Question for Americans?

Thanks

Published on August 3, 2004 By Muggaz In Politics

Hi Guys

I saw Fahrenheit 9/11 last night, and while it was nothing I didn’t already know, It was a bit wish washy, and not objective at all… I am looking forward to seeing a movie that tells the story in an objective fashion…

I did learn something last night though – I was completely unaware that it only took one member of the senate to sign an objection to Bush becoming president in 2000 – I know, I am a bit daft, but could one of you please kindly tell me, in your opinion, why no member of the senate considered the petitions coming from the African American communities?

The impression I got from the movie was that Al Gore would have won quite easily if just one member of the senate objected, hence getting the ball rolling for a thorough investigation… Whether Bush won or not, well, it’s irrelevant now, I would just like to know why not one member of the US senate had the courage to object and instigate the investigation…

I could be completely wrong, and because it was directed by Michael Moore, a blatantly obvious fact might be missing from my picture here – that’s why I am asking for your help…

Thanks Yanks!!!

BAM!!!

Comments (Page 2)

messybuu

on Aug 03, 2004

It might help to learn more about a similar situation that happened with Kennedy and Nixon. I haven't waded much through the links myself, but a quote from this article might explain why Gore acted as he did. After all, Nixon was definitely not noble, and yet he "graciously" accepted defeat.

"It was seen as opening a Pandora's box where Nixon could be viewed as a poor sport and destroy his political future and his own votes could be challenged as well," says Lanoue. "Like Nixon, Al Gore is walking a thin line. Gore has a tough decision. He could be in the same position as Nixon. If he challenges, he could be perceived as a political spoiler or a martyr of the political election. If Gore wins the popular vote and bows out graciously he will get brownie points. But it may be too late for that now."

And if you don't mind, one more link about the Nixon/Kennedy election. I find the similarities to be quite intriguing.

kingbee

on Aug 04, 2004

I find the similarities to be quite intriguing

it is amazing how life imitates life huh? quite intriguing to say the least. i cant image gore looking to nixon's example but it was a lose-lose situation for both.

Muggaz

on Aug 04, 2004

They were some cool Links Joseph!!! thanks!!!

America is a great place huh??? What a model democracy

BAM!!!

kingbee

on Aug 04, 2004

either he is one outstanding individual

gore is an honest man as nearly as i can determine. unfortunately boring trumps honesty in america's political circus.

although you were inspired to ask the question by moore's film (i havent seen it btw) the answer had nothing to do with the movie or moore's character, etc. sorry you had to deal with the editorializing.

stevendedalus

on Aug 04, 2004

That the Supreme Court made its ruling negated, I believe, any action from the senate.

Good question, though.

Muggaz

on Aug 04, 2004

Yeah - I know Kingbee... I am really happy with the discussion though, I have actually learnt a lot about the American political system in this thread... Brads post included.

BAM!!!

Madine

on Aug 04, 2004

I remember that there were 3 vote counts, and Bush won all 3. The Florida state government, controlled by Republicans including GW's brother Jeb, decided to not do another recount. Gore sued to do another recount, and the Florida Supreme court sided with Gore. The ruling was appealed to the US Supreme court, which ruled against Gore.

An independent study determined that even with another recount, Bush still would have won.

Also worth noting is that the Florida panhandle is on Central time, which is one hour later than most of Florida. Many national networks reported that Florida's polls were closed, even when the places on Central time were still open. This is believed to have caused some in the panhandle not to vote. The Florida panhandle is primarily Republican.

Draginol

on Aug 04, 2004

Oh I read the article. specifically:

The impression I got from the movie was that Al Gore would have won quite easily if just one member of the senate objected, hence getting the ball rolling for a thorough investigation…

Moore gives lots of impressions. Few of them accurate.

Draigon74

on Aug 06, 2004

Steven I think got it right I believe. The Supreme Court made a ruling and it was final. About the only thing Congress could have done was brought up a Constitutional Ammendment for instances like this that should happen in the future. In the end though, it was proven Bush did not steal the vote at all but won it fairly according to the election process set out by the Constitution. As for voters not being allowed to vote, I find it to be a travesty even if Bush, my personal choice, would not have won because of it. I believe that if their really was blacks not allowed to vote, then that is a travesty and should be dealt with accordingly with prison sentences for those denying the right to vote to anyone. Not only the blacks, and I would like to see proof of this, but also the overseas military votes not counted.

kingbee

on Aug 06, 2004

Few of them accurate

as i said, i havent seen the film. in this case, the assertion--as re-stated by muggaz--seems correct. the senate could have objected to ratifying the electoral vote as provided by us code, title 3, chapter 1, section 15.

lifehappens

on Aug 10, 2004

but also the overseas military votes not counted.

The first three vote counts were completed BEFORE Bush took office. Since then several independent studies found that Bush did win....if you take into account the military votes that did not arrive in time, it was an even larger margin.

I do have some right wing tendencies, but I don't agree with any one group on all my issues and opinions. No offense taken!

I just hated listening to the whining after the election...it was the whining that finally did me in. 20/20 hindsight=Bush won. If you have valid issues about people being refused the right to vote, fine. Bring it up and fix the problem, but don't put the leadership of the country on hold because you are looking into the situation. If you are too stupid to understand how to vote.....You probably are to stupid to make a rational choice but if you want to vote, ask for help or close your eyes and vote randomly.

archtct

on Aug 10, 2004

you see i can't exactly tell you why the senators didn't have any guts. the fact is that there is a lot of corruption in the american government. i think that they knew what president gb would do once in office. michael moore may be a crazy person but many things that he says can be researched. i haven't watched farenheit 9/11 yet but i will. and from what i have read of moore, i have been able to back them up with more than three reliable sources. it's just corruption man. and we have to deal with it

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!