Which was worse, the election in 2000 or this past (2004) one?

[Stargleamer]

I tend to think the election in 2000 was worse, because it brought Rove and his team to power. But I can understand if you think this past one was worse, because now Rove's team is unleashed.

[wryter2000]

1. I see your point

From that point of view, 2000 was definitely worse because it caused * to be an incumbent this time around.

From the point of view of election theft, though, I think this one is worse. I think they had to steal a hell of a lot more votes to win this time, but they did it. Also, if the results were on the level, they'd show a clear preference for * over Kerry. Before, he always had the * after his name. Now, he can claim that the majority of us really want him and his policies.

[Cobalt Violet]

2. This one is worse because...

Kerry won in a landslide. And right under the eye of the media and they aren't even questioning it this time.

This is the 3rd one they have stolen in a row.

[coeur_de_lion]

3. I think 2004 was worse because

we knew to expect voter fraud -- and did nothing about it.

[malatesta1137]

4. both horrible

but 2004 was worse. The 2000 recount gave us some hope.

[Cherie59]

5. 2004 is worse

Because there is so much more at stake.
The war,economy, deficit, health care costs,
medicare up 17%, no child left behind not funded
properly, our sad reputation in the world, homeland
security, jobs going overseas, gas prices, social
security in danger of privatized, prescription drugs
for the elderly, stem cell research, the supreme court,
rove v wade, and an administration that is worse than
Watergate!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[newyawker99]

17. Hi Cherie59!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[bri_in_austin]

6. 2004 is way worse...

in my opinion. In 2000 the whole country KNEW that Gore really won! In 2004, most of the country and the world believes Bush won!

[Pirate Smile]

7. I am more heartbroken this time because I personally invested

a lot more and knew how desperately this country and the entire world needed John Kerry to be President. This election was the first time I donated money and volunteered. I have also never been so terrified of the consequences of having one person elected president.

I was mad and depressed in 2000. Anger feels better then despair. I don't know why, but it does.

I actually don't think we had any idea how terrible Bush was going to be in 2000 either. I thought he would be horrible but the last four years really stunned me in exactly how terrible they have been.

It is especially scary because reality seems to be so unimportant to them. The lack of control of either the House or Senate also contributes to the feeling of having absolutely no power to deal with anything. No way to investigate these guys.

Even if I wasn't for a President, I always figured that in foreign policy both parties would generally do the right thing (and pretty close to the same thing). That is certainly not true with the Bush Administration.

[stellanoir]

10. this one

is far worse because their stranglehold on power and future elections is seemingly intractable.

We must stay on the issues of gross malfeasance in this and the past two elections an prove it. Otherwise, our democracy is simply toast.

Now they control everything and we have to prove that they acquired it unethically and illegally.

Exposure of this issue is essential before the certification of the election.

We have to fight and fight hard and support Bev Harris at

http://blackboxvoting.org

She is our only hope IMHO.

[seabeyond]

8. neither were worse. each had their reason

the 2000 election was a we know and trusting that know. and seeing we were right, just had to research.

this all was a lesson. progression.

this allowed site

the spread of fraud much grander scale, yet in bushco escalating so hugely to win. since there was a landslide for kerry. we knew it. we felt it. trust in ourselves. and sure enough, seeing it everywhere. pat on back ability to see. lordy these people are lying cheatin stealin son of a bitches, lol lol hard being in truth, integrity and honesty, (shaking head) to be able to believe what they do. but they do. and we know. so we will be able to see.

trust and confidence in that.

so with this i say each event 2000 and 2002 (robgeorgia) and 2004 all had there lessons. we are learnin.....as fast as we can.

[tinrobot]

9. This one is worse

Because the cancer of these voting machines has truly killed democracy.

In 2000, it couldn't be stolen at the press of a button. Now they can do it cleanly and without the Supreme Court.

I really fear for our democracy.

[fsbooks]

11. Democrats won MT in 2004, things looking up here.

Well, Bush got the electoral votes, but got the governor (and other statewide offices), the state senate, possibly tied in the state house, got the right Supreme Court Justices, stopped the repeal of the cyanide ban, approved medical pot. Overall, not so bad. Organize locally, 2002 is coming.

[bemildred]

12. This one. nt

[tridim]

13. Defining both "elections" as a coup

Which they are. 2004 was much worse, because the coup was premeditated, well planned, and executed almost flawlessly. In 2000 they just got lucky.

[robpopulace]

14. 2000

2000

That election made the Supreme Court more powerful than the will of the people.

How can they overrule state's rights?

How can they make up a set of rules that are automatically nullified after their application?

The post 2004 SCOTUS may well be more extreme.

[demosincebirth]

15. This one...its too fresh.

[Minstrel Boy]

16. This one, by many magnitudes.

After 2000, there was still the hope the suspension of the people's will was anomalous. Now, well...this is how it is.

Also, in 2000 I don't think anyone expected a Bush presidency to be this catastrophic. Now, we know.

[LisaL]

18. I agree. We probably didn't have a chance in 2004 because

of voter fraud, etc. We should have put more effort into it in 2000. They shouldn't have won in 2000 and then we wouldn't have 2004 election go the way it did.
:-(