Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 23, 2013
An "enum" for Python 3
An unexpected perf feature
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
The current US government was not elected, just took over.
The real major losers are...
Posted Apr 24, 2003 13:33 UTC (Thu) by KaiRo (subscriber, #1987)
I'm no US citizen, and I'm glad I didn't have to vote because it's quite hard to chose between two awful choices, but the US people made their choice, as I said, in a democratic manner.
Well, anyway, that's not what this discussion or this article is about...
I think it's not a good thing to speak out against people funding you, especially in a situation where you need the funding for a project. OTOH, it's bad decision to pull the plug just because of one person saying those things one time.Well, it seems we can't change it anyway, let's go back to work and hack up some code, we can achieve more doing that :)
Re: The real major losers are...
Posted Apr 24, 2003 14:06 UTC (Thu) by Ross (subscriber, #4065)
Re: Supreme Court didn't step in; election still an embarassment
Posted Apr 25, 2003 23:21 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)
The Supreme Court decided to step in to avoid a Constitutional crises
This is a misstatement. The Supreme Court's decision was not to act. The Court was petitioned to order Florida officials to recount votes. The Court denied the petition, leaving interpretation of election laws up to Florida.
I don't see that a Constitutional crisis was ever in the offing.
By the way, for those who believe technicalities of vote counting laws shouldn't matter and the person who got the most votes should simply win, I'd like to point out that an army of journalists did finish an accurate count of every single Florida ballot a year later. It showed that by any interpretation of the unclear ballots (hanging chads, etc.), Bush got the most votes. It is true, though, that in the precincts that were in controversy just after the election, Gore won by some counts.
If you want to take pokes at the election results, it is much better to look at 1) Ralph Nader certainly split the vote. Asked to choose between Bush and Gore, voters would have chosen Gore by a landslide. 2) It is quite clear that hundreds of voters using the butterfly ballot preferred Gore but marked their ballots otherwise by mistake. 3) Voting by states achieves no desirable purpose these days; had the vote been a simple popular one, Gore would have won by a wide margin.
Posted May 1, 2003 21:01 UTC (Thu) by ffeirtag (guest, #10976)
>This is a misstatement. The Supreme Court's decision was not to act.>The Court was petitioned to order Florida officials to recount votes.>The Court denied the petition, leaving interpretation of election>laws up to Florida.
Even though this thread is off topic, I can't believe this posting, whichis so utterly wrong, has gone unchallenged.
Far from deciding "not to act," inhttp://i.cnn.net/cnn/ELECTION/2000/resources/uscdecision1212.pdf
The majority wrote:"The judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is reversed,..."
Dissenting, Justice Ginsburg wrote:"Time is short in part because of the Court's entry of a stayon December 9, several hours after an able circuit judge inLeon County had begun to superintend the recount process."
Dissenting, Justice Breyer wrote:"By halting the manual recount, and thus ensuring that theuncounted legal votes will not be counted under any standard,this Court crafts a remedy out of proportion to the assertedharm. And that remedy harms the very fairness interests theCourt is attempting to protect."
"Dec. 8: The Florida Supreme Court orders manual recounts to begin inGore's election challenge and adds 383 votes to his total.
Dec. 9: Counting begins of 43,000 statewide "undervotes" and then haltswhen the U.S. Supreme Court, divided 5-4, orders the manual recounts stopped.
Dec. 11: U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments on Bush's appeal ofFlorida Supreme Court's decision ordering recounts.
Dec. 12: In late-night, divided opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court rulesFlorida high court erred in its order for a further recount of contestedballots. The justices send the case back to Florida but indicate there isno time to fashion a new effort to pass constitutional muster, all butassuring Bush of victory. Earlier, the Florida House approves 25 electorspledged to Bush."
OT: Election 2000
Posted Apr 24, 2003 16:43 UTC (Thu) by Baylink (subscriber, #755)
This is factually incorrect.
I call your attention to the *extensively* footnoted proof offered in the book "None Dare Call It Treason", written by former (104:1 record) LA County Prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi.
No, Bush, et al, were *not* elected pursuant to the US Constitution and Code and the Florida Statutes.
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds