Why do so many people on ATS hate Bush?, page 2

Ah, I may have inadvertently posted a link which doesn't fully support my argument. Now there's a generous act! In addition, I stated in my previous post that all 680 of the spoiled overseas ballots were votes for Bush. I have subsequently discovered that this is incorrect: 544 of the votes were for Bush, the remainder for Gore. Even taking this into account, Gore won the Florida election by 7 votes. As for the standards of said ballots...

From the New York Times: How Bush Took Florida
Many of the 680 flawed ballots in the analysis of the overseas envelopes had multiple defects, so the total number of flaws exceeds the number of defective ballots. The following questionable ballots were found:

344 ballots with no evidence they were cast on or before Election Day. They had late, illegible or missing postmarks.

183 ballots with United States postmarks.

96 ballots lacking the required signature or address of a witness.

169 ballots from voters who were not registered, who failed to sign the envelope or who had not requested a ballot. A request is required by federal law.

5 ballots received after the Nov. 17 deadline.

19 voters cast two ballots, both of which counted.

... all of which are make the ballot unacceptable according to election law.

The exact figures for the final, accurate count vary, as one would expect, according to the exact standards you demand from a ballot, but the arguments cannot disguise the shocking truth that the ballots listed above were actually counted in the first place!

It's also worth glancing at the Miami Herald - unfortunately, I only have a seocnd-hand link for this story, but you can find it here.

"Had discarded ballots in two counties that bore marks no different from others accepted been counted, Gore would be in the White House today."

"By a standard many Republicans, including the Florida Republican Party, advocated, Al Gore would have won the election by an indistinguishable three votes."

"Bush's lead would have vanished ... if the recount had been conducted under severely restricted standards advocated by some Republicans."

Or, to simplify, had Dubya been judged by his own standards, he would have lost. Had he shown an ounce of the integrity he promised he would "bring to the Oval Office", he would have conceded defeat. I think it says a lot for Bush's presidency that his morals go out the window when there's a chance his "authority" will be challenged.

Add to this the report in the Palm Beach Post which said that 5,330 voters - predominantly elderly and Jewish - intended to vote for Gore but accidentally voted for Pat Buchanan due to the way the ballot paper was laid out.

That's five thousand elderly, Jewish voters who cast their ballots for Pat Buchanan. Sound likely? Even Buchanan himself said that there must have been a mistake!

If you're feeling really brave - and maybe just a little bipartisan - try this site. Try as I might - and remember, I'm not a paid up Democrat or an American citizen - I can't fault their logic or their mathematics. And that last photograph is particularly interesting...

I don't think that the outcome of the Florida election is supposition - I think there is ample evidence to indicate that Bush's presidency is illegitimate. As I said before, it's clear to the dispassionate observer that he flouted the spirit of the law, even if he cynically obeyed the letter. If you accept the strictest standard of ballots, Gore won the election by seven votes. If you analyse who the good people of Florida actually voted for - the will of the people - Gore won by thousands.

I accept there is - at present, at least - no concrete evidence which would allow Bush to be impeached over the result in Florida, but, even if the evidence I was provided doesn't convince you, the questions raised must surely make you wonder:

Is this petty, cynical, grasping little man really fit to stand in the White House?

And out of interest, Kozmo, what did you think of the other links I posted?