[mwbajor]

Why is it no problem to say that the 2000 election was bogus? It was, and its not a big leap in logic to say that our "leaders" only got bolder since then.

edit: I dont care about my groupthink points/karma, I truly would like an answer. I dislike both political parties equally and have no skin in the game so please, someone take a stab at an answer to my question.

[alphabettsy]

My opinion.

The 2000 election was essentially decided by the courts based on mostly agreed upon facts. The outcome depended on interpretation of the law.

In the most recent election the facts themselves are not agreed upon and there are many many unsubstantiated allegations.

[mwbajor]

Yea, got that. The folks who had a vested interest in the system basically picked the president and they found a reason to do so (the chads and close results). Have our leaders ever shown restraint in any of the power we have given them? How does this HN community constantly and correctly bemoan our increasing security state but looks past the rapid gerrymandering, vote harvesting and other funny business because of the wrong letter after a persons name? At this rate, our politicians are most likely going to fix or attempt to fix an election at some point. It might have happened, it might have not.

[dudul]

As a proponent of sortition i would (half) jockingly argue that all elections are fixed bu design. They oppose pre selected candidates and their outcome rarely matters.

[pauldenton]

It seems like it would be better to resolve those disputes in the court instead of dismissing them all on procedural grounds like the doctrine of laches