|
|
As America hurtles toward the next presidential race, the HBO film
'Recount' will relive the fervor of 2000's messy election. Kevin Spacey
and Denis Leary take Al Gore's fight to the courts on May 25 - make your own case here on the boards, where the most cogent arguments will be featured in a special poll on HBO.com. And don't worry - this time all the votes will be counted.
The question: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisan?
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
12/13/08
|
|
(71 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisan?
Dec 13, 2008 9:59 PM
|
|
If anyone has ever read Florida election law it states that a recount has to be called for in all 67 counties.Al Gores' team only asked for a recount in 5, the ones that may have made a difference to his numbers. It never really made any difference as he lost the recount anyway. The founding fathers were smart in the fact that no one section of the country will be able to dictate their will on the rest of us. I hope the electoral college never dies.The law prevails!
|
|
|
Posts:
5
Registered:
10/23/08
|
|
|
Posts:
652
Registered:
1/17/08
|
|
(69 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisa
Aug 29, 2008 12:42 PM
|
> Are any of you interested in seeing that new movie
> Swing Vote? I am still trying to figure out exactly
> how a presidency is hanging by one single vote. 
>
If you haven't seen it, I encourage you to do so! I thought it was a really good movie, alot of fun to watch. Kevin Costner plays the deadbeat dad character really well, which is meant as a compliment, by the way! It's also got some hysterically funny moments; the campaign commericals had me rolling! The movie though had that wonderful undercurrent of how vitally important it is to vote. It really is critical and every single vote counts. It is your right and your duty as an American to be a part of the process to determine the one person who will run your country. To sit by, and do nothing is a tragedy of epic proportions. To complain later about how the country is run after not voting is irresponsible. We really are the shapers of this country's destiny and we really do all have a voice! 
--
*********
Host_Ginna
HBO Forums Host
|
|
|
Posts:
22
Registered:
7/30/08
|
|
(68 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisan?
Jul 31, 2008 1:03 PM
|
Yep
--
Yoo-hoo
|
|
|
Posts:
455
Registered:
2/21/08
|
|
(67 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisan?
Jul 31, 2008 11:52 AM
|
> Now I have to cipher through all this information,
> and try and make an oppinion, since I was too young
> when Bush v Gore was happening to know what the hell
> was going on.
>
> --
> Yoo-hoo
So you are going to be voting for the first time then?
--
__________________________
Jaydes
HBO Forums Host
|
|
|
Posts:
22
Registered:
7/30/08
|
|
(66 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisan?
Jul 31, 2008 12:28 AM
|
Now I have to cipher through all this information, and try and make an oppinion, since I was too young when Bush v Gore was happening to know what the hell was going on.
--
Yoo-hoo
|
|
|
Posts:
455
Registered:
2/21/08
|
|
(65 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisa
Jul 29, 2008 10:12 PM
|
Are any of you interested in seeing that new movie Swing Vote? I am still trying to figure out exactly how a presidency is hanging by one single vote.
--
__________________________
Jaydes
HBO Forums Host
|
|
|
Posts:
11
Registered:
6/9/08
|
|
(64 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisa
Jul 23, 2008 10:45 PM
|
Dimpled Chads only confused the issue. The USSC got it right. They recognized the re-count in Florida for what it was: an unfair advantage for Gore.
Fact is, Florida's votes would've been treated differently than those of any other state. You can't scrutinize the vote of just one state and not the rest. Invalid, ill-defined, incomplete ballots are cast aside all throughout the US. It's all part of the process. Florida for Gore wanted to go back and make those count....and that's not fair
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
7/7/08
|
|
(63 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisa
Jul 7, 2008 5:43 PM
|
Of course it was. Blatantly.
The movie nailed it. For 8 years I have been trying to lay this stuff out for my (especially conservative) friends, and they never really get it. The press never did explain most of the details, as for example that one county was counting dimpled chads while the other was not. Nor was the Supreme Court?s opinion ever summarized clearly. But you did it!
How could Kathryn Grant possibly square shutting down the vote count on a Sunday afternoon when it was 98 % complete and the one important goal was vote count accuracy? How could the U.S. Supreme Court find that same process to constitute a risk of irreparable harm to an individual (George Bush) when what was at risk was the integrity of democracy itself? How could that same court order the count stopped and then a few days later declare it to be too late for a count to be completed? How did a squadron of ruffians get from the Washington D.C. area to Miami to intimidate the vote counters and who paid their expenses? You answered all these question and more ? and in a clear concise readily understandable way. The one question that still hangs for me is why Justice Kennedy chose to go with the conservatives on the question of the appropriate remedy for the violation of the equal protection standard. You captured the skills and attitudes of both sides quite graphically. I especially liked your point-counterpoint. This is not a street fight, says Warren Christopher. This is nothing but a street fight, says Jim Baker. Who also, when he concludes that the only argument that will fly is equal protection, says, ?Maybe the conservatives on the Supreme Court will discover their inner liberal.? What comes through very loud and clear is that the people involved were not in the least interested in accuracy. They were instead driven strongly by partisanship. Except two groups: the Florida Supreme Court and the minority of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Your timing however is quite open to question. Why run it on Memorial Day weekend? Not one of my friends have even heard of it, and several watched it only because we referred them to it on Comcast On Demand. Surely you were not pressured into showing it when it was unlikely a very large portion of the country would be aware of it
|
|
|
Posts:
931
Registered:
1/17/08
|
|
(62 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisan?
Jun 29, 2008 3:25 PM
|
> You are so right. Neither side was a 'little guy' and
> each side has formidable power.
Which I agree with. Though it would have been a bit more interesting if it was say, the Libertarian party instead of the Democratic party.
|
|
|
Posts:
946
Registered:
1/17/08
|
|
(61 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisan?
Jun 12, 2008 5:28 PM
|
|
You are so right. Neither side was a 'little guy' and each side has formidable power.
|
|
|
Posts:
11
Registered:
6/9/08
|
|
(60 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisan?
Jun 9, 2008 3:30 PM
|
Although GW has had a truly miserable presidency and it probably would've been better if Gore had been elected, the USSC made the right decision.
I am a little surprised at HBO's depiction showing the Gore's camp as the noble, little-guy who can never win against the big bad GOP.
Fact is, if you allowed Florida to re-count every vote you'd have to let every other state do the same thing. And if I remember correctly, Gore's camp didn't want every state to be re-counted, just Florida.
|
|
|
Posts:
931
Registered:
1/17/08
|
|
(59 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisa
Jun 8, 2008 3:36 PM
|
> It's just like statistics, you can manipulate them to
> prove anything you want to.
Go to agree there.
Darn statistics!
|
|
|
Posts:
946
Registered:
1/17/08
|
|
(58 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisa
Jun 5, 2008 5:43 PM
|
|
It's just like statistics, you can manipulate them to prove anything you want to.
|
|
|
Posts:
6
Registered:
6/3/08
|
|
(57 of 71)
Re: Do you believe the Supreme Court's handling of Gore v. Bush was partisa
Jun 3, 2008 6:00 AM
Rate this post:
|
> After watching the movie "Bush's Brain", I believe
> that Karl Rove was the genius who devised the ballot
> for West Palm Beach.
Your like most Democrats. You basically believe anything that is told to you, and make your own assumptions without actual fact.
Let's stick to actual facts. Theresa LePore invented the butterfly ballot. In 2000, she was Supervisor of Elections for Palm Beach County, Florida. She was also a Democrat.
> There was no reason why they could not have gathered those people that voted in some > major convention center and had them verified as a legitimate voter and ask them
> straight up, who did you cast your vote for?
Because it's against the law.
> I heard people say that Gore said he "invented the Internet".
> He would have to be an idiot to claim this.
His own words... "During my service in the United States Congress I took the initiative in creating the internet"
> Its obvious that the real winner in the battle (besides W) was the Supreme Court. They > successfully fulfilled the role they were appointed to perform by their masters. They > wielded their power in an entirely partisan manner against all sense of justice for > their real client
The Court's opinion was 7-2 which held that the Florida Supreme Court's method for recounting ballots was unconstitutional. They also stated that Three of the concurring justices also asserted that the Florida Supreme Court had violated Article II, § 1, cl. 2 of the Constitution (misinterpreting Florida election law that had been enacted by the Florida Legislature.) That's hardly partisan. Remember, the Florida Supreme Court violated election law, and they weren't on Bush's side. You all seem to miss that point. If they hadn't violated the law in the first place, then it would have never ended up in the US Supreme Court.
> Issuing a one time only ruling undermines the legitimacy of the court. Every case the > court decides is unique. No two set of circumstances is ever the same. To say that > Bush v. Gore is not allow to be used as a precedent in any future case due to the > special nature of the case is absurd. Shame on them all.
Maybe you need to read the opinion instead of taking a movie at it's word. No where does it state that it's a "one time only" ruling.
> Almost every single Justice on The Supreme Court that day in December 2000 was > nominated by a Republican President.
Ginsberg and Breyer were nominated by Clinton. They happen to be 2 of the most partisan justices on the court.
> Funny, the only things we were supposed to seperate were church and state.
Where in the constitution does it state this?
|
|
|
|
|
