Posted on 11/16/2001 1:04:36 PM PST by Mr. Mulliner
I know "overvotes" can also be produced by the classic vote-tampering technique known as the "wire" in which a sharp wire is inserted into a stack of ballots in the hole for the desired candidate.
This is always my biggest concern. It is amazing how ignorant the average American is. Most people I know have no idea what went on in Florida. No idea at all. Their concept is that the Supreme Court ruled in Bush's favor. They have no clue why, no knowledge of what occured before that decision, and no clue why there was a controversy. They had a higher level of awareness last December but have not bothered to think about it since then.
These people are just waiting to be spoon-fed any propoganda the DNC and press will feed them.
Where is the RNC in presenting this stuff? Where are the RNC in making the argument that these 'overvotes' were spoiled balllots and probably the result of ballot tampering on the part of Democrats? I have'nt heard anything from the RNC. That fact alone has a smell to it. Why won't the RNC talk about it?
By those rules, George W. Bush won a close race, despite the disenfranchising of 1500 military voters and the early call that cost him at least 8,000 votes (by the admission of Bob Beckel).
Sorry, but Bush won. The far left needs to go put some ice on their bruised ego.
Actually, the originator was Lenin. But Goebbels got a lot of mileage out of it, as well.
The Dems owe a great deal to their mentor, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, and the precepts of dialectical materialism. More than anything, they have adopted Lenin's signal assertion:
"Everything is political!"
This charge, of course, places the political agenda ahead of all other considerations -- be they economic, social, scientific, educational, military or whatever. In my view, the leftists' politicization of every aspect of human life and affairs is their most perverse contribution.
By asserting that "everything is political", they have poisoned everything...
I do think that the dems willl use the Gore got robbed theme to motivate their base, both in 2002 and in 2004. I don't see how that can be avoided. Blacks are by and large still livid about this and will remain so. But even if Gore had lost "fair and square" in their minds, the democratic base was still going to be highly motivated, I think, because of Gore's win in the popular vote. About that, I've got to say how surprisingly wimpy Gore was on that score. I think that if I had been just barely on the losing end of the electoral college in the same murky way, but had won the popular vote, I would have more explicitly used my popular vote win to justify the recount. Plus I would have shopped for faithless electors. I would have gone all out to use every tool at my disposal, even if it meant discrediting the electoral college. That's what I really expected Gore to do. But he whimped out.
I suppose that if the dems nominate that stiff Gore again in 2004 -- though I'd be really surprised, since the party heavyweightss think he should have clobbered Bush -- his mere presence will raise the issue as "subtext" as loonies like to say and little will be directly said about it. (though you can imagine some journalist asking Gore in a debate whether he believes that Bush was legitimately elected. and Gore parsing his words too too carefully)
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.