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

Skip to comments.

Johnson declared winner in SD by Fox
Fox News | 11//5/02

Posted on 11/06/2002 7:30:33 AM PST by pabianice

Wins by 800 votes.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next last
To: Leto
Forget the recount, look into voter fraud.

That's the whole nut right there. With the difference below one quarter of one percent, Thune has a choice to ask for a recount or file suit on the voter fraud issue. He can't do both.

41 posted on 11/06/2002 8:53:17 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Bloody Sam Roberts
Forget the recount, look into voter fraud. All Thune can really do is work at the recount. Higher powers will need to get involved in the voter fraud. I think Johnson will still win. GOP just won't be able to get together as Lott will fear more talk of them stealing the election and not enough time for feds to really do anything.
42 posted on 11/06/2002 8:59:20 AM PST by Jened
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: WRhine
Well it looks like you got everything figured out for the next two years. Hope you are right. However, I doubt we will get 3/4 of the loaf now. Not with this president. My expectation is that we might get a 1/4 and if we are lucky in 2 years get another 1/4. And when you mention RINOs I'd put George on that list too...Reagan he is NOT!

Of course he isn't Reagan. Reagan lost seats in his first term and in his second.

Bush has gained seats first time out.

Any questions?

Be Seeing You,

Chris

43 posted on 11/06/2002 9:00:58 AM PST by section9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
If Trent Lott has a spinal transplant

A transplant is a good idea, but I think he needs one on the other side of his body.

44 posted on 11/06/2002 9:05:02 AM PST by 11th Earl of Mar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: section9
That is a good point. Thanks.
45 posted on 11/06/2002 9:11:59 AM PST by WRhine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: WRhine
And when you mention RINOs I'd put George on that list too...Reagan he is NOT!

George W. Bush will build upon and surpass Reagan's accomplishments in the cause of Conservatism, while pathological malcontents like you continue to grouse on the sidelines. His successes will come and they will be to none of your credit.

46 posted on 11/06/2002 9:12:23 AM PST by Agamemnon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Jened
Can't a recount involve throwing out demonstrably fraudulent votes? It's not as if the numbers are that large. If Gore managed to throw out the absentee ballots in Florida, I should think the same thing could be done in SD, with much better evidence.

Congress let Bob Dornan be fraudulently defeated when it foolishly agreed to seat his cheating opponent. What did they gain by doing that? Did they gain any Dem good will or willingness to compromise? I don't see why they should make the same mistake again. They should refrain from seating either candidate until all the issues are resolved, even if it takes six years to resolve them.
47 posted on 11/06/2002 9:14:25 AM PST by Cicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
i hope you're right cicero. my concern is that there is so much going on and that the law may not matter when it comes to the courts like in nj and fl. this will be interesting, if not frustrating story to follow.
48 posted on 11/06/2002 9:18:55 AM PST by Jened
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: unspun
Thanks for the info, unspun. Republicans won everything in SD except for the Senate (?) and a schoolboard seat, it appears. Treasurer, AG, Sec. of State, House, Governor...all Republican. Would this state choose a Senator who's known as Tom Daschle's 'Mini-Me' on votes in the Senate?
49 posted on 11/06/2002 9:23:55 AM PST by Ragtime Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Quilla
I've read that anything less than a 0.25% margin triggers an auto-recount in SD. I can't confirm that from personal knowledge, however.
50 posted on 11/06/2002 9:30:33 AM PST by MortMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
Some of it was probably the drought-relief flub by Bush...

But some of it is fraud, and some was crossover.
51 posted on 11/06/2002 9:37:23 AM PST by hchutch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
"If Trent Lott has a spinal transplant, or the Republicans have a leadership transplant"

That's a lot of "ifs." Hope it happens.

Carolyn

52 posted on 11/06/2002 10:06:40 AM PST by CDHart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 1L
What's the source of your info?

Sorry - South Dakota Secretary of State's official election returns.

53 posted on 11/06/2002 11:01:27 AM PST by GreatOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: FryingPan101; rellimpank
You two have some really serious problems -- and they have nothing to do with people who voted for Libertarian candidates.

First off, has it occurred to you that you're arguing that those voters should have voted against their consciences? That you put your partisan ambitions above the free choice of other people?

Second, were you aware that the Libertarian Senate candidate in South Dakota withdrew from the race several weeks ago, and publicly threw his support to John Thune? Well, a lot of South Dakotan voters weren't aware of it either -- because the regional media barely mentioned it!

Third, why do you think that those 3000 LP voters would have voted Republican had there been no LP candidate? What about the possibility that they would have voted "None Of The Above Is Acceptable" in the only available way -- by staying home?

If you want Republican candidates to garner the votes that ordinarily go to minor-party candidates, you have to offer those voters what they want. What minor-party voters tend to want is ironclad pledges of allegiance to particular principles (e.g., Libertarian), or particular stands on issues (e.g., Right To Life). To make such pledges entails the risk of alienating other voters who would normally vote Republican.

Where I live (Long Island, NY), Republicans are just "Democrats On A Budget." They never dissent from any Democratic statist initiative; they just promise to phase it in or do it cheaper. Since that contradicts my beliefs, I stay home. A great many voters do the same; we just want real limited-government Constitutional-fidelity Republicans, and all we get are fakers.

In short, it's time you stopped assuming that your troubles were caused by the minor parties. You don't have any claim on those votes -- and the people who cast them would be the first to tell you so. Get to work on getting the GOP's house in order if you want better results.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit the Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com

54 posted on 11/06/2002 11:59:49 AM PST by fporretto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: nicmarlo
Didn't the woman they are going to indict for vote fraud get caught burning absentee ballot applications? Isn't this more evidence of rampant fraud?

Seems to me that every absentee ballot should be checked against every application signature.

Furthermore, she (the vote fraud woman) has two completely different sounding names. How can we be sure that the same person on these reservations was not voting as Mary Smith, Maria Redfeather, and Maya Featherred? Are Indians who live on reservations even given social security numbers? Do they have to register for the draft and pay taxes? And, if there was fraud, would the fact that it was on a reservation (federal land?) make the punishment more severe?

55 posted on 11/06/2002 12:05:58 PM PST by MHT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fporretto
"You two have some really serious problems." Hello, Doctor. I don't even have one serious problem. IMHO, you sometimes hold your nose for the sake and greater good of others. Some people call it reason. "Partisan?" I voted for five Democrats. "Ambitions?" Huh?? "What about the possibility that they would have voted "None Of The Above Is Acceptable" in the only available way -- by staying home?" There is no reasonable excuse for not voting. The point is lost on me because that would mean my Dad, my husband, my sons in law, my nephews and cousins fought, were wounded, some died in vain?
56 posted on 11/06/2002 1:08:25 PM PST by FryingPan101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: rellimpank
So the Libertarians were supposed to know in advance that the election would be this close? Were those casting their vote for 'L' at 8 a.m. supposed to be part of a collective consciousness with Libertarian voters at 8 p.m.? And I wasn't aware that Republicans own all non-Democrat votes by default. By birthright maybe?

Now please stop making asinine posts in public forums.
57 posted on 11/06/2002 1:10:31 PM PST by Conservative til I die
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FryingPan101
--#'s 54 and 57 apparently don't agree with us --they can be happy with timmy.

Same deal as Harry Reid , Ron Wyden-left of Hillary-of Oregon got in the Senate a couple of elections ago thanks to a "Conservative" vote of one percent--

58 posted on 11/06/2002 1:25:57 PM PST by rellimpank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: FryingPan101
Bah. Emotionalized nonsense in place of an argument.

"The greater good of others" is a non-argument. "Others" can be trusted to look after their own greater good. They do not get to determine my moral position. If my conscience dictates that I support some minor party, then I do so. If my conscience dictates that I not vote, then I don't vote. That is the way it will always be, until the day voting is made compulsory -- and on that day, I'll lead the local militia in a full-scale assault on whatever state installation is handiest.

There are frequently exceedingly good reasons for not voting. I will not reward a man I regard as morally reprehensible with my support for public office -- which is what the vote is. If you think it's "the lesser of two evils," or some equivalent nonsense, you need to check your premises; there is no gain to be had by supporting evil. When all contestants align themselves with evil, the sole remaining alternative for a good man is to abstain from voting, so as to refrain from endorsing the legitimacy of a wholly evil set of alternatives with his ballot.

Whatever your relatives were wounded for, it wasn't the vote. The vote is the least excrescence on the true purpose of the Republic: "to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." If I feel not voting, or voting for some minor party, is the best route toward that, then that's what I'll do -- and on the way I'll be pitying you benighted fools who tell yourselves that you simply have to vote for a Republican (or a Democrat; let's at least admit the outside possibility) because he's "the lesser of two evils." Not only do you put your moral position in hock to some party's promise to look after your interests, in defiance of all history on the subject; you also ask to be shafted by the very candidate you support, by providing him evidence that, as long as the alternatives look even worse, he can count on your vote.

Not smart. Very not smart.

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit the Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com

59 posted on 11/06/2002 1:53:56 PM PST by fporretto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: fporretto
--if you,on Long Island, and I, in Las Vegas, knew about Kurt Evans' withdrawal from the race, stating that he felt John Thune was closer to Libertarian values than Tim Johnson, it would seem that at least some of the South Dakota Libs would also have been aware of it, regardless of the media--

Incidentally, since it's still a relatively free country, I am still free to advocate always voting against Democrats as effectively as possible. This is almost never accomplished by voting third party--

60 posted on 11/06/2002 1:56:09 PM PST by rellimpank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 next 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