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

Samantha

(9,314 posts)
29. The slate of electors chosen as a result of such an act by the Florida legislature
Mon Aug 3, 2015, 02:17 AM
Aug 2015

would have been challenged as a violation of the Constitution. In that light, the Electoral College would have been absolutely correct to discard that slate and not count those electoral votes in the final tally.

Absolutely no state can change its election laws within such close proximity to the actual election to overthrow the outcome. The Constitution delegates the right to conduct Presidential elections to the states, but each must have the rules outlined in their respective state constitutions prior to the vote. Any changes voted by the Florida Legislature during this controversy could not legally have any impact until the next election.

Had the recount of the entire state allowed to be resumed and Gore had won the popular vote, a Democratic slate would have had to be been sent to the Elector College. Had the Florida Legislature carried through with its threat to send a Republican slate regardless of the outcome, the votes of that delegation could have been protested if by no one else members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

During Election 2000, there were many, many maneuvers as well as threats the Republicans publicly aired, but their strategists in some cases did not know the law -- in other cases they just figured they could threaten anything and people would not know the threats could not be legally executed.

Chief Justice John Roberts at that time was a Constitutional lawyer from DC who traveled to Florida to give advice to Jeb Bush during the recount. It is very difficult for me to assume he did not know this very maneuver was unconstitutional....

In the matter of had the recount resumed, who would have won, all one has to do is remember the 6,000 votes that went to Pat Buchanan which were intended to be Gore votes. Many of the voters in that community were Jewish, and their horror was publicly palpable when they realized their votes had gone to Buchanan rather than Gore. No question Gore would have recaptured those votes in a statewide recount....

Sam

Recommendations

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

It was a ridiculous ruling. How, can this be any hint of a democracy! n/t RKP5637 Aug 2015 #1
Message auto-removed Name removed Aug 2015 #32
Of course, if Bush v. Gore hadn't happened..... DFW Aug 2015 #2
A lot of things could of been different had 2000 happened differently Hydra Aug 2015 #3
Also wouldnt have gone into Iraq!! nt 7962 Aug 2015 #12
The world will be suffering from the consequences of that fiasco for decades DFW Aug 2015 #14
I have said many times it was definitely the US's worst foreign policy decision EVER. 7962 Aug 2015 #20
Agree--this was the worst decision both regarding consequences spooky3 Aug 2015 #38
I think it's Bush v Gore... IMO onecaliberal Aug 2015 #4
tough call, but justices tend to take the long view unblock Aug 2015 #6
Here's what makes Bush v Gore the worse decision... thesquanderer Aug 2015 #11
i see your point, though i'm no longer much into those time travel games. unblock Aug 2015 #17
Bush v Gore decided the other way would not have resulted in Gore taking his rightful office. stevenleser Aug 2015 #22
Interesting. thesquanderer Aug 2015 #23
Take a look at this Google search. I was living in Florida at the time and was volunteering for stevenleser Aug 2015 #25
The slate of electors chosen as a result of such an act by the Florida legislature Samantha Aug 2015 #29
Of course it would have been challenged. And the Constitutional remedy for disputed electors where stevenleser Aug 2015 #34
And by the way, the argument against it being improper is pretty strong. Namely Article 2 Section 1 stevenleser Aug 2015 #35
For me it is Citizens United, Bush vs. Gore and Adoptive Couple vs. Baby girl, when Veronica Brown StevieM Aug 2015 #5
I regret she didn't poison the Terrible Threes Demeter Aug 2015 #7
So you'd like to see them murdered? 7962 Aug 2015 #13
The death penalty, for mass murderers Demeter Aug 2015 #21
And who have the judges killed? Think carefully of course. 7962 Aug 2015 #24
Shall we start with Iraq and Afghanistan? Demeter Aug 2015 #31
If you're going to reach that far, you'd have to include Pres obama 7962 Aug 2015 #33
The argument against that is that the UN has voted dozens of times to designate Al Qaeda stevenleser Aug 2015 #36
I agree with you. The other guy would like to see 3 SCOTUS members killed! nt 7962 Aug 2015 #37
According to the NY Times 400 families provide half the money rasied in the 2016 election campaign. jalan48 Aug 2015 #8
well, the top 400 families have half the wealth in the u.s., so that seems about right. unblock Aug 2015 #18
Easy guess. EEO Aug 2015 #9
Bush v. Gore. Without The Stolen Election... Herman4747 Aug 2015 #10
One thing to consider RichVRichV Aug 2015 #16
excellent point. people forget that republicans had other ways of stealing the election. unblock Aug 2015 #19
Gentle reminder: Who was Gore's vice presidential candidate? RufusTFirefly Aug 2015 #26
Best current sitting justice on the SCOTUS. lark Aug 2015 #15
That was a most disastrous decision. Uncle Joe Aug 2015 #27
It doesn't surprise me at all that is the one she is most disappointed with davidpdx Aug 2015 #28
We now live in a oligarchy. Sam_Fields Aug 2015 #30
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Ruth Bader Ginsburg revea...»Reply #29