Subject:
|
Re: Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:19:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
244 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
Not quite yet no. Actually I think Bush is out of bounds at the moment in
going to court to seek an injunction to stop the manual recounts. I think he
would be better off picking 4 predominantly Republican county's in Florida and
asking for a recount their. That would balance off some of the gains Gore will
make in the Democratic counties he picked.
>
> I can't decide. To a certain extend, I can see his point. But if I were
> cynical, I would say that he is just going to go on wanting re-counts until
> he gets the results he wants.
I think up until now he has done what the law allows and I don't have a problem
with it. Remember he did not ask for the first recount, that was automatic.
He asked for this one as is his right under Florida law. If he tries to go for
more then I would have a problem with it.
>
> Perhaps there really are constitutional issues at stake here? Even if there
> are, did he not accept the current system when he entered "the race". Should
> he just accept the result now, and then work to clarify the system for the
> next time?
I definitly don't think he should "just accept the results now". He has to
wait until at least friday so all the oversea's ballots can be counted. Even
though the oversea's ballots tend to lean Republican with the narrow margin
there is now you just never know.
BTW, I don't think there will be any Constitutional crisis about this. I think
the system is fine. I stated before that if they did away with the electoral
collage then the smaller states would just be ignored by the presidential
canidates and they would stick to the more populated areas. I personally live
in a medium sized state (Electoral wise) but many of the states around me are
small and would be ignored. As it is Massachusetts is ignored because it is so
heavily Democratic that neither candidate bothered to campaign here.
>
> If he does loose in the end, will history view him as a bad loser, rather
> than a former VP? Will he be able to run again? Will HC let him?
Maybe maybe not, it is so hard to tell what history will say. I personally
think Clinton, with all his problems, will go down in history as a pretty good
president. As for Gore he probably has a better chance of being labeled a sore
looser just because people don't remember the Vice-President so the only place
in history for him is on the pages for the 2000 election which was one of the
closest in history.
As it is I think no matter who wins that the winner will be a damaged
president and will be considered by many to be a "lame duck". With this
election bickering along with the current direction the economy is going in I
doubt either one of these guys has a chance a re-election in 4 years.
Eric Kingsley
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
|
| (...) I have do agree. Bush should sit back and try to look cool. (...) Yes, but is he not inciting other to take action as individuals? I'm sure I heard that. (...) That's fair comment. I agree with you about Clinton. As an outsider looking in, I (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser?
|
| Spot Pole - Is Gore Just a Bad Loser? I can't decide. To a certain extend, I can see his point. But if I were cynical, I would say that he is just going to go on wanting re-counts until he gets the results he wants. Perhaps there really are (...) (24 years ago, 13-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
