• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Former President Ford dead at 93

I had him in my death pool for 06. Made it in just under the wire. :2razz: :3oops:
 
That Republican son-of-a-bitch deliberately died to
take sympathy away from the black man!
 
Billo_Really said:
That Republican son-of-a-bitch deliberately died to
take sympathy away from the black man!
Click to expand...
Snicker...

He was the President who was never elected by the American voter. Placed in office by a crook, he later abused his authority and obstructed justice by pardoning the same crook for his crimes.

Who says Washington is not a conspiracy? I'm glad we don't have to pay his retirement any more...
 
I am sorry to see Ford go. He was kind man and person who loved America. He belonged to the Republicans when Republicans still loved the country and the people.

People still call themselves Republicans, but now they are so far to the right and controlled by the corporations that they have forgotten America and it's people. God Bless You Gerald Ford.
 
Ford was not the only president not elected by the Voters. One only needs to think of Voter fraud, the supreme court, strange elections in florida where military votes and votes from blacks were mysteriously not counted, and one knows that Gore was elected,, not Bush the chimp. the only thing that saved Bush from being ousted, was 911.

We would be much better off if he had never served. America will pay and pay for the Bush fiasco, for decades.
 
Last edited:
dragonslayer said:
Ford was not the only president not elected by the Voters. One only needs to think of Voter fraud, the supreme court, strange elections in florida where military votes and votes from blacks were mysteriously not counted, and one knows that Gore was elected,, not Bush the chimp. the only thing that saved Bush from being ousted, was 911.

We would be much better off if he had never served. America will pay and pay for the Bush fiasco, for decades.
Click to expand...
Only an idiot would believe that Gore would have gotten even 15% of the military vote that GORE tried to have thrown out and not counted by using the courts.

Gore lost and you libs are still whining and crying 6 years later......a bunch of sore losers......you dont see us on the right whining and crying like little babies even 2 months after losing an election........
 
dragonslayer said:
Ford was not the only president not elected by the Voters. One only needs to think of Voter fraud, the supreme court, strange elections in florida where military votes and votes from blacks were mysteriously not counted, and one knows that Gore was elected,, not Bush the chimp. the only thing that saved Bush from being ousted, was 911.

We would be much better off if he had never served. America will pay and pay for the Bush fiasco, for decades.
Click to expand...

What a partisan hack.
Caine needs to scold you -- where the hell is he?
 
Cold Dirt said:
Gore lost and you libs are still whining and crying 6 years later
Click to expand...
Never mind that none of them can tell you how the 7-2 decision that decided the outcome of the election was unsound.

Most of them dont even know the decision was 7-2...
 
PatrickHenry said:
Snicker...

He was the President who was never elected by the American voter. Placed in office by a crook, he later abused his authority and obstructed justice by pardoning the same crook for his crimes.

Who says Washington is not a conspiracy? I'm glad we don't have to pay his retirement any more...
Click to expand...

Guess you weren't actually around at that time....
Ford didn't 'abuse' his authority. He was fully aware of the turmoil Nixon's actions put both the Republican party and the nation in and wanted it over and done with. Hindsight tells us it was the right thing to do, but at the time he was knocked around for it, costing him the 76 election. By pardoning Nixon, he was attempting to move forward.
Ford was placed in an unenviable position; not elected as either Vice President or president, he was thrust into the roll of the leader of the free world and handled it all with grace and aplumb-one of the more honest men to occupy that office. Americans can be really stupid-their anger at Nixon carried over to Ford and we ended up with a peanut farmer.....
 
Goobieman said:
Never mind that none of them can tell you how the 7-2 decision that decided the outcome of the election was unsound.

Most of them dont even know the decision was 7-2...
Click to expand...

That's because it wasn't. It was 5-4. Scalia/Thomas/Rehnquist/O'Connor/Kennedy versus Souter/Stevens/Ginsburg/Breyer.
 
Kandahar said:
That's because it wasn't. It was 5-4. Scalia/Thomas/Rehnquist/O'Connor/Kennedy versus Souter/Stevens/Ginsburg/Breyer.
Click to expand...

The 5-4 decision concerned the remedy and was pursuant to the 7-2 decision regarding equal protection.

Thre 7-2 decision said that the method of counting the ballots in question as laid out in FL law and as per the previous ruling of the FLSC did not provide equal protection to the voters of Florida and therefore could not continue under those methods.

THAT decided the outcome of the election, not the 5-4 remedy decision, as no matter how much time you allow, there's no way to create a new method of counting those ballots that will satify all the legislative and constitutional requirements regarding same.
 
Goobieman said:
The 5-4 decision concerned the remedy and was pursuant to the 7-2 decision regarding equal protection.

Thre 7-2 decision said that the method of counting the ballots in question as laid out in FL law and as per the previous ruling of the FLSC did not provide equal protection to the voters of Florida and therefore could not continue under those methods.

THAT decided the outcome of the election, not the 5-4 remedy decision, as no matter how much time you allow, there's no way to create a new method of counting those ballots that will satify all the legislative and constitutional requirements regarding same.
Click to expand...

Yes there was. There could have been a statewide recount, instead of recounting specific counties. That would've solved the equal protection problem.

But this thread is getting off-topic. I'll discuss this elsewhere if you like.
 
Kandahar said:
Yes there was. There could have been a statewide recount, instead of recounting specific counties. That would've solved the equal protection problem.
Click to expand...
No, it wouldn't.
The state law allowing/mandating manual evaluation of ballots did not prescribe a specific standard for doing so -- its terminology, 'to determine the intent of the voter' was too vague -- thus leaving the standard to the local boards. Therefore the standard would vary from county to county. If the value of a given ballot can change depending on where it is evaluated, there can be no equal protection, and that was exactly the case in FL.

So, the 'determine the intent of the voter' statute was all that FL election law had, and it did not provide EP as per the court in the 7-2 decision. As such, it violated the Constitution and was invalidated as a means by which the ballots could be recounted. Without any legal statute prescribing the manner in which to recount the ballots, they could not be counted.

This law could not be changed to prescribe a specific standard as changing election law during an election violates federal law; a standard could not be set by a court because that would be either a change to the law (already mentioned) or the creation of new election law, which is the sole purview of the legislature.

And certainly, the court could not order the legislature to pass a new law.

And so, there was no remedy to the EP question.

But this thread is getting off-topic. I'll discuss this elsewhere if you like.
Click to expand...
Ok. Pick a spot.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom