Would we react differently to a 2000-like election result?

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2004-10-30 01:48pm

The election is only days away. There are growing concerns and actual news of voter fraud with missing ballots and challenges to voters. If we have a similar result as we did in 2000, say Florida all over again would the US electorate be as sheepish as they were in the last one? Many people were no where near as fired up as they should have been the last time this happened because some people felt "How bad could it be?" Well now we know just how important 4 years can be. Do you think the US elecotrate would be as passive as they were the last time this happened? Do you think either camp will be even more rabid in their defense of their own candidate?

And if it does happen the same way again or have a president elected by electoral votes instead of popular vote would we see a movement to either abolish or revamp the electoral college?

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2004-10-30 02:00pm

We're probably going to be more cynical and annoyed this time around. Politics should just fucking end.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2004-10-30 02:45pm

I don't know what else the electorate could do. They would probably be more outraged, but there're not a lot of good options for them at that stage.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2004-10-30 03:41pm

aren´t the americans allowed to own guns to be able to defend themselves against governmental injustices?

Tom_Aurum · Post by **Tom_Aurum** » 2004-10-30 03:41pm

My personal impression is that this is going to be decided by our nation's courts. Again. Hopefully, the "court" in question is our legislature this time, like it is legally supposed to be.

Stravo · Post by **Stravo** » 2004-10-30 03:47pm

I was thinking about a reaction like general discontent and mass demonstrations and protests. In retrospect I think Americans reacted rather underwhelmed by what was going on in 2000.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-10-30 05:02pm

We in the rest of the world thought of it as low comedy; none of us took it as seriously as we should have either (not that it would have mattered anyway since we have no direct influence over the American political process, but it's still worth noting).

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-10-31 07:12am

salm wrote:aren´t the americans allowed to own guns to be able to defend themselves against governmental injustices?

Funny, i don't rememeber a constitutional provision for armed insurrection.

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2004-10-31 07:20am

Stravo wrote:Do you think the US elecotrate would be as passive as they were the last time this happened? Do you think either camp will be even more rabid in their defense of their own candidate?

According to John Titor, Time Traveller, an American Civil War will be waged after this election. He knows, he's from the future. View the gory details here: +www.johntitor.com

And yes, my pointing out is a joke. But the scary thing is some people think he's serious.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2004-10-31 07:22am

Col. Crackpot wrote: Funny, i don't rememeber a constitutional provision for armed insurrection.

that was an honest question. IIRC the second amendmend states that firearms are legal because the US needs a milicia. for some reason i always thought that such a milicia is there for having something against the government in case the government does illegal things.

maybe i was assuming bullshit.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2004-10-31 08:12am

Xenophobe3691 · Post by **Xenophobe3691** » 2004-10-31 10:08am

salm wrote: that was an honest question. IIRC the second amendmend states that firearms are legal because the US needs a milicia. for some reason i always thought that such a milicia is there for having something against the government in case the government does illegal things.

maybe i was assuming bullshit.

Militia are supposed to act as a counter against the power of the Federal Army. Technically, each state can have their own Army, but not Navy (except for Texas).

Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba · Post by **Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba** » 2004-10-31 10:08am

salm wrote:
Col. Crackpot wrote: Funny, i don't rememeber a constitutional provision for armed insurrection.
that was an honest question. IIRC the second amendmend states that firearms are legal because the US needs a milicia. for some reason i always thought that such a milicia is there for having something against the government in case the government does illegal things.

maybe i was assuming bullshit.

I believe that was put into effect to defend against the British re-invasion. But, the thing is: The re-invasion has been called off. Nobody told you.

The Cleric · Post by **The Cleric** » 2004-10-31 12:36pm

Patrick Degan wrote:<I know not to quote images!>

That comic more accurately reflects on the Democratic voting practices in several large cities, noteably Chicago and Baltimore (two that I know off the top of my head). Republicans seem to be more concerned with the ballots that do come in, and "dispose" of those.

jcow79 · Post by **jcow79** » 2004-10-31 03:39pm

It seems to me that Florida2000 has just become a tool for each side to use as a tactic against the other in the event the outcome isn't in their favor. Both sides are already revving up their lawyers and are prepared to contest any "close" electoral victories amongst the states. No matter what state you investigate you are going to find instances of fraud. I think both sides feel they can contest a lost state in a close election. What they plan on gaining from this I'm not sure.
Is there a contingency plan in the event that major fraud is discovered in the elections of any states? Does that states electoral votes get thrown out? Does the state have to revote? Do we just let it go and count the ballots as they stand (like we did in 2000) What exactly have we learned from 2000 if anything?

JME2 · Post by **JME2** » 2004-10-31 03:50pm

Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba wrote:But, the thing is: The re-invasion has been called off. Nobody told you.

Sure it has.

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2004-10-31 05:13pm

This election has a good chance of being screwed up. At least half a dozen states are using machines that have been hacked by monkeys in the past (I kid you not), which also happen to not leave a paper trail for voting. I actually expect Florida to come through this one fairly well; there may be some fighting over absentee ballots, but the illegal butterfly ballots are gone. Roughly half of the counties are using optical scan machines, which give an error rate so low that most county recounts altered the vote by single-digit amounts. The other half are using various paper ballots, though I have less information on those, as I don't live in or near any of those counties.

The states most likely to be fucked up this year: Washington, Oregon, Texas, Georgia, Maryland, and either Colorado or Wyoming (don't recall which

). All have already had minor problems with their voting system in previous elections or the build-up to this election, and have shown no success in correcting those problems. Expect lawsuits when electical problems cause 50+% of precincts to be turned away because the machines don't have battery back-up.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-11-01 03:06am

Col. Crackpot wrote:
salm wrote:aren´t the americans allowed to own guns to be able to defend themselves against governmental injustices?
Funny, i don't rememeber a constitutional provision for armed insurrection.

There is an unwritten constititional provition for armed revolt in all nations.. "Armed revolt is always legal providing you win"

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Would we react differently to a 2000-like election result?

Would we react differently to a 2000-like election result?

Re: Would we react differently to a 2000-like election resul