Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Jim Lane

(11,175 posts)
13. I'm no big Clinton fan but I disagree with you here.
Thu Jul 4, 2013, 02:11 PM
Jul 2013

My understanding of the 2000 campaign is that Gore made the tactical decision to minimize Clinton's role, because he wanted to distance himself from the Lewinsky stuff. In fact, I thought I read that, after the election, there was a somewhat angry conversation between the two -- Clinton told Gore that Gore had made a mistake and that, if he'd had Clinton out there campaigning for him, he would've won.

As for the litigation, the Supreme Court did have jurisdiction. There was a federal constitutional claim raised as a challenge to the decision of the Florida Supreme Court. There was no further appeal possible within the state court system, but state courts are not given ultimate authority over federal constitutional questions, so it went to SCOTUS.

I don't see what Clinton could have done. Under the Constitution, the counting of the electoral votes is committed to Congress. Congress could have chosen not to count the votes of the Florida electors, but the President has no role in the process.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Remember the surplus Clin...»Reply #13