If it were the Dems who stole the election,would we have supported Gore?

[DerekG]

I have been at the DU since late spring of 2001, and I can't recall a thread of this kind being posted.

Many of us were expecting the further dismantling of social programs and perhaps an oil war in the Middle East upon Bush's "win." But I admit that I myself couldn't fathom the prospect of America's descent into fascism.

Knowing what you now know, would you have been as outraged at the ethical and legal sins of stealing the 2000 election had Gore been the one to do it? Let's say the Felonious Five had been beholden to the neoliberals instead of the neoconservatives, and let's say Florida was delivered to the Democrats by a Gore relative and Democratic bureacracy.

If the world could have been spared at least four years of Bush, would you support something so insidious?

I just might, especially considering my feelings towards the race between John Quincy Adams and Andrew Jackson. Adams surely ascended to higher office through peculiar methods (by way of Henry Clay), but I take solace in the fact that he won.

You see, America had been spared Andrew Jackson for four short years, the man who waged some of the bloodiest campaigns against slaves, the white poor, and of course, the American Indian. This genocidal madman, who spit in the face of the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act, waged war against the American Indian with an unprecedented fervor. Adams was no saint, but it is impossible to believe that the fierce opponent of slavery, Indian "removal," and the Mexican War, would have harbored a similar degree of ferocity.

Don't be hasty in answering the aforementioned question, for it is imbued with serious moral and ethical contours.

How many of us would eschew the American Constitution in our efforts to save lives, and perhaps democracy itself?

Edit: I changed the wording of the title to shift the focus to the Democrats and not Gore himself.

[jokerman93]

1. You're kidding right?

<snip>
How many of us would eschew the American Constitution in our efforts to save lives, and perhaps democracy itself?

[demnan]

2. No

and I know Republicans who supported Bush who weren't in favor of it also. It was intrinsically wrong for the Supreme Court to decide the election when there were legal means to count the votes and settle the election.

A moral decision can not be made in retrospect to things that occurred because of it. That would be like saying, "I'm okay with Hitler killing the Jews because after WWII Israel got its own state".

[Character Assassin]

3. Yes, I think most democrats would

Precisely like most republicans support Bush.

But then, one must first accept the premise the the election was 'stolen'. Not everyone does.

[corporatewhore]

4. never supported gore

[SharonAnn]

5. No, because people don't steal elections to do good things.

Therefore, whoever steals the presidency doesn't have it in mind to do good things for us.

The means do NOT justify the end.

I believe that truth trumps anything.

[ParanoidPat]

6. What a STUPID question!

First off, NO!
Secondly, Gore would not have tried to 'steal' the election.
Anyone who knows how much that man did for this country through all his years of service and all of the legislation he was involved with would know better than to even ask!

Al Gore is too much of a patriot to even consider such a thing. :evilgrin:

[DerekG]

12. It is NOT a stupid question...

Being liberal does not make one a paragon of virtue. You're pretty damned confident that you wouldn't support a cirumvention of constitutional law even if thousands of lives were at stake. I've seen far too much irrationality on this website to be convinced everyone would be appalled at a crime perpetrated by Democrats.

[ParanoidPat]

19. RE: Your question, "had Gore been the one to do it".....

I lived in Tennessee for a few years. Gore was my representative. I've met him, been to his home, sat and talked with him 1 on 1 for hours, followed the legislation he authored and why he authored it for over 20 years now and I can assure you when it comes to Al Gore subverting the Constitution for ANY reason, it's a S T U P I D question! If you took the time to understand Al Gore the man and what he's done for this country instead of the media hyperbole and myth, you would know why it's a stupid question! (At least as far as "had Gore been the one to do it" is concerned!)

Besides, no one can know what the future holds therefore there is no way for anyone to know how many lives would be saved if they cheated to win. :)

Being from a given political party does not give one a pass to subvert the law in my book.

BTW, If you are reading this on the Internet, THANK AL GORE! :evilgrin:

Your question would be a little better if you phrased it as 'if the Democratic candidate in the next election'....'based on the history of the present administration...'.

My answer would still be NO!

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MuseRider]

7. Interesting question.

I would like to think I would have been equally outraged no matter who it was at the way the election was handled. This was, however, only the first outrage. I guess the answer is that we, as a country would have been better off than we are now but still democracy would have suffered from the selection either way. So, I suppose I would have supported him but still would not have been happy at the way he was put into office.

[carolinayellowdog]

8. I posted this question in 2002-- overwhelming NO response

But that is because Democrats are principled, and ends-justifies-means is a much more common attitude among Repukes. Hell, I'd have been quite uncomfortable with an electoral college victory and popular defeat, had the shoe been on the other foot. If all the other dubious aspects of Florida had been reversed I could not have supported Gore even though I voted for him.

[Booberdawg]

9. No, but Gore wouldn't have tried to steal an election.

He won. And it was stolen from him many times over, before and after the counting and non-counting of the votes.

[Cocoa]

10. no

Gore would be reviled by many dems if he had stolen the election.

If he had any support, it would be very unenthusiastic support, and Gore wouldn't be an effective president.

But Gore would NOT have done this, no way. Remember how he conceded the election, he did that for the good of the country.

[Bandit]

11. It wasn't Bush* that stole the election it was the Extreme Court

Bush* faught the fight and did what he could to win. The Supreme court is the one that stole it. They are the ones that didn't follow either law or their supposed state's rights ideology. The Crooks are the Supreme Court and Bush* is just benefitting from their crookedness. Bush* benefits and the world suffers.

[0rganism]

13. the ends do not justify the means

I would not have supported his ascendancy, but after that, he would gain or lose my support based on his actions in office.

The question is, then, supposing the 9-11 attacks occurred as they did under bush, would republicans have united en masse behind Al Gore to do anything he damn well pleased to the constitution for six months?

[brainshrub]

14. Great question!

And the answer is no.

[CalebHayes]

15. No. Bush would have ended up president anyway.

Gore has morals. :dem:

[LittleDannySlowhorse]

16. I have to be completely honest here

I probably wouldn't have minded. I know that sounds horrible, but it's probably true.

[Gringo]

17. I dunno, but

I have ALWAYS hated the idea of the electoral college. I've always thought it should be straight popular vote.

[Demeter]

18. These Ends Don't Even Justify the Ends

The Democratic Party didn't support Bill Clinton, even though they hadn't been in such good shape since Roosevelt. So why expect them to support Al Gore, which they didn't even during the campaign?

It was the anonymous voters who supported both, elected both. It was the GOP who were so pissed off at democracy in action (losing TWICE to Clinton) that they had to lie, buy, and then steal the election.

[tom_paine]

21. No, not if he subverted the Constitution to do it as the Buisheviks did

Now way. On the other hand I am a self-avowed moderate who distrusts extreme left and extreme right equally. Well, maybe not quite equally anymore, but it took an Attempted Coup, a Bloodless Coup, and the repeated and shameless use of Nazi-style propaganda by the Busheviks to even tip those scales a little bit.

I still distrust the extreme left, but the Busheviks by virtue of their actually having unchecked power and what they have done with it, are far more distrustworthy...