I held my nose and voted for Gore, my grandfahter was one of the founders of the headstart program. My wife reminded me of what my grandfather would say, if I voted for Bush.
We know many people didn't want to vote for either cannidate. The close race reflects this state of affairs.
Bottom line, the machine counting proccess has a certain level of error. I don't think we should alter that standard. I think the buck should stop at the machine count period. The playing field is the playing field, it worked and didn't work, basically, equally for both canidates. Where it wasn't as equall, oh well, do better next time, and get the vote out.
If more people had voted, we wouldn't be in this fix. I hate to say it, but Bush is right, he won the vote, based on the existing standards.
It was a close race, and I can understand how the Gore camp, kept seeing an opportunity to keep hope alive, but bottom line Bush has won the machine count, and that reality can't be changed. I don't think anyone has demonstrated aggregious or criminal tappering of a nature that should over turn that reality.
The supreme courts job in here is ref. The race has a winner, for get about the condition of the field, the other sides fan helped there player up, and are team didn't get as good oranges at the half, enough already. One side put more points on the board, when the game was called.
Bottom line, The Gore campaing stretagy was flawed. He should have listened to Clinton and covered his back side more. Gore pulled ads on states that were close to save money, and focused the big key states. Gore left himself no back up, he cut it too close. Why wouldn't you listen To your boss, when he won twice, against all odds.
Gorer should have been able to turn out more vote, he lost because he cut it to close, with a voting system that is only so accurate, those are the brakes. |
