Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chris Matthews: Final tally gives Bush legitimacy
San Francisco Chronicle ^ | 11/18/2001 | Chris Matthews

Posted on 11/18/2001 9:58:51 AM PST by Pokey78

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:39:04 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Washington -- The real loser of the 2000 presidential election was hardball politics.

George W. Bush thought he would lose the limited recount ordered by Florida's Supreme Court, so the Republican presidential candidate got the U.S. Supreme Court to stop it. The result was a victory in the Electoral College that gave Al Gore backers reason to question Bush's legitimacy.


(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: floridarecount
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 last
To: LarryLied
I've read all the comments. I like yours the best. I'm changing a word or two and e-mailing it (ours) to Matthews.
61 posted on 11/19/2001 12:21:41 AM PST by onyx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: corkoman
OK - here is a big question: what was the justification for doing a recount? I remember. Anyone else???

I haven't scrolled down to read any answers past this point yet, but the original reason for a recount was "the butterfly ballots [also used by Daley's Chicago]were so confusing." When that was proven bogus, it was then "all the votes didn't get counted." After trying to throw out the military votes and only recount four heavily Democratic counties, this reason was exposed as fraudulent, also.

62 posted on 11/19/2001 12:41:59 AM PST by razorbak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
Nah...they were Americans who were absolutely sincere in doing their patriotic duty in making sure every vote was counted.... (/sarcasm) as a vote for Gore, or maybe 2.
63 posted on 11/19/2001 12:42:20 AM PST by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: razorbak
I think the post I responded to asked for the original justification for a recount. I just read one poster who said, Florida law required the first recount. But the "justification" for subsequent recounts by the Democrats, such as Matthews were the "confusing" butterfly ballots and then, when that didn't fly, making sure every vote counted [except the military, except Republican counties, etc.]
64 posted on 11/19/2001 12:46:05 AM PST by razorbak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Just for the heck of it and to hear the screams of outrage from the Democrats, some conservative should suggest the death penalty for voter fraud. It is a good place to begin negotiations Puts the burden on them to say how serious they view the issue. We can always compromise at life in prison.
65 posted on 11/19/2001 5:25:27 AM PST by LarryLied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Gee Chris, did you get that script from your handlers or was it all your own insight?
66 posted on 11/19/2001 5:29:46 AM PST by pointsal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leftiesareloonie
even though I supported McCain in the primaries.

Well, now, I guess that says it all, doesn't it?

I thought I caught a whiff of some Bill Kristol-esque gripe wipe in your orignial post. Now there's a fellow thoughly enamored of himself pining for the least scintilla of relevance as he snivles away in his presumed self-importance to current debate.

And what is McCain after-all but a money grubbing member of the infamous Keating Five who couldn't control his own appetite for campaign cash, whose self-flagellating catharsis involves taking away every citizen's right to influence an election with $ contributions, while sucking up to democrats in the process.

"...Lead me not into temptation, but deliver me from the electorate, for mine is the Presidency (usurped), and the White House, and the Power forever!!! AMEN. (Ok, maybe for at least 4 years, but I WILL have it one these days....just you wait!!!)

Surely you don't wish to be numbered amongst McCain's and Kristol's lot of malcontented losers and pretenders to conservatism, do you?

67 posted on 11/19/2001 7:21:21 AM PST by Agamemnon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
This was one of the worst articles I've ever read. He's wrong half the time, and blandly pedestrian when he's right.

How dare you post this and make me read it! 8-)

68 posted on 11/19/2001 7:34:54 AM PST by dead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KeepTheEdge
Please refresh my memory when exactly it was that the Republicans CHEATED AT THE BALLOT BOX???? I have NEVER heard of this action before, but I'll listen.
69 posted on 11/19/2001 7:40:59 AM PST by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: All
You've GOT to see this!

This takes a long time to load and a long time to watch, give yourself plenty of time...

Brings back everything..

http://attacked911.tripod.com/

70 posted on 11/19/2001 7:43:55 AM PST by 2ndMostConservativeBrdMember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Had Gore insisted on recounts throughout the entire state, the analysis shows him winning both Florida and the presidency.

Oh hogwash. And Cris if you are lurking today--BALONEY, CRUD-BUCKETS and PHOOOOEY. That line is a LIE. Anyone who believes this is nuts. Was Crissy, by any chance, including the overseas votes in this assumption. There was a very good reason Gore only wanted the heavily dem counties, counted. That is where all the efforts went into CHEATING. Imho, anyway.

71 posted on 11/19/2001 7:45:47 AM PST by Republic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy
Did I say that? No, I didnt think I did, but I will explain what I meant by my statement.

The 2 major Party Politic in this Country have long had controlling interest in how votes are counted, how they are tabulated, and how, and who handles those votes, as well as what type of security measures voting has, or has had.

I think we can agree that if the outcomes of National Election results are so important, then why is it not mandated that these ballots be handled by a prescribed, trusted, security force, other than Mr. or Mrs. Anonymous that drives them in their mini-van somewhere else to be counted?

Why is something so obviously important to the entire nation treated like grocery store coupons?

72 posted on 11/19/2001 7:53:34 AM PST by KeepTheEdge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: KeepTheEdge
In fact, grocery store coupons have more security features, at least they have bar codes.
73 posted on 11/19/2001 7:54:34 AM PST by KeepTheEdge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: KeepTheEdge
I don't knw what kind of weird Democrat controlled place you live in, but where I came from I believe they counted the votes at the polling place....my mom worked there as a judge every election day.
74 posted on 11/19/2001 12:46:15 PM PST by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
That's truly horrible analysis by Matthews. The recount did not show that Bush would have won under the recount scenario requested by Gore. What it showed was that Bush would have won if these particular ballot counters had tabulated the undervotes.

But that misses the point of why the Republicans opposed the recount. The recount would not have been conducted by this consortium; rather, it would have been conducted by precinct workers, and it is entirely possible (probable, in fact), that they would have come up with different totals. The idea that was can know today what an actual recount would have shown is simply wrong.

75 posted on 11/19/2001 12:51:46 PM PST by XJarhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Ahhhh, Chris?

Thinkin' about moving on over to FNC, are ya?

76 posted on 11/19/2001 12:53:33 PM PST by Landru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leftiesareloonie
Leftie, you are oh-so-righty. The amount of denial is staggering.

I think it's safe to say that every single eligible voter who considered themselves conservative or Republican or just plain tired of Clinton/Gore came out to vote a year ago for GWB. And what happened? A weak Democrat running an even weaker campaign got almost 600,000 more votes than he did.

Yes, GWB won the electoral vote fair and square. But I read a few months ago (sorry, don't have the link, I know, I know) that Karl Rove's own internal polling showed that if current trends continue into 2004, GWB will lose the popular vote by three to four million votes.

Notice that's "if current trends continue." They don't have to by any means, but if they do, the denial you mention will be the culprit, not ballot-stuffing or dirty tricks.

Flame on, dudes!

77 posted on 11/19/2001 1:00:16 PM PST by JamesinGA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
Where to start...

George W. Bush thought he would lose the limited recount ordered by Florida's Supreme Court, so the Republican presidential candidate got the U.S. Supreme Court to stop it. The result was a victory in the Electoral College that gave Al Gore backers reason to question Bush's legitimacy.

The courtroom battles were started by the Gore forces and Bush answered as any candidate should...end of story.

Last week we discovered the irony in this game-playing. A ballot-by-ballot analysis by a consortium of newspapers shows that Bush would have won the election clean if he'd let Florida go ahead with the partial recount that Gore wanted.

He wasn't playing games...Gore was. The media recounts are hogwash of process.

Gore made an equally fatal mistake. The Democratic candidate sought a recount of only four counties -- Palm Beach, Broward, Miami-Dade and Volusia -- where he expected to pick up votes.

The recounts had to be based on legal reasons and were then no state-wide recount was legal under FL law, where was Mathews during all this?

Had Gore insisted on recounts throughout the entire state, the analysis shows him winning both Florida and the presidency.

"Insistance" was not in accordance with "law". Actually, if a recount had followed state proceedures, Bush would have won. It is only when wishful thinking and convoluted standards are applied that one out of a hundred outcomes shows to some media sense that they have an excuse to say Gore "would have"...In his dreams.

So all this recounting was not in vain after all. While it doesn't change the results of the 2000 election, it teaches valuable lessons about politics. Sometimes playing it cute is the most costly strategy of all. Sometimes playing it straight is not only the right thing to do, but the winning strategy.

The media lost....they played it "cutest"

Both candidates paid for choosing cute over straight.

Gore's strategy cost him immesurably more than Bush's cost him in general approval. Gore's supporters never rallied because they knew they had lost. Had Bush not gotten the U.S. Supreme Court to stop the limited recounts ordered by Florida's high court, he might have won the election by anywhere from 225 to 495 votes. Even diehard Democrats would have been forced to concede his victory

78 posted on 11/19/2001 1:13:17 PM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
"A ballot-by-ballot analysis by a consortium of newspapers shows that Bush would have won the election clean if he'd let Florida go ahead with the partial recount that Gore wanted."

And once Bush won that "partial recount," what on earth makes Matthews think Gore would then have stopped his efforts to overturn the election?

79 posted on 11/19/2001 1:26:14 PM PST by white rose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JamesinGA
He James. These "conservatives" on this board aren't nearly as tough-minded as I thought they would be when I joined up. If they were tough-minded, they'd be able to look reality square in the face and still march ahead. That's what I admired about the House impeachment managers. They knew they didn't have support out there in the land. And they didn't really pretend too. But they marched full speed ahead. I think conservatives should just admit that Gore got more. Say "too bad." because he never wanted all the votes to be counted any more than Bush did. What matters now is who has the stage. I think Bush is doing quite well with the stage. But I won't lie to myself and say he won it fair and square. We don't play politics by polite rules in this country.
80 posted on 11/19/2001 2:50:56 PM PST by leftiesareloonie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson