[kingstu]

This was written in an article in The Nation recently. I knew it was a left wing rag but why write outright lies which have been disproven.

What The Nation Claims

In fact, Gore won Florida, only to have the results manipulated into Bush's column by the Republican nominee's many allies in state government, with an assist from the Supreme Court.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20...ion/45289420_1

What is actually true

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A comprehensive study of the 2000 presidential election in Florida suggests that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a statewide vote recount to proceed, Republican candidate George W. Bush would still have been elected president.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/flo...ries/main.html

A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward.

Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...52C1A9679C8B63

In the first full study of Florida's ballots since the election ended, The Miami Herald and USA Today reported George W. Bush would have widened his 537-vote victory to a 1,665-vote margin if the recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court would have been allowed to continue, using standards that would have allowed even faintly dimpled "undervotes" -- ballots the voter has noticeably indented but had not punched all the way through -- to be counted.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/media/me...count_4-3.html

Eight fucking years later and numerous studies have shown Bush won Florida. Perhaps we can move on at some point. I can't even believe The Nation is still writing this shit.

[Xenu]

How do we know for certain what the results of a recount would have been if the recount was stopped while Gore was ahead?

[ABACA]

Of course a leftist rag can't pass the chance to attack Bush and undermine American legitamacy at the same time.

[mr.bigglesworth]

i dont mean to thread jack here but i cant make threads

Why the fuck do US territories have delegates?

[Mr. Omoplata]

When I first saw this I thought it was an old thread risen from the ashes of obscurity which is back when Gore was actually running, but it seems it was made today which brings me to ask if the article writer is stuck in some sort of ridiculous time loop.

[ABACA]

Try reading the TS' post, Mr. Omoplata.

[Chest Rockwell]

The thing that no one seems to mention are the hanging fucking chads!
Why did the printing company use below standard paper stock?
Who stood to gain in a comprehensive reform of brand new electronic voting machines?
Who had the patent and contract to produce such machines?

[Nietzsche13]

I just vomited in my mouth a little as I realized that this country would have been better off if Gore had won.

It was a bad year for D&R candidates.

[Xenu]

Gore hated Al Qaida and had a strong aviation security streak. He probably would have prevented 9-11.

[Zankou]

Actually there's yet ANOTHER thing that really bothers me about this: People fixate on the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on this issue, but they (perhaps through lack of familiarity with the legal system?) have no familiarity with the monstrous decision that the U.S. Supreme Court addressed and reversed -- that of the Florida Supreme Court.

The Florida trial court affirmed the Florida administration's vote count procedure. That decision was then affirmed by a Florida appellate court. This doubly-affirmed decision went up before the Florida Supreme Court, which consisted at the time of six Democrat appointees, and one independent.

By a 4-3 majority -- the independent and 2 of the democrats could not stomach it -- the Florida Supreme Court reversed the appeals court below with one of the most preposterous, outrageous appellate opinions in recent memory. It is simply impossible for the Florida Supreme Court to have done so in good faith; they flatly repudiated their own prior opinions regarding the relevant statute in black and white language. Two of the Dems could not go with the charade, and broke ranks. You will not find a better example of a state supreme court deliberately ignoring the relevant law. And if you want to know exactly what the whole debate turned on from a juristic perspective, you cannot do better than read the dissenting opinion from the Florida Supreme Court.

It is that majority opinion of the Florida Supreme Court which went before the U.S. Supreme Court, and was reversed. Now, there is a very valid dispute about whether the U.S. Supreme Court had jurisdiction to entertain that challenge. That is where the action is in criticizing the U.S. Supreme Court, and I concede that there are valid problems. But what gets lost in that debate is the fact the Florida Supreme Court's opinion was a monstrosity, and once it got past the jurisdictional barriers, was rightly crucified by the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling. The people who rage against the U.S. Supreme Court inexplicably ignore (or more likely, are completely unfamiliar with) the far more abominable ruling that was overturned.

If anyone has the time and the legal background, I recommend reading these opinions in sequence to see what really went down.