The legacy of 'W'?

Well said Smooty. I honestly don't get people who are still stuck in 2000. The man won and not only that but he won again in 2004. Time to move on and look to the future.

I don't even read the stuff Crazyhorse1 writes anymore because it's just a big rant along with some preaching. It's old and tired.

p.s. Obama for president because it feels right.

What happened to Ron Paul? I still have this gut feeling Gore is going to enter the race

What happened to Ron Paul? I still have this gut feeling Gore is going to enter the race

I would totally vote for him but he's not going to make it out of the Republican primaries and he said if he doesn't he wouldn't run as an independent. Basically, I'm not going to be able to vote for him.

Obama on the other hand has a realistic chance of winning the primary. We'll just have to see if he can beat Hilary.

As for Gore, his time is up. I don't get why the fuck people want him to run. That ship has sailed. Time to move on.

p.s. Obama for president because it feels right.

I find it interesting that the Democrats are throwing every kind of minority they can into the ring. (not that they are doing it on purpose, just how it fell this year)
1- Clinton - female
2- Obama - African American
3- Richardson - Mexican
So if they are going to win the white house back, they are going to have to do it in a HUGE an unprecidented way.

FYI- I could get on board with Obama, but not those other two. You guys have no idea how bad Richardson is. It's like SS knowing Stewart, I have met Richardson on several occasions, and he is one horrible person. He has hurt this state a lot.

I would totally vote for him but he's not going to make it out of the Republican primaries and he said if he doesn't he wouldn't run as an independent. Basically, I'm not going to be able to vote for him.

Obama on the other hand has a realistic chance of winning the primary. We'll just have to see if he can beat Hilary.

As for Gore, his time is up. I don't get why the fuck people want him to run. That ship has sailed. Time to move on.

Good points. I don't think Gore should run, I just have this feeling he and Newt will enter the fray this fall. Could be wrong though.

I think I should accept that McCain is done now so I must look elsewhere. Who would be the VP on your Obama ticket?

I've always loved John McCain.

Poor guy has zero chance now.

Here's a link to WaPo's reporting on Fla's statewide "recount".

Florida Recounts Would Have Favored Bush (washingtonpost.com) (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12623-2001Nov11.html)

Couple of things:

It shows Gore may have won had ALL of the disputed votes, 175,010 to be exact, in the entire state been counted. By 171 votes at most.

The "recount" was not actually a recount but a study sponsored and conducted by various news media.

My problems with they way Crazyhorse is using this are several fold.

It seems CH that you are asserting that this study shows that Gore actually won the state when in fact it shows nothing of the sort. It shows when only the disputed votes are recounted by hand that Gore wins. It says nothing about all the other non-disputed votes which surely have mistakes numbering in the hundreds at least. Statistically that is certian. Who knows, these votes could fall for Gore or maybe not but in the end the 171 margin produced by counting only a small portion of the votes, disputed or not, is competely insignificant. Heck the article points out that basically we'll never know. So don't use this supposed "recount" in your arguments without properly understanding it please.

As for the disenfranchised non-felons. The info I found while Googling showed the number to be 8,000. Not 80,000. Not insiginificant by any means but someone so in the know, educated, and stuck on facts I thought you should know that your number is wrong. Also my researching, short as it was, didn't really lead me to believe that some type of conspiracy was perpetrated. It seems likes a regular old screw up.

Now I did find some info that had actual felons been allowed to vote Gore would have won by 80,000 votes. Maybe CH is confusing his number with this one. Imagine that, convicted felons voting for Gore. Who'd have thought?

I've always loved John McCain.

Poor guy has zero chance now.

I think he could make a great President, but he seems to be a terrible politician

What was this thread about again? :)

You are unintentionally showing that you don't know how the ballot was designed. Also, your remark seems to be that of a racist, since ballot confusion was pretty much limited to minority districts.

I know you probably aren't exactly a racist, but you do seem to be suffering from the delusion that dems are stupid. You should acquaint yourself with the ballot's design before making pronouncements.

By the way, studies show dems more likely to achieve advanced degrees than republicans.

The ballot was perfectly clear in relation to where to vote for Bush. How to vote for Gore and not Buchanan was unclear. The poor design was probably accidental.

The ballot's design probably did cost Gore the election but it was only one of many things. Others things were probably not accidental. The case for Fraud is not affected one way or another by the ballot controversy. Nor does the fact that Gore received more votes in Florida rely in any way in counting those lost votes for Gore.

Gore had more votes in Florida than Bush anyway. The materials I've cited are pretty clear about that. Try reading them again.

I think many of you guys must be very young. You seem not to be aware of the basics of the election controversy. I was fifty six at the time. People usually don't start following the news in any detail until their forties. I don't think he was making a statement about the intelligence of the voters. I think he was trying to show how your argument seems to basically prove that only Democrats were dumb enough screw the ballot up. I am not saying that but your argument could lead someone to think that. I know the ballot was screwy and probably moreso towards Gore but I seriously think you read way too much into his post. He was simply pointing out how the mechanics of your argument make the argument seem indicting of democratic intelligence.

I find it interesting that the Democrats are throwing every kind of minority they can into the ring. (not that they are doing it on purpose, just how it fell this year)
1- Clinton - female
2- Obama - African American
3- Richardson - Mexican
So if they are going to win the white house back, they are going to have to do it in a HUGE an unprecidented way.

FYI- I could get on board with Obama, but not those other two. You guys have no idea how bad Richardson is. It's like SS knowing Stewart, I have met Richardson on several occasions, and he is one horrible person. He has hurt this state a lot.

They don't have to do jack because Republicans have molested the nation for the past 12 years. You would like to see people get on board with the democrats but the sad truth people are going to vote against Republicans more so than vote for Democrats.

As for Richardson, he's a recycled old timer I don't like recycling head coaches and I certainly don't like recycled politicians.

I actually did some volunteer work for Obama last weekend and was quite surprised how white people in general felt about him. They really liked him and I was taken aback quite a bit. It was an amazing experience really to hear what they thought about him. This is in the Northwest which is a little bit different from the rest of the country...we'll see how he does against Hilary.

I'm curious, in what way has Richardson hurt Arizona?