Full Version: The Last of the 2004 Election Debates
QUOTE(By Joanne Kenen @ Thursday, January 6, 2005)
The U.S. Congress on Thursday formally certified President Bush as the victor of the November elections after two Democrats symbolically stalled the event in protest at alleged voting irregularities in Ohio.
Despite a last ditch effort by California Sen. Barbara Boxer and Ohio Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones, the challenges will not be address. Both the House and Senate voted to rejected the objection to the election (Senate 74-1, House 267-31). Hence the state-by-state certification has been completed with the votes as follows: Bush - 286, John Kerry - 251, John Edwards - 1. Question:
- Is an official state-by-state certification by the Senate sufficient enough to warrant the end of the election?
- What future actions should Congress take to secure that questionable voting processes do not occur in the future?
- Will this decision by Congress haunt the President as being once again an "illegitimate" president?
Is an official state-by-state certification by the Senate sufficient enough to warrant the end of the election?
From a Constitutional aspect, yes. The election is over, Bush is the President.
What future actions should Congress take to secure that questionable voting processes do not occur in the future?
None, interference by Congress in state issues only serves to screw up the state issues. And, elections are state issues. Democracy is a difficult and imperfect thing and there are always going to be issues over procedures raised. All we can strive for is doing our best to make the process better, but it's never going to be perfect. That is best left to the local and state levels.
Will this decision by Congress haunt the President as being once again an "illegitimate" president?
No, not in the least. That entire circus yesterday was simply lip-service to the Crazy Howie/Michael Moore/George Soros wing of the Democratic Party. If anything, it strengthens Bush's position by virtue of the number of votes in both chambers of Congress that acknowledged that he did indeed win the election.
From a Constitutional aspect, yes. The election is over, Bush is the President.
What future actions should Congress take to secure that questionable voting processes do not occur in the future?
None, interference by Congress in state issues only serves to screw up the state issues. And, elections are state issues. Democracy is a difficult and imperfect thing and there are always going to be issues over procedures raised. All we can strive for is doing our best to make the process better, but it's never going to be perfect. That is best left to the local and state levels.
Will this decision by Congress haunt the President as being once again an "illegitimate" president?
No, not in the least. That entire circus yesterday was simply lip-service to the Crazy Howie/Michael Moore/George Soros wing of the Democratic Party. If anything, it strengthens Bush's position by virtue of the number of votes in both chambers of Congress that acknowledged that he did indeed win the election.
Is an official state-by-state certification by the Senate sufficient enough to warrant the end of the election?
Yes, Bush is President. Unfortunately I can't support much that he's proposed since the election. His statement about wanting to be president "of all the people" is little more than window dressing. We will never have unity as long as people continue to take victory laps by leaving bumper stickers on their cars or rubbing it in with statements in their sig lines.
What future actions should Congress take to secure that questionable voting processes do not occur in the future?
Congress should work with the states to find and fund the most sophisticated, fool-proof voting technology possible.
Will this decision by Congress haunt the President as being once again an "illegitimate" president?
I think Bush was an illegitimate president after the 2000 election. The only case for his 2004 election being illigitimate is that he would have never been reelected in the first place save his illegitimate victory in 2000. That said, for better or worse, and I fear worse, he is president for another for years. His next judge will be historians who write biographies after about twenty-five years hindsight. I doubt that history will be kind to Bush. The people of Iraq will NEVER celebrate his birthday.
Yes, Bush is President. Unfortunately I can't support much that he's proposed since the election. His statement about wanting to be president "of all the people" is little more than window dressing. We will never have unity as long as people continue to take victory laps by leaving bumper stickers on their cars or rubbing it in with statements in their sig lines.
What future actions should Congress take to secure that questionable voting processes do not occur in the future?
Congress should work with the states to find and fund the most sophisticated, fool-proof voting technology possible.
Will this decision by Congress haunt the President as being once again an "illegitimate" president?
I think Bush was an illegitimate president after the 2000 election. The only case for his 2004 election being illigitimate is that he would have never been reelected in the first place save his illegitimate victory in 2000. That said, for better or worse, and I fear worse, he is president for another for years. His next judge will be historians who write biographies after about twenty-five years hindsight. I doubt that history will be kind to Bush. The people of Iraq will NEVER celebrate his birthday.
QUOTE(BoF @ Jan 7 2005, 05:39 PM)
Will this decision by Congress haunt the President as being once again an "illegitimate" president?
I think Bush was an illegitimate president after the 2000 election. The only case for his 2004 election being illigitimate is that he would have never been reelected in the first place save his illegitimate victory in 2000. That said, for better or worse, and I fear worse, he is president for another for years. His next judge will be historians who write biographies after about twenty-five years hindsight. I doubt that history will be kind to Bush. The people of Iraq will NEVER celebrate his birthday.
I think Bush was an illegitimate president after the 2000 election. The only case for his 2004 election being illigitimate is that he would have never been reelected in the first place save his illegitimate victory in 2000. That said, for better or worse, and I fear worse, he is president for another for years. His next judge will be historians who write biographies after about twenty-five years hindsight. I doubt that history will be kind to Bush. The people of Iraq will NEVER celebrate his birthday.
The funny thing about the 2004 election and staunch democrats is that people keep eluding to the "stolen election" idea. Frankly, just consider that the highest court in the land made the decision, and they are the legal experts.
Secondly, MANY democrats were hard on Reagan, whom most scholars believe that may have been one of the most influential Presidents of the Century. That being said, why the cynicism in relation to Bush? If his election was so illegitimate in 2000, and he's so horrible, why is he President again? The funny thing about this debate is that apparently a large portion of the US wanted to see Mr. Bush at the helm again, and this time the margin of victory was anything but narrow.
QUOTE
We will never have unity as long as people continue to take victory laps by leaving bumper stickers on their cars or rubbing it in with statements in their sig lines.
I'm confidant that you're referring to both parties due to the preponderance of John-John bumper stickers still on cars and anti-GW sig lines.
Will this decision by Congress haunt the President as being once again an "illegitimate" president?
Of course not. I didn't vote for GW either election (Browne and Badnarik), but I saw nothing for all the media circus in the 2000 election to think it was....what's the word they like to use...ah, stolen. I see even less illegitimacy in the 2004 election. Apparently so does Kerry, Moore and every Democratic congressperson minus Boxer and a handful from the CBC. Even the oft quoted LibBlogger Daily Kos has raised the white flag:
QUOTE
I do not believe any evidence exists to claim that Kerry definitively received more votes in Ohio than Bush, and I believe the oft-cited exit poll evidence, in particular, is weak
The Dems had their 15 seconds of protest, took time out from the schedule of congress to theoretically raise a point about electoral reform.....which should be debated, but in a different forum. We all know virtually nothing gets accomplished in congress.
QUOTE(Dontreadonme @ Jan 7 2005, 04:53 PM)
I'm confidant that you're referring to both parties due to the preponderance of John-John bumper stickers still on cars and anti-GW sig lines.
I have only seen two Kerry stickers in the last month, but I still see Bush stickers on a daily basis. It may be different in Alabama, but that's what I'm seeing in North Central Texas.
I took my Kerry yard sign down and removed my bumper stickers a soon as the polls closed on November 2 and my Kerry caps and buttons now reside in my private museum. I also removed election materials immediately after Clinton's victories in 1992 and 1996. I have no anti-Bush sig lines, although at some point I might insert one dealing with a specific issue, like Social Security or tax reform, but not about the election itself.
For those who haven't figured it out, THE ELECTION IS OVER!!! My main interest right now is the 2006 midterm Congressional elections.
QUOTE
None, interference by Congress in state issues only serves to screw up the state issues. And, elections are state issues. Democracy is a difficult and imperfect thing and there are always going to be issues over procedures raised. All we can strive for is doing our best to make the process better, but it's never going to be perfect. That is best left to the local and state levels.
Now that is a mouthful. Leave it up to the states.
Take Florida in 2000. For instance the felony list. How many individuals were on the list that should not have been and weren't allowed to vote. At last count there were thousands that should not have been on the list. Do you think there were 500+ that may have voted for Gore. Never know will we. Just leave it up to Governor Jeb and now Congresswoman Katherine Harris.
Then in 2004 they attempted again to keep the felony list secret but were finally forced by the courts to release that information. And guess what, more mistakes on this list, and they scrapped this list. Another attempt by the state to aid Mr. Bush. Again let the states be fair and impartial.
Now in 2004,Ohios Secretary of State, head of the election process, is also the Co-Chairman of the Bush-Cheney election in Ohio. And yes he was very impartial.
Also the issue of voter registration forms not printed on 80 - pound weight.
QUOTE
The secretary of state is under fire for instructing county election officials to reject voterregistration forms if they were not printed on "white, uncoated paper of not less than 80-pound text weight," a heavier stock similar to subscription cards found in magazines.
Blackwell reversed the order Wednesday, telling county boards of elections to process all otherwise-valid forms. But it appears that some Ohio elections workers had been returning the flimsier forms to applicants. Election officials say it’s impossible to know how many would-be voters have not been registered.
In his second directive, Blackwell said provisional ballots should be issued only to voters who show up at the correct polling place.
The insane part was that The Secretary of States offices wasn't complying with the 80 - pound weight issue either. They did not have any in stock.
Now that was a important issue, but no harm done. We just wanted to confuse you voter a little. But that is a state issue and of course as stated above Interference by Congress in state issues only serves to screw up the state issues.
Apparently these states couldn't be any more screwed up.
But the ends justifies the means.
We got our man elected.(by hook or crook)
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.