Florida rationale

< Previous | Next >

Aidanriley

Senior Member
English
The explanation is partly partisan politics. Many Democrats are so blinded by their loathing of George W. Bush that they can’t think straight. In their hearts, they don’t see Bush as the legitimately elected president, just as Tom DeLay and the right-wing attack machine tried to deny President Clinton’s legitimacy from the outset, without even a Florida rationale. In both cases, this thinking can take you right over the cliff.

My guess is that Florida rationale refers to something that happened in Florida involving politics, but I'm clueless. Any ideas?
 
  • JamesM

    Senior Member
    The final deciding state for the 2002 presidential election in the U.S. was the state of Florida. The vote was very close and the vote count was challenged. There were allegations of fraud but no definite proof and quite a bit of contention over the way the votes were counted (and once again in the way they were re-counted). Parts of the matter ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court. It was a particularly sore point among those who did not wish Bush to be elected that his brother was the governor of the state which decided the election.

    I imagine the "Florida rationale" would be that the election was rigged in Bush's favor by the manipulation of the ballot counting process in Florida. No such controversy regarding votes surrounded Clinton's election so the same rationale could not be applied to any claims that he was not the legitimately elected president by those who opposed his election.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top