What do you girls/guys think about this Ohio recount?

[fshrink]

Pressure from the ranks? Genuine concern about fairness? Beginning of constitutional reform?

[PassingFair]

1. I can speak freely here, right?

I think the recount is only being done because the Greens and the Libs have paid for it and pushed for it. The dems are in it only to the extent that it makes them look bad if they don't say SOMETHING!

Shameful. Kerry should have demanded a recount immediately. In Ohio and Florida.

[fshrink]

2. You know, Gore made the HUGE mistake.

That was the time to have balls, stand up ans say, sorry, this does not work, this is not acceptable. Everybody would have joined in then and real issues would have been dealt with in a way or in another. Now, it's too late, the reactionaries can perfectly say, Ah! You lose so you want to change the rules. That's a valid argument unfortunately. It IS too late and it's not Kerry's fault.

[robbedvoter]

3. Funy! Kerry rolls over and Gore gets blamed? That takes the cake!

Seem to recall GORE FAUGHT. No Moveon, no air America, snickering from nader&celebs, freepers screaming at his house, he fought.
Somehow, kerry gets the pass for doing zip, and Gore is STILL blamed?



Famous last words
He is impatient with Democratic oratory about the "stolen" election.
"Stop crying in your teacups, It isn't going to
change. Get over it."

John Kerry, campaign July2003
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/connelly/129019_joel02.html

[Biased Liberal Media]

4. It's because Gore didn't secede...Kerry did

That's my guess anyhow. I've seen conservatives say that Kerry did the "right thing" by seceding and he "had a lot more class than that whiner Gore". Whatever.

[fshrink]

5. And Kerry fought too!

I don't blame Gore (although, OK, it might have looked like I was). The choice he had was completely unexpected and extremely hard to make for a classic, honest and trustful democrat. Problem was that nobody seemed to realize that the right in this country had turned plain neo-nazi (which the Gangrichs and Starrs made very plain though), and was developing the same political tactics. Gore played by the rules and they did not: they stole ballots, physically pressured people, DeLay flew down a bunch of neo-nazi activists they knew that with a little push they could access power. I think that Gore made the concession, not because there was no fight to fight, but because he preferred to avoid a constitutional mess. Kerry, like I said had no choice than to say what he said. If he had chosen to keep the issue alive, he would have lent his flank to an infinite number of attacks and this would have minimized the impact of his message on all the rest. Politically, that was indeed too late to make that move. I think Kerry did the best within a *business as usual* strategy. Problem is: this wasn't business as usual any longer! This country was led by rightist extremists, who owned and/or controled every source of power in every domain. I still think that the best possible political move for 2004 would have been to say, OK, we're gonna lose this battle but we are going to tackle this mess at the root and bring up the real underlying issues (e.g. media ownership/control, power of lobbies, proportional representation, electoral reform, healthcare, education, etc...). That's, I think, 2 major strategic mistakes in 4 years for the progressives and I'm afraid we're gonna pay for it for the foreseeable future. And it started in November 2000...