Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News 2000 Election Stolen

  1. No

  2. Yes, via vote fraud

  3. Yes, via illegal/unconstitutional post-election manipulation via the courts

  4. I don't know/I'm not sure

  1. Oct 14, 2005 #1


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Follow-up to my previous poll:

    Question: Do you think the 2000 United States Presidential election was stolen via some (any) form of vote fraud or legal malfeasance?

    There are more choices this time due to the legal wrangling that went on after the election.

    Again, I won't be arguing the subject here - I just want to know opinions.
  2. jcsd
  3. Oct 14, 2005 #2
    what about yes, both?
  4. Oct 14, 2005 #3


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Hmm. Hadn't considered that. If that's what you think, pick one and then state that you really think it was both.
  5. Oct 14, 2005 #4
    I think yes both too.

    And I think "stolen" is too loaded of a word.

    I would rephrase it: Did Bush use numerous measures to get into the white house, fully knowing that Gore actually was the people's choice not only in the national popular vote but also in the contested state of Florida?
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2005
  6. Oct 14, 2005 #5


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    That's too loaded of a phrase
  7. Oct 14, 2005 #6


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I choose the word "stolen" because it means illegal. If, for example, someone believed he won by waging a sleazy, but legal campaign or that the legal wrangling was sleazy, but legal, that would require a "no". It would also make him not all that unique, whereas winning by illegal means would make him unique - and that's what I want to know.
    Well, that has more than one point, including statements of fact (which shouldn't be in a poll) so I don't think it goes well in a poll. Ie:
    That's extremely vague, but at face value, it has to be a statement of fact and can only be answered yes.
    Again, a statement of fact (worded in a loaded way), that can only have one answer: yes, Gore got more popular votes than Bush. It is also an utterly irrelevant fact when dealing with presidential elections, since popular vote is not what determines who wins. You could start a poll asking if people think there should be a constitutional amendment.....heck, I'll do that....
    That is an opinion (sorta - there are actually a number of factual answers to it) that posited alone could make a good poll. If you feel like posting one, be sure to specify what counting criteria or specific court challenge you are talking about.
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2005
  8. Oct 14, 2005 #7


    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I considered adding the word "unique" to the poll, but thought it might be somewhat prejudicial and reduce the response rate. Ie, if Bush did something illegal but not uniquely different from what Gore did, it would require a "no" response.
  9. Oct 14, 2005 #8
    I don't know enough about the legal end of the tricks he used. The tricks he used *should* be illegal, just as lying in order to invade a sovereign nation should be illegal. I think he has acted in ways that should be considered illegal too many times to count, but it wouldn't surprise me if he wiggled out of all of them on some obscure technicality.

    So I think "stolen" is still the wrong word. The things he did, or that others did for him, *should* be illegal.

    (A neutral example that is tangentially related, but is not one of the tricks I have in mind: It should be illegal to have hidden source code in election machines, for example. It should simply be *required* that the source code is completely available; this is our vote, not some run-of-the-mill business. There should be a different standard for those who are working in areas at the very base of our society - they should be transparent because we *all* depend on them, the structure of our society depends on them. )

    But as I don't know the *details* of most law, I am hardly able to assess whether Bush "stole" the election. So, I can't participate in this poll. If I were to vote, I'd say yes to both.
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2005
  10. Oct 14, 2005 #9


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    So patty... you know he did something illegal... yet you have absolutely no idea what the law actually is? I don't really understand...

    And think about what you're saying. Put the source code for the software that will be run at a US Presidential Election... out into public hands. Why not hand terrorists the blueprints to every military base in US posessions while we're at it.
  11. Oct 14, 2005 #10


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

    How could the answer to that possibly be yes? Without actually counting every vote, how would Bush know that Gore really won Florida? Did he just intuit this information using his clairvoyant powers?
  12. Oct 14, 2005 #11


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Actually since a large majority of studies concluded that Bush would have won Florida.... I don't see how anyone could say yes to it. Of course, there was always the 1 variable where Gore won the court decision to toss out the military's absentee votes that would have won it for him.
  13. Oct 14, 2005 #12
    Well, I have Volusia county in mind. This is the county where 16,000 Gore votes disappeared on election night and were never recovered. (Every one of those votes was for Gore, in my understanding.)

    Diebold counted those on election day, lost those on election day, and upper management at Diebold knew about it.

    Jeb Bush as governor must have been involved in some manner, in getting diebold into the county (he was involved in some manner in getting the SoS into office, who certifies the machines for elections.)

    So I expect Shrubby knew about it too. If he didn't know the details, I expect he knew that Diebold would do what it could to help him out. I expect he knew that that included some shady business.

    I gave a link on one of the other similar threads.
  14. Oct 14, 2005 #13
    Try rereading my post to see why you are misrepresenting what I said.

    Pretty sure we're clever enough to safeguard against that.
  15. Oct 14, 2005 #14


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    And the thousands of voter registration cards that were found to be illegal that were all democrats? Of people who were dead/didnt exist?

    Hmm... election fraud at its finest, of course, by the illegitimate Democrats.
  16. Oct 14, 2005 #15


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yah sounds like you really gotta hold on the information there.
  17. Oct 14, 2005 #16


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Yes, via some form of fraud or legal malfeasance.

    Character is a consistent thing through life (across the board, from beginning to end). IMO Bush, et al, are corrupt beyond anything to enter politics to date. How much will be revealed to the American people in time, who knows? But, he has not earned anything in his life based on his own achievements and merit.

    I am very suspicious of the court, but less certain of this, so would vote "I'm not sure" on that if I could.

    You realize no matter how many times there is a poll on this topic, and no matter the wording, you aren't likely to get the results you would prefer.
  18. Oct 14, 2005 #17
    Why are you so hostile towards me?

    Also, I'd love to see a reference on the thousands of illegal democratic registrations in florida. I haven't heard of those.

    Laugh at me some more if you must, but please include a reference for the information. (Particularly since I have such a bad grasp of it.)

    thanks in advance,
  19. Oct 14, 2005 #18
    I don't actually think both happened. I just noticed it wasn't on the poll. I actually don't know anything about the 2000 election so I couldn't make an opinion on it... not that I would care anyways. Elections are in themselves mere rituals to keep the populace happy (and many often cheer!) during the transition of power from one dictator to the next.
  20. Oct 14, 2005 #19
    Sexual frustration. He's been humping rocks so long he doesn't know how to act around a real female.
  21. Oct 15, 2005 #20


    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I voted no. Florida may have turned into more of a tactical legal battle than an election, but I don't believe there were any illegal actions.

    I'd say pattylou's statement pretty much hits the target, with the exception of the vote in Florida. With that many votes and a count that close, if you recounted the votes again today, it would be 50/50 which candidate would win. You could get a different winner every time you recounted.

    Comparing Bush's and Gore's balancing of personal goals against ensuring the public has faith in the democratic election process to three other candidates.

    Top 5 (of Bush, Gore and 3 other candidates)

    1. Richard Nixon. Could have disputed election returns in Illinois, but decided the national trauma of a disputed election wasn't worth the presidency.

    2. Rutherford Hayes. Refused to concede a Presidential election in which he won the initial election count by 1 electoral vote. At least he kept himself out of the dispute and allowed an election board (5 Senators, 5 Representatives, and 5 Supreme Court justices) and Congress to decide the issue. There was a dispute over 20 electoral votes - 3 states in which a large number of Democratic votes were thrown out by Republican election officials because of fraud and one electoral vote in Oregon where Democrats tried to give one of Oregon's electoral votes to Tilden on a technicality.

    3. Samuel Tilden. Refused to concede a Presidential election that he lost by one electoral vote. The dispute continued right up until the day before inaugaration. The ranking between Hayes and Tilden is a toss up. Hayes gets the edge since he won the initial electoral vote count, but Tilden had a case on the 3 states where Democratic votes were tossed. Overall, the situaton was handled as badly as a situation could possibly be handled, even if the candidates themselves stayed out of the fight.

    4. George Bush. Actively involved in refusing to have a statewide recount. Florida's Republican Secretary of State's decisions certainly seemed very partial to Bush.

    5. Al Gore. Actively involved in refusing to concede the election. His team even proposed discarding military absentee ballots, seemingly taking the position that if military votes weren't counted, it was the military's fault, not his. The ranking between Bush and Gore is a toss up. Bush gets the edge since he was the winner of the initial vote count (it's hard to expect the winner to concede the election).
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Similar Threads - Election Stolen Date
News Reaction to Trump winning the 2016 US Presidential Election Nov 9, 2016
News Election Day! Nov 8, 2016
News Maine GOP alleges rampant voter fraud, stolen elections. Sep 22, 2011
California election stolen! Jun 8, 2006
News Presidential election stolen? Oct 12, 2005