In an Absolut World, saying that Al Gore won in 2000 would be unacceptable in polite society. At the end of the day, it was clear to anybody with eyes that the Democrats were trying to steal Florida, but just barely failed. It takes a corrupt Chicago politician to bemoan the fact, at this late date, that the Florida vote-stealing operation was not quite effective enough to succeed.

gridlock2 on April 15, 2008 at 6:35 AM

Bravo! Standing ovation!

Red Pill on April 15, 2008 at 9:54 AM

Thank you, Obama, for once again showing us who you really are.

One of the reasons that Democratic Socialists think Al Gore won in 2000 is because Al Gore won the popular vote. Not only can Democratic Socialists not stand it that they were unsuccessful in their attempt to steal Florida (although they were successful this year in stealing the Republican Primary for McCain, but that’s another point), they also can’t stand it that Gore won the popular vote but lost the election (although this is far from the first time that has happened in our country, and they don’t like to acknowledge that George W. Bush was re-elected with a larger percentage of the popular vote than any Democrat has received since LBJ in 1964!)

Democratic Socialists think our country should be a Democracy, not a Republic. They believe that “majority vote” should always rule, and they do not support the rule of law. The CONSTITUTION OF THE COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA contains the phrase “majority vote” no less than 11 times. Democratic Socialists/Communists are actively trying to change the Presidential Election rules by pushing The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. Some states have already passed this into law, and the game plan of the Democratic Socialists/Communists is to keep pushing this year after year until they have enough states to control the Electoral College. At that point, the law would take effect, and the Electoral College votes of the non-participating states would become irrelevant…essentially disenfranchising them.

While it is true that Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution says

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors…

…it is implied that the “Manner” is limited to the domain of the individual State…anything that is “Interstate” is by definition within the domain of the Federal Government and governed by the Constitution. If you want to change the Constitution, you do that with a Constitutional Amendment, not an “Interstate Compact”.

If The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact had been in place in 2000, Al Gore would have won the election. That is why people who believe this country is a Democracy (mob rule) tend to favor The National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, while people who know the truth that this country is a Constitutional Republic (rule of law) tend to favor the Constitution. Our counties founders knew what they were doing when they set up the rules for the election of our President. If the rules are allowed to be changed unconstitutionally, Presidential candidates would focus their attention on the big cities (Boston, New York, LA, San Francisco, etc.) and ignore Jesusland.

Red Pill on April 15, 2008 at 10:38 AM