Clinton May Take Delegate Fight To Convention

[Justin86]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1538768' date='May 24 2008, 03:10 AM']In addition, other posters have claimed that it was a "liberal" SC who ruled in this case. The five justices who ruled to stop the recount process were Kennedy (appointed by Reagan), O'Connor (appointed by Reagan), Rehnquist (appointed by Nixon), Scalia (appointed by Reagan), and Thomas (appointed by Bush Sr.). As you can see, they were hardly "liberal."[/quote]
Who appointed them as nothing to do with their political views. O'Conner is in no way, shape, or form a conservative justice. As a matter of fact, she is viewed as the epitome of liberal justices on the Court.

[quote]My contention is that the SC should have allowed, indeed, required a full recount. By not doing so, they essentially voted 5-4 for the president of the United States.[/quote]
What law would they have invoked that required this?

[quote]Finally, as CatherineM has already noted, there were huge conflicts of interest represented by Katherine Harris being both the Secretary of State for FL as well as the head Bush's campaign in FL, and Jeb Bush being governor of FL. As was said of Caesar's wife, you must not only be pure but be seen to be pure.[/quote]
[i]Appearances[/i] of conflicts of interests aren't proof that anything is really going on, much less a legal reason for the court to demand another recount.

[kujo]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1538768' date='May 23 2008, 02:10 PM']In essence, the SC said that the only fair thing to do would be to recount the results for the entire state, but then said that there wasn't enough time to do so and ordered the recount process stopped.

In addition, other posters have claimed that it was a "liberal" SC who ruled in this case. The five justices who ruled to stop the recount process were Kennedy (appointed by Reagan), O'Connor (appointed by Reagan), Rehnquist (appointed by Nixon), Scalia (appointed by Reagan), and Thomas (appointed by Bush Sr.). As you can see, they were hardly "liberal."

My contention is that the SC should have allowed, indeed, required a full recount. By not doing so, they essentially voted 5-4 for the president of the United States.

Finally, as CatherineM has already noted, there were huge conflicts of interest represented by Katherine Harris being both the Secretary of State for FL as well as the head Bush's campaign in FL, and Jeb Bush being governor of FL. As was said of Caesar's wife, you must not only be pure but be seen to be pure.[/quote]

The SC said that the Constitutional thing to do was to require the same standards for counting votes be applied to everyone in the whole state, a fair and reasonable thing to do; however, given the fact that the deadline for submitting the votes was December 12th, the SC stated that to do so would not be possible. In typical "liberal" fasion, we had the dissenters trying to weave a tale about December 12th [i]really[/i] meaning something else while the majority stated that the law is the law and should be followed.

As for your statement on the ideologies of the justices, you are flat wrong. Sandra Day O'Connor was a liberal through and through.

[CatherineM]

I was a registered voter in Florida in 2000, and still am, so I feel I have the right to say that the appearance of impropriety does matter to me even if I truly believe that nothing illegal or immoral is going on. A person of true character would have recused herself from the process.

Edited May 23, 2008 by CatherineM

[Justin86]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1539304' date='May 24 2008, 09:48 AM']I was a registered voter in Florida in 2000, and still am, so I feel I have the right to say that the appearance of impropriety does matter to me even if I truly believe that nothing illegal or immoral is going on. A person of true character would have recused herself from the process.[/quote]
That's fine, but the Surpreme Court can't factor that into their descion.

[XIX]

[quote name='homeschoolmom' post='1536707' date='May 21 2008, 10:05 PM']

(btw, nice use of "quixotic" in the OP-- that word is never used often enough)[/quote]
It's a great scrabble word.

[Aloysius]

I always like a good windmill fight. Go Hillary! Divide divide divide!... if only Ron Paul were as strong on the GOP side to divide, divide, divide... perhaps the quixotic fight would topple over the windmill of the two-party system and we could have four candidates duke it out. that's what would need to happen, of course... both sides would have to be as divided at this point as the democrats are now, then the two that were goin to lose their own party's nomination could call each other up and make an agreement to both run so that neither spoilt their own party... one can dream...

[Apotheoun]

Hillary = nuts

[CatherineM]

Hillary is starting to look a bit off. It's not just the hanging on to the bitter end, you could almost admire the stick to it that requires, but going $20 million in debt, and starting to say weird, even offensive things, and it makes you wonder how she would act if something big, stressful, or catastrophic came up while president.

[kujo]

I don't admire the actions of someone who is actively-harming her political party. Furthermore, her RFK comments and her bitter attitude as of late are starting to make her seem even less likable (if that's possible) than before. She's screwing up any political future she has.

And do I care?

NOPE!

[Ash Wednesday]

Hillary is delusional. But is it me, or does it seem like McCain isn't doing much to capitalize on the Democrat situation?

[Alycin]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' post='1543113' date='May 26 2008, 08:06 AM']Hillary is delusional. But is it me, or does it seem like McCain isn't doing much to capitalize on the Democrat situation?[/quote]

He probably feels like he doesn't need to. They are making his job pretty easy.

[kujo]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1543120' date='May 26 2008, 09:13 AM']He probably feels like he doesn't need to. They are making his job pretty easy.[/quote]

Yeah. Better to stay above the fray. Let them hack at each other.

[kujo]

I just heard a Clinton supporter on CNN referrence how FDR didn't get the nomination until the 4th ballot at the convention. I wonder if he was declared mathematically-dead before the convention.

[Justin86]

How does one get declared mathematically dead?

[kujo]

[quote name='Justin86' post='1543138' date='May 26 2008, 09:33 AM']How does one get declared mathematically dead?[/quote]

Something with Pi and the radius squared.