Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (82714)	11/2/2004 10:12:38 AM
From: Andrew N. Cothran	Respond to of 793883

Election Day Projection:Bush 50.2% Kerry 48.5% On Election Day, the final Rasmussen Reports Presidential Tracking Poll projection shows President George W. Bush with 50.2% of the vote, Senator John Kerry with 48.5%, and other candidates with 1.3%. We have been polling nightly on this Presidential contest since January 2 and it's hard to believe Election Day has finally arrived. We have prepared a Viewers Guide showing when each state's close their polls. We've also provided a month-by-month look at how we got to this point... and how close the race has been for eight months.

To: LindyBill who wrote (82714)	11/2/2004 10:14:29 AM
From: LindyBill	Respond to of 793883

IDEOBLOG - The legal attack on the 2004 election Will this election be a legal mess? Will 10-15,000 lawyers descending on the nation's polls manage to find anything to complain about? Duh. How did we get into this mess? The most obvious reason is the supposed injustice wrought by the Florida 2000 election, and its messy end in Bush v. Gore. Having supposedly had the last election "stolen," the Democrats won't let it happen again. So Democrat lawyers descend on the polls and the courts. Republicans have little choice but to follow them there. It is worth reflecting on the deeper meaning of all this. Before doing that, consider the following: --As Robert Nagel writes in today's WSJ, Gore would have lost even if the Florida recount had gone through. --My former colleague Nelson Lund argues convincingly that, contrary to almost universal wisdom, Bush v. Gore was right. As Nelson says: For more than a quarter century, the Supreme Court has treated the stuffing of ballot boxes as a paradigmatic violation of the Equal Protection Clause. Much more subtle and indirect forms of vote dilution have also been outlawed. Like some of those practices, the selective and partial recount ordered by the Florida Supreme Court may have been an inadvertent form of vote dilution. But that recount had effects that were virtually indistinguishable from those in the paradigmatic case. There is no meaningful difference between adding illegal votes to the count and selectively adding legal votes, which is what the Florida court was doing. The Supreme Court rightly concluded that the vote dilution in this case violated well-established equal protection principles. Even if Nelson is wrong, his argument is at least plausible enough to raise some doubt about whether the case deserves to be the rallying cry for disrupting the present election. --Even if Bush v. Gore was wrong, in our nation supposedly of laws, the Supreme Court was the referee our nation selected to decide the last election. There is something fundamentally wrong about the Democrats' undermining faith in the law and our legal system for short-term political gain. Here are some deeper explanations for the attack on this election: --Nagel blames law schools. Noting that Bush v. Gore probably did not affect the ultimate result in the election, he asks: "To what kind of mind is it an injustice that an argument is rejected even if that argument could not have changed anything? Put another way, to what kind of mind does the making of an argument in itself have urgent moral force?" The answer, he says, is in how lawyers are trained in this country. There is something to what he says, but I think that the attitudes afoot today go way beyond law schools. --The vitriol of the anti-Bush partisans does not allow them to accept that he could possibly have been legitimately elected. --The prevailing litigious attitude that holds that every disappointment in life must have a legal remedy, or a legal cause. However it comes out, this election almost certainly will be a disgrace wrought by lawyers and by blind outrage whipped up in the name of partisan politics. It will be a sad day that I hope, but doubt, will teach us a lesson.