Article

2004-10-20 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2004-10-20 10:04:46 AM|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Bingo. This will, indeed, be the game - should've seen it coming weeks ago. You can bank on this.

Picture the possibilities!

Incumbent President in squeaker...
Administration in place...
Election outcome tied up in courts...
Jan 20th, both Bush and Skeery show up for Oath of Office...
Dhimmidick appointees show up for "work"...

LOL!

Ugly, ugly, ugly.

Posted by .com 2004-10-20 11:12:44 AM|| 2004-10-20 11:12:44 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 Calling Florida election results (I think is was Afghan Dan Rather)early for Bush in 2000, resulted in the heavily Republican panhandle (one hour behind) not going to the polls (stupid, but they thought Bush had the state). This is often glossed over when Dimlight O'Crats point out that Bush only carried FL by 500+ votes. The number would have been much higher without the Rather flub.

Posted by RN 2004-10-20 11:25:37 AM|| 2004-10-20 11:25:37 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Skeery's campaign has announced (just heard on Fox) they have $6.8M for post-election legal fee fund, at present. Also, even if the election is NOT close, they will challenge - whatever that means. And another goodie: The Fed Election Comm says there will be NO limits on the legal fund donations, soft money will be OK, so we can expect Big Bux from the usual Socialist Fascist Sources.

Posted by .com 2004-10-20 12:04:58 PM|| 2004-10-20 12:04:58 PM|| Front Page Top

#4 well...when it gets right down to brass tacks...the military supports GW by, something like, 75%. So, if the courts can't decide...then guess who wins? If you want to start a war, you might want to have something beside crazed un-armed pacificsts on your side.

Posted by Creath Crort7947 2004-10-20 12:13:16 PM|| 2004-10-20 12:13:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#5 .com -- I fear you may be right. I've suspected Kerry may see himself -- even after a clear loss -- as the head of a "shadow presidency".

This idea -- of Kerry declaring himself the winner and taking the fight to the courts -- is exactly what vodkapundit was talking about in his famous rant. It strikes at the very legitimacy of the system by saying you're not going to follow the rules if they don't break your way.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2004-10-20 12:32:13 PM|| [http://www.kloognome.com/] 2004-10-20 12:32:13 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 maybe Teresa can buy Elba and establish him as King there

Posted by Frank G 2004-10-20 12:39:21 PM|| 2004-10-20 12:39:21 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 RC - Such has been demonstrated in the same-sex marriages and similar. If they don't like it - they just ignore it.

And I forgot to Thank You for this post - it really will be a watershed event in American history - of the wrong sort, but extremely important nonetheless. If Skeery "wins" - and with all the voter fraud afoot it appears he has an excellent chance of pulling it off, I will NOT contribute one thin dime to his disasterous term. That, as far as I am concerned, will be that. You guys will prolly need a decade to "recover" - and that ignores the inevitable disasters that will occur, from Iran to domestic terror hits.

Thanks, again. This is BIG MAGIC.

Posted by .com 2004-10-20 12:43:14 PM|| 2004-10-20 12:43:14 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 .com, if the election is in doubt come the first week of January, things will get settled in a hurry.

The House will meet and vote (if necessary) to elect a President, per the Constitution. If GWB plausibly has ? 269 EV, he's the President. Kerry would have to have serious claims to 270+ EV to be elected, and those EV would have to be pretty clean looking. If the 2000 Election had ended up in the House (e.g., Florida never sent its Electors to vote, so no one had 270 EV), there's no question GWB would have been the winner.

The Senate then will meet, elect the Vice-President (Cheney in this scenario), and start to confirm the appointees of the elected President. The Dim appointees won't get the chance to show up for work.

Of course, if sKerry really does win, there won't be a problem, as GWB and crew have enough class to respect the rules and clean out their desks.

Posted by Steve White 2004-10-20 1:36:07 PM|| 2004-10-20 1:36:07 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 I have had the same fears for a while now - that at some point we are going to get a losing Presidential candidate who REFUSES to lose - who is so sure of their Righteousness that they will say something along the lines of, "The People didn't know what they are doing." And remember my prediction from a couple weeks ago - that in the last part of October, some 'voter rights' group or groups we've never heard of will announce "proof" of a massive vote fraud plan on the part of the GOP, and the Donks will demand the election be postponed - or worse, handed to Kerry.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2004-10-20 1:49:16 PM|| 2004-10-20 1:49:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Over on Democratic Underground last night (and I should NEVER EVER EVER go there; it's bad for my blood pressure), they were speculating that the flu vaccine shortage (and the school plans found in Iraq) were Repug ploys to keep people from voting. Gah. Did I mention I should NEVER EVER EVER go there?

Posted by Seafarious 2004-10-20 1:55:15 PM|| 2004-10-20 1:55:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Creath Crort, I don't know any military men or women who are going to do anything close to what you say. They may not like the C-in-C (ie. Clinton), but they aren't going to do a palace coup.

Posted by Desert Blondie 2004-10-20 1:55:47 PM|| 2004-10-20 1:55:47 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Ah, Dr Steve - ever the optimist!

For those who don't know, if we have a bona-fide or "apparent" 269 to 269 EV tie, then it goes to the House. Each state delegation gets one vote. The Pubs would win, in that case, if party lines are observed. There is no identified solution, AFAIK, for a 25-25 tie there.

But that's not the scenario that I believe will occur.

"Kerry would have to have serious claims to 270+ EV to be elected, and those EV would have to be pretty clean looking."

If there are states in dispute, as is currently planned by the Dhimmidick strategists (no matter what the vote results are, btw) and neither candidate has 270 without counting one or more of the disputed state's EVs, then it doesn't go to the House - it goes to the courts. This is a no-brainer for the LLL's - just dispute enough swing states, which they have already announced they will do.

Anything can happen, then, given the massive voter registration fraud, silly system hernias, such as the Colorado EV / popular vote gambit, the Ohio court ruling which says any voter in OH can vote anywhere - and officials are req'd to be able to validate - or are forced to accept the vote if unable to link all systems to validate, wild-eyed efforts to disenfranchise military votes, unverifiable overseas absentee ballots, not to mention the most obvious avenue for fraud: No valid official picture-ID required to vote.

Maybe you'll be right - there'll be enough votes to overwhelm the Loonies. Maybe we'll see a John Howard type of silent majority motivated to vote. Maybe it will be sufficient to overwhelm the assholes - eventually. I doubt it, utterly, but I've been wrong many times. I see this election ending up in the courts because all challenges must be handled by rule of law. No matter how silly or absurd, it will end up in the courts because they have decreed they will challenge in numerous states - more than enough of which are in doubt that they actually have a chance of changing some results.

My $0.02.

Zee sheet, she ees getting deep, no?

Posted by .com 2004-10-20 1:55:50 PM|| 2004-10-20 1:55:50 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 More than - enough to make this conservative Democrat gag.

Bush has my vote and my support. I've had enough.

Posted by too true 2004-10-20 3:04:18 PM|| 2004-10-20 3:04:18 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Relax, folks. This election will not be close.

As in the Calif governor's race, and the FL governor's race, and several other state races, the polls have no connection to how millions of centrists and swing voters will actually vote on Nov 2. There are at least a million national security Democrats who find Kerry horrifying but are not willing (or able) to come out openly for Bush. In the privacy of the voting booth, these closet Bush supporters will make their presence felt. But not before Nov 2-- the wrath of colleagues, neighbors, friends, even family is too great for them to come out openly.

Posted by lex 2004-10-20 3:10:15 PM|| 2004-10-20 3:10:15 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Everyone:

Go home and pull up a chair, pour yourself a nice glass of beer/wine/tea/pop.

Bush will win in a superlandslide in November.

And all ya gotta do is show up and vote right.

Posted by badanov 2004-10-20 3:15:03 PM|| [http://www.rkka.org] 2004-10-20 3:15:03 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 One caveat: Rove needs to quit worrying about the fundamentalist vote and go after every Lieberman and DNC Democrat he can find between Philadelphia and Detroit. At least 100,000 votes there, enough to tip one or more of PA, OH and MI.

Posted by lex 2004-10-20 3:18:24 PM|| 2004-10-20 3:18:24 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 How about this scenario: The LLL talking heads on ABC/CBS/NBC/CNN declare Kerry the winner, he claims victory, but then the final tallies throw the election to Bush. Can you imagine the howl from the left? It would be litigation after litigation for the next few months.

Posted by Cyber Sarge 2004-10-20 3:37:37 PM|| 2004-10-20 3:37:37 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 I have talked to more than a few democrats here that are not goin to vote at all. They don't like Kerry, don't like Bush, and despise Nader. I say don't ever vote for a candidate you will not later support. It's better in my view to not vote at all.

Posted by Deacon Blues 2004-10-20 3:47:01 PM|| 2004-10-20 3:47:01 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Sure, declare victory early. Just one more thing to flip/flop about. "I won before I lost."

I can almost hear the Acceptance of Defeat speech: "The People have spoken. The bastards!"

Posted by SteveS 2004-10-20 6:22:22 PM|| 2004-10-20 6:22:22 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 we are going to get a losing Presidential candidate who REFUSES to lose

That's why we have US Marshalls.

Posted by Shipman 2004-10-20 7:47:00 PM|| 2004-10-20 7:47:00 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 Hey, I've got an idea! sKerry windsurfs, bikes, plays football ... how about banshee jumping or skydiving?
[wink, wink]

Posted by Memesis 2004-10-20 7:53:42 PM|| 2004-10-20 7:53:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Why wait - declare victory today and have done with it. Why let a pesky thing like an election decide the important issue of John Kerry becoming President. Voters are such a ... nuisance.

Posted by A Jackson 2004-10-20 9:27:41 PM|| 2004-10-20 9:27:41 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Lessee...
There was the Papal Court in Avignon during the Middle Ages. Rome and Avignon spent a lot of time excommunicating each other, as I recall.

And a few years ago Lackawanna, NY had three mayors, 'cause the job was just too lucrative. The old guy stayed in, the new guy moved in, and I still have no idea where the third guy came from. ;-)

Posted by trailing wife 2004-10-20 10:59:19 PM|| 2004-10-20 10:59:19 PM|| Front Page Top

07:39 Sock Puppet of Doom
07:22 Shipman
03:29 Sock Puppet of Doom
02:48 Classical_Liberal
02:23 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:57 Jabba the Nutt
23:41 Pappy
23:38 Bomb-a-rama
23:36 .com
23:19 Pappy
23:17 Seafarious
23:14 Pappy
23:13 SON OF TOLUI
23:12 Seafarious
23:10 .com
23:05 trailing wife
23:04 .com
22:59 trailing wife
22:58 Pappy
22:54 whitecollar redneck
22:52 Pappy
22:47 Poison Reverse
22:43 trailing wife
22:41 Dar