Posted on 11/12/2001 3:25:02 AM PST by YaYa123
Rush Limbaugh and/or Bill O'Reilly might have some interesting comments on this piece.
Dan Keating of the Washington Post says Undervote is where Gore thought they would pick up votes. Much to everyone's surprise, the undervote favored Bush.
"Yes, Matt, we looked at statewide results of undervotes, not just the counties Gore requested."
Overvotes. 60 - 70 - 100 more votes for Gore if double overvotes were counted.
Matt Lauer conducted a surprisingly short interview...no wonder...every question he asked of Mr. Keating gave a positive response for Bush.
Well, the latest news about last year's election has all the DU, DemCom, Bartcop, Smirking crowd in a tizzy. Too much rage for so few websites.
But with the losses in Afganistan by the Taliban, the Bartcop crowd must be near the end of their (loosely defined) sanity limit ... I mean, just how much rage and dysfunction can one expect Prozac to counter?
Anyway -- at this point I would ask all Freepers to please be kind to these people ... especially Bartcreeps. After all, some of them may in fact pay taxes and they may share as much as 93% of the same genetic code as humanity!
But the cnn.com headline on the results is:
"Florida recount study: Bush still wins
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....."
The word before it in the dictionary, "pendejada," means "a stupid thing to do/say."
I understand that Spanish slang varies a good deal from one Spanish-speaking country to another.
I love The Drudge Report, but Matt isn't above using misleading tabloid style headlines to attract readers. Bait and switch journalism...that's what it amounts to.
Really, the Florida recount story should be broken as: "The Never Ending Story: the Story of the Results of the Florida Re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-re-count Has Broken. Again."
When will the recount issue end? When we find the answer to the question, "How many chads can a ballot-shucker chuck when the ballot-shuckers shuck them chads?"
Breaking news: we have anthrax scares, fears of a new attack, a war in Afghanistan, and the World Trade Center lies in smoking ruins, entombing the remains of thousands of innocent people. We have economic uncertainty, and job uncertainty.
George Bush won the 2000 election. Again. Gore lost the 2000 election. Again. The 2000 election is over and done with. Move on. We have the man we need to lead us in this terrible time. Let him continue to lead us.
I can't wait to see how Joe Conason in The NY Observer covers this final, final, vote count.
Gene Lyons too. hee hee hee
Somebody slap me!! I shouldn't joke about Gene Lyons...he might be under a suicide watch!
So what? Terry Gilmore,Janet Ashcroft,nor Bill Bush seem to care about this,so why should anyone else?
"So what? Terry Gilmore,Janet Ashcroft,nor Bill Bush seem to care about this,so why should anyone else?"
I care, because the very real issue of vote fraud was completely swept under the rug by this recount BS.
It would have been oh so personally satisfying if President Bush and John Ashcroft had blasted the behavior of Gore/Lieberman, of their lawyers and team members, of Florida democrats, of Mary Frances Berry and the Civil Rights Voting Commission, of Robert Wexler, but it wouldn't have accomplished anything else beneficial for them, or for the country. It sure wouldn't have healed any wounds.
McAuliffe kept up the devisive fight long after Gore/Lieberman and most other reasonable people gave it up. He continues to this day to play the race card against Bush and republicans. We need to pay attention, we need to take action against him, and most certainly, we need to care.
I started to send her the following in an email, but she might think I was gloating, so I'll just share these headlines from today with you:
LATimes
"Election 2000: A Recount
Bush Still Had Votes to Win in a Recount, Study Finds"
WASHINGTON Post
"Florida Recounts Would Have Favored Bush"
Palm Beach Post:
" Under the two most likely scenarios, Bush Wins Florida"
New York Times:
"Study of Disputed Florida Ballots Finds Justices Did Not Cast the Deciding Vote"
Chicago Tribune:
"Ballots, rules, voter error led to 2000 election muddle, review shows"
Atlanta Journal Constitution:
"In last analysis of vote, Bush would have won under any recount scenario"
The Nation:
"Consortium: If standard had been "count every vote," Gore would have won Florida November 12 @ 3:01am
The long-awaited media recount of disputed ballots from the 2000 presidential vote in Florida has provided only a little new information regarding the election result. Despite investing almost $1 million and 10 months of effort in a review of uncounted Florida ballots, the conclusions of a consortium of major newspaper and broadcast partners were generally inconclusive."
Imagine how they feel. I remember months ago, McAuliffe and Carville on television promising this vote count would definitively prove, once and for all that Gore won. "Just wait..you'll see, Gore won Florida", they said. Pardon me while I ROTFALMAO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.