As far as the protests having any impact on the decision to stop the recounts, that I seriously doubt. I've seen a few protests and I have yet to see one that impacts the decision makers, at least not favorably; sometimes the protests harden the decision makers against the protesters, but they never sway them in favor of the protesters.
I see in the first piece you quoted that there was a brick thrown through a window, and the second piece refers to allegations of "punching and kicking individuals, pounding on doors, screaming threats" so I'd call that violence, albeit fairly small-scale so far, though still unacceptable. I hate to say this, but I fully expect extensive violence before we're through, but this is earlier than I was expecting it to get started. You can't have an election as divisive as this with no clear winner and expect to maintain order, even in the US. Whichever side is eventually declared the winner, fully half of the people in the country will feel cheated. I won't be surprised to see full scale rioting and massive civil disobedience before we're done. I just don't see a process taking place that either side can respect, nor do I see any effort at conciliation from either side. In my opinion things will get much worse before they get better. And this opinion is why I think the USSC should have stayed out of the matter.
Turning to the USSC, it is easily possible to argue bias on their part. The court contains 7 members appointed by Republicans. Some of these perhaps would like to retire, but they don't want to retire without a Republican President. Thus they may have a clear preference for Bush, arguably. If they rule for Gore their independence will be proclaimed, but if they rule for Bush, they will be labelled as just another set of political hacks.
Maybe I am too pessimistic in expecting nationwide violence to arise out of this election. I certainly hope I am way off base, but so far things just keep spiraling downhill in accordance with my pessimistic expectations and fears.
Carl |
