Can We Privatize It? Yes, We Can!

You didn't think Bob Barr would let this 24-hour Plumbergasm go without comment, did you?

"'Joe the Plumber' doesn't need Senators Barack Obama or John McCain'" says Bob Barr, the Libertarian Party's nominee for president. "He needs 'Bob the Builder.'"

"While Senators Obama and McCain seek only to put government patches on today's problems, 'Joe the Plumber' needs a leader who will rebuild our government into one that serves the interests of the people; not the interests of Washington," says Barr. "Senator McCain wants to make 'Joe the Plumber' responsible for his neighbor's mortgage, and Senator Obama wants to tax 'Joe the Plumber' for being successful.  Both Senators Obama and McCain want to spend 'Joe the Plumber's' tax dollars on wasteful projects, such as the $850 billion dollar bailout of Wall Street."

I hasten to remind the reader that Wayne Allyn Root is a Son of a Butcher.

Comments

[Jamie Kelly]

Jamie the Felcher doesn't give a rat's bloody dick.

[Mad Max]

Bear in mind, whatever we may say about Mr. Wuetzelocacoaclbachter, there is one plumber who rules them all.

[SIV]

OT:

The screaming red pixeled headlines at Drudge say that Gallup's likely voter sample has Obama McCain in a statistical tie nationally at 49-47.
Let us all hope this stays interesting right down to the wire.

[ed]

Mr. Barr is sticking his finger in the dike.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
It's what third-party candidates do, bless their hearts.

[joshua corning]

Jesus was a carpenter.

[Alexander Solzenitzen]

Obama was a cadre leader.

[EJM]

However, no-one can save us from Kim the waitress.

[Andy Craig]

Barr really does a horrible job of trying to not come off as a career politician who speaks in platitudes and buzz-words. It's a relatively minor detail, but I think it plays a huge part in setting the tone of his campaign. Part of what made people love Ron Paul is that he didn't *sound* like a politician. Barr does, and it doesn't nicely complement the (largely well-deserved, IMHO) perception that he's arrogant and extremely self-centered.

One of many reasons I agree with David Nolan's approach of "Vote for Barr as a vote for the LP, but don't otherwise directly support him."

And before I get jumped, I totally support the idea driving the LP Reformers and that got Barr the nomination. The LP *should* be a broad libertarian coalition rather than a radical niche. The problem is that Barr has clearly demonstrated that he doesn't want to be part of any coalition that he's not in complete control of, and I'm not just talking about the meaningless press conference Ron Paul held. His people won't even play nice with the state affiliate LPs on ballot access. While I think the conspiracy-minded radicals veer way too far into tin-foil hat territory with their attacks on the Barr/Redpath faction at the LNC, it's not entirely unfounded. These people *act* like a nefarious cabal, even when it's counterproductive.

[Bingo]

Andy: Bob has a very dry sense of humor. It sounds like platitutudes but he's essentially mocking people that speak in platitudes.

[David E. Gallaher]

Bob Barr says Joe the Plumber needs Bob the Barr/Builder?
This is getting gay pretty fast.

[concerned observer]

How cute a wingnut makes a reference to a little kids show. Damn you people piss me off so bad.

[concerned observer]

THen again, given the general intellingence of the poseteres here itsn not surprising that one of the people who thinks like them would reference a little kids show to make a point.

[concerned observer]

All I can say is have fun on your irrelevance trip. In the real world your wingnut fantasies like deregulation are finally getting replaced by actual reason.

[Andy Craig]

Bingo-

I think there's certainly an element of that to Barr's speaking style, but when he says things like "'Joe the Plumber' needs a leader who will rebuild our government into one that serves the interests of the people; not the interests of Washington'", that's politico-speak, plain and simple.

In fact, his whole obsession with "leadership" is annoying. It's not strictly speaking at odds with libertarianism, but it certainly cuts against the grain of libertarian sentiment.

[sage]

Gee, Edward, and do you love to hear yourself talk too?

[BDB]

SIV--

Go to the Gallup website and look at all the numbers.

You can rest assured, though, that Drudge will use whatever poll has the race at its tightest (or whatever sub-poll of a poll) right through election day. Yesterday it was Zogby. The day before that, Rasmussen. The guy has no consistency.

[SIV]

BDB,

American Democracy is better served by not declaring the race over 2.5 weeks out.We don't want polling perceptions to overly influence voters.Well unless you are a major Party partisan and your guy is "winning".

[Mr. Nice Guy]

Yeah SIV, and I'm sure you'd think the same thing if it was the GOP ahead.

Actually, you answered this yourself:
"unless you are a major Party partisan and your guy is "winning"."

[SIV]

MNG,

I'm voting for Barr. I would prefer divided government as the actual outcome though.

[Fluffy]

Exactly how many Joe the Plumber threads do we need?

Joe the Plumber is the new Sarah Palin.

NEVER USE THE WORDS "JOE THE PLUMBER" AGAIN!!!!

[BDB]

SIV, I just find it pathetic that Drudge uses a different poll for a different day. It makes it hard to compare. I guess it's because he has a woody for Palin.

[Lefiti]

Voting Barr is like fucking a dog. It's disgusting and will bear no fruit. But, hey, if fucking dogs is your thing...

[Warty]

given the general intellingence of the poseteres here itsn not surprising

Is this Muphry's law?

[Tom W (Fla. not FL)]

Barr should refer to McCain and Obama as "this one" and "that one."

[concerned observer]

@Lefiti-amen to that. its also a sign of paranoid schizophrenia.

[BDB]

Fluffy--

I'm with you there. I never want to hear about him again, either.

[David E. Gallaher]

Andy Craig,
Thanks for pointing out that the concept of "leadership" is anathema to at least the peaceful anarchist subsection of posters here, namely, Ruthless.

[concerned observer]

of course the libertards are afraid of leadership. then again if Barr is there idea of a leader its probably a good thing for them to be afraid of.

[David]

THen again, given the general intellingence of the poseteres here itsn not surprising that one of the people who thinks like them would reference a little kids show to make a point.

You might look more intelligent if you learn how to spell. Gee, do you project a lot?

[Mr. Chartreuse]

THen again, given the general intellingence of the poseteres

then again if Barr is there idea of a leader its

Dude, try a little harder.

[David E. Gallaher]

Is "concerned observer" the one from the McCain campaign who drew the short straw and thus was assigned to pester H&R for the eve?

[Mr. Nice Guy]

SIV
A more lopsided race means more votes for Barr of course.

[idiotface]

Voting Barr Reading a Lefiti post is like fucking a dog. It's disgusting and will bear no fruit...

fixed.

[BDB]

I thought you were voting for McCain because of Palin, SIV? Or did the Palingasm wear off?

[Boston]

Question:

What exactly is Barr doing with the money he is raising? Are there any commercials? I haven't seen any. (I get commercials aimed at NH)

[concerned observer]

i am teh most FAIL troll

[SIV]

BDB,

No,I would vote for Palin if she was at the top of the ticket.I've been for Barr since before he secured the LP nomination.I would have considered voting for McCain if I lived in a swing state(I don't) before he backed the bailout. I'm still pulling for the GOP as divided government is the best possible outcome.Not to mention my low opinion of the more vocal Obama supporters.

[joe]

Here's an old thread about polls.

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/128187.html#comments

Some of the comments hold up well. Others, not so much.

Did you know that Barack Obama isn't very good without a script, and will probably lose the debates?

[joe]

Ohnoes! The Democrats are blowing it! They picked someone who can't win!

[idiotface]

joe, unless an obama donkey sex videotape is produced, he's got it locked up.

[BDB]

I thought the Democrats would lose until the conventions.

[BDB]

Who here is ready for three weeks of stories about TheBradleyEffect?

[JW]

I just want to know how edward concerned observer became such an expert on dog fucking.

NEVER USE THE WORDS "JOE THE PLUMBER" AGAIN!!!!

Who is this guy Joe and why is he a plumber?

[joe]

Funny you should mention that, BDB. Whole lotta comments in that thread from people insisting that only an America-hating fool would attribute Obama's impending loss to his race. It's a consequence of elitism, doncha know.

Oddly enough, many of them have spent the past couple of weeks telling us there is going to be a Bradley Effect.

[BDB]

I will note that I predicted that McCain would surge in September, then lose it in that thread.

I thought it would be a close race, though. I didn't know it would break this big.

[SIV]

I don't think the Bradley effect exists.
I do think Obama's lead is soft support.
I don't think McCain wants to win badly enough although he has benefited from circumstance and pure dumb luck his entire career.I don't want this thing to be "over" yet just for the sheer spectacle of it all.

[BDB]

McCain doesn't want it?

He looked like he was going to cry last night.

[idiotface]

BDB, those tears were due to excessive blinking.

[BDB]

BTW, bringing up the whole abortion thing really blew up in McCain's face. With the "scare quotes" around the words "health" of the mother.

[brotherben]

"idiotface | October 16, 2008, 8:58pm | #

joe, unless an obama donkey sex videotape is produced, he's got it locked up."

IMO, it would depend on whether he was pitchin or catchin.
I just can't decide if the outcome is cause Obama is that likeable or McCain is that detestable.

[SIV]

joe is in full panic mode, this bodes well for McCain's chances.

[BDB]

Joe is also flat-footed, SIV.

[SIV]

Hell I'm not claiming McCain is winning but this overreaction to Obama getting nailed on taxes by an actual working American combined with a little contrary poll data is making things interesting again.

[joe]

Well, I'll give you that, SIV.

It is more interesting to watch you people get your hopes up again, than the morose capitulation of the past two weeks.

Being the good liberal that I am, I was actually starting to sympathize with you underdogs.

So, thanks to Joe the Non-Plumber for making in fun to watch you lose again.

[joe]

Smell the panic.

[LGF Fan]

Just wait until real Americans hear about how Sen. Obama wants to "spread the wealth".

[brotherben]

I vote and I'm thinkin, "hell my brother, stop bogartin the cash and spread some of it my way."

[brotherben]

"ya just gave the richest assholes a trillion bucks, where's mine?"

[brotherben]

I'm out to get all I can for me and mine and this year it's comin from Obama Claus.

[Twisted Nerve]

I hope you dont hang too bag a stocking, past performance say you will be dissapointed.

[alisa]

Andy: my sentiments exactly. Barr's a libertarian, but not my favorite politician. And I think we could have a "broad coalition" a lot broader than he imagines. I suspect that there are a lot of passive (non-LP) libertarians out there, some of whom showed up in the Ron Paul movement, and after four years of Obama or McCain we'll get a much wider wave of frustration with government and a more successful 2012 election.

Think about it this way: Obama's campaign is the "Campaign for Change." The subtext is: change from Bush, an end to the abuses and the incompetence and the infringements of rights. They've (pretty successfully) made this campaign into a referendum on bad government and executive power. But if Obama tries to put through FDR-style reforms, I imagine that some of the same momentum for "change" will turn against him.

[brotherben]

Twisted Nerve, LOL

alisa, I think a lot of the future of Obama depends on the economy. If it gets real bad, I see him firing up a ton of public works projects similar to the WPA and the CCC. If it is done right, with an emphasis on infrastructure and alternate fuels, and not just a buncha made up jobs, it could go real well for Obama. If the economy turns around in a few months and it's typical tax and spend democrats, I think the new will wear off by the next congressional elections.

[Derrick]

If a Bob Barr press release falls in the woods, does it still make a sound?

[BDB]

Someone saying the WPA and CCC was a good idea? On a libertarian site?

[John]

Drudge is saying Gallup has it 49 47 Obama. That is just one poll but I think Acorn, Ayers finally getting an airing, Obama slipping up and being honest with old Joe about sharing the wealth and the media going crazy and eating the furniture over some poor bastard who asked a question have combined to make it a bad news cycle for Obama.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

My main point has always been that Obama was a bad choice. Now, the factors pushing the Dems over the GOP may actually be strong enough that even this poor candidate wins this year. But a better candidate would have won more handily. Obama will underperform his party in general.

For example, polls show Obama up 8-12 in VA. Mark Warner is up like 30 there. If Warner were the candidate this would have long ceased to even be interesting.

[BDB]

And if that same poll has Obama up 6 tomorrow, you can rest assured Drudge will pick one that shows it closer. That's whats so great about the sixteen tracking polls--Drudge can cherry pick any one he likes.

Actually, the Gallup poll he is showing was a subset of a tracking poll.

[Rev. Jesse Jackson]

John
Keep hope alive!

[joe]

Drudge is saying that.

What Drudge is not saying is that Gallup released that poll as its "traditional likely voter model," with their raw results recentered to the party and demographic breakdown of the electorate similar to that of 2000 and 2004.

Gotta go below the topline.

[BDB]

MNG, if Gilmore were the Republican nominee for President rest assured Obama would be up 30 in Virginia.

[joe]

MNG,

Barack Obama is now overperforming the generic Congressional Democrat. That's always been your evidence for your "Obama is a terrible candidate" argument, hasn't it?

Check out Pollingreport.com

[John]

Obama is a terrible under performing candidate. My God, the Republicans are running a guy most of the party can't stand and there is an incumbant President with a 24% approval rating. Despite all of that, they really might need all 600,000 of ACORN's phoney voters to win the damn election.

[RCP]

This is underpreforming?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=1

[joe]

Um, the actual number say the opposite, John. Obama now outperforms the generic Congressional Democrat.

[John]

How stupid was Obama to say "spread the wealth around"? Jesus, he is a politician, would it been that hard to just lie and tell the guy "no way. I am going to cut your taxes". That is what politicians do; lie to voters. Hell Bubba Clinton would been down helping the guy rake his yard telling him how hard life is.

[joe]

I'm impressed by how ACORN, just by submitting registration forms, can not only cause Barack Obama to win the election, but to lead in the polls as well.

You know how they do that? They're crafty, that's how.

[John]

"Um, the actual number say the opposite, John. Obama now outperforms the generic Congressional Democrat."

Considering that the Democratic Congress currently has an approval rating of 12%, the lowest ever recorded for any Congress or President, that is not surprising.

[BDB]

Jesus, in what universe is a Democrat winning Virginia North Carolina underperforming? That'd be like the GOP nominee winning New Jersey and Connecticut.

[John]

Joe is there any amount of sleaze that the Democrats won't tolerate? 600,000 fradulent voter registrations. Imagine if the Baptists were doing that for Republicans? ACORN is a criminal organization that you could probably prosecute under RICO. But they seem to be quite acceptable among Democratic circles.

[John]

BDB,

In what universe can a Demcoratic politician with the entire media in the tank for him in the middle of a financial meltdown in the most Demcoratic year since 1964, not get a decent lead over his opponent? Any boring white guy on the Dem side would be up 10 to 15 right now.

[BDB]

Where was ACORN when Kerry and Gore needed them? How come they didn't win the election for Mondale, too?

[joe]

John,

The approval rating is for Congress, not Congressional Democrats.

Congressional Democrats have an 8.8% advantage on the RCP aggregate over the hapless Republicans.

BTW, I was wrong - the numbers flipped back. The Congressional Dems' advantage over the GOPers is now 2 points higher than Obama's advantage over McCain.

[BDB]

"Any boring white guy on the Dem side would be up 10 to 15 right now."

Um, if you want to cherry pick polls, Obama was up 14 in the NYT/CBS poll.

It's cherry picking bullshit, but no more than using the one Gallup subset from Drudge is.

[John]

Hell BDB, if they had run Warner or Richardson I would be voting Democrat this year. I have no love for McCain and a repeat of the 1990s with a little bit more sense on foreign affairs wouldn't be the end of the world.

[joe]

BDB,

I'll tell you what universe: a desperate, panicky, flat-footed universe, that's where.

Is it a sexist universe, too? I don't know.

[John]

BDB,

Obama will not win this election by 10 to 15. I gaurentee it. The CBS poll is bullshit and an outlier.

[BDB]

Well, he's not going to win it by two points, either.

I say he wins by the same margin poppy Bush did over Dukakis--53-45, with only 20-30 fewer EVs.

[joe]

You can't even get the story straight, John.

It's 600,000 new registrations, in Ohio alone. You're losing the election, badly, so you've decided that every single one of them is fraudulent?

Keep up with those excuses. No, the Democrats aren't really winning. Those crafty community organizers are denying the uber-popular John McCain his rightful victory.

[John]

Joe,

Why would anyone panic of Obama? It is not like he is an evil genius or something. I think this country is a little bit more resilent than for a mediocrity like him to do much damage if he were to win. More importantly, it will be funny watching people like you jump through their ass to explain why things haven't changed.

[John]

Joe,

It is not about winniing the election. it is about an organization that engaged in massive vote fraud by its own admission. Either you have integrity or you don't. If you don't, you think it is ok for people to commit crimes on your side. If you do, you are appalled by people like ACORN. Which are you? A decent person or just a piece of shit thug who thinks it is okay for people to defraud the system if they are your people?

[John]

Say it Joe, ACORN is wrong. That is all you ahve to say. Admit that a liberal group can do wrong. That is all it takes to show you have some integrity.

[John]

"I say he wins by the same margin poppy Bush did over Dukakis--53-45, with only 20-30 fewer EVs."

This election is within three points either way.

[BDB]

It's not 2004. We will know very early election night who wins. The media hates that (they want a horse race), but either the polls are right and Obama wins in a landslide or theres some kind of massive Bradley Effect. Either way, this isn't a 2000/2004 election.

[BDB]

I don't think Obama would be putting money in Kentucky, Arkansas, North Dakota, and Mississippi in the last weeks of October were it a 2000/2004 election.

[BDB]

And I'll probably vote for Barr. But I can't say I'll be sad to see the Republican Party crushed--they've earned it.

[joe]

In what universe can a Demcoratic politician with the entire media in the tank for him in the middle of a financial meltdown in the most Demcoratic year since 1964, not get a decent lead over his opponent? Barack Obama has the largest lead of any presidential candidate since Clinton/Dole.

Any boring white guy on the Dem side would be up 10 to 15 right now. Ronald Reagan beat Jimmy Carter by nine. George Bush beat Mike Dukakis by eight. Those were considered big victories.

[BDB]

And I'll probably vote for Barr. But I can't say I'll be sad to see the Republican Party crushed--they've earned it.

[John]

Admit ACORN is wrong Joe. Or are they right? Is it okay to submit hundreds of thousands for fraudulent documents? Come on Joe, I never think of you as being a bad guy, just obnoxious and misguided. You know it is wrong and those people are scum.

[BDB]

IIRC they have to submit all voter registration forms, by law--even ones that appear fraudulent.

[joe]

it is about an organization that engaged in massive vote fraud by its own admission.

Lie.

I think frauds, like the people whose talking points you repeat, are a stain on the system. Hence, my contempt.

I've encountered frauds, John. They don't generally flag fraudulent information as problematic when they pass it on to people they're trying to defraud. As oppose dot ACORN, which flags the registration forms it is required to hand in when there are problems with them.

ACORN is a wonderful organization. They've registered millions of people. It does not bother me in the slightest that they are very occasionally the victim of canvessers who falsify forms.

[joe]

Oh, and John? I could give a shit what you think about my integrity. You're the hack who went to the mattresses insisting that Scooter Libby was innocent, and US AttorneyGate was bogus.

You're a sad hack, and I love the way you're losing it over this election.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

"insisting that Scooter Libby was innocent"

So John, you KNOW ACORN has broken the law even though we are in the investigation phase with them but when Scooter Libby goes in front of a jury of our peers with a more than capable defense and is found guilty you KNOW he was innocent?

WTF?

[joe]

IIRC they have to submit all voter registration forms, by law--even ones that appear fraudulent.

That is indeed the law in most states. Are you ignorant of this, John, or just being dishonest again?

They flag problematic forms for the elections registrars when that happens, though. When their system of calling three times to confirm the registration cannot establish that it is a real person who registered.

Again, John, ignorance, or dishonesty.

ACORN is a great organization, John. They are doing God's work.

[Mr. Nice Guy]

John
Are you troubled by all this?

http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7Bfb3c17e2-cdd1-4df6-92be-bd4429893665%7D/VOTINGIN2008.PDF

[joe]

How disreputable is it to disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of people because you don't like how they're likely to vote?

Yeah, ACORN's the bad guy here, because they follow the law when someone writes "Tony Romo" and "Mickey Mouse" on their registration forms.

This controversy has nothing to do with explaining why the Permanent Republican Majority is going down to ignominious defeat. Oh, heavens no! It's just that the same people who ginned up the fake voter fraud allegations that led to U S AttorneyGate are really, really concerned about actual voter fraud.

[joe]

I don't think you're a bad guy, either, John.

I think you're a propaganda victim. A willing one.

[BDB]

I'm continually amazed at how a certain group of supporters of the loser in Presidential elections always fails to see that they are, in fact, the losers.

The Democrats did it in 2000 and 2004. The Republicans are doing it this year. It's just so fascinating to watch. Like 9/11 Truthers, or Westboro Baptist.

[brotherben]

I wonder if peter will lose his sweet gig at the pearly gates for what he says out loud when the westboro baptist folks get there expecting to get in?

[Note to Republicans]

Your popularity is somewhere between AIDS and brain cancer. ACORN has shitall to do with it.

[joe]

BDB,

The Democrats actually won by half a million votes in 2000. Had the ballots worked right in Florida, Gore would have been sworn in. As it was, the situation was resolved by a party-line Supreme Court majority so embarrassed by their own ruling that they stipulated it never be used as a precedent.

So, I can understand Democrats thinking they were screwed in 2000.

[BDB]

Joe--

The way I see it, 2000 was a statistical tie and it had to be resolved SOME way. The Supreme Court as a good a route as any. A coin flip would have worked, even. Either side would have felt screwed.

What about 2004?

[joe]

I think of it this way: our election system is an instrument that can only measure to a certain level of precision, and the situation in Florida was closer than it could accommodate.

But even given that, there was some absolutely deplorable behavior. Katherine Harris was a corrupt hack who didn't even make a pretense of executing her office in an impartial manner. Staging a mini-riot to intimidate election officials from counting ballots should disgust anyone who cares about democracy. While going to the Supreme Court is fine in theory, in practice, Bush v. Gore was a sick joke of a decision, and even its authors knew it.

Things were a lot more muted in 2004, as far as I could tell.

I think the 2000 debacle really did do damage to our political culture, and there was some hangover in 2004.

I don't think it's quite the cynical, premeditated strategy we're seeing now, though.

[BDB]

Only because the left isn't organized enough to have a cynical, premeditated strategy.

[ACORN]

Yes we can!

[brotherben]

The candidates were pretty damn funny tonight at that charity thing.

[joe]

OK, that was me. And totally unfair.

But c'mon, that shit's funny.

[BDB]

If Obama wins even North Dakota, West Virginia, Mississippi, and Arkansas on election night, I just wonder how John will explain it as underperforming?

I'm not saying that will happen (I doubt it) but how would they explain THAT away? Would the DaleyMachine have its tentacles in Fargo and Beckely, too?

[SIV]

Bush won in 2000. It was close "down there in Florida".Gore should have conceded on the machine recount.Everything after that was a Democrat Party attempt to steal the election.
They failed on the ground and took it to the courts where they got a rules-changing golden ticket from the FSC that was slapped down by the SCOTUS, they failed again.Their homeboys the MSM and academia did their own recount later when it didn't matter any more.Original result confirmed.Bush won

For Gore and the Democrats they lost two or three times and it poisoned their brains.

"Staging a mini-riot to intimidate election officials from counting ballots should disgust anyone who cares about democracy."

You mean trying to stop Democratic Party officials from taking unmarked ballots to another room to change them into votes for Gore. Heaven forbid that anyone would try to prevent illegal vote tampering.

Katherine Harris might have come off looking bad, but she did her job according to the law. It was the responsibility of County election officials to count ballots and report the results to the Secretary of State by the statutory deadline.

Oddly enough, all the counties that had voting irregularities were ones run by Democrats.

Yes, joe, the republicans stole an election in a state where all the laws controlling elections had been written by democrats, practically all the election machinery was controlled by democrats (IE the majority of county election supervisors - the ones with the actual power over the system - were democrats) and the majority of registered voters were democrats.

Boy howdy pardner that ole Karl Rove is some kinda evil genius.

Fucking get over it. Bush won, Gore tried to steal the election by restricting "recounts" to counties where he thought his people could change enough unmarked ballots into votes for him.

[joe]

Man, you can't even discuss historical events from the 2000 election without Republicans degenerating into a white-hot rage.

Easy there, fellas. Guilty conscience, or what?

Gore should have conceded on the machine recount But the disputed issue was that the machines were miscounting the votes.

You mean trying to stop Democratic Party officials from taking unmarked ballots to another room to change them into votes for Gore. Heaven forbid that anyone would try to prevent illegal vote tampering. That was the elections board. They used physical intimidation to stop the official body tasked with carrying out a recount from doing so, no matter how you want to phrase it. They were doing the job they were ordered to do by law, and the result was a riot by a bunch of scumbags flown in for that purpose.

Katherine Harris might have come off looking bad, but she did her job according to the law. Her actions were within the letter of the law, but there were plenty of areas where she had discretion, and just happened to use it in a way that advantaged Bush every single time she had the opportunity.

Oddly enough, all the counties that had voting irregularities were ones run by Democrats. Well, no, not all of them, but it's not surprising that more populous, poorer, more urban areas are going to have more problems. Their election machinery is more likely to be underfunded and outdated (punch cards? Is this the Jetsons?), and the larger number of votes is going to create that much more opportunity for something to go wrong.

Fucking get over it. You're the one driven to profanity, chief. Settle down, now.
You're clearly still worked up about the whole thing.

[joe]

county election supervisors - the ones with the actual power over the system

Uh, yeah, the Secretary of State, the "Honorable" Katherine Harris, actually did have some actual power of the system. You might have noticed.

Yes, the power to tabulate the vote counts received from the county supervisors of elections by the statutory deadline.

That's some awesome power, dude.

"They were doing the job they were ordered to do by law,"

No, they weren't. They were trying to take some of the ballots, the "undervotes", out of the room where they were subject to the legally required scrutiny by both parties to a room where only they (democratic party officials) could go through them and change them into votes for Gore.

Furthermore, the ballots in question were punchcard ballots which under Fla law at the time were required to be counted by machine unless the machine was not working correctly. In other words, hand recounts were illegal since at no time were the tabulating machines shown to be faulty.

Punch card tabulating machines will count a correctly punched card correctly every single time. They have been used by numerous private and public agencies for billing and payment purposes for over a hundred years with a rate of error approaching zero.

People choose to punch cards twice or not at all and suddenly it's Katherine Harris' fault.

I'll point out further that under the State Constitution and legislation at the time the powers of state constitutional officers, including the governor, were strictly limited at the time.

Huge amounts of state power were delegated to the counties and their constitutional officers, sherriffs, tax collectors, supervisors of elections etc.

Nobody prevented the supervisors of elections from completing legal recounts. What prevented the supervisors in Palm Beach and Broward Counties from completing their "recounts" was their inability to come up with a way to change blank ballots into votes for Gore as they had been instructed to do by the campaign.

Sixty five other counties got their tabulations done on time, including some where there were other complaints of irregularities including the rejection of a number of absentee votes from military personnel.

"Their election machinery is more likely to be underfunded and outdated (punch cards? Is this the Jetsons?)"

joe, Palm Beach County is one of the richest counties in Florida. Up in the top five or so.

Hell it's one of the richest counties in the nation.

Broward is not far behind. So, two of the richest counties in Florida, whose election machinery is controlled by democrats had voting irregularitahs because Katherine Harris (way off in Tallahassee) hates teh darkies.

And, all counties got essentially the same amount of money from the state back in the eighties to update their equipment. Some chose optical scan, some chose punch cards. A few smaller counties stayed with paper ballots.

When it was purchased it, along with the optical scan machines were considered state of the art.

As usual, you are so full of shit, it's hard to believe you can stand the smell.

By the way, three, that's three out of sixty-seven counties had counts close enough to warrant the hand recounts (again not legal, but we'll let that go).

Volusia got its done in three days, because the supervising judge mobilized every county employee to count the optical scan ballots around the clock. Republicans bitched like hell that the judge was treating their contested votes as fairly and Gore picked up a few votes. And the tabulation was submitted. And in the end every one accepted that the count had been fair.

There is only one reason why Palm Beach and Broward did not get their "recounts" done on time.

And that is, instead of sitting down and counting they were looking for ways to make Gore win.

So everyone in the country has this hardon about Florida not being able to pull off an election when in the end it was two counties out of sixty-seven that couldn't pull off an election.

Oh and in true Democrat style the Supervisors in those two counties were reelected.

Now as to the reasons that while being, theoretically, a good way to cast ballots, punch cards don't work that well.

1)As pointed out earlier, the tabulating machines will count every single properly punched card.

However it seems a portion of the electorate is so technologically ignorant and inept that they do not understand that the stylus has to be pushed all the way in to punch the "chad" out. This portion includes those that joe refers to as "poorer, [living in] more urban areas". In other words those educationally disadvantaged enough to be unable to follow instructions and to understand the concept of simple machines. Incidentally these people also have problems with optical scan and even oldtime paper ballots.

However, the hole punching device used to mark ballots is sufficiently complex to make the punch card and unsuitable voting device. Nonetheless, at one time it seemed like a good idea and the machines were sold across the country. And I'm pretty sure that not one was bough by an official who walked away from the deal signing rubbing his hand together saying "this will keep the niggers from voting bwaaahhhaaahhhahhhh!!!".

2)The second disadvantaged group are the elderly some of whom have arthritis so bad that they lack the strength to push hard enough to dislodge the chad. This is aggravated by the aforementioned technical ineptitude that leaves the voter not understanding that if they don't push the stylus all the way in the vote won't register.

All in all a user unfriendly system, but one nonetheless that elections supervisors picked in good faith.

Oh and since the date from the eighties and nineties they were hardly "outdated". For the most part they replaced the old mechanical lever systems that had been in service for decades.

Your a smart guy joe, but on some issues your just ignorant. Especially the ones where you're parroting the party line.

[Fluffy]

Joe,

One other point:

A bunch of guys in dress shirts and ties standing in a room chanting innocuous slogans is not a "riot". Refusing to leave a room is not "riot". It wasn't a "riot" when antiwar protestors held sit-ins during the Viet Nam war, and it wasn't a "riot" when a bunch of guys stood in a room and refused to leave.

A "riot" is when those guys pick shit up and crater a few Election Board Member skulls with it.

And I too think Bush v. Gore was an "odd" decision, but the SCOTUS was pretty much forced into that situation by the blatant bad faith of the FSC. The Constitution gives control of voting processes to the states, but if this November some state election board went insane and tried to declare Richard Nixon the winner of their state's election, and that state's Supreme Court backed them up by rewriting election law after the fact, the feds would pretty much have no choice but to find a way to smack that state down. And I bet they would use a contrived and arbitrary SCOTUS decision to do it.

[BDB]

Why DID they replace mechanical levers with punch cards? The former was much easier.

[BDB]

I don't think the butterfly ballots helped Gore. But that wasn't some pre-meditated plan--that was just bad luck and governmental ineptitude, which given how Bush's Presidency has gone, was somehow an appropriate way of him winning it the first time.

[joe]

Wow, six posts. That's, like, 2 screens of scrolling.

Dude, get over it.

No way I'm wading through that.

[brotherben]

joe, I hate to say it friend, but your weak reason for a lack of rebuttal has lose written all over it.

[joe]

Eh. So be it.

Waste of time.

[BDB]

Was "|" another one of TallDave's many names?

[economist]

There's way too much hoopla over elections. Whether people vote for the person they mean to vote for or "accidentally" vote for the other guy, we're still screwed. Even if everyone "accidentally" voted for Bob Barr.

[The Democratic Republican]

It's been a while since I've been here, but one thing stays the same: joe is so damn f-ing irritating.

[joe]

Then leave.

No one missed you.