a reason it's the lead story all over the news, even on Fox News...
Who is calling for an "armed rebellion in the streets"? You are rationalizing. Fact of the matter is ANY politician would call for a recount if it is that close. The entire premise of the question is ludicrous. Re-litigating Gore v Bush on these boards only serves to prove my point.
The irony in all this is every answer to the Wiki dump isn't to answer on a factual basis, it is to say "omg omg omg, the Russians are trying to RIG our election". LOL amazingly that is ok. But to say the media/D/Potus/FBI/AG connections rigging the election is utter blasphemy.
Who is calling for an "armed rebellion in the streets"? You are rationalizing. Fact of the matter is ANY politician would call for a recount if it is that close. The entire premise of the question is ludicrous. Re-litigating Gore v Bush on these boards only serves to prove my point.
Agree in the Gore v Bush- just trying to point out the differences, and perhaps did editorialize a bit. The fact remains, nobody talked about recounting a close race- it was a point blank question about one of the bedrocks of our democracy, and unlike any candidate prior, Trump refused to respect the legitimacy of the voting process. Again, right or left, this is downright ludicrous.
and btw- Trump surrogate Sherrif David Clarke Jr, whom he had speak at the Republican convention, has called it "pitchforks and torches time" on twitter already....that's in addition to "2nd amendment solutions"
Agree in the Gore v Bush- just trying to point out the differences, and perhaps did editorialize a bit. The fact remains, nobody talked about recounting a close race- it was a point blank question about one of the bedrocks of our democracy, and unlike any candidate prior, Trump refused to respect the legitimacy of the voting process. Again, right or left, this is downright ludicrous.
and btw- Trump surrogate Sherrif David Clarke Jr, whom he had speak at the Republican convention, has called it "pitchforks and torches time" on twitter already....that's in addition to "2nd amendment solutions"
Any other answer PRIOR to knowing what actually occurs is disingenuous, as Gore proved. Now the word games that politicians play is "of course I'll accept ANY outcome" when in truth, no one believes it yet like everything else when it comes to politics we all know they are lying but we'd rather hear the lie. Even in 2004 Kerry claimed Ohio was RIGGED. This is just silly.
For 8 years most Ds considered Bush "illegitimate" due to the SCOTUS being rigged. The word "rigged" began in this election cycle by the Bernie contingent with saying our economy is "rigged" then saying the primary was "rigged" due to superdelegates. The economy is "rigged" is a bedrock tenet of Democratic nomenclature. For some reason now when Trump uses it, it becomes a toxic term that we should "omg never use"? The different rules depending on whether a R or D follows ones name is mind boggling.
Any other answer PRIOR to knowing what actually occurs is disingenuous, as Gore proved. Now the word games that politicians play is "of course I'll accept ANY outcome" when in truth, no one believes it yet like everything else when it comes to politics we all know they are lying but we'd rather hear the lie. Even in 2004 Kerry claimed Ohio was RIGGED. This is just silly.
For 8 years most Ds considered Bush "illegitimate" due to the SCOTUS being rigged. The word "rigged" began in this election cycle by the Bernie contingent with saying our economy is "rigged" then saying the primary was "rigged" due to superdelegates. The economy is "rigged" is a bedrock tenet of Democratic nomenclature. For some reason now when Trump uses it, it becomes a toxic term that we should "omg never use"? The different rules depending on whether a R or D follows ones name is mind boggling.
More of the same blather, so I assume you don't understand the difference of Trump compared to Bush or you are working really really hard to ignore the differences.
Ensuring that votes were properly counted is hardly the same as potentially refusing to accept the final
results.
Even Laura Ingraham weighed in on accepting the results: There is no other option unless we're in a recount again.
Spoken like a true Trumpette. Ready to take up arms to dispute the election?
Amen!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
