Q3JR4
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 10:52 AM
Original message |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-28-04 10:53 AM by Q3JR4
The black caucus in the house was circulating a petition objecting to the election (2000 race) and they needed one senator's signature for the objection to be noted....am I understanding that correctly?
What would have happened if they had been able to get that signature?
Would they have been able to force some type of action in the matter?
Or was it just to enter in some formal objection into the records regarding the election?
|
Beware the Beast Man
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 10:54 AM
Response to Original message |
1. Hmm...I think it would have stalled the process |
|
But the handover was inevitable. It was pretty clear from the footage that Gore felt defeated, and just wanted to get the whole thing over with.
|
Goldmund
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 10:54 AM
Response to Original message |
2. I've been wondering the same thing. |
DenverDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 11:01 AM
Response to Original message |
3. It would have forced a congressional investigation into the vote fraud. |
|
No doubt, it would have drug the process out, but it would have saved the world from busholini because the truth of what happened would have come out rather than being flushed from the collective conscience to the sewer that holds the truth of the Kennedy assassinations, the '80 October surpise et al ad nauseum.
|
rock
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 11:01 AM
Response to Original message |
4. I think it would have meant a hold up |
|
And would have required an investigation.
|
Q3JR4
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 11:02 AM
Response to Original message |
5. The democrats in congress |
|
could have at least given them support in this issue and at the same time voiced their irrevocable belief that the election results in favor of * was a farce.
They could have entered into record what most of us believed at the time (and still do)...* stole the election.
Honestly, I don't see how the Dems. can count on the vote of the African American population. Especially if they won't stand up for something as quintessential as their right to vote. I mean it's just mind boggling.
At the time we had 50 senators and NOT one could bother with the minute's worth of time necessary to place their signature on paper. I for one find that very troubling.
|
LynneSin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. I have a feeling they did nothing because Gore requested so |
|
I was stunned too when I saw that scene. I couldn't imagine that not one Democratic Senator would allow the Black Caucus to have their voice heard on the floor, especially some of the more liberal senators like Kennedy, Feingold, Corzine to name a few.
I would have to think that it was Al Gore himself that asked the senators to just allow the vote to go through without question. I'm not sure how I feel about that. Half of me understands why Gore wanted this overwith after the months of emotional manueverings between the courts. But the other half makes me angry because we had a chance to stall this process and get the votes counted and make a difference and we didn't bother to do so.
|
papau
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 11:03 AM
Response to Original message |
6. Forced a vote - with one vote per state - and GOP wins - so just a slow |
Fleshdancer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 11:06 AM
Response to Original message |
7. I was told it would then go to the House. I don't know if this is right |
|
that's just what I read here in a different thread.
|
Q3JR4
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 11:09 AM
Response to Original message |
9. Any congress rules people out there? |
|
Edited on Mon Jun-28-04 11:22 AM by Q3JR4
...Does anyone KNOW what would have (could have) happened?
It just makes me wonder that maybe if congress had done, I don't know, THEIR JOB that we wouldn't have to deal with this dimwit as president.
And if we did, that the American public would KNOW exactly how the election in 2000 was stolen.
I don't get it... I just don't. Can someone explain it to me in a way that would help me to understand it?
|
frylock
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Jun-28-04 11:21 AM
Response to Original message |
10. it was all nader's fault |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:58 AM
Response to Original message |