| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Citizen Carrier
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
322 Posts |
 Posted - 02/05/2008 : 7:40:00 PM
|
Perhaps it is a sign of our times.
I recall that when Nixon ran against Kennedy, the shenannigans that took place in Chicago under Daly (dead people voting for Kennedy, etc.) were obvious and numerous enough that Nixon would've had every right to contest the outcome in court.
Illinois, and Daly's Chicago in particular, handed the Presidency to Kennedy largely on the basis of widespread election and voter fraud.
Nixon, for whatever reason, decided that it was better to accept he'd been outmanuevered and not contest the election.
It is sad to note that people believe politicians now are not expected to conduct themselves with the same dignity as Nixon all those years ago... |
Edited by - Citizen Carrier on 02/05/2008 7:41:33 PM |
 |
|
|
zombiewhacker
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
1475 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2008 : 12:14:22 AM
|
Actually, Nixon's lawyers did contest, demanding recounts in some fourteen (IIRC) different states, including Texas, where Democrat voter fraud was also alleged to have taken place. The courts refused recounts in all instances, so we'll never know.
The courts did, however, grant a recount in Hawaii (!) which originally went to Nixon. When it was recounted, the votes changed and went toward Kennedy.
BTW, Illinois alone did not give Kennedy the Presidency. Even if you discount the bogus ballots for Kennedy, he still would have had the edge to win the Presidency. That's where the shenanigans in Texas came in. |
|
|
|
Citizen Carrier
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
322 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2008 : 05:56:57 AM
|
I read up a little more on that not long after I posted and did see that Kennedy would still have had an electoral edge even if Illinois had went to Nixon.
Oops.
Furthermore, I read that while Nixon publicly called for no recounts to be done on his behalf, he was privately urging the chairman of the RNC to push for recounts.
Soooo, I hearby retract any previous statements I may have made in which the words "dignity" and "Nixon" were used in the same sentence....
...and acknowledge that I am at a loss to cite a period of time in which politicians were not skeevie polecats. |
Edited by - Citizen Carrier on 02/06/2008 05:59:33 AM |
|
|
|
Ericb
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
648 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2008 : 06:01:01 AM
|
I'd venture to guess that electoral shenanigans are hardly restricted to 1960. The advent of television merely made knowledge of such actions more easily available to a national audience. In any event the corruption of the 19th century probably puts most 20th century stuff to shame.
"I reserve the right to look as well as be boring." - Robert Fripp |
|
|
|
Ericb
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
648 Posts |
Posted - 02/06/2008 : 06:09:11 AM
|
Ah, the good old days and the Election of 1824. The more things change the more they stay the same.
http://www.presidentelect.org/e1824.html
"I reserve the right to look as well as be boring." - Robert Fripp |
|
|
|
R. Dittmar
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
420 Posts |
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 02/09/2008 : 8:01:44 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by thewarden
And it is just annoying to hear that Dems have had their panties in a bunch ever since 2000 just because their man lost. I'll tell what else... most Dems desperately wanted to rally around Bush after 9/11, but he deliberately chose to govern in a divisive fashion. And finally, the notion that only hard-left, George Soros-loving, Saddam Hussein-defending, Michael Moore-supporting, defeat-o-crats dislike GWB is laughable. His approval rating has been in the 30s forever. None of the current GOP candidates wants to run as his heir (they all harken back to Reagan).
Everyone here has had smarter and more well-phrased things to say about the 2000 election than I could, but I'd like to single out this statement for agreement. I've had a lot of people in right-wing atmospheres (like, uh, this board) assume that I'm a hardcore partisan Democrat because I don't like Bush, and they've done so pretty much since I started to criticize him. Obviously I'm not a Democrat, since I'm not American, but there's still an assumption that I'M the one being knee-jerk in my assumptions. This has been an unfortunate defining trait of this administration's defenders--criticism, warranted or otherwise, has constantly been dismissed as partisanship. In truth, I'm a progressive kinda guy, but I take a live and let live attitude on a lot of stuff, and there are plenty of things I've admired about Republicans and/or conservatives. I was never opposed to the *idea* of the Iraq war, and in fact I was cautiously optimistic about Afghanistan when it began, but as soon as it looked like the people in charge were making some poor decisions, an entire subculture emerged to call the detractors like myself a bunch of America-hating flag-burners who loved terrorism, and it's continued right up until Romney's embarassing concession speech the other day.
That's the biggest issue I've had with Bucrapes since day one--they seem to divide everything into a black-or-white, us-or-them mentality. There's no "OK, we all have the same goals, but we disagree on methods", it's "If you don't think the Iraqis will greet us as liberators, it's because you HATE FREEDOM," and "If you remember that Saddam and Bin Laden have both been allies of the US in the past, you're saying that BUSH IS JUST AS BAD AS THEM." Because God forbid there should be concessions, apologies, or acknowledgements of reality. To 49% of the country.
A simple desire for wise and open leadership was treated as though people wanted Bush's head on a pike--which is pretty much what it turned into. But the idea that this is all bourne out of passionate love for the Democrats has always seemed weird to me. They are, and always have been, the lesser of two evils at best. It's the right who seem to be acting like a bunch of loyal sports fans, defending "their team" no matter what--even, for a while, after Bush and co. betrayed almost everything the party was supposed to stand for. That's fine for football, but it's a lousy way to run a country.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
Prankster
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
Canada
727 Posts |
Posted - 02/09/2008 : 8:03:46 PM
|
I'm not sure what "Bucrapes" are, but that should say "Bush defenders" or "Bush partisans" or something, y'know, in English.
---
Check out my online comics at [URL]http://www.phantasmictales.com[/URL]! |
|
|
|
Ericb
Holy Cardinal and Five Star General of the Righteous Knighthood of Jabootu
USA
648 Posts |
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked