Dont you think a 0.00019% is to little of a difference to be valid?

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Those 537 votes that matters the world to the elections in the US are only 0.00019% of the total population. In every election about anything there are allways some variations from the final count, about +-2% maybe, depends on the amount of people voting, the more votes the more variation. So isnt this tiny percentage a little way to low to make these elections valid?
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Hehe, true, it would crash at 95% and then they would have to reboot their win95 compaq computer and start again :)
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,270
103
106
Whether the difference is 10,000,000 or 1 single vote -- it's irrelevant. So long as that difference is tabulated using the legal standards and properly established, it is perfectly acceptable. By your rationale, a basketball game that ends 125 to 124 should not be 'valid' because the difference is too small.....
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
As we have seen, there were kids in some school that voted up to 4-5 times, there were dead people voting. This cant be right, its like in a basketball game the scoreboard would say something else than what has been counted.

Why are dead people voting and why are people allowed to vote more than once?
 

3615buck

Banned
Sep 22, 2000
786
0
0
<< Why are dead people voting and why are people allowed to vote more than once? >>

I suppose they took over this idea from France.
During the last elections in Paris, there were also many dead people who voted...
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
And because dead people can vote that means that there is something very wrong with the system and that means that someone is cheating. If this is happening there should be a +- michmach.
 

3615buck

Banned
Sep 22, 2000
786
0
0
Anyway, everybody now understood (I hope so at least) that the President will not be elected by the people but by the courts and judges !
 

chess9

Elite member
Apr 15, 2000
7,748
0
0
Yes, the U.S. Supreme Court has decided the question. It was decided by Republican judges in favor of a Republican Presidential candidate. Democracy failed here in America.

This is the blackest day in history for the U.S. Supreme Court.
 

3615buck

Banned
Sep 22, 2000
786
0
0
I don't understand why people keep so cool...
I mean, you voted and some of these votes are not taken into account...

This would not have been surprising a few years ago in eastern european countries or in some African countries, but in the US ???

You people should all be in the streets to show that you cannot agree with this...

A few years ago, more than 300,000 people were in the streets in Brussels here in Belgium because the justice and the police had not worked properly in an horrible case of pedophilia.

300,000 out of 10,000,000 inhabitants, this would mean something like 7,000,000 Americans ! OK, only 3,500,000 because half of you agree with the judges' decision.

I'm sorry guys, but you are being fvcked !!!
 

nickdakick

Platinum Member
Jun 27, 2000
2,484
0
0
Oh my, Czar, *sigh* did you have to start this ? ;) You'll get them goin'. BTW the American election system isn't democratic IMO. After all the rules were set before the race so they have to play by these.
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
I was just pointing out how itty bitty tiny part of the US population its all about. The world is truly laughing.
 

nickdakick

Platinum Member
Jun 27, 2000
2,484
0
0
I've got your point but was imagining the flames coming when they're all up over there. :D Will be fun to watch though.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
It's hard to argue for either candidate here. Simply because Bush winning by 500 votes in FL doesn't mean that a majority of Americans wanted him for pres. Same thing if Gore got a recount and won by 500 votes. Since the American people as a whole didn't really care which one became president with any degree of consensus, it was decided by chance, which I think is better then dragging this thing out too long. It's like when you want to buy a new phone set or something, and it comes in white and black, and you don't really have a prefference for either. So you just flip a coin and pick one. Maybe you would have been better off taking the other one, but if you are going to stand in the store for 5 hours trying to decide, you are better off just letting chance choose.
 

rmeijer

Member
Oct 3, 2000
133
0
0
<<it was decided by chance>>
While I agree with you in principal, I think that the appearance of how things were conducted will raise many eyebrows around the world.
 

nickdakick

Platinum Member
Jun 27, 2000
2,484
0
0


<< So you just flip a coin and pick one >>


Hehe that's what should have been done. Whole thing over in a wink of an eye. :D
 

WoundedWallet

Platinum Member
Oct 9, 1999
2,325
0
0
I also looked at it through the same perspective. Not regarding the US population, but comparing it to the total votes in Florida.

The percentage was higher, but still in the thousands of one percent if I'm not wrong.

If it was a horse race it would go to the photo finish. If it was a swimming race they both would get the medal. But since its politics the whole thing gets muddied.

This election exposes a few things about our electoral system.

It shows that the system is not honest, otherwise we would have been able to have a definitive number as in the photo finish case. The simple matter that we can't have a definitive number shows that the system is vunerable to manipulation.

It shows that the system is not fair, otherwise we would have been able to share the title since they were so close. Israel did that a while ago when the two parties shared, 2 years each, the premiership.

But hey! Nobody said that our political process was supposed to be honest or fair. It's just supposed to work.

Well, somehow for half of the country the system didn't work this time. It it was a marriage it would've been reasons for divorce. If it was a couple hundred years ago it would have been reason for a war.

So what can be done to avoid another scenario like this?

While I don't think I can come up with such an answer, I think that the route to solve this problem involves spliting both parties into three.

A new strong party would make all the politicians a little more honest and a little more caring of what people really want.

At this point I'm angrier with Gore for losing to such a character than I'm angry at the republican party for picking up a comedian to be the president. Come to think of it we went from a Cowboy to a Don Juan to a Comedian. Nothing to be proud about. I sure would like to see some major changes in the entire process.

Maybe Gore will become a political activist and acquire some personality in the process....
 

Thorn

Golden Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,665
0
0
Blackest day? Sounds more like sour grapes. You Libs just love your spin. The world doesn't revolve around the Dems, and no amount of legal wrangling, frivilous litigation, or character assassination is going to change the fact that Gore lost. He lost on election night, he lost on the first recount, the 2nd, the 3rd, the 4th, and none of his legal actions to swipe this election held enough water to float a rubber ducky. You want to blame someone? Blame the Democrat election officials in the counties that you libs have been fighting for the last 5 weeks. If they would have done their jobs properly your boy just may have been able to pull off a sqweeker.

And now the Dems whip out the race &quot;card&quot; again to try and stir things up because they didn't get their way. Well, boo-hoo, Jesse can cry all he wants about &quot;disenfranchisement&quot; and &quot;police presence&quot; and all that nonsense. But it still doesn't change the fact it was obviously the Democrat election officials in those counties that didn't prepare the voting equipment correctly and didn't properly alert voters in those counties of proper voting procedure (heck, they didn't even post the voting rules on some of the voting machines).


The US SC simply upheld the Fla law (unlike the Fla Supreme court). 7 of the 9 Justices declared that the Fla SC was in violation of the Constitution and that the Fla SC was biased in their decision (even some of the Libs on the Fla SC got squeamish on that last decision they made). And it probably didn't help the Dem's cause that the Fla SC thumbed their collective nose's at the US SC's previous ruling, even Ginsburg said the Fla SC's attitude was &quot;unprofessional, bordering on insubordinate&quot;.

Anyway, it's over. Gore lost. Get on with life. I've got a party to attend tonight! Woot!