SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: KeepItSimple who wrote (37895)11/16/2000 11:16:17 PM
From: Dan B.  Read Replies (1) of 436258
 
I could say someone stuck the stylus next to a candidate
and decided not to push through for him/her. This may even be likley when considering the undecided folks
standing there voting, but this argument may not be worth waging even if it's quite plausible.

Best, is just to recognize that handcounting these things DOES recover votes, and like it or not, if the oversight is/was
proper at all times, it's going to be fairly fairly done, perhaps.


Best, is to consider that you can't rightly call such a vote recovery method fair when it is employed to the
benefit of only one candidate, where the other candidate could benefit if the same method were employed
on all state ballots.
The Federal courts won't allow it, I think you can bet on that, and the American People can and will
understand this.

My Guess now is, the Federal courts will give the State the task of deciding whether the hand-count goes statewide,
or the vote goes in to Congress as it is.

Mr. Bush didn't want to drag it out, and that was easy to say because he was ahead, but Gore wouldn't concede. I won't blame Gore for that simple matter(I will for calling selected county counting fair for a week), this is close. But both appeared to stay within the law such as it is. Now Bush seeks to win under the law and the Secretaries certification. This is Ok too. Without the skewed partisan county results included, it's a level playing field.

But a main thrust of his Federal case is to make the argument I've made here with respect to selective territories being accepted. Therefore, he has, for a week, been drawing attention to the inherent unfairness of anything less than a statewide hand-count. It's fair to say, the statewide hand-count has been what he's been saying would be relatively fair all along, though he feels the chad cards are innacurate and people who didn't remove their chads as instructed when they voted should be disqualififed.

If it goes to the statewide hand-count one way or the other, the loser will concede when it's evident he's lost, just as usual.

P.S. Because of this, when Gore came forward with his offer last night, he effectively recognized the guts of Bush's case in Federal Court, probably because his lawyers told him the Fed's would never allow selective counties to stand, and might in fact allow the count to go through as it is. It was a card Gore had to attempt to play. If Bush would agree, a court might well skip over the possibility of letting things go through as they are with the Secretary of state.

Freedom Works,

Dan B
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext