Once more, with feeling:
In legal parlance there is something called "the theory of the case". It is the means by which one advances one's position, by providing an explanatory framework that can, in the light of testimony and evidence, either convict or exculpate.
Now, it is possible to advance more than one theory of the case, along the lines of "my client didn't do it; and if he did, it was an accident; and if it wasn't, it was manslaughter". However, one can only argue one theory of the case at a time. An essential element of Gore's "theory of the case" is the importance of counting all votes, overriding scruples about technical defects or being forced to speculate about intent. However, Gore's people appear to have been behind the disenfranchisement of servicemen, and are not trying to stop the lawsuit in Seminole County from moving forward. Thus, they belie their theory of the case, and prove that their position has no weight. Should the Florida Supreme Court ratify these Democratic attempts to exclude Republican ballots, they will prove the chimerical nature of their own rationale for intervening.
On the other hand, the Republican theory of the case is simple and consistent. First, absent a compelling reason to resort to hand counts, the results of the mandatory recount should have been certified. Second, absent an objective standard for assigning ballots, any hand count was bound to be unfair. Third, absent allegation of fraud or actual machine malfunction, there was no reason to delay the certification. Finally, there is reason to assume that machine error worked against Gore throughout the state, and therefore that it constituted a significant factor. In sum, the Republican theory of the case is much more compelling, elegant, and consistent with the subsidiary arguments of the Party. |
