Bush v. Gore: The Disputed Election Fades Into History

Nobody, NOBODY, ever said GWB was in office for personal gain.

Gore had less class than even Richard Nixon to put the country through that wrenching and unnecessary 39-day challenge to an election he had lost. Given Gore's hypocritical gluttonous personal energy profligacy coupled to his stubborn insistence that the Earth's climate is in peril at the behavior of suburban Americans.

sndjentinc and ajtlawyer ... I think there is significant confusion of facts here, having lived through this travesty from a very close perspective and having it indelible etched in my mind ... the supreme court did not say that Bush won the three recounts before, could not have another "and put a halt to it", or that the panhandle vote threw off the tally, or that Gore tried to have the overseas vote thrown out, AND that Bush won every recount. the fact is there is no turmoil in assuring that or elections are fairly judged ... the chaos was first in a lack of standards in counting or votes, i.e. your voice in this goverment, and then the ensuing political manipulation of that system. Please fact check me, but the Gore comment on the validity of the oversea votes came about when Catherine Harris did not accept the delay of the manual vote of the 4 most populous counties; Palm Beach, Volusia, Broward and Miami-Dade, all typically democratic BUT was would wait for the overseas vote to come in about a week later BEFORE she would certify the final outcome of the election. This was an unfair bias to deny the CORRECT TABULATION of a great deal of votes that would trend democrat and then allow others that would trend republican. the discussion was how can you allow one and not the other, NOT just deny the overseas vote. An out of context recall of the event. That was just the beginning to the court challenges. The State Supreme Court ordered a statewide mandatory manual recount to be fair and count the all the votes THEN a day later the US Supreme Court stayed that order (stopping the recount) due a week later ... the court then issued its decree on the day of the deadline. The court ruled here was no way to establish a uniform standard of vote counting or counting all the votes before the expiring deadline ... so by default the last established vote stood. Gore's only remedy was to court challenge the date ... where he THEN chose not to. In my judgement in erro. There were no multiple vote recounts that called Bush the winner, only one that was continually manipulated by Catherine Harris (Jeb Bush), local courts and ultimately the Supreme Court. Every independent report conducted after that declaration had Gore winning the vote ... and Fox Noise is not independent. Check out www.rci.rutgers.edu/~gpomper/FloridaRecount.doc for a concise summary. I won't get in the Volusia County hack intended to get Gore to inappropriately concede, democratic vote spoilage or any of dozens of other accounts of voter fraud that favored Bush. As the phrase goes you are entitled to an opinion , but not the facts ... This would have been a very different country if the truth was told in time.

A lot of the comments here are dragging this out just like the Kennedy assasination conspiracy. If Gore was elected the country would be in worst shape then it is. Let the election be relegated to history and lets get on with our lives.

For those of us who care deeply about the integrity of the United States Supreme Court, the decision in Bush v, Gore is not "forgettable." Sadly, the Court did damage not only to itself but ,by extension, to the American people,not because of the result but because of its lack of judiciousness in reaching a decision.

fades into history ? the only statement I,ll remember about the " hanging chad " election is good ole georgie boy bush placing himself on national tv saying , " this is america , every vote should count , but I don't want a recount " . now that statement my friends will not fade into history .

That day was the day we lost our democracy. The Tea Party screams about us ing our democracy because Obama is a socialist or whatever their gripe is. But on that day we actually lost our democracy literally, when the right wing of the Supreme Court took our vote from us. What could possibly justify stopping the counting of votes to determine who the American voters and specifically the voters of Florida actually voted for as President? How could anyone possily justify ending that recount on the basis that it was taking too much time? Our democracy was stolen from us on that day. And the same right wing of the Supreme Court now has stolen our democracy again with Citizens United. We no longer have a democracy, we now have an plutocracy, which is rule by the wealthy. No longer is our government chosen by the choice of the multitudes after a fair competition of the candidates, it is now chosen by a few corporations who can overwhelm candidates who won't do their bidding with tens of millions, even hundreds of millions of dollars worth of negative TV ads. And once their choice is elected they can use the lure and threat of tens of millions in contributions to dictate what laws get passed and what laws get killed.

After Bush v. Gore several liberal groups did an unofficial recount of the disputed votes just as Gore had wanted and the result? Bush won in every recount. Somehow that fact is always omitted when liberals want to revisit the 2000 election. Because you know very well that had the post-election recounts turned out to prove that Gore had won Florida, there would have been no end to commentary and protests from the Left. Gore could've made it all moot by winning his home state of Tennessee but he didn't. And every man who has been elected to the Presidency has won his home state. Maybe Gore should've been looking at why his home state rejected him.

The presidential election in 2000 was stolen with the help of a family conspiracy against the voters. I think everyone knows it. Similarly, the presidential election in 2004 was stolen with the help of fraudulently programmed voting machines in Ohio. As we discovered, just because someone is allowed to move into the White House does not necessarily turn that person into a president.

One more fact may be relevant to your coloumn: seven news organizations commissioned re-assesments of who whould have won the Florida electoral votes if a recount had been allowed. All concluded that Gore would have won in Florida (and, thus, in the electoal college)if a recount had been conducted upon a statewide basis. At some level knowing 'who did the nation really elect', both in popular vote and electorally, probably should be part of our consciousness about what happened, even if subsequent events have swept us into new patterns.