What more could Gore have done to fight on after the SC ruling?

[fujiyama]

I've seen some people say that Gore stopped fighting way to early, but after the USSC decision, what more could he have done?

[Fovea]

1. He might have mentioned that the decision

was not constitutional, and a MC Escher-like interpretation
of equal protection.

[knowbody0]

2. im not sure but imagine his day on the senate floor

when the black representatives begged for a senator.
at the time it was "for the good of the country" floundering around with no leader.

[Eric J in MN]

3. Called for a statewide recount,

since the Supreme Court said it was unconsitutional to only re-count some counties.

[glitch]

13. That's what the FL State Supreme Court did, which the USSC overturned

remember? They stopped the full state count, because it could damage Bush.

[Eric J in MN]

20. No, there was a recount in some counties, not every county NT

NT

[glitch]

21. Gore asked for individual counties to be recounted as allowed by FL law,

Bush took that to FL Supreme Court, they ruled every county to be recounted to satisfy equal protection, USSC in Bush v. Gore stopped that statewide recount.

[regnaD kciN]

35. Wrong...

The Gore campaign asked for a recount in certain counties, The Florida SC ruled that there had to be a statewide recount. SCOTUS killed the recount by ruling that a) there was no statewide standard for evaluating disputed ballots (which meant a violation of "equal protection," since a voter that left a two-corner hanging chad might have their vote counted in some counties but not in others), and that b) any attempt, in the light of this decision, to decide such a standard couldn't be applied retroactively to an election already held.

In fact, as the newspaper-sponsored study that was due to be released right after 9/11 (and was eventually released to near-total silence several months later) pointed out, had the Gore-requested recount been approved by the SSC, Bush would still have won. However, had the SSC-mandated full statewide recount taken place, Gore would have won.

[Warpy]

14. The problem was always that the only person who had the power

to order a statewide recount was Jebbie. Gore was left to sue county by county, and he sued in the ones he thought were the most impostant.

He got caught in a classic catch-22. Either he could sue in every single county in the state (a financially ruinous prospect with little hope of success) or he could sue in the most important ones.

The Florida supreme court ruling in his favor should have been the last word on the matter (ever though the limited recount would have thrown it to Bush). That the USSC stepped in and overruled the Florida court on a strictly state matter is a decision that will go down in infamy right next to the appalling Dred Scott decision.

The consortium of newspapers finally did the recount long after Bush was illegally sworn in. In the two limited recount scenarios, Bush won. In the seven broad recounts, Gore won. A statewide recount would have given the state, and the election, to Gore.

[InvisibleBallots]

16. we wish he had done that in the first place!

Isn't that what the FL Supreme Court ordered? The only logical thing to do was a hand recount of all the votes in FL.

[newyawker99]

33. Hi InvisibleBallots!!

Welcome to DU!!

[smifffffy]

4. What Gore Should Have Done

He should have pulled his thumb out of his ass & showed us the true size of his BALLS by fighting them every step of the way & seeing what happend.

[Pepperbelly]

11. the only recourse was throwing it into the House and ...

we know exactly how that would have turned out.

It's easy to say he should have this or that but what the fuck does that mean? Should he have thrown a televised tantrum? Or tried to raise an army?

What do you suggest?

[kerry-is-my-prez]

17. He did fight it every step of the way. He had no backing from the Party.

Ed Rendell - the head of the DNC came out and said he had lost and should just give up....

[shance]

25. Exactly, our own DNC chair said Gore should just hang it up.

Quit blaming Gore. Unlike Kerry who had an army of support, everyone in the Democratic party was pressuring him to fold as well.

They were NO help.

Gore did the right thing and did everything that was in his power. He wanted to be president and actually tried to fight it.

A big and significant difference from what we are seeing today, which is talking out of both sides of the mouth and doing nothing to change the result.

[Silverhair]

22. How could he have fought?

Please be explicit. Under our law the SCOTUS has the final say - period. There is NO APPEAL from a SCOTUS decision. The next step would be violent revolution.

[newyawker99]

34. Hi smifffffy!!

Welcome to DU!!

[unblock]

5. after the ussc decision, he could have done something

but almost immediately thereafter, the florida supreme court backed down and caved to the supremo's wishes. the florida supreme court SHOULD have told the ussc that they didn't have jurisdiction over florida's selection of its electors, but they all caved.

once this was done, there wasn't really much gore could have done.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

18. Plus the counties that were supposed to do the recounts quit (Miami)

and then Katherine Harris pulled her b.s. with the support of Jebbie.

[cornermouse]

6. Gore fought longer than Kerry did.

I've revised my opinion of Gore upwards.

[fshrink]

8. Of course!!!

The second time around it's "Ah! You lose so you want to change the rules!". Not the first time. So Gore "could" fight longer than Kerry and did, although I still think that he should have fought all the way to a crisis. This country could not afford a neo-nazi idiot.

[Pepperbelly]

12. again ...

what does that mean?

There is no appeal from the Supreme Court.

The House was Republican.

What else should he have done?

[WyLoochka]

9. Gore had more firm

ground to stand on than Kerry, with the vote in FL being so close. The repukes learned in four years how to skim votes here there and everywhere by a myriad of devices, so that it would appear it wasn't close enough for anyone to hang in there and fight.

[shance]

38. Unfortunately, no man is an island. Kerry had the support, Gore had none.

or very little to say the least.

[WyLoochka]

7. He should NEVER have

made a concession speech EVER, for one.

[autorank]

10. He might have said...

"Today five justices on the Supreme Court contradicted their entire history on this and other courts. They claimed to vote for Federal rule in a state electoral matter. In fact, they voted for their own rule. The Supreme Court just stole the election for George W. Bush."

[Silverhair]

23. What good would that have done?

Would such a temper tantrum have changed anything?

[autorank]

24. Since when is the truth a temper tantrum.

All sorts of major events have happened in this country since I've been observing and/or involved in politics. What strikes me is that the left/center never names it and claims it! The SC decision was a hack vote by political hacks as demonstrated by their vote. These five have been states rights people and very clear about it. All Conservative Republicans, they turn on their own philosophy, betray it is a better term, and give the election to their political co-religionists *. That's the truth. But nooooooo, what did we get. A civil handover of our election to the big crook, *, through the co-conspirators, the SC 5.

We had Gulf of Tonkin which was known. How much noise was made about that, not much. It's relevant today. Ever hear anything.

We had Iran-Contra which we let die.

We had the blatant lies about babies and incubators plus phony photos of Iraq troops near Saudi Arabia prior to Gulf War 1. Anybody cry fraud?

We had the August memo clearly indicating total incompetence, malfeasance. Any major Democrat lay that one on the line?

The 2000 election (and I like Gore a great deal) was the turning point. If we could do it over again, Gore should have called it theft.

The Democrats treat American politics like a drawing room comedy when in fact it's more akin to professional wrestling. You have to really state the truth loudly and forcefully to get peoples attention and you have to repeat the truth again and again. Sorry, no tantrum suggested, just caring enough about the country and truth to speak it.

2000 was stolen by the Supreme Court, Jeb Bush, and GW Bush. We knew it shortly after the election, we've known it since then, and we know it now. Why shouldn't our leaders say it? We are.

Happy Thanks Giving silverhair (and that's the truth)

[Silverhair]

26. You didn't answer the question.

What good would that have done? What would it have accomplished? It would have only been seen by the general public as a temper tantrum by a sore loser, and by association, would have damaged the Democratic Party.

Please direct yourself to the question: What good would that have done?

[autorank]

27. Hold on a minute. I don't need to be ordered around...

"Please direct yourself to the question." But I'm glad to answer again. I did answer previously. Read the previous response. It is quite clear.

To elaborate, we never lay it out, just say what happened. Why do you think a majority of Americans think they never got the truth about the Kennedy assassination? Why are more than 50% of NYC residents now of the belief that the government was complicit in some way in 911? Because the truth is not spoken, the people know it, and they have an endemic cynicism and skeptical outlook. The antidote to this is telling the truth as it happens, in real-time.

In my opinion, you're of the 'play nice' rules of Democratic behavior outlined by 'corporate media' (formerly known as mainstream media). The Democrats are supposed to suck it up whenever we get screwed or we fear that we will be called sore losers, extremists, etc.. The Republicans can put forth all sorts of filth, (e.g., Gingrich, Delay, Falwell, etc.), and 'corporate media' says nary a word about excess.

We were robbed of our most precious liberty, the fair election. We were robbed by a bunch of political hacks, not justices.

To fail to speak the truth about that is a failure to accept your responsibility as a political leader: protecting the peoples right to a fair, free, honest election.

When the political deceit of our engagement in Viet Nam became apparent, Senators like Wayne Morse and Ernest Greuning (both Republicans) spoke out in the starkest terms. They were not well received but they and those who followed let the people know that there was a grain of truth in our body politic.

What happens if we find out, without any doubt, let's say around 2-3/2005, that the election was stolen. Is Kerry just supposed to suck it up? I think not. If he does, others will not. We knew enough about FL to know it was a theft and enough about the justices who selected Bush to know that it was a theft.

By your logic, it would make no sense for a witness to ever testify in court...tantrum...because the crime was a fait accompli!

That's why, along with my previous response, Gore should have spoken up and told the truth.

TRUTH IS THE ULTIMATE GOOD

[shance]

29. For the Democratic party to speak up would have been its responsibility

I agree with Auto in the fact our complicity (some would call fear of retribution or cowardice) has cost us far more than naming issues head on, including JFK, MLK, and Bobby Kennedy. We should have let those individuals know that if someone else dares to try and hurt one of our own again, they would pay one HUNDRED times over, but we didnt.

With regards to Gore, in a perfect world should he have stood up, YES, and HE DID. The glaring flaw was, WHERE WAS THE PARTY TO BACK HIM UP??

No person, no matter if they walk on water, can do that by themselves. Gore was abandoned. He was wronged. Our party leadership is to blame as they are on so many other situations. We, along with the true Democratic leaders need to face that truth. We must become the leadership that SUPPORTS and defends our leaders with the strongest conviction that will never fold under pressure.

If we don't, our leaders, who will consciously think they are not backed up, will continue to cave, not to mention we will continue to promote leaders that are bought and sold and are not true leaders at all. Gore was a prime example of one of our own that was left to fend for himself. That is inexcusable, and has affected us all because of our leaderships refusal to protect and defend him. It is also our responsibility as well. Very little responsibility is left to Gore. If anything he has a right to totally disconnect from politics because of that betrayal.

On edit: I for one, am truly grateful that he hasnt.

[autorank]

36. i agree with shance and noirblu...it's never wrong to stand up

and tell the truth. I'm not disappointed in Gore or upset with him. In fact, shance, I agree, he has stayed involved and appeared at critical times. His 'betrayal' speech was tremendous and the Georgetown analysis recently should be mandatory reading for all Democrats. The party was not there, particularly the Congressional delegations (save the Black Caucus). In fact Lieberman wasn't there, other than to concede. And our leader Rendel, like him as I do, also gave in.

Must have been lonely.

[noiretextatique]

32. the party was damaged and will be damaged anyway

as long as cowards and enablers are in control of the party. let's ask YOU a question: what was the benefit of caivng in without even a protest...to a coup? and did that HELP the democratic party? if you think it did, you haven't been parying attention since 2000. if there was a strategy, it's clear the strategy didn't and isn't working out very well for democrats.

[noiretextatique]

31. what good would it do? temper tantrum?

the republicans stole the election...simply stating that fact might have changed a lot of things. we will never know because faux decorum has become more important than anything else, including democracy in this country.
what should the oppostition do when faced with a blatant, illegal power grab? even a temper tantrum would be better than nothing.

[Leilani]

15. Early on, it was handled badly.

They should have had a statewide recount, & the entire Dem party should have been on the ground in Florida to help him out.

A lot of it was perception; the Repubs ACTED like they won, & staged a coup...the Dems fell short.

I think Al Gore did the best he could do...it was such an unexpected outcome, Bush had his brother Jeb & Katherine Harris controlling Florida.

And once the Supremes weighed in, it was over.

This election is different...we knew there would be trouble, & aside from raising funds, I don't think too much was done proactively, to ensure a fair count.

[kerry-is-my-prez]

19. The Repubs in Florida and/or in Congress would have voted against it also.

The would have had the ultimate say-so - if I remember correctly.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Deja Q]

30. Question the need FOR the supreme court. The Constitution, purportedly,

has ways of dealing with the situation that happened in Florida; rigged or otherwise.

Or so I'd been told.

[LiberalFighter]

37. Come out and call USSCJ activist judges