> Jerry wrote:
> Who is in the Whitehouse?
> Then, by definition, he won.
>

I wouldn't go that far, at least for the first election.  I'm not
trying to open that can of worms again, but my point is that the
Supreme Court was asked to get involved, as well as Florida's Sec of
State.

Neither of these bodies can be considered impartial and had enormous
power in a national presidential.  Regardless of how all of the counts
and re-counts turned out, those entities had way too much power in the
process.

And even if we agree that, in the end, things happened the way they
should have - I believe Bush was in office before that determination
was made.  Meaning that it was possible for the outcome to be the
opposite and yet Bush would've still been in office.

The point is that 2000 was not a standard election as it revealed all
kinds of problems with our voting systems: it involved the Republican
Sec of State of Florida - a state where the governor was the winning
candidates brother, as well as the Supreme court.  And to top it all
off, the losing candidate won the popular election.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:208840
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to