John,
I'm not arguing, but what's your reasoning?
I think if there is a recount, it will be only one based on some standards. And a standard is something that you can write down as a rule, and any number of different people would have following the rule would have to come to the same conclusion. This means that the rule has to be unambiguous.
This has to exclude dimples, because counting dimples in undervotes means that a dimple is a selection. If a dimple is a selection, all the ballots that were counted would have to be examined for dimples, and any valid vote with dimple would have to be thrown out as an overvote.
If you exclude dimples, Palm Beach county actually for some time showed a Bush lead in the manual recount, and it turned into a Gore lead only after dimples were counted (somewhat conservatively).
Broward county used extremely liberal dimple standard, yielding a high percentage of new votes from no votes, a multiple of the Palm Beach county yield, and if the dimples were not counted, the Gore votes would evaporate. Broward county got between 500 and 600 net gain, heavily relying on dimples.
If there is a standard, there are 2 practical choices: SOS sets the standards or judge Lewis sets the standards. I believe judge Lewis's standard for count he was overseeing was no dimples. (can somebody confirm this)? I believe SOS would also set the standard to mean no dimples.
Both of these practical standards run into a problem of the standard being set after the election, so the only possible standard that can stand up to judicial challenge is the one that justice O'Connor mentioned during questioning - voter instructions. This would be the strictest standard, since the instrucions order that any hanging chads need to be removed by the voter (I believe, you tell me, since you voted there).
The bottom line here is that Gore needs dimples. Without dimples, Gore has no chance of winning, if the probability theory of expected "recovery" of votes holds.
So right now, the US SC can do 2 things, and I am guessing here:
1. Just overrule the FL SC, saying that the current scheme (or remedy) is unconstitutional, and there is no time left because Gore + FL SC burned 12 days of their contest phase due to the 1st Mickey Mouse ruling
2. US SC does limited "legislating" from the bench, extend the Dec 12 deadline, tell either judge Lewis, SOS to set the standard, or set the standard themselves based on the voter instructions
Under both scenarios, Gore loses. I don't see a scenario under which there are enough votes to sustain the current FL SC ruling, and their scheme. If that is the only choice, the ruling may be to overrule by margin anywhere from 5:4 to 8:1. (Ginsburg is a lost case)
Joe |
