The Truth Hurts . Huh .

She sounds bitter.

So you all think we have zero problems with how we elect our President? Nothing wrong at all happened in 2000?

So you all think we have zero problems with how we elect our President? Nothing wrong at all happened in 2000?

:confused:

 

Wrong?

 

What "wrong" happened? :popcorn:

Got to say that I heard nothing in there except an observation.

 

RTS, you can say she was "insunating" a problem, but that would be conjecture.

 

What I heard her insinuate was, "We have our problems in democracy too. Our 2000 election came down to one state and the brother of the one who won that state was Governor."

 

I voted for Bush in that election. But even I noticed that the problem was not the way the process unfolded to determine the winner (state house to appelate court to Supreme Court), the problem was that the "party lines" were followed so rigidly at each level (whether GOP or Democrat). To not acknowledge the factors of the characters outside the ballot is to ignore the realities of the event IMO.

 

That said, I believe that Bush won the election and would have won the recount in an even more narrow margin, but I do believe partisanship directed the appeals process at every level. Had the state house been run by the Dems I believe they would have continued to recount until they found enough to declare victory and that too would have been a travesty.

 

Just my take RTS. :thumb:

Got to say that I heard nothing in there except an observation.

 

RTS, you can say she was "insunating" a problem, but that would be conjecture.

 

What I heard her insinuate was, "We have our problems in democracy too. Our 2000 election came down to one state and the brother of the one who won that state was Governor."

 

I voted for Bush in that election. But even I noticed that the problem was not the way the process unfolded to determine the winner (state house to appelate court to Supreme Court), the problem was that the "party lines" were followed so rigidly at each level (whether GOP or Democrat). To not acknowledge the factors of the characters outside the ballot is to ignore the realities of the event IMO.

 

That said, I believe that Bush won the election and would have won the recount in an even more narrow margin, but I do believe partisanship directed the appeals process at every level. Had the state house been run by the Dems I believe they would have continued to recount until they found enough to declare victory and that too would have been a travesty.

 

Just my take RTS. :thumb:

No problem, Hatz, I understand your take on this.

 

Yes, I have to say that, IMO, she was insinuating Bush stole the election. Simply my opinion though.

There are so many on the left that just can't get over the fact that Bush defeated Gore. My main difference with you would be that I think the more they counted the larger Bush's win was becoming.

So you all think we have zero problems with how we elect our President? Nothing wrong at all happened in 2000?

 

Yep, Al Gore couldn't carry his home state of Tennessee, the voters that knew him best. THAT IS WHERE HE LOST THE ELECTION!!!!

No question what she's insinuating.

So you all think we have zero problems with how we elect our President? Nothing wrong at all happened in 2000?

Assuming that this comment is partly aimed towards me (as one of "you all"), I did not make any statement regarding the election of 2000, just the tone of Secretary of State Clinton's comment.

Yes she's insinuating and it's unfortunate but I don't see it as a big deal. She is right that our system still has a ways to go.

The best thing that came out of the 2000 election, IMO, was the way it was handled by this country. There were no armed groups in the street, no coup, no military response or Civil War. It was a process and like the outcome or not, the thoughts of armed protest happening never crossed anyone's mind.

 

Now compare that to the same events in Latin America, a nation in Africa, or Iran and I become most proud that America has come this far. My hope is we will always appeal to the "rule of law" over the chaos of angry and violent mobs.

So you all think we have zero problems with how we elect our President? Nothing wrong at all happened in 2000?

 

Yes we have problems but I doubt that there were more in 2000 than any other year. It's just that the closeness of the election amplified them.

The best thing that came out of the 2000 election, IMO, was the way it was handled by this country. There were no armed groups in the street, no coup, no military response or Civil War. It was a process and like the outcome or not, the thoughts of armed protest happening never crossed anyone's mind.

 

Now compare that to the same events in Latin America, a nation in Africa, or Iran and I become most proud that America has come this far. My hope is we will always appeal to the "rule of law" over the chaos of angry and violent mobs.

 

Great point.:thumb:

She could've said if my husband wasn't such a bad word Al wouldn't have had to distance himself and probably would've won the election.

Edited August 29, 200917 yr by The Scribe