General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNo Republican president since Eisenhower has been legitimately elected, says Thom Hartmann
http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/gaius-publius/55646/no-republican-president-since-eisenhower-has-been-legitimately-elected-says-thom-hartmannThanks, Mr. Hartmann, for reminding us of this part of our history. I rag on neoliberal Dems liberally, and they deserve it. But Republicans have been committing treason since Watergate and before. Never forget it...
Reagans campaign was long-rumored to have undercut an agreement to free hostages toward the end of the Carter administration because it would likely mean Carters re-election. The Reagan campaign [allegedly through a fall 1980 meeting with revolutionary Iranian government officials and Reagan campaign honcho William Casey*] promised Iran a better deal than they said Carter would give them, as well as spare military parts...
Did Bush I commit treason to become president? If the above is true, ultimately yes. He probably, in my view, participated in the plot, was probably at the core of it, and his presidency depended on Reagans and on the whitewashing of his own 1980 actions...
And then you have George W. Bush, whose brother was governor of Florida when Al Gore appeared to have more actual votes [although uncounted] than Bush. On top of that, Jeb Bush, through Katherine Harris, got about 80,000 African-American voters stricken from the polls through a caging strategy that struck felons and non-felons with similar names from the voting rolls. And that put Bush within range of officially counted votes for the Supreme Court to steal the election for Bush.
yallerdawg
(16,104 posts)the national media called Florida for Gore before the panhandle finished voting (the state has 2 time zones)?
They say Reagan is their hero, but their role model remains Tricky Dick.
WHEN CRABS ROAR
(3,813 posts)What was the reason for that?
daleanime
(17,796 posts)WHEN CRABS ROAR
(3,813 posts)but never could figure out the why, why wouldn't the court want a complete count, what was the rush?
AlbertCat
(17,505 posts)especially when inaugurations used to happen in March.... I believe. Let's see...
Yep...from Wiki:
(Prior to the Twentieth Amendment, the date was March 4, the day of the year on which the Constitution of the United States first took effect in 1789; the last inauguration to take place on the older date was Franklin D. Roosevelt's first one on March 4, 1933.)
Now of course there's no reason to go back to that. But the "we must do it in a hurry" argument is moot.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)would cause irreparable harm to Bush's presidency.
And no, I'm not making a smart-ass remark. That was their reason for stopping the recount:
alittlelark
(18,890 posts)mountain grammy
(26,644 posts)KansDem
(28,498 posts)"It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue," O'Connor told the Chicago Tribune editorial board in an interview. "Maybe the court should have said, 'We're not going to take it, goodbye.'"
"Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision," she said. "It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn't done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."
Sandra Day O'Connor Doubts Decision To Take Bush v. Gore
"Probably?" That's a gross understatement!
And, as I recall, they all continued to pull their impressive salaries with all the perks and benefits...
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)She doesn't want the taint of her vote to appoint Bush president to follow her to her grave, too late, Sandy, you own it.
Javaman
(62,532 posts)pansypoo53219
(20,987 posts)it was a judicial coupe d etat.
defacto7
(13,485 posts)They knew exactly what they were doing. And now O'Connor is playing dumb for the SCOTUS? I don't think so.
FailureToCommunicate
(14,020 posts)defacto7
(13,485 posts)zany and madcap, don't they?
zeemike
(18,998 posts)navarth
(5,927 posts)as one of the best examples of the media letting us down and our own blame for being so fucking uninformed. Those 2 things are the only explanation for them getting away with this.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Billy Budd
(310 posts)The story began on election night at 2:16 AM. Fox News projected George W. Bush as winner of the Florida primary and the Presidential election. In a classic case of pack journalism that college professors will no doubt cite for years to come, ABC, CBS, NBC and CNN all followed Foxs lead during the next four minutes, calling the election for Bush.
The telling part of this story is that the call was made by John Ellis, a freelance political advisor contracted by Fox News to head their election night "decision desk." Ellis is also first cousin to George W. Bush and Florida governor John Ellis "Jeb" Bush.
http://mediastudy.com/articles/jellis.html
TroglodyteScholar
(5,477 posts)tofuandbeer
(1,314 posts)I worked at Yamaha-Motor, a place teaming with early neo-cons. Employees were separating from each other like oil and water during that election debacle.
I remember asking them, "You really want a President who has direct ties to oil billionaires?" They just smirked and said, "Yes, why not?"
Look what the bastard-duo did to the U.Sand the world.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)Her face was all over the news for a few years and, now, I can't recall the last time I saw her mentioned. Is she still alive? Jeb might need her.
Blue_Adept
(6,400 posts)As wikipedia notes without saying where;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katherine_Harris
Lasher
(27,632 posts)In 2011 she and her husband (wealthy businessman Anders Ebbeson) had a waterfront mansion built at Sarasota. Then in November last year her husband killed himself after having experienced some health issues.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)All her wealth hasn't brought her much to be happy about, has it?
Lasher
(27,632 posts)Unhappiness is easier to endure when you have servants. But all of Ebbeson's money couldn't buy his health or youth back. I invite you to share a moment of reflection:
tofuandbeer
(1,314 posts)so when they do finally take their last breath, they believe they'll be remembered as brilliant men/women.
Take Reagan. Please.
nikto
(3,284 posts)Harris has the satisfaction of knowing in her heart that she helped
steal an American presidential election.
She probably thinks she's rated a special place in Heaven because of that.
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)I think I'd go into hiding if it were about me. She seemed to be easily manipulated.
navarth
(5,927 posts)and he's right. Nixon and Reagan committed treason and walked.
Lasher
(27,632 posts)It was profound to hear President Carter come right out and say it.
navarth
(5,927 posts)billhicks76
(5,082 posts)Go Lions btw...trade up for Watkins. But the point is Repubs cheat...it's their only hope. There are imposter profiles even here to dissuade us from the truth...especially with NSA or federal law enforcement related threads as those are Republican core issues. It's much like the phony online, sock-puppet profiles that the New York Times and The New Yorker exposed. They are run by paid military contractor employees outsourced by such agencies as the US military, NSA, republican PACs, corporations and foreign governments that want to improve their image and " MANAGE" public opinion. One person often manages up to 100 fake profiles a day, littering the web and news sites with its " comments". Even if this manager quits, gets fired or promoted the next manager steps in and resumes using those profiles which means even though they are fake they can have thousands of comments attributed to their name because they exist in cyberspace and never die or have their account terminated....they, in fact, usually have more comments in their historical profiles because they are quite active daily because it's a job to them. The worst offender is Strafor but firms like KBR, Booze Allen, and the old Blackwater are heavily engaged. HuffPost had commenters exposed but it's the price of having the gift if the internet I suppose. We just need to be educated, aware and vigilant. Anyone who can't face facts is being naive. This us the way the world works...when money is involved people and corporations do what's in their own interests. And Republicans have a stranglehold on our government through corporations to do their bidding.
navarth
(5,927 posts)You touched on several things that I have always suspected.
also: thanks for the Go Lions...you a Lions fan? Watkins eh? I hear some talk about him but they really do need some defensive playmakers too.
I'm also a fan of Bill Hicks. Great loss there.
Takket
(21,611 posts)taught_me_patience
(5,477 posts)Seriously, sometimes you win some and sometimes you lose some. Not every loss is illegitimate.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)The evidence is there. Feel free to actually do some research as the information is readily available and well documented.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)It isn't sour grapes. Republicans interfered with the results of several presidential elections.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)but not Reagan's second win. I mean that was just embarrassing to discuss. Only lost DC and Minnesota?
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Have you done the research?
His statement is easily backed up by the facts. It has fuck all to do with sour grapes...
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)to the argument. It's just a cliche'.
AnalystInParadise
(1,832 posts)I wonder about the 2000 election.....but the rest of them seem pretty legit to me.
Blanks
(4,835 posts)were undisputed blow-outs. As Dubya demonstrated in 2008 - being an incumbent isn't ALWAYS enough for a huge victory.
So, perhaps they (Nixon and Reagan) interfered with the first election - but they had successfully pulled the wool over the eyes of the electorate by the second election.
JEB
(4,748 posts)Not.
calimary
(81,435 posts)Their policies and ideas were totally illegitimate. So why shouldn't their "presidencies" be?
DesertDiamond
(1,616 posts)coming out to vote, I always say, "How do you know they didn't come out to vote? Maybe their votes just weren't counted."
But this subterfuge and subverting of government operations is far, far worse because it not only skews the election results, but it also puts lives at risk. Really, truly heinous.
Reter
(2,188 posts)I understand what they are saying and agree, but at first glance I said to myself "Is this guy seriously saying Reagan stole the 1984 election?"
With the Iran hostages and pappy bush, the ex CIA director, had a lot of practice in fixing elections in (at least) foreign countries.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...the birth of that impeachable crime was his 'October Surprise' in 1980...when his team asked the Iranians to delay releasing the hostages until AFTER Raygun was elected...
Reter
(2,188 posts)But the title made me initially think literally, meaning Dukakis got more electoral votes in '84.
joanbarnes
(1,723 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)Why doesn't Hartmann just say Reagan was born in Kenya?
HomerRamone
(1,112 posts)cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)HomerRamone
(1,112 posts)ErikJ
(6,335 posts)HA!
riqster
(13,986 posts)Yupyupyup.
chknltl
(10,558 posts)I understand that cheaters oftentimes win and yet one could still say that they 'legitimately' won because they did in fact win.
Thom Hartmann points out to his listeners and readers that there has been some pretty substantial cheating going on by those on the right. This cheating was of a type and magnitude he 'believes' that the American voter would NOT have put up with in any of the referred to elections had they only known about it.
I agree with Thom in that I too 'believe' that had the American voter seen the very facts and data-the cheating, those elections would have turned out differently.
So in truth one can say that every President since Washington has indeed won the posting 'legitimately' but arguably not all of them have won through means the American electorate would have allowed had they but known.
Is it one of these two points where you are in disagreement with Thom on? Do you disagree with his use of the word 'legitimately' or is it that you disagree with his, (and my), 'assumption' that the American electorate would have in any or all of the cases referred too NOT put up with the cheating. OR is there an entirely different aspect to all of this that you disagree with?
defacto7
(13,485 posts)I don't put the democratic process on the same level as a parlor game.
If it is that trite, then the recent analyses determining our government to be an oligarchy and not a democracy would be strengthened by degree. Games can be played by politicians and the wealthy in other forms of government but not in a democracy or we really don't have one at all.
chknltl
(10,558 posts)Then again maybe you know something I do not. Thom Hartmann's facts and data are legitimate as far as I can tell. Do you have something substantive to refute Thom's historical data and conclusions? If not and I promise you that I intend no disrespect, may I point out that it is common practice for many here in the DU to say that 'righties' refuse to allow actual facts to get in the way of their personal paradigms. Some would also say that we on the left are better than that. I'd like to think that people on either side are better than that. I'd like to think that I am not being naïve for thinking so highly of my fellow American.
cthulu2016
(10,960 posts)there's hardly any point.
What constitutes "legitimately elected" in the OP is a personal value judgement of Hartmann's, not a "fact."
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...so that Carter would appear weak and powerless and Raygun would be swept into office in a wave of Uber-Patriotism that Ronnie would bring 'em home...
Seriously, you should look into the facts and circumstances that Thom Hartmann uses to back this statement up....Or you could just bash a well-known Liberal voice for shits and grins..
Your call.
merrily
(45,251 posts)before Reagan declared for office. The lines at gas stations did not help, either.
In my view, had Carter gotten militant, he would have lost the hostages and a lot of other lives, so please do not construe my post as agreeing with Koppel. All I am saying is that Carter was made to look weak by a number of cynical people from the jump.
Reagan did prevent a surge in Carter's favor that release of the hostages before the election would likely have given him.
GeorgeGist
(25,322 posts)a Reagan Democrat.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)Their report was also later found to be virtually 100% wrong.
The Team B reports became the intellectual foundation for the idea of "the window of vulnerability" and of the massive arms buildup that began toward the end of the Carter administration and accelerated under President Ronald Reagan.[4]
Some scholars and policy-makers, such as Anne Cahn of the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, later criticized the Team B project's findings.[5][6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Team_b
polynomial
(750 posts)This article brings to view the very essence how our mainstream media has been compromised since Walter Cronkites famous news sign off Thats the way it is.
The American Titanic that is too big to fail hit the ice burg a long time ago. As the American poor and middle class float around in life jackets for the past five decades
Thomas Hartmann is exposing the real charade in terrorism and treason transpired for decades. It has been an inside government secret society. Abusers black robed, the American Imams, the America Supreme court justice officiating priests of the Constitution keep throwing more Americans over board to stay afloat example by free speech is money. Those new money bags are water proof
Presidents seal records forever till generations pass for the memories to be covered up by the cheaters and criminal abusers to rule, and profiteer as long as possible. Exposing rampant disrespect and corruption towards We the People in what is called the living document that is the plan for the American experiment to pursue life liberty and justice for all. Only when a guy like Snowden appears to prefer exile over the American Justice system many wonder if it is getting very compelling to join him.
What Thom Hartmann left out is what is so difficult for the American mind to finally submit to is that too big to fail has been failing relentlessly sidelined by media Mongols. The Bush family committed treason, Johnson was complicit, Nixon was a trader, Reagan with the help of the media accomplished more corruption helped by business, Hollywood, and of course the military industrial complex in the profit machine of the past century.
The problem is the lie is so huge many American cannot believe it. Of course there is no recourse besides war other than keep busting the banks and business while the bulk of America flounders.
A lot of politically connected people need to be convicted of treason. America is just having fits getting through that part of history that every country goes through...this failure is so big where do you start...
Shoulders of Giants
(370 posts)Nixon and Bush Sr too.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Read up on it...I was staggered by what Nixon did...there is even tape of LBJ talking about what a treasonous, back-handed crook Nixon was even BEFORE he got into office..
maindawg
(1,151 posts)That is treason. He should have been impeached. But in those days ,our government was civil. They did not spend 100% of their time attacking one another. It is the Republicans who would drag our nation through the mud because they have zero respect for us, as a nation. They work for GE, and they work for BP. They are evil.
navarth
(5,927 posts)doesn't mean you know ANY thing. The treason of Nixon and Reagan is well documented.
Shoulders of Giants
(370 posts)They were both elected by the people the though. Sometimes, our side simply loses.
santamargarita
(3,170 posts)mylye2222
(2,992 posts)Neither in 2000 nor in 2004....
2000; CNN Calls Gore as winner in Florida before Fox says its W
2004: CNN Calls Kerry winner before results beeing reversed in a matter of an hour and a half of time.....
MrScorpio
(73,631 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)but he's dealing with a little bit of the hypocrisy bug by taking a paycheck from a guy who counts the votes like Joe Stalin, and who probably isn't legitimately elected either.
Question more? Maybe TH should ask Putin if he was legitimately elected, as well!
AAO
(3,300 posts)Demeter
(85,373 posts)rickyhall
(4,889 posts)I'm just sayin'
mountain grammy
(26,644 posts)and even would rather believe almost anything but the truth. Reagan would have won even if the hostages were released before the election. Interests rates were in the double digits, we waited in line for gas, and Americans were held hostage in Iran. The time was ripe for a right wing takeover, and many forces were at work to ensure it happened. Once they got their foot in the door, well, the last thirty years tell the story, including the Supreme Court coup and rigged voting.
Dark n Stormy Knight
(9,771 posts)when a D wins.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Minus the 2000 election, it's pretty obvious that Reagan and Bush I won their elections. Reagan won 44 states in 1980. I mean there was no corruption there. I think Carter got politically screwed over in a number of ways (including within the Democratic party). But that doesnt mean Reagan didn't win legitimately.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Democrats yelled foul loud and long after both Gore and then Kerry lost. Democrats controlled both houses in 2006. Waxman held hearings in which testimony proved machines could easily be hacked. But that was the end of it. Republicans were not even put to the trouble of voting against a bill.
As a result, the point seemed to me to be to convince America that the Republicans had stolen the elections--and they well may have--but not to really, you know, do anything about preventing such things in the future. Why? If only Republicans steal elections, why not enact legislation with long prison terms and other safeguards?
We HAVE to stop thinking that every thing is totally one-sided. That may be great for professional politicians and their shills to have us do, but demonizing only one side and sanctifying the other has not been doing the general population much good for at least a few decades.
You are not rooting on the home baseball team here. This is not the century old Red Sox v. Yankees rivalry. It's our lives and the lives of our kids and their kids.
ETA: Before some maroon starts deflecting, no, I never said both sides are equally bad.
liberal N proud
(60,339 posts)And I consider voter suppression - cheating!
They could not win a fair, clean election.
BeyondGeography
(39,377 posts)His approval ratings were in the 30s throughout the campaign and he was underwater with Democrats. The last debate was a week before the election and Reagan blew him away. Carter's strategy hinged largely on scaring people about Reagan but the latter was cool as a cucumber in that last debate (and the two before them, one of which Carter missed) getting off his zingers while Carter appeared tense and irritable and failed to land any of the many punches he threw.
Watch the debates. Reagan won; not only that, Iran hardly comes up. People were much more freaked out about the economy than they were about Iran.
The Iran dirty tricks happened, but they aimed as much as getting Reagan's presidency off to a triumphal start as they were at denying Carter one last hope at re-election. You don't lose 44 states over what was then an old crisis.
HomerRamone
(1,112 posts)is the Presidency "legitimate"?