52% of Republicans Believe ACORN Stole the Election

Started by jimmy olsen, November 19, 2009, 08:36:21 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

grumbler

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 20, 2009, 11:17:54 AM
Quote from: grumbler on November 20, 2009, 11:11:37 AM
The argument that all governments that are elected according to their laws are "legitimate" is technically correct, but I think you will find that you are in a minority when you claim that that is the only possible meaning of the term, even with regard to governments.
Okay.  But give me an example of a time when illegitimate has been used for any allegation other than the legal formation of a government?
Justice Antonine Scalia: "The counting of votes that are of questionable legality does in my view threaten irreparable harm to petitioner Bush, and to the country, by casting a cloud upon what he claims to be the legitimacy of his election. Count first, and rule upon legality afterwards, is not a recipe for producing election results that have the public acceptance democratic stability requires."  Clearly, counting first and ruling afterward would be legal, but still, as Scalia notes, not without danger to "legitimacy."
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

garbon

"I think Obama is a charlatan. I don't think such a person can be a legitimate president without profound character changes."
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Sheilbh

Okay (and I agree with his point) but wouldn't you say that's the most technical understanding of the word 'illegitimate' and not how it is commonly used?
Let's bomb Russia!

Sheilbh

Quote from: garbon on November 20, 2009, 12:10:09 PM
"I think Obama is a charlatan. I don't think such a person can be a legitimate president without profound character changes."
Who's that?
Let's bomb Russia!

garbon

"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

Sheilbh

Quote from: garbon on November 20, 2009, 12:10:46 PM
Hypothetically me.
Okay.  The word that would jar with me and I'd quibble with would be 'illegitimate' - I think that's the case for most people.
Let's bomb Russia!

grumbler

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 20, 2009, 12:10:12 PM
Okay (and I agree with his point) but wouldn't you say that's the most technical understanding of the word 'illegitimate' and not how it is commonly used?
No, I think he was using it as he said;  having the "public acceptance democratic stability requires."  That means something more along the lines of the usual and expected than the legal, IMO.

Whether he is correct that recounts like those the USSC siopped in Florida undermine democracy isn't really an issue here.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

grumbler

Quote from: Sheilbh on November 20, 2009, 12:13:02 PM
Okay.  The word that would jar with me and I'd quibble with would be 'illegitimate' - I think that's the case for most people.
I'ma gonna agree with you on this.  If the statement were "I think Gore is a charlatan. I don't think such a person can be a legitimate presidential candidate without profound character changes" I think garbo's point would be made in the sense that he uses the word.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Josquius

In 2000 it was forgivable, the victory margin was very small and very contrversial.
Obama though won quite overwhelmingly. Its just dumb to call fraud this time,
██████
██████
██████

grumbler

Quote from: Tyr on November 20, 2009, 01:03:26 PM
In 2000 it was forgivable, the victory margin was very small and very contrversial.
Obama though won quite overwhelmingly. Its just dumb to call fraud this time,
Agree, but don't know the extent to which people are actually calling fraud this time.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

garbon

Quote from: grumbler on November 20, 2009, 12:53:18 PM
I'ma gonna agree with you on this.  If the statement were "I think Gore is a charlatan. I don't think such a person can be a legitimate presidential candidate without profound character changes" I think garbo's point would be made in the sense that he uses the word.

Fair, although if that candidate was to win, I wouldn't hypothetically start viewing him as legitimate. I wouldn't be prepared to accept him as the rightful president because even though he managed to get elected it was through deception.

Which, of course, could stem from my misuse of the word.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

grumbler

Quote from: garbon on November 20, 2009, 01:18:43 PM
Fair, although if that candidate was to win, I wouldn't hypothetically start viewing him as legitimate. I wouldn't be prepared to accept him as the rightful president because even though he managed to get elected it was through deception.

Which, of course, could stem from my misuse of the word.
I guess I should have seen this implication of your statement, and now that you have pointed it out I withdraw my objection.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

Jaron

Winner of THE grumbler point.

garbon

Quote from: grumbler on November 20, 2009, 03:35:02 PM
I guess I should have seen this implication of your statement, and now that you have pointed it out I withdraw my objection.

Yeah and while that is somewhat loony as it is closely related to the statement that "All the people who voted for that candidate must have been deluded", it is a far cry from believing that ACORN stole the election.
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

The Minsky Moment

Quote from: alfred russel on November 20, 2009, 10:14:38 AM
Quote from: Scipio on November 20, 2009, 08:01:51 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on November 19, 2009, 09:37:41 PM


The count in the 2000 was totally legit--Bush won 5-4.
Actually, he won 7-2.

But didn't 2 of those 7 want to send it back to the Florida courts? With the Florida Supreme Court in Gore's corner, they were voting to hand it to Gore.

The Fla Supreme Court didn't have the ability to "hand it to Gore" - the best they could do would be to keep counts going and run out the clock.  The end game would then be either the Florida legislature selecting an electoral slate or the whole election being decided in the House.  Either way, Bush would still win.

Nonetheless, the USSC decision still probably is in lead for worst Supreme Court opinion of this century IMHO.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson