What is Digg?67 Comments
- seldon452, on 05/25/2008, -6/+42I am really excited to see this. A little story you prob don't care about. I was riding the elevator in the NBC building and I get in with my friend and a few other people who I just glance at. I start talking to my friend about how Recount looks GREAT and I am excited for it. He keeps giving me all these weird looks so I turn around as the door opens and one of the guys walks out and its Kevin Spacey. He was laughing at me because I didn't recognize him.
It was a little awkward. - Enasni1212, on 05/25/2008, -3/+31Considering it was one of the the most blatant affronts to democracy in quite a long time... yes. It's made worse by the fact that people barely remember it, and don't particularly care when they are reminded.
- foofightrs777, on 05/25/2008, -0/+17Can't we just learn from our mistakes and have reliable voting machines that would avoid this issue all together? To those we who say it can't be done: For decades we have had a nationwide ATM network. These machines are 100% accurate, barring human error. They run on their own secure network which has resisted attacks. And finally, they offer a printed receipt upon request.
Things like this really show where the priorities are in this country. Money: 1, Democracy 0. - verge, on 05/25/2008, -7/+22Watched this live. Love Spacey. Katherine Harris, who declined to be involved in this movie at all, was rumored to have not understood how she could be played by an actress w/o her hair color. Enough mascara could make anyone look like her.
- jedisushi, on 05/25/2008, -7/+19Dugg for Charlie Rose!
- inactive, on 05/25/2008, -3/+14historically, sometimes monsters become easier to understand when you understand the conditions of their birth
- mbonzo531, on 05/25/2008, -2/+12The douche bag is still president... so yea.
- PapaZit, on 05/25/2008, -10/+18Maybe after watching this film, people will stop blaming Nader for the outcome of the 2000 election.
- rambovsthailand, on 05/25/2008, -0/+7Yes screw that guy and his fighting for people to have safer cars and cleaner air to breathe.
Damn you NADER!!! - sfury, on 05/25/2008, -2/+8***** BUSH SUCKS!
- PapaZit, on 05/25/2008, -2/+8How so? Because he has dedicated his entire life to fighting injustices?
- falese, on 05/25/2008, -12/+17i heard they settled for laura dern for harris after cruella deville was unavailable.
bitch is horrendous. - exomni, on 05/26/2008, -1/+4Scalia is a scumbag. "Get over it, it's so old by now".
What the *****? Who gives a ***** how old it is? You're still alive, the party that supports you is still around, that means it's still a ***** issue. - YamiJim, on 05/25/2008, -1/+4because the people who control the ATMs WANT THEM TO BE SECURE and protect their money.
The people who control the voting (the government) want to control the voting machines for the EXACT same reason, Savy? - Dragon88, on 05/25/2008, -3/+6I saw the writer interviewed in person. He said they've screened the film to Washington people and many of those who were actually portrayed in the film. They all said it was very accurate - and that Catherine Harris is spot on and actually even MORE crazy in real life.
- flair1, on 05/25/2008, -2/+5you think gore would have stopped 9/11? put the crack pipe down son.
- plinstrot, on 05/25/2008, -4/+7Fun Fact:
The writer of the film, Danny Strong, who is praised in this piece, is actually an actor who got started playing the fan-favorite character Jonathan on Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0834960/ - bigtech64, on 05/27/2008, -0/+2It's not exactly conclusive as there are numerous scenarios where Gore wins, particularly if you just recount all ballots for the whole state. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_election_reco ...
- spankaccount, on 05/26/2008, -0/+2http://www.nytimes.com/pages/politics/recount/
- spankaccount, on 05/26/2008, -0/+2The New York Times, along with a consortium of news papers from around the nation commissioned their own recount of the votes, using Gore's rules, and Bush still won. Not surprisingly, HBO's film doesn't cover this important fact.
New York Times recount details:
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/politics/recount/ - muckemuck, on 05/25/2008, -1/+3I'm a Republican.. go watch the last 10 mins or so of this http://tinyurl.com/4r6pn3 HBO documentary where they show a mock election with election officials watching on and show how they can hack the electronic voting machine. In many states there are NO paper trails - no way to confirm that the machines have counted accurately. In other states the paper trails are a joke (watch the rest of that documentary to see how they find some official paperwork in the trash). Fair and accurate elections can't be guaranteed in the US, and that can work against the Republicans too. Educate yourself and start trying to fix the problem.
- oldgal, on 05/25/2008, -0/+2Used to trouble shoot the ATM system at a big bank - they definitely have errors - we made big bucks fixing them and making things right for the customer.
Even if you have better voting machines we still have no method for resolving a statistical tie. Being someone who spent 50 years in the technical world, I wouldn't trust the machines because I wouldn't trust the multitude of people who have to deal with them. - kipmartin, on 05/25/2008, -1/+3Did you read this somewhere, or do you know this from experience? My guess is this: you read an article and are simply passing this meme around without questioning it. Its a common belief about the man, but not based in truth.
My experience with Ralph Nader (yes, i did know him and am not beholden to him by any means) is that he is driven, brilliant, maybe a bit of a task-master, but anything but 'egotistical'. Ralph Nader believes ALL candidates of the two main parties are bought and paid for.
Isn't that a bit more criminal than being 'a [sic] egotistical douche bag'? - spankaccount, on 05/26/2008, -1/+2The independent recount of the votes, commissioned by the New York Times, showed that no matter how the votes were counted, Bush still won. See here of wikipedia page.
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/politics/recount/ - Bemuzed, on 05/28/2008, -0/+1JPowell180, since you didn't put a lot of time or thought behind your post, I will do the same. So on that note:
If we were all riding mopeds, then we could all afford to pay for the gas to power them since many families are having problems filling their tanks -- something people should have thought about before buying that house in the suburbs with an hour drive to get to work. As for the Kyoto Treaty, not one of the countries that signed the treaty has seen their economy tank...so that argument -- which business has been so fond to use --- has very little relevance.
O.K. I lied. I could not allow your ill informed post to just dangle there without a response. -- cheers - flumkin, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1Does Scalia recognize that our legal system is built on the concept of precedent - by definition, precedent is something that had to occur in the past - is he suggesting that we throw out the recognition of the significance of precedent? Oh yeah, they dropped that stipulation in the Gore v. Bush ruling that their decision couldn't be used as precedent.
Nevermind - republican logic is at play here, suspend all other logic. - portnoy, on 05/25/2008, -4/+5I can't help but imagine what the world would have been like had the Bush team not stolen that election. All those lives that wouldn't have been lost, maybe gas still below $2 a gallon. Perhaps two really large buildings in New York still standing.. sigh.
- spankaccount, on 05/26/2008, -2/+3The New York Times, along with a consortium of news papers from around the nation commissioned their own recount of the votes, using Gore's rules, and Bush still won. Not surprisingly, HBO's film doesn't cover this important fact.
New York Times recount details:
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/politics/recount/ - DaDrake, on 05/25/2008, -1/+2ATM machines 100% accurate ...... heh.... nope.
Remember reading about some guy, who somehow reprogram what cash comes from what box. the end result was 10 dollars were 100 dollars... and he took advantage of it.
Problem for him... the camera. - DiggMasterJ, on 05/27/2008, -0/+1Regardless.
Worst President in history. - exomni, on 05/26/2008, -1/+2Err... usually when you say "digs into" you mean "tears apart" or "exposes". This wasn't a tearing apart, this was a good interview.
- sassip, on 05/25/2008, -1/+2History is written by the victors. Obviously, one can't "change" the past, but the perception there of... can be.
- jpowell180, on 05/26/2008, -0/+1He didn't write it - he's just doing that magical thing again where everyone thinks the little nerd is a big hero again (remembe when everyone thought he played Neo in the Matrix?) - which is all the more interesting now that he's been dead since 2002, killed by his friend Andrew Wells.
- spankaccount, on 05/26/2008, -0/+1And if you know who she was, you wouldn't have made that comment. But thats what you get when you learn your politics from Hollyweird.
- toarn, on 05/26/2008, -0/+1Nader sure as hell didn't help.
- inactive, on 05/25/2008, -3/+3Dramatic headline for a well-done interview... 'Digs into' I expected Charlie Rose to drop the f-bomb or something. Oh wait, this is PBS. Turns out it was a civilized conversation with people involved with the recount, and an actor in the film.
- ryanov, on 06/05/2008, -0/+0Considering Gore won the election as-is, what difference does it make? What makes you think that it's any harder to screw around with the totals if you control the courts and the rest if the difference is 97,000? There were like 20,000 or people scrubbed from voter lists that were probably mostly democratic.
I voted Nader. Not sure if I woulda voted for Gore if Nader weren't running. I was very unimpressed. - Adamande, on 05/25/2008, -1/+1Papajohn56
The idea is to remember mistakes of the past so you won't keep repeating them in the future. It's pretty basic common sense, really. But perhaps you, for some mysterious reason, prefer an electoral system that doesn't work... - Bemuzed, on 05/25/2008, -2/+2This was an utterly fascinating interview on a deep rooted subject. I can't wait to see it tonight or tomorrow. Thank you HBO.
-- cheers - flumkin, on 05/27/2008, -0/+0Remember - as evidenced in the movie, the behavior from this administration over the past 8 years, and even in the actions of justice Scalia and our supreme court - all of this is a game to the republicans. Its a football contest. All that matters is winning. Consequences are irrelevant to them.
- DiggMasterJ, on 05/25/2008, -2/+2I wonder how many of those judges regret the decision.
- rhino369, on 05/25/2008, -1/+1I KNOW HE JUST LAYS THERE!
- DangerDee, on 05/25/2008, -7/+7Nader is STILL a egotistical douche bag.
- inactive, on 05/25/2008, -1/+1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_preside ...
it's happened before - DaDrake, on 05/25/2008, -1/+1What? Are you suggesting the candidates shouldn't have followed the law?
- flumkin, on 05/27/2008, -0/+0Nader received 97000 votes in FL in 2000. Gore lost by 537 votes. Nader voters would have either stayed home or voted for Gore if he wasn't on the ticket.
If just 1% of those 97000 voters showed up for Gore, had Nader not been on the ticket, what would the outcome have been?
Please explain how Nader's presence wasn't a factor. - spankaccount, on 05/26/2008, -1/+1No way, Scalia is a hero.
- ryanov, on 06/05/2008, -0/+0Just because someone said it on the TV doesn't mean it's true.
Someone painted this guy as an egotist and all of a sudden every idiot walking is parroting it. It's incredibly lame. Even if it were true, the fact that everyone says it almost exactly the same way tells me they all heard it the same place. - jpowell180, on 05/26/2008, -2/+1Al Gore would have raised taxes sky high - we'd all likely be riding mopeds by now - if we could afford them, being that the economy would have crashed due to all the limitations imposed on us (but not China) by the Kyoto Treaty, which Gore would have pushed through.
-
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is