Do you (still) believe the 2000 election was 'stolen'?

[Q]

- There are many threads blaming Nader and the Greens for taking away enough votes in 2000 to allow Bush* to 'win'. But seldom do we see threads or posts about the 300,000 registered Florida Democrats who voted for Bush*, the tens of thousands of purged 'felon' voters, Harris and Jeb manipulating ballots or the illegal SC decision.

- I'm not suggesting we should continue to revisit this issue above all others. But it's surprising that it isn't included in the debate about why Democrats 'lost' the 2000 election.

- Blaming Nader without including the facts about election fraud, civil rights abuses and the illegal (partisan) Supreme Court decision is a disservice to our country and party.

- 'Move on' if you wish...but don't allow the crimes committed in 2000 to fade from memory.

[sweetheart]

1. stolen, and not forgotten -eom-

.

[Dookus]

2. Why must there be one reason?

Life is complicated, and rarely black and white.

There was voter fraud. There was theft. None of which would've been enough to give the White House to Bush if Nader hadn't run.

I can blame Katherine Harris AND Nader equally.

[Q]

5. If there is 'equal' blame...

...you couldn't tell by reading many of the posts here on DU.

- We should also be asking ourselves why so many Democrats voted for Bush* in 2000. What's up with that?

- But the most important aspect of the 2000 election is that our democratic process was subverted and there has been NO action taken by Republicans OR Democrats to correct the system or punish the abusers. Simply amazing.

[G_j]

25. that is an important distinction

on the one hand Democracy was subverted in a clearly undemocratic and arguably criminal series of actions. On the other, an individual legally ran for the office of president. A question that could be asked is what the greatest danger to democracy?

I'll add that the one thing that troubles me about some attitudes here is the seeming lack of real outrage over the civil rights violations that a substantial block of African Americans experienced in the 2000 election.
Is it something new when the African American contingent of the Democratic party gets taken for granted? Of course not. I wonder what the reaction would be if a substantial number of Blacks began moving over to a third party out of the frustration of being consistently ignored. Just a hypothetical question at this stage, but it may not always be so.

[Vogon_Glory]

8. Excellent Points

I would have blamed Jebito and Katherine Harris for the all-too-successful theft of the 2000 election without thinking about Ralph Nader, but I believe that either Harris or Jeb Bush would have been able to pull off their caper without Ralph siphoning away the vote.

I hope and pray that many of the Nader voters have learned that there was indeed a huge difference between the former Clinton/Gore administration and what George UU Bush and his Banana Republican allies have wrought and what a disastrous effect their vote for Nader had on the country.

Unfortunately, I don't see many of the 2000 Nader voters as being politically mature enough this year to see how their quixotic crusade could help give the USA four more disastrous years of "W"oe.

[indepat]

12. I don't recall how many votes Nader got, but some 55,000 wrongfully

disenfranchised voters is my recollection of claims of Ms. Harris's handiwork.

[DFLer4edu]

68. Nader took 97,000 Harris took 91,000

This doesn't excuse the crime, but I'm wondering how many of those 91,000 that were purged from the voting roles, how many actually showed up to vote?

[DFLer4edu]

67. I'm with you

Harris and Nader are both to blame. The reason Nader takes more heat is because he should know better.

[DennisReveni]

95. Why is Nader to blame?

If 300k registered DEMOCRATS voted Bush in FLA 2000, aren't they the REAL people to blame?
What about those 1.1 million gays who voted for Bush? Don't they count as well?
Maybe Democrats should step right up and take a little responsibility for the loss.
But, no you prefer a nice easy scapegoat to blame.
That is why you have lost on nearly every single issue since 2000.
Arnold and Democratic support of him ring any bells?

[nolabels]

104. I feel exactly the opposite

I Knew better than to be naderized, but still as a result of Harris it still happened.

I never blame or get angry at stupid people for misgivings I might have suffered. I just get that way at the people that would bring them on intentionally in a process of being so :mad:

P.S. this is one reason showing intent is such a important component in law. In civilized societies individual must become demure and innocuous when inflicting harm on others could be of an issue, otherwise it is not civilized, but barbaric and feudal

[zanana]

3. I think it should return as an election year issue...

I still remember Republicans being bused in to walk around with signs that said "Sore-Loserman". How could we possibly forget that?

[illini]

4. Hell freaking ya it was stolen.

I don't just think it was stolen I know it was stolen!!!! :smoke:

[glarius]

6. Isn't it a fact that without Nader in 2000 Gore would have won despite the

other problems you mention????....If that's true, it's valid to be angry that he's considering doing the same thing again...

[Toby109]

14. Yup

Nader~97,000 votes.

Jeb/Harris voters scrubbed~75,000.

Bush margin of victory-537.

[Deja Q]

19. So? If Jeb and Kathie played fricking fair... that'd be 75000 more votes.

And Gore would win.

What is the problem?

Blaming a bunch of people who wanted Nader is still sheer lunacy when you consider the legality of the system:

Let's blame the people who fucked with the system to discount votes; there were reports saying plenty of people who were NOT felons lost their right to vote because of so-called "accidents". You can bet your sweet bippy that at least 538 of those 75000 votes should have been utterly legitimate.

Edit: Spelling

[Q]

26. It's disingenous to suggest 'only' 97,000 votes were stolen...

...because there was widespread fraud on many levels.

- For instance...Harris allowed hundreds of disqualified ballots to be 'fixed' by Republican operatives working out of her office.

[Q]

15. We're in deep trouble...

...if the only question is who would have won with or without Nader.

- Why is it that we've framed the argument this way? It seems that convincing Nader not to run has become more important than prosecuting election fraud or trying to fix the system that allowed it to happen.

[LifeDuringWartime]

63. its troubling, alright

good work stirring things up a bit!

[LeahMira]

89. Nope.

As Mr. Nader pointed out this morning, there were Reform and Libertarian candidates on the ballot who also drew their share of votes. While I don't believe for one second that all those Jewish seniors in Miami actually intended to vote for Buchanan, fact is that their votes did take away from Mr. Gore's count. I also know of a few Republicans who voted Green, for different reasons than the Democrats who went Green, but still...

Wondering why Nader is such a threat to Democrats who seem to basically agree with what he's saying policy-wise? Or, if it's that independents and third parties don't have a prayer in the US, why not vote for either Kucinich or Sharpton in the primaries that remain?

[mhr]

7. Thanks Q For Reminding All About Complexity And Politics

My sense of the outrage at DU is that many here smell blood in the water for the 2004 general election.

Any threat to the presumed dethroning of Bush is taken personally.

Hence, Nader becomes the focus of attack and blame instead of the impetus for effective action.

It also seems that many have discounted the benefits that Nader could bring to the election. Primarily, he could defuse the sting of the Rove attack machine against the presumed democratic nominee.

To your point, it is clear that Nader cannot be singly blamed for the selection of Bush as president.

[RainDog]

9. there was a combination of factors

absolutely, without a doubt, I think Greg Palast showed that Florida was rigged by Jeb and Katherine.

however, Nader did have an impact on the number of votes Gore received...though I don't know if any of these made a difference in the outcome of the election.

What is appalling to me now is that Nader has had a chance to see the horrors of this Bush's presidency and he is so full of...whatever...to divide the liberal vote at this crucial, crucial time.

I am astonished that he could be so selfish.

If he stays in this race to the end, I can say that I will detest him with nearly the same level of viseral repulsion that I feel for Bush.

I'm more liberal than the DLC, etc, yet, a Nader run now will alienate this voter from EVER supporting the greens if he is in any way associated with them.

how can he run now, knowing the environmental issues that are so crucial, and knowing that he cannot win?

it is hubris beyond measure, to me. an astonishing disregard for anything he claims to care about.

there are times when you have to compromise because it's in the best interests of all for a greater good-- which is getting rid of the fundamentalist, anti-environment, anti middle and lower class piece of crap who is squatting in the White House now.

[Q]

13. But what Nader was doing was legal...

...while what the Bushies did was plainly ILLEGAL.

- We can complain all we want about Nader and the Greens...but it's perfectly legal in the United States for third party candidates to run for president...even if it pisses off one of the two major parties. BushCo* broke the law...yet few even want to talk about that aspect of the 2000 election.

- It seems we've made Nader the scapegoat while downplaying the blatant subversion of Democracy.

[RainDog]

33. no, they are two different issues

which I think I stated.

I have known for more than three years that there was election tampering in Florida, at the least.

it's noted ALL THE TIME on this board, as is the unconstitutional and ethicially sleazy selection by the interest-conflicted Supreme Court decision.

Yes, it is perfectly legal for third party candidates to run.

No one is saying that it isn't.

The problem right now, as Greens such as Medea Benjamin have noted, is that removing Bush is THE issue, and a Nader candidacy hurts that cause if he stays in the race all the way to the ballot...which I would have to assume he would do if he declares.

Why are you trying to say that anyone who opposes a Nader candidacy now isn't supportive of third party tickets?

Why are you trying to say that anyone who opposes a Nader run now is not paying attention to the theft of 2000, or the possible electronic...make that near certain attempt at electronic voter fraud this time around?

I didn't say that. What I did say, and what I firmly believe, is that a Nader run right now is the height of irresponsiblity. He has no chance of winning, and he is making it more likely that Bush can win.

It makes me sick to think he would do this.

That's why, the more he postures, the more I start to detest him.

Don't try to twist my words to say that my concern about Nader denies Republican election fraud. It doesn't.

But Nader is supposed to be on the side of the environmentalists, etc...so why would he now do something which supports the very group that is working so hard to kill any restraints on corporate rape of the environment??

[LeahMira]

91. I don't know that they are totally different...

The problem right now, as Greens such as Medea Benjamin have noted, is that removing Bush is THE issue, and a Nader candidacy hurts that cause if he stays in the race all the way to the ballot...which I would have to assume he would do if he declares.

Do you think he would be running if Kucinich or Sharpton were the nominee-apparent? Or Clark or Dean or any of the others who have left the race? I really don't know... just asking what you think.


Why are you trying to say that anyone who opposes a Nader candidacy now isn't supportive of third party tickets?

I don't know that anyone says that. At the same time, do you think that with the two-party system we have now either one of the parties will ever calmly agree that it's a good time for a third party to come into its own? Thinking back over the past thirty or forty years, when might have been a good time for a third party?


Why are you trying to say that anyone who opposes a Nader run now is not paying attention to the theft of 2000, or the possible electronic...make that near certain attempt at electronic voter fraud this time around?

What have Democrats done to ensure that voter fraud does not happen?

For that matter, why do you assume that even if there are no third party candidates there is any less chance of fraud? Are you claiming that Democrats will win so decisively that even with fraud their numbers will be so overwhelming that the fradulent outcome will still favor Democrats? If so, I'd reconsider that assumption if I were you. I think that the Republicans wouldn't blink at anything they think they can finesse or fake their way out of.

[DuctapeFatwa]

10. There is little evidence to support the theory of a causal relationship

between which candidate gets the most votes and who takes office.

[nostamj]

11. stolen before a vote was cast

with the voter purge.

'chads' were a distraction. along with 'butterfly ballots' and side issues. all designed to keep the purge out of the story.

and it succeeded.

(which is NOT to say that other tampering didn't happen, including electronic)

[Q]

16. Good point...and should it matter to us...

...how many votes Nader 'took' when the election itself was riddled with fraud and abuse?

- It's strange...but we don't allow this type of cheating in sports. Yet...we've allowed the 'other side' to cheat us out of an election and the advice of our leadership is to 'move on'.

[sattahipdeep]

Move on....LMAO

The role of Krongard & Bremer....

When asked about the status of the investigation into
the disproportionate pre-attack stock option trades
involving United and American Airlines, Merrill Lynch,
Marsh and McLennan Insurance, Morgan Stanley, Citigroup,
Bear Stearns, and American Express, etc. -- all icons
of American capitalism -- NYSE Communications Director
Ray Pellecchia said, "We don't even confirm that there
is an ongoing investigation."

Prior to being in Iraq, Bremer was Chairman and Chief
Executive Officer of Marsh Crisis Consulting Company, a crisis
management firm owned by the financial services firm Marsh &
McLennan. From 1989 to 2000, he was Managing Director of
Kissinger Associates, a strategic consulting firm headed by former
Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger.

Krongard's current lofty intelligence community position,
combined with his prior leadership of a financial institution
allegedly connected to terrorist hijacker bank accounts, suspicious
UAL options contracts, and "private banking" is so controversial that
it has not as yet sparked any official investigation.

That said, the evidence is substantial enough to potentially
expose the prior-knowledge issue -- if Congress chooses to act.

And while Treasury Department official Rob Nichols agreed that
unresolved conflict of interest questions remain, the CIA Executive
Director is still currently charged with supervision of the U.S.
intelligence investigation of his former firm and its
"private banking" operations.



Since the Sept. 11 attacks, Krongard has traveled to Afghanistan, hiding
his facial features behind a beard. After the war in Iraq broke out in
March, he went to Baghdad to see firsthand how events were unfolding.
While inside a palace that belonged to the deposed Saddam Hussein,
Krongard had a snapshot taken of him sitting on a palace throne.

Any fool can make things worse among people.
It takes a genius to make things better.

[nomatrix]

65. Your post is interesting

Has some very interesting traits.
It shows you replying to the previous comment (above linking message) but reply area indicates original message (with no hyperlink) and is totally off topic. That being said...

Is there a link to this statement you just made about Krongard & Bremer?

Do I think the election was stolen? No it was a "coup"

[Deja Q]

17. The "Nader only" crowd are nuts, not worth real time and discussion

Several elements caused the downfall of Selection 2000:

* Supreme Court playing partisan politics, ignoring solid factors such as the Popular vote (which has since been abolished, hmmmm...) and instead throwing in the little mental midget*...

* Jeb and Kathie Harris sodomizing the system to disallow votes from people who were or were not felons for brother's benefit x( .

* The recount, which had repukes acting like unevolved animals at every turn, trying to keep things from going smoothly and legitimately at every single level of the process... for obstructing an government government process the whole lot of them should have been thrown in jail for 20 years.

* Gore running a weak campaign, plenty of people have said that and it is true.

* Clinton's acts of being bipartisan in the past were nothing until Monica came about helped out the pukes BIG time, save the argument that it was his personal life - it was made public you cannot ignore it at that point, and if you were giving the President semi-regular fun-time sex acts, wouldn't you eventually tell somebody?! It's easy to look back and compare atrocities, and yes the repukes are infinitely worse, but thngs were different at the time and that should be remembered. :-(

And with the Green party support plummeting in the 2002 elections, anyone who thinks Nader is a threat is an nut.

Let's look ahead to 2004: Will Nader be the judas goat again, with people blindly forgetting all the NB_ idiots who'll do write-ins of their precious candidate, ditching the DFL party in the process. I can still see * winning, even if they do play fair (which I doubt).

[PATRICK]

18. Stolen and still buried

with a fist sticking out of the grave. That is wholly separate from a legal candidate''s effect on the election especially if the even that legal campaign was gamed illegally by one side and mishandled badly by the other. I suppose Perot is not a trade off though we certainly did not wickedly manipulate the phenomenon.

Nader without the Greens and most of his scanty backing is just a bogeyman from 2000. Handle gracefully and show no fear. As far as his pristine stands on issues damned to the furnace if Bush wins again they can as easily be gamed by our "too liberal" candidate into making himself look more centrist. A deft and shrewd candidate can use Nader, a floating mine no longer, instead of feeling angry or threatened.

Blaming Nader is yet another misdirection for people ashamed of this nation's inability to face or face down the coup d'etat. The argument that some part of those votes would have negated the cheating would have left the weak but victorious Gore with all the cheating unrevealed and intact and BBV coming in under the radar.

In the longer view I hope it may still be said this forced us to face the lack of democracy in our country and that organizational Democrats were all too willing to compromise this into oblivion. if we fail now we will have a lot more people than Nader to blame.

[BiggJawn]

20. Yeah, I'm still angry. and I'm angry that it will happen again.

BushCo would have had a harder time of it if Darth Nader (thanks, Keith!)had stayed out. Sure, he got "only" a few percent of the vote, but how many didn't like Ralph, but gave creedence to his massage of "There's no difference between the Dem partty and the GOP" and stayed home?

I see the same thing getting set up now. Heard a sound bite yesterday from a former Deanie who wasn't going to support Kerry because he's "bought and paid for". Now, if this voter is presented a choice between Kerry and Nader, WHO do you think they will support? Why do you think Dean admonished his followers NOT to throw in with 3rd party candidates?

Karl Rove and Jebbie are just licking their chops over tomorrow's MTP.

I haven't forgotten all the crap that Jebbie, Cruella Harris and the rest of the Florida GOP pulled to get their "boy" installed, but to the average person, I may as well be talking about the face on Mars or Elvis on ice at area 51 as far as credibility goes. By continuing to spray bile at Nader, I can at least keep the notion that SOMETHING was ROTTEN in Talahassee alive. then you drop in the tid-bits about retired Jewish folk voting for a Nazi sympathizer and thousands of people getting purged by mistake. Oh, and when you get to the purge, you let it slip that the same fucked-up technology that wrongly purged people from the voter roles is the same "modern" technology that will "count" their vote this year...

THAT opens some eyes up....

[Q]

21. More Americans need to learn about the details...

...of the 2000 election. For instance...many know nothing about Harris allowing some districts not to do a recount at all. And they haven't heard much about Harris allowing GOP 'workers' to have access to election computers to 'fix' ballots in favor of Bush*.

- Widespread fraud and corruption in the 2000 election...and we're worried about third parties 'stealing' votes?

- Priorities.

[Touchdown]

46. I made a tape of "Unprecedented" and "Counting on Democracy"

And I pass it around to as many people as I can get to watch them. So far, at least 20 people have borrowed the tape. It's getting worn out, and My TiVo still has both on it...ready for another pass through, when the first one breaks.

"Counting on Democracy" was the PBS special about the vote purging. Palast is also in it.

I can't trust that these shows will be broadcast again before the election.

[Blue Gardener]

22. Greg Palast has the proof

If anyone has any doubt the 2000 election was stolen, just read his books. That should clear things up for you.

[Q]

24. Also watch 'Unprecedented'...

...which puts it all nicely together. You can't watch that movie without getting pissed off at the blatant manipulation of our election system and the intimidation of those who only wanted fairness.

[cosmicdot]

28. yes, to both

'Unprecedented' should be played on air as much as possible between now and November ... just as if it was a normal cable rerun ...

[greatauntoftriplets]

23. Yes, I still believe the election was stolen.

And I am not over it.

Also not over:

The disenfranchises black voters in Florida.

The fact Gore didn't fight hard enough during the recount. He played too nice.

LIHOP/MIHOP.

USAPatriot Act.

Department of Homeland Gestapo -- er, Security.

Democrats caving on the Iraq war resolution -- if I could see that there was no way to stop that out-of-control locomotive that * is, why didn't they???

No (Rich) Child Left Behind.

PNAC/PPI.

American world hegemony and the rush to globalization.

The corporatization of the American gummint.

Voter apathy -- exactly what percentage of registered voters actually bothered to go to the polls in 2000, not to mention 2002? How many will make the effort this year?

Bechtel, Halliburton, The Caryle Group, Trireme.

Politicians being in hock to the K Street gang.

You get the picture.

[Q]

29. Do you get the impression...

...that allowing the 2000 coup and stolen election to go unpunished made way for the rest of the things on your list to happen?

- There was no stopping the Bushies once they realized they had pulled off a coup without consequence.

[greatauntoftriplets]

30. Yes, to some extent...

...though a number of things on my list were long underway before the 2000 election. They have only speeded up since the coup and -- sadly -- with many elected Democrats helping to enable them.

[cosmicdot]

27. seems whenever someone tries to focus on the 2000 election crimes

and the allowing of them to go uncorrected and the abusers unpunished ... which is the big issue ... the most crucial issue ... the subversion of our system and Constitution ... gets diverted by 'other factors' ...

... those factors are, like, a distraction to the Big Story ... they water down the focus ...

as we have become familiar with the GOP/Media use of 'distractions' ... one has to, at least, wonder if that may be at-play ...

why can't we maintain that focus on the stolen election?

people sometime will ponder: how can a crime of a certain magnitude go undetected, unsolved, etc., with so many people 'in on it' ...
if no one is ever held accountable for 2000, ... voila ... it can happen ...

I can't imagine what would happen in other countries when what happened here on 11/7/2000 and 12/12/2000, occurred on their watch

On a similar note, I never thought that such hot topics as Enron, and the energy looting done on *'s watch, wouldn't have saved the day in California. Surely, the people would have held the Republicans accountable ... but, as we all well know, we in California now have a Republican Governor, who seems to enjoy the roar of a crowd when he lashes out at Gay Californians ...

it's all too troubling

[Q]

32. Focus: RWingers maintained their focus...

...on a blowjob for literally years. They were relentless in their 'pursuit of justice' over something that had nothing to do with a president's job performance. They still bring it up to 'discredit' Clinton and Democrats in general.

- Yet...why is it that the Democratic party can't focus and try to resolve those issues important to the very survival of Democracy?

- Election fraud...move on. Civil rights abuses...move on. Harken, Halliburton, Enron...move on. Hiding Reagan/Bush presidential papers...move on. Refusal to release national energy policy documents...move on. Outing a CIA agent...move on. AWOL...move on. Lies that drove this nation to war...MOVE ON.

- Yes...it looks like we're on our own.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

31. the theft of the 2000 election and the NeoCon Coup of December 2000...

...will NEVER be forgotten, IMHO.

Additionally, I don't believe anyone here has forgotten the 2000 election and for anyone to imply that we have is an insult to our collective intelligence. JMHO.

[Q]

34. I was responding to...

...the threads that always mention third parties as 'stealers of votes'...but seldom if ever mention the most important aspect of the 2000 election: fraud.

- It's a foregone conclusion that DUers know about it. Perhaps they're just burned out and tired of talking about it. Indeed....many of us have 'moved on'.

- But let's not forget that DUers are unique in this regard...and that many if not most Americans have never been told the truth about the 2000 election.

[nostamj]

35. part of our problem, and THEIR strategy...

BOOS - Bush Outrage Overload Syndrome

they keep up such a relentless stream of outrages that before you can get traction on one, you're reacting to the next ten

and, of course, the corporate media provides endless distraction with JanetMarthaKobeMichaelScottPetersonJacksonBryantStewertJackson 24/7

[Media_Lies_Daily]

38. My 83-year-old Dad could tell you things about the 2000 NeoCon Coup...

...that would surprise you in terms of his depth of knowledge. And he's NOT on the Internet, nor does he have any plans to get on the Net. In his opinion, it's not necessary to use the Internet to be capable of reading between the lines of what passes for the mainstream media news these days.

Dad's a WWII vet who feels strongly that what he fought against in WWII has taken control of America and he's definitely pissed. There are quite a few Americans out there that are not as stupid as you seem to imply, nor are they focused on singular issues.

How many times do any of us have to post remarks discussing the theft of the 2000 election for you to personally feel good about that level of input on DU?

Perhaps you would be better served to not make remarks that imply in an arrogant fashion that only YOU are smart enough to grasp all of the current issues.

[Q]

45. You're using the word 'stupid'...not me...

...and you should stop it immediately. You're reading things into my comments that I've never said or even implied.

- It has nothing to do with 'stupidity'. It's about knowledge and the 'fixers' rewriting history.

- Americans will go to the polls in 2004 to vote in an election where the truth about election fraud in general and Bush* in particular are being covered up by the 'mainstream' media.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

70. No, I'm not going to stop it "immediately"...you started this thread...

...if you don't like the responses that's your problem, not mine.

[sangha]

86. Don't sweat it, MLD

That's how Q reacts whenever someone disagrees with him, Instead of fighting for what he believes in, he suggests that they leave the discussion, while continuing to complain about how nobody wants to fight back.

[Jose Diablo]

36. Vote fraud did not start in 2000 election

Look at JFK and the Daley machine in 60 election. Joe made a deal with the 'Daley' machine and Illinois went to Kennedy. But in the immortal words Tina Turner in Mad Max Thunderdome- "Break a deal and face the wheel". Thats Karma baby. This Camelot Vision about JFK comes from seeing what we want to see.

Anyway, elections should be on the up and up. But 2000 wasn't the first time an election was stolen.

[mac2]

39. Yes...but when will it end?

It is not "We the people" as it should be.

[Media_Lies_Daily]

40. Nixon was busy cutting deals with his friends in the mob, too...

...let's not forget that either, okay?

The mob thought they had the election covered regardless of who won the election. What they didn't know is that Joe forgot to tell his son about the deal.

And if you're implying that the mob was solely responsible for JFK's death, nothing could be farther from the truth.

[Jose Diablo]

43. Yes, it is true

JFK made a lot of enemies, not just the mob.

For example, the Bay of Pigs. There was an active CIA cell operating a 'hit squad' against Castro. If you want talent to perform the mechanics of Daley Plaza, there it is. Its also to note the place name of the hit, Daley Plaza.

JFK damn near put us in a nuclear exchange over the missile showdown. I am sure many in the top echelons of the pentagon just loved JFK for that.

Then there is the deal worked out between the FBI and the longshoreman's union in WWII. No union activity to interfere with war effort. This deal of 'letting' the mob do their thing was broken when JFK and Robert tried to change the rules.

As for the principle of free elections, as I said before the elections should be on the up and up. But it is not just a republican thing to cheat at elections. Vote fraud is as American as Apple Pie.

I think it would be for more productive to examine the system that leads to the lies and cheating. What is there about America that rewards the liers, stealers and murderers with success. Could it be the idea that the ends justify the means?

[Media_Lies_Daily]

71. JFK was killed in Dealey Plaza, not Daley Plaza...

...and the military brass had been attempting to push JFK into a nuclear attack on the Soviet Union since the day he took office. They had also been trying to provoke a war with Cuba since Castro asked the Soviets for aid after the U. S. turned him down. Read this site for more details on what they were willing to do to get a war started:

Operation Northwoods
<http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html>
<http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html>
<http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/>
<http://www.rense.com/general24/operationnorthwoods.htm>

I'm always amazed that people think that no American would be willing to kill other Americans to provoke a war.

[SharonAnn]

60. But JFK won even without Illinois

But JFK won even without Illinois

[peekaloo]

37. Big Dick in Tampa last night gearing up for 2004

raised over half a million dollars for a "brief appearance" to go into the Florida GOP fund. Their intent is to "register" an additional 75,000 Repubs for the re-selection. This time around they'll point to the "success" of their efforts as the reason for a Boosh win.

[mac2]

42. Dick is not our VP...

but the Bush Mafia money collector.

He's not even there most the time doing his job as VP. He works for Repub, Halliburton, Enron, etc. He does not represnt all the citizens. He's above working for his salary.

Fire him!!

[scarface2004]

41. they stole 2000...

and they ll steal 2004 if we let em, the bastards!

[BillZBubb]

44. Absolutely!

The fix was in in Florida

[sendero]

47. OK...

... Let's say that a group of 5 men decide to rob a convenience store. One is driving the getaway car, one is a lookout and three go in. One of the three shoots the manager.

THEY ARE ALL EFFING GUILTY. STOP MAKING EFFING EXCUSES FOR ANY OF THEM.

Nader sucks and he can go straight to hell. He is not accomplishing a damn thing running this time or last. He couldn't even get the Corvair right. He is a freaking joke.

[Jose Diablo]

49. I liked the Corvair

Had a tendency to break fan belts, but was loads of fun to drive.

Also had a gasoline heater, thus you could stay warm with your honey at the drive-in with the engine not running.

[dbt]

48. DAMN RIGHT it was stolen!

There's enough evidence (in studies paid for by the "major" media) to impeach bu$h over it. But nobody wants to talk about that Elephant in the living room.

:argh:
dbt

"Get over it," my shiny metal ass!!!

[bobthedrummer]

50. Yes, I believe there was a coup of some type, the election was stolen

and while Nader complicated matters he wasn't the main reason behind the sElection that saw the installation of George W. Bush.

ABB.

[Charlls]

51. now, this is exactly the kind of reasons about democracy self-phagocytism

I cant believe democrats that put on equal footing to blame some candidate to 'drain votes' which is something legal to do, and a massive election fraud

[Virginian]

52. I believe even more now than in 2K that the election was stolen.

I read on a link somewhere from this board that the "Democrat" who designed the butterfly ballot in Palm Beach was a previous employee of Poppy bush and had flown with him to entertain the Saudi who was the connection to Iran in the Iran/Contra dealings.
Does anyone have that link?

I could never have imagined how badly one President could mess up the country as badly as he did in his first two years in office, and it has gotten worse since then. Heaven help us if this man is given the opportunity to destroy us further.

I will never get over it. This one election has incapacitated the US significantly and it will be difficult for his successor to fix the things he has broken.

[dansolo]

53. It is true that there were dozens of factors that contributed

That is a fact because of the small margin of victory. 600 votes in Florida would have made the difference. However, just because any number of other factors could have affected the outcome, it doesn't absolve Nader's role. People hate Nader because he:

1. Lied when he said that there was no difference between Gore and Bush
2. Actively worked against the Democratic Party. His stated goal was the collapse of the Democratic Party.
3. His stating that he wouldn't actively campaign in close states, and then going ahead and doing it.

If Nader ran an honest campaign, people wouldn't be placing as much blame on him.

[JNelson6563]

54. considering the voter roll purges

resulting in some 50,000 (I believe) being deemed ineligable to vote, I'd say yeah, it was stolen, but not really by Nader--who I think is an asshole.

The votes that were not cast due to these purges out-number what Nader got, don't they?

Julie

[osaMABUSh]

55. Of course, why wouldn't I? We need to remind everyone of it

let's get pissed off again, dammit. As we alll know the SOTU gave him the election.

[sangha]

56. Somewhat misleading

-Threads about Nader are an inappropriate place to discuss the various crimes relating to the Electoral Theft of 2000, just as a threads about Bush* Iraq lies are an inappropriate place to discuss Bush*'s tax cuts or Bush*'s other crimes.

-Everything is related to everything else somehow. Limiting the discussion to one particular issue does not indicate the anyone has forgot anything or that they have "moved on". It's misleading to imply otherwise

-If you want to see threads about the theft of the election, the best way to fulfill your desire is to start threads about the theft of the election.

-No one has blamed Nader for the theft of the election. Nader has been blamed (somewhat unfairly IMO) for drawing votes away from Gore, for breaking his promise to not campaign in the seing states, and for lying about the differences between the D's and the R's

[bravejet69]

57. No doubt in my mind the election was stolen

There are so many things attributed to the Democrats losing the 2000 election, and I hope it is never forgotten. It wasn't only Nader, which in my opinion was a minor thing. He took votes away from the Democrats, but what happened in Florida I hope never happens again.

[newyawker99]

58. Hi bravejet69!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[shanti]

59. yep

and they'll try it again if we aren't vigilant.

[mithnanthy]

79. Yes

I'll never get over it because justice will never be served against the thieves.

[booley]

61. Why blame Nader voters? Why not blame shrub voters? Or Buchanen?

Why should Nader voters get blamed for doing exactly what we are told that we should do as Americans? Vote for whom you beleive is the best canidate?

Why not blame Bush voters? After all, many of them were self described as Moderates. anyone with half a second and nearly as much brain could find out what kind of president he would be from what kind of governor he was (aparently Shrub is an old hand at the surplus to massive deficit trick or with telling people what they wanted to hear to make himself sound more reasonable )
even the conservatives shouldn't be have been so easy to fool just because he said 'Jesus" al the time.

I mean, put it this way..Nader voters had a right to vote for Nader. Shrub voters had a right to vote for him. Just like Al Gore voters had a right to choose Al Gore.

What no one had a right to do was purposely expunging hundreds of thousands of people most likely to vote for your brother's opponent, stage riots, disrupt vote counters and sway SCOTUS judges by giving thier kids cushy jobs.

when we continue to bitch about what LEGALY went wrong, it becomes easier to dismiss the entire affair as sour grapes and thats dangerouse becuase we all know they will try to cheat again.
we can't afford to get distracted and divided again.

[kaitykaity]

62. Yeah it was close enough to steal because

of Ralphie's :puke: ego. And Gore distancing himself from Bill Clinton and the record of the previous eight years.

All played a role, but if Nader had done the honorable thing and withdrawn the day before the election, Gore would be president right now. <end of story.>

[marigold20]

64. I'll never believe anything else.

It was stolen.

[tobius]

66. Why don't Kerry or Edwards bring this up everytime

they are on the air? Is the ourageous selection of 2000 purposefully being played down? Didn't the butterfly ballot get designed in house? Who pushed to convert to electronic voting?

Why are Kerry and Edwards turning away from this issue? Can't they warn the rest of Americans that don't have the truth, as to what may happen?

[sangha]

81. Because it doesn't win them one single vote

Think about it! Do you really think that people who think the Repukes stole the 2000 election are going to vote Repuke? If they do, it's only because they are Freepers, and *they're* not about to vote Dem.

Talking about the theft during the primary will only scare voters away, while failing to attract one single vote.

[tobius]

82. How does the truth scare voters away?

"Think About it!" --? I love this argument; "the people can't handle the truth- it will shatter their illusions!" The same reasoning is used regarding UFO's.


If this is bigger than watergate in terms of effecting elections, the people responsible need to be held accountable. If Kerry or Edwards is elected and this issue is not addressed, who's to say that they will not be corrupted by this power to tamper?

[sangha]

83. Is that a serious question?

The Repukes have been using lies to make people scared to vote Dem ("tax and spend", "gun-grabbers", etc) and you think the truth always works on voters.

If this is bigger than watergate in terms of effecting elections

Well , duh! In "*IF* it's "bigger" " the operative word is "IF"

[tobius]

84. Yes,

using your logic, the dem party should have ignored nixon's actions.

[sangha]

85. Sir or Madam, logic is nowhere to be found

in your post. Maybe that's why you never explain the logic you used to come to that ridiculous conclusion

[tobius]

92. let's try this- - I ask why is not the theft of an election a major issue

pushed and challenged by Kerry or Edwards? You say that it can't be brought up because it is too scary.

Watergate was an example of dirty tricks trying to change an election, and the electorate was able to handle it.

Please explain again why this threat to democracy should not be discussed by the Dem nominee again. I am trying to understand.

[tobius]

105. crickets chirping , very softly......

[sangha]

107. The theft of the 2000 Election is not a good campaign issue

because it will not win votes for the Dem candidate. Anyone who believes that the 2000 Election was stolen will be voting for the Dem anyway. Campaigns aren't about setting policy; They're about winning elections.

IIRC, Watergate was not a big issue in Nixon's re-election campaign. It didn't really explode until after he was re-elected. During the campaign, most people thought "It was just a burglary"

[tobius]

110. Thank you for your responses. Something tells me that

there is a reason why the eventual nominee won't be running with this as an issue, but your explanation makes no sense whatsoever.

Your effort is appreciated.

If everyone who believed the election was stolen will vote Dem, it seems to follow that the more this issue is brought up, the more votes the Dem will get. Anyway, it's probably way too complicated for me to understand, so I will defer to your expertise.

[sangh0]

111. People have already made up their minds

IMO, people have already made up their minds as to whether or not the election was stolen. Raising the issue won't change anyone's mind, so the idea that the Dems will get more votes by raising the issue seems unlikely, IMO.

[lpbk2713]

69. Hell yes it was stolen.

And I resent the fact that Harris has gone on to be a repuker folk hero. She's not qualified to run a lemonade stand.

[mountainvue]

72. Yes.

Stolen and not forgotten.

[burrowowl]

73. Stolen?

It was a coup d'etat. When all votes were recounted in Florida Gore won! And something like 90,000 people were purged from the Florida roles!
It was a COUP D'ETAT! Why aren't people marching in the streets!

[PaDUer]

74. Absolutely...

without a shadow of doubt..KKKHarris took care of that..she even had company that day to ensure she wouldn't back out..It's in Al Franken's book of what took place.

[Dover]

75. Thank you. I'm no big Nader fan, but this has gotten ridiculous!

Save your venom for Bush, people...

[TankLV]

76. Stolen - and nader was a big factor in the close states.

Those are just 2 of the most important facts.

[otohara]

77. Nothing Would Convince Me It Wasn't

filthy thugs in Florida

[bushwakker]

78. Nader allowed them to steal it

Gore still got more votes even with Nader helping the GOP. It would not have been close enuf to steal if Nader had sat it out.

[peacetalksforall]

80. No matter how the Republicans steal the vote,

1. They don't have to steal as many if Ralph is in, therefore it lessens the risk of them getting caught.

2. Nader could also get the votes of the Republicans who are not goint to vote for the Resident Divider-Liar this time. Another way of fuzzying up the message to the right wing.

We should have at least five parties, but we don't and now is not the time for Ralph Nader to make some more money for himself. (Forget the accusation of ego, his motivator is money, imo.

[LeahMira]

87. Yes.

I'm not suggesting we should continue to revisit this issue above all others. But it's surprising that it isn't included in the debate about why Democrats 'lost' the 2000 election.

What's more surprising (to me) is the fact that not much has been done to make sure that the same kinds of things can't happen again. Rather, it seems to have gotten even worse with the "no paper trail" stuff.

But yes, 2000 was stolen. I remember reading somewhere at the time that the Supreme Court thought the country would blow apart if the election wasn't settled promptly, and I'm also insulted that the Justices think so poorly of all of us. Yes, we are an impatient bunch, but we always value truth and fairness no matter how long it takes to sort it out.

[sangha]

88. 38% of the population thinks Bush* stole the election

I don't know why Q thinks this has been forgotten

[methinks2]

90. Of course

everyone in florida knows that. The repubs won't admit it, but they know it too. That's why they're so militant over the issue. Guilty conscience.

[Q]

93. Many Americans 'know' about Iran/Contra...

...but they couldn't recite ANY of the details to you if you asked. The same goes with the 2000 election. They have some vague idea that it was stolen...but most couldn't provide a reason WHY they think that way. It's these types of generalities that allows Bushie Republicans to call allegations about the election 'conspiracy theories'.

- And how can we blame them when the American media did everything they could to downplay the details of that election? This...after devoting hundreds of stories calling Gore a 'pathological liar' and smearing his character.

- How many Americans have EVER read about Harris allowing GOP operatives into her office to 'fix' ballots on the state election computers? They aren't aware of it because the corporate media didn't report it or call for accountability.

- In retrospect it appears that the 'corporate' media wanted Bush* to win. They helped him in many ways...from trashing Gore to covering up George's horrible past and record in Texas.

[DennisReveni]

94. Don't forget the gays

1.1 MILLION gays voted for Bush in 2000.
So, just how did Nader screw Democrats?

[baldguy]

96. Yes.

I cringe everytime someone says Bushit "won" the election!

[Robin Hood]

97. Need link to the 300,000 dems who voted for bush, furthermore.

I find it telling that Nader is running as an Independent this time around. It seems to me that the Green Party is silently owning up to it's part of the Florida debacle. Nader set the green party back in this country god only knows how many years. in fact, nader in 2000 was the worst thing to happen to the Greens.

If you disagree then explain to me why he is running as an independent and not a green. Nader is a republican schill.

[Robin Hood]

100. Still waiting for them hard facts.

Nader is still a tool.

[Piperay]

98. YES (nt)

:mad:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

99. Hey, YOU are the omniscient one here! You tell me!

[jor_mama]

101. It's kind of like blaming one play in a one-point game

Whenever you lose a basketball game 90-89 you spend the next hours and sometimes days overanalyzing every single thing that went wrong. You know that if just ONE of those shots had gone in, or if you hadn't thrown that ball out of bounds that they took for a hoop in the first quarter, the outcome would be different at the end. But when you win by one point, all those "what if's" are irrelevant and rarely mentioned, unless it was a shot at the buzzer that won, but I digress ...

Obviously a victory (in 2000, like the fictitious basketball game) is the preferred outcome. But when the final score is so close, you find yourself questioning a number of aspects of the game, and almost preferring a blowout loss to a close one because it's so agonizing. The best thing to do, though, is to ratchet it up wherever possible. And in the case of the election, I always say "all of the above."

[texasmom]

102. I awoke from a deep sleep that November-December

and I'll never sleep soundly again. My children and my grandchildren will know everything I will be able to remember about that stolen election and the myriad crimes committed by and on behalf of the Republicans who would stop at nothing to get Bush into office.

There is plenty of blame for 2000 to go around, but personally I blame the press the most, because they let them get by with it. First, during the election they accepted faxes from the RNC and reported them as fact without even fact-checking. After the voting, they reported very little about the voter purges, civil rights commission findings, belittled the people victimized by the butterfly ballots, and made light of the process that was going on when we were attempting to count the votes. I can remember when Nightline finally! did a story on Duval County, and their slant was against the voters--not the travesties that had gone on there. No investigative journalism. They fell in line with the message that Bush was the president and nothing should be done to contradict that message. They are only now starting to question his and his press secretary's statements.

Ugh. Don't get me started. As for Nader, frankly people should have known.

[dweller]

103. Hell Yes

i don't even want to read the rest of these posts.
i'm sure they are well written responses, i'm just too tired now.

pissed off going on 4 years...and i want to see it historically admitted and acknowledged before i die.
dammit.
dp

[Iverson]

106. without new evidence or better analysis, yes

However, witch-burning does not derive from evidence and analysis, so appealing on that basis to stop it will not work.

[Q]

108. Which witch burning...

...are you talking about here? There have been many in history. But in these 'modern' times...we don't actually burn people...they're shunned and excommunicated.

- Ask Gore and Nader.

[Iverson]

109. for the sake of discussion ...

The model of the reaction is the same whether the situation is historical witch-burning or modern, enlightened, symbolic witch-burning.