Gore Vidal discusses the Ohio Election on Real Time

Tight-lipped about Ohio?



Nobody puts this into better perspective than Gore Vidal. The man is a jewel! He made some very valid points. For instance, there were three third-party candidates that nobody in Ohio had heard of, and and yet they got more votes, than Kerry. We still have to fight for PAPER ballots.

http://www.safesearching.com/billmaher/print/t_hbo_realtime_051305.htm


Okay, let's get to it. Ohio , what went wrong in Ohio ? The Democrats seem to be in two camps about losing the last two elections. One camp says, “Get over it! You know, you're making us look worse by just belaboring the fact that we lost to this man.” And the other side says, “No. There are irregularities and they're stealing elections. And the one thing the Democrats shouldn't do is get over it.”


GORE VIDAL: Well, I quite agree. We shouldn't. If we're to have a republic. And after the 2000 election, somebody said, “Do you think he'll get re-elected?” I said, “Well, he hasn't been elected, so far.” “But he may be reappointed by the Supreme Court.” But I said, “Look, he'll lose again, but he'll probably serve a second term, because they've got four years between 2000 and 2004 to make sure that he gets an overwhelming vote from Diebold, the electronic machines.

MAHER: Yeah, I mean, the thing that I found disturbing about this – and I'm not a conspiracy theorist – is that everybody agrees there were irregularities. And when you say that, the Republicans go, “Well, shit happens.” Except that all the shit favored Bush. All the shit that happened seemed to favor one guy. That does strike me as—

<snip>

VIDAL: Well, there's one interesting irregularity. There were three third-party candidates that nobody in Ohio had heard of, except perhaps their mothers——and they're on the ballot. They got more votes, just three of these people that nobody knew, than Kerry, who was the best-financed Democratic candidate for president in years. Now, that's very odd.