You are even worse. You don't even know what evidence is.

Pramer

Wow Bill, what a rant!  As if it makes any difference now who won the
2000 election.  The 2 terms were served out, pretty horribly, by Bush.
My observation was mainly that it was unsurprising that a presidency
that began in such controversy would turn out badly.  Your reaction
mainly proves that you Republicans feel compelled to defend to the
death the 2000 election that put your buddy in office.  Most likely because
he botched the job he did so badly that you are now scared to death that
historical analysis will show that he never deserved the office in the
first place, thus cementing his crown as the worst US President in
history.

I suppose you  are unaware of The Florida Ballot Project:

http://www2.norc.org/fl

Contrary to your wild-assed assertions that every time they
recounted it looked worse for Gore, in actual fact the opposite
was true.  The conclusion NORC arrived at was that if all votes
in Florida had been counted either under Florida law (which
prescribes "intent of the voter), under the rules requested by Bush,
or under the request by Gore within a week of the election to
count all the Florida votes, Gore would have won the election.

Ironically, the actual recount requested by Gore (including just
the 4 counties but not the entire state) gave Bush Florida.  Kind
of one of those things where if Gore hadn't tried cherry-picking
Florida and just let the grunts there do their jobs and recount the
entire state, he would have got it.

Of course, that's NORC's findings.  Doubtless there are others,
although I'm sure they aren't anywhere near the quality of that one.

Now's your cue to claim NORC is
partisan (which is another lie) and just dismiss the historical
research because it doesen't neatly fit into a 5-second Republican
talking-point.

Yes, Bill, despite your conservative-driven bent to shove every
problem into a neat little package, the truth is more complex
than you make it out to be.

Typical engineer thinking - your brain can't handle anything with
multiple solutions.  Personally, I'm highly satisfied with the way
things turned out.  If Bush was half the President that any other
US President was, he would have been greatly concerned with
acknowleging the problems with 2000 and bully-pulpiting during
the rest of his term for better elections - rather than what they
actually did, which was shoving some of their rich friends into
the states (ie: Diebold) to make a lot of money selling junk e-voting
systems that could be hacked into in the future to make the election totals
say what they want.

Even Jeb Bush was disgusted over the mess Florida made of the 2004
election - but you conservative party types like to forget that.

But what ended up happening was better than anything since it
reminded the public that when you put a jerk in office, that the
resultant presidency you get out him will be garbage.  So until
this generation dies off, we should be seeing better quality
candidates for a while.  (like Obama)  We may have had to
pay for it with 8 years of pure crap - but we now should be good
for at least another 30 years or more of decent people in
office.  Who knows, by the time I die, the US Presidency might
even be respectable again!  Imagine that!

Ted

His Senate seat is