Skip to content

comment: Trump vs Gore-2000

October 20, 2016

Skipped the debate again, but Trump’s “keep you in suspense” line about the election outcome seems to be focus (see screenshot of headlines below). So there’s a republican talking point, in response, about comparing to Gore in 2000. I think it is not without some merit, although is not an entirely apples-to-apples comparison, either.

One of the things that did disappoint me much about Gore in 2000 was that after all the Florida shenanigans, he actually didn’t fight hard enough.

Gore’s concession came in the second week of December, after the recount mandated by FL law, and with further hand counting which Gore had every right to request. With the recount results slow in coming,  and subsequent litigation going to the Supreme Court, Gore did not make his concession until more than a month after the vote. Even so the full range of counting methods were never implemented, and the net results were famously dependent on counting methodology (hanging chads etc). There were also some other irregularities including media reporting results before the polls closed (erroneously sending the message that polls already closed when they were still open in some parts of the state), the less-than-clearly designed butterfly ballot, Republican control of localities and their election process, and accusations of disenfranchisement. See the wikipedia.

So applying this to Trump’s line about “keeping you in suspense” about accepting the results? Well, as usual his brash and nonspecific delivery brings out the worst. However, does it make any sense to be up in arms about this – after everything else, is this the best they got? Looks pretty weak.

Now in reality, based on Trump’s other statements, the impression is that he is really referring to the alleged bias in the media against him, rather than his stance on how he would react to voting irregularities. But again, the headlines don’t do anything at all to counter that view. And of course there is not a whiff of any substance or issues visible in that screenshot.

politico-20161020

My position continues to be that every piece of evidence we have says we can expect both Clinton and Trump to be step backwards for the US. Trump unquestionably the more offensive of the two, but Clinton probably the more belligerent and thus dangerous internationally. And if she comes into power she would also be the greater impediment to progress within the Democratic party. Better candidates were available all along ; the fact is Trump and Clinton need each other as their opponent, just to have a chance.

To vote for either one would be a mistake.


Jill Stein 2016!

Advertisements

From → Uncategorized

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: