Joe,
< ... I completely fail to see what impressed you about Gore speech.>
I didn't say anything about being impressed about Gore's speech, did I? Let me be totally brutal here - I find both the candidates terribly unimpressive, unispiring, and lacking much in the way of being leaders. I refuse to defend either candidates. So, let's get that part straightened out.
<Gore lost the 1st count, 2nd count, he is still behind after 1 county hand recount, he is about to lose overseas ballots. >
I have talked to many people about this issue in the last few days (obviously!) and I find that most people - republicans and democrats alike - think that hand counting is not a bad idea given how error prone the current process has been. Think of it - we have a counting system whose accuracy is not sufficient to determine this close an election.
<Now with his back against the wall about to lose it all, the time is running out, he offers to play the whole counting game over to determine who the real winner is.>
You would do the same thing if you were Al Gore, wouldn't you?
<Not only he didn't put anything online, and ask Bush to put everything online, he actually sneakily slipped in 1 county to his recount condition that is officially off the table (Dade).>
So, you are scared that Bush has to put everything online, i.e., Bush has a chance of losing the election if the count is more accurate and so he should not agree?
I think that is a bad argument to make, don't you think?
<Gore is a desperate man at this hour trying desperate measures, anything to delay or reverse the inevitable.>
Gore is clearly a desperate man given that he is behind but I fail to see how one can conclude the result is "inevitable" given that this whole thing seems like such a mess.
Chuck |
