To: kodiak_bull who wrote (79870 ) 11/24/2000 9:43:45 AM From: JungleInvestor Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 95453 OT: Kodiak, thanks for your excellent commentary. Gore may well pick up sufficient votes to win based on dimpled chad ballots. (the first "dimpled chad President") The Florida Supreme Court and Gore are essentially saying the best method to include all votes is to manually count ballots in the four most highly Democratic districts and have the Democratic Canvassing Boards divine the "intent of the voter" by utilizing changing "standards" (see below) that are biased and therefore certain to add additional votes for Gore. The Republican argument before the U.S. Supreme Court is that the manual recounts are not giving equal protection per the U.S. Constitution because they are arbitrary and subject to manipulation. One argument that I have not yet heard (either in court or in Republican press releases) is that the Republicans should be permitted to use the same method as the Democrats, i.e., select four predominantly Republican counties with Republican Canvassing Boards for a manual recount and use the standards of their choice that will assure additional votes for Bush. As the old saying goes "what's good for the goose is good for the gander too." Isn't this really what Bush's argument of equal protection all about and why wouldn't the U.S. Supreme Court want to weigh in on an equal protection issue such as this? The Republicans should describe in their press releases the unfairness of manually counting four heavy Democratic counties without manually counting four heavy Republican counties to highlight the absurdity of what Gore is doing. Excerpt from a Washington Post article today: <<Today's deliberations of the Broward County canvassing board--held in the courtroom of board chairman Robert Lee-- marked the first time that decision-making over partially perforated or indented chads was carried out in public view. The Palm Beach board has done some work on disputed ballots, but has not allowed the media to listen in. After some initial discussion, the three members of the Broward board settled into a pattern. They would spend about one minute on each of the numbered ballots, hold a punch card up to the light, turn it around several times, pass it back and forth and allow attorneys for Bush and Gore who were sitting with them at a long conference table to look at the punch card, then hear their discussions. Each board member pronounced an opinion. If two agreed, the matter was settled. On the matter that has caused an extended legal dispute and no end of late-night comedy on television--how to judge dimpled ballots--the board seemed to have settled on some improvised standards. Like its counterpart in Palm Beach, the Broward board is accepting ballots in which votes for several offices are not fully perforated because that indicates the voter had difficulty punching through the ballot. But in cases in which only the presidential vote is imperfect, the Broward board is also looking at whether the voter picked candidates from the same party down the ballot and is taking that as a sign of intent. In addition, when several ballots from the same precinct show extensive dimpling, the Broward board is being more lenient under the assumption that the voting machines were faulty. The Palm Beach board has agreed to hear final pleas from both camps when it resumes deliberations Friday. Lawyers for Gore are certain to ask that it follow Broward's examples on these last two standards, particularly because they contend there are 119 dimpled Gore votes in a single precinct in which they believe the machine became clogged with chad.>>