To: ColtonGang who wrote (8726 ) 12/11/2000 6:34:26 AM From: Sig Respond to of 10042 Stephan says: <<If speed comes at the expense of accuracy, let's sacrifice speed. So what if the count is not over by Dec. 12? Whenever it is over, if Bush is still ahead, nothing changes. He has already been certified the winner based on a partial manual recount completed on Nov. 27. >>> At this point I stopped reading the article.... If time is not essential, why not vote in Florida on Nov 14 th instead of the 7th. Why not allow until Dec 12 for the first re-count, why not allow challenges after the President is in office? And IMO, having lost, that is all the Gore team has been after these many weeks. You can bet they will have people counting those dimples, in selected counties,until finally perhaps the middle of next year, they can persuede a Newspaper to print the results "proving" that Gore would have won if only........... I hope the USSC locks up those public records for 4 years to prevent it ! Like the OJ trial or Watergate, a best seller(?) and many lesser books should result. Probably one already being written for release on Jan 21 th.(G) "Who Won, in 2001?" by xxxx Sig And as a Bush supporter, I have no objection to a statewide recount of every ballot with consistent clear cut rules. The Gore team had a small chance of winning that one, but chose instead to invest (now huge) sums in a trying to change the rules and conduct the count on un-punched ballots in Democratic counties. Taxpayers of either Party (or no party) should be incensed over the entire incredibly expensive operation. My father said many times, back in the 1930's, that Lawyers would end up with all the money. I guess he was right.