| OT: The idea of sealing or destroying the ballots is hilarious. Doing so would be unimaginably stupid - strongly reinforcing the impression that the Rs (all of 'em, including the Supremes) were afraid of THE TERRIBLE TRUTH. In fact, it would be so unimaginably stupid, I could almost see it happening. I did hear one Republican Congressperson, Jennifer Dunn of WA, suggesting on CNN Capital Gang that, indeed, getting at the ballots may not be as easy as is widely assumed, but she's the only remotely credible individual I've heard suggesting it. The more typical R line is that, even if the ballots are eventually counted and re-counted, no one will be able to agree on what a "fair" assessment amounts to. In this regard David Boies made a thoughtful observation yesterday, suggesting that, as far as perceived legitimacy goes, it might be better for the legal victor (i.e., Bush) to remove the uncertainty, rather than having the great unknown hanging over him, regardless of what the numbers actually revealed (i.e., even if they showed him 5 or 50 or 500 chads down). You might disagree with Boies in the end on this one, but, whatever you think about the justice of the case, you have to admit that the Rs do look a bit like they're calling the game early because they're afraid to play it out. I found it interesting also that, despite all the wailing and gnashing of teeth about the supposed crisis and end of public patience, Republican pollster Frank Luntz observed that certain poll responses suggest that, regardless of what people say, a lot of them will be disappointed to see the show come to an end. |
