To: DMaA who wrote (74982 ) 11/14/2000 11:53:38 PM From: Johannes Pilch Respond to of 769670 The democrats are not talking merely about recounting ballots. They are advocating attempting to judge the intent of voters who for whatever reason spoiled their ballots. I assume the ballots in question are those that misfed or were not counted for technical reasons. If so, then it seems reasonable to me to employ human faculties to determine voter intent. >i>This judgment will be made by partisan, fallible human beings as opposed to disinterested machines. The problem is, machines are really quite fallible, and a fairly executed manual recount would ameliorate circumstances of machine failure.This process is doomed to reduce the moral authority of the Fl vote, not increase it. Perhaps. I think the authority of the vote is already compromised. It seems to me were a fair judge to analyze the ballots, it would go far to improve the credibility of the FL vote.The wisdom if the "arbitrary" time limit is validated by the fact that as time passes, only Gore votes seem to show up. (grin) No doubt it is tactically wise from Bush’s point-of-view to have a time limit. I think moral theory would point us toward a full and fair count, especially if such a count is acceptable by law. Gore’s improvement is likely due to the fact the manual recount is occurring in a mostly Dem district. I think there are GOP districts that have close votes. Bush should have them recounted also. Once the full recount is done fairly, then the results should be released and the issue laid aside. As it is, there will be a cloud, a Dem exacerbated cloud of doubt hovering over Bush should he win with a deadline. The Dems are not going to allow this sort of Bush victory to go quietly into the night. The 5pm deadline is like Affirmative Action on Bush’s behalf, a handout given him by his crony. Dems are going to use it to incessantly assault his administration, to be sure. Gotta get to sleep (up with baby). I'm killing Bambi's dad tomorrow morning.