Oh yeah, we want EVERY vote counted...

[Stoid]

A note of caution…to all of us.

I think it behooves us debaters, and the nation, to try and keep distinctions between supporters of either side and the candidates themselves.

In this particular instance (Scylla’s) , Gore himself does not have the power to challenge or disagree or throw out any overseas votes. Each canvassing board in each county, and there are 67 of them, representing about 200 individuals, examines the absentee votes to make sure they comply with the written rules of the election. Before they are ever opened. The board decided to keep or reject based on those rules, not messages from Gore or his staff.

This is not the same as the Gore camp going to court, asking for recounts, or even, if you wanna go that far, helping draft recommendations for how and when to challenge a ballot in the hand count. Those canvassing boards existed prior to any of this, as did the rules.

It isn’t fair of any of us to lay every single thing that goes for or against either candidate at the feet of the candidate themselves. Both of them have alot of power in this, but not complete.

Stoid

[Scylla]

Agreed. Not all countries put Postmarks on their mail though.

When I hear canvassers trying hard to get the PBC included and the overseas excluded, it kind makes me sick. Can I in fairness apply that distaste to Gore? Probably not.

The same guys that are fighting to exclude PBC are also trying to get every last overseas ballot included, on Bush’s side.

The whole thing stinks.

[panzermanpanzerman]

Hello, gang…

this is, like, my 5th post or something. Usually I hang out on the Democratic forum on Compuserve, but I’m coming here for some <ahem> adult company.

A little perspective on military mail…

I did some time as an S-1 (adjutant, or personnel officer) for a tank battalion in the field. One of my duties (and a constant headache) was to oversee the distribution and collection of mail for 836 soldiers, plus some attachments.

We did not postmark the mail we collected from the troops. They’d write mail, then give it to their platoon sergeants, who would get it to the company First Sergeant, usually early in the morning the day AFTER they wrote it, as the 1SGT brought chow out to the platoons around 6am.

The 1SGT would then hang onto it for the day, until he came to the Combat Trains Command Post (where I was) at the END of the day, for the Service Support planning session/rehearsal. So already a full day has passed since it was “mailed” by the soldier, before it even GETS to my section.

Someone in my section would consolidate the mail brought in by the 1SGT’s, and then they’d give it to the truck driver who brought dinner out to the CTCP. He’d backhaul the mail with the trash back to the Field Trains command post, some 5 miles to the rear, co-located with the Brigade headquarters.

The mail would pile up for a couple of days there, until the Battalion chaplain had occasion to drive someone back 40 miles to the rear (family emergency, illness, or what have you.)

Since we were still in the United States, eventually, that mail would be dropped off at a Military Post office, in this case, Fort Irwin, California. But even if the system worked flawlessly, that wouldn’t happen until 2 days
after the item was mailed, if then. And probably 4-5 days is more typical. I know we had a hard time distributing mail within 3 days of when we got it. We could do it, but it required a concerted effort on the part of a lot of people with a lot of things on their minds besides distributing mail.

A postmark on military mail doesn’t mean a whole heck of a lot.

I’ve also recieved mail from men and women on ships without a postmark, as well. An aircraft carrier with a crew of some 5000 men and women has its own mini-post office. Smaller ships do not, nor do separate brigades on the ground. Mail gets out in a very ad hoc way, in real life.

As Battalion adjutant, I would have had no way of postmarking ballots had I been unfortunate enough to have held that position during an election. No regulation I was aware of required me to postmark them.

As I understand it, a federal law recognizes that military mail will not always come postmarked, and therefore allows absentee ballots to be counted as long as they are recieved by the deadline and signed and dated as of election day.

If so, then that is what Florida needs to do…honor dated ballots.

[Stoid]

I’m depressed.

The guy talking right now on TV has ruined my day.

I’m sure SOME of what he’s talking about is true. I have no doubt that some Democratic zealots are being incredibly stupid, and if I could, I’d throttle them.

I also don’t doubt that there are Republican zealots being equally stupid in creating/reporting/inventing many of the things he’s talking about. (I believe Democratic zealots could stash Bush ballots in the Gore pile, and I believe that Bush zealots could do the same to make Democrats look bad.)
Either way, the spin on it is horrendous, and I think Gore is screwed.

He should bail now, let Bush win on making accusations and avoiding the truth, and live to fight another day.

We’re better off.

Stoid
Disgusted with stupidity.

[yosemite]

Taking a break from the pregnant and hanging chad issue —

I think the thing that stuck in my craw in the L.A. Times article (and mind you, L.A. Times is not exactly a conservative paper) is this - (emphasis mine):

Our goal," said one lawyer as he patiently lectured his new charges, “is to preserve the Al Gore vote.” The volunteers nodded. “It’s very, very important that if you see any kind of mark–a scratch, a dent, a pinprick in Al Gore’s column–that you challenge.” When someone then asked what they should do if they found a Bush ballot with an indent, the lawyer said: "Keep your lips sealed."

I’m sure that the Republicans are not perfect, I’m sure they’ve pulled their own shit. But this “fair and accurate count” spin I keep hearing from the Dems is pure crap.

[wring]

I agree that quote indicates a wrongful attitude to take.
Never have said any different here.

[Spoke]

yosemitebabe, the problem is that your OP implies that these partisan Democrats are the vote counters. They are not. These are overseers, watching over the shoulder of the county employees conducting the vote.

Have you seen the images on TV and in newspapers of a county employee counting, with a Democratic observer peering over one shoulder and a Republican observer peering over the other?

The Democrats described in the article are advocates, not neutral observers. They are as ardently partisan as their Republican counterparts. Thing is, neither the Democratic nor the Republican overseers get to make any decisions about whether a vote counts or not. All they can do is make objections.

As I understand it, what happens is the county employee reviews a card, and announces who gets the vote represented by that card. All the observers get to do is say “objection” if they disagree with the call, in which case, the card gets placed in a disputed stack to be reviewed by the commissioners, who then render the ultimate decision.

I don’t think the Democratic observers are going to be able to slip anything past the Republican observers standing at their side. And vice versa.

[yosemite]

But spoke, the mantra of the Dems in this is that every vote should be counted. Every voter’s voice be heard.

And these people are being instructed to “keep their lips sealed” when it comes to anything Bush. Sure, they are Democratic advocates, there is no secret whose side they are on. But the obvious implication from this article is, if they see a Bush ballot, let it go. Say nothing. If no one else catches it, fine and dandy. Right? Or do you think that if no one else caught a Bush vote, that these Dems would speak up, “to make sure that every vote was counted”?

No, I don’t think the Republicans are delighted to see a Gore vote. But I don’t hear them chanting “fair and accurate” everywhere…

[Stoid]

Fox News (which, by the way, can never be accused as being a tool of the liberal left!) just interviewed the Republican judge on the Palm Beach canvassing board, and he basically said that the charges coming out of the bush camp are crap, going into detail about several of the charges and explaining exactly how certain things were being distorted.

Again…FOX news talked to the REPUBLICAN JUDGE on the PBC canvassing board, and he said that the BUSH camp allegations are CRAP.

I feel MUCH better.

stoid

[Freedom]

Boy you guys are frustrating. Do you even bother to read before you post? Here, let me help you out just a chad.

To summarize:

I am not argueing that these ballots should be accepted.

Is that simple enough for you guys? I know it didn’t seem to sink in the first time I posted it, so I hope the second time has a magical aura about it that makes it legible.

And Freedom2 you are wrong about military mail. It is normally postmarked. (Which in itself raises questions about why these absentee ballots are coming in without postmarks. Use your imagination.)

I think this has been satisfactorily answered, although I still have no problems throwing out the absentee ballots without a postmark.

Show me, please any reputable (non partisan) evidence that whatever she did could have caused some vote to appear or disappear.

Link

There is a whole article about irregularities in the counting. Among the things I have heard alleged, are instances of chads re-taped to the ballot to cover Bush’s spot.

Look wring, you and I can argue all day about whether or not the handcounting is subject to fraud, or whether Roberts is stealing votes. I said it from the get-go, we have a basic difference of opinion on this. I don’t think you can convince me (no matter how many words you capitalize:)), and I do not expect to convince you.

One thing that is undeniable though, is that the process is under dispute.

Nope. Actual numbers

Since the absentee ballots were not opened, and the ballots may or may not all be handcounted, I have trouble seeing where you draw the conclusion that you are talking about actual numbers.

LOOK at this. As a Secretary of State in MI, Candice Miller has the presumption of objectivity in this election.

There are 50 friggin states. I could care less about what happens in any of the rest of them right now. Florida has enough of it’s own issues without worrying about the relevancy of Ashcroft having enough class to concede, or Texas election laws.

And for the next part: the chronology is: vote on Tuesday. State issued recount immediately. Gore asked for certain counties to be recounted. SoS attempted to stop that. Florida Judges and Supreme Courts BOTH have issued rulings to allow the counts to continue.

Not so fast there wring. The SOS did not attempt to have the handcounting stopped until Tuesday, one week after the election. There was a seperate Judge, somewhere under the Attorney General Butterworth who ruled that they could not continue with the handcounts. The PBC sought out this ruling. Then Butterboy (sorry) got involved and ruled the other way. Then PB decided to wait until the FSC figured things out.

Handcounts were included in the results Harris certified, but those handcounts were completed by Tuesday at 5pm.

So you suggesting that the SoS overrules the State Supreme Court? So, then, tell me, how did you reconcile that point with the Federal Supremes ruling over President Clinton?

They don’t.

Name one instance where the Supreme Court told Clinton what to do in an official capacity as President.

and Freedom you keep on saying “refer to my prior post” about the lack of postmark on absentee ballots. Didn’t you see in your OWN cite where the standard is that they DO have postmarks. damn near all of them. So, how likely would it really be that of all times 100 or so BALLOTS would ‘oops’ not have them???

I think I have handled this one already, but in case some people are still having trouble, let me give it a third try…

To summarize:

I am not argueing that these ballots should be accepted.

Can’t you see that without a recount he would face 4 years of “yea buts”??? do you really wish that on our country?

Either one of them is going to face that at this point. There is now no way to change that.

Thank you, Wring!

Your extreme thoroughness in rebutting these weak arguments is deeply appreciated.Fight on for truth, justice, and the American Way!

stoid

You are such a moron.

(I know, childish and in the wrong forum. But it just felt good.)

It’s interesting to me that the same side crying foul now over 100 absentee ballots were calling dems “whiners” when they complained about the several thousand votes tossed in one county alone as being improper. No one seems to want the high road anymore.

It is 1400 votes (thereabout). So far I have not seen any attempt by the Republicans to get the ballots included. They are only currently pointing out the hypocrisy of the democrats. Of course…Who knows if they file a suit on Monday.

I suspect it will depend on the results of the whole handcount fiasco.

I think it behooves us debaters, and the nation, to try and keep distinctions between supporters of either side and the candidates themselves.

In this particular instance (Scylla’s) , Gore himself does not have the power to challenge or disagree or throw out any overseas votes. Each canvassing board in each county, and there are 67 of them, representing about 200 individuals, examines the absentee votes to make sure they comply with the written rules of the election. Before they are ever opened. The board decided to keep or reject based on those rules, not messages from Gore or his staff.

Bullshit.

Gore’s lawyers passed out a 5 page letter, with protest forms included, that specifically addressed disqualifying as many military absentee ballots as possible. Maybe you mised it the first time around, so here is the relevant part again:

Earlier this week,** Mark Herron, a Tallahassee lawyer helping shepherd Democratic presidential election lawsuits** through the local courts, sent a five-page letter to Democratic attorneys throughout Florida giving them tips on how to lodge protests against overseas ballots.

Such protests must be lodged before the ballot is taken out of the envelope. The letter, given to The Associated Press by a Republican source, focused on protesting military ballots, which are assumed to be heavily in favor of Bush, and included a section on military postmarks.

This strategy came straight from the top. Gore is directly involved here.

As I understand it, what happens is the county employee reviews a card, and announces who gets the vote represented by that card. All the observers get to do is say “objection” if they disagree with the call, in which case, the card gets placed in a disputed stack to be reviewed by the commissioners, who then render the ultimate decision.

The problem is that most, if not all of the counters are also democrats. Predominantly democrat county = predominantly democrat employees. (and vice versa with the pubbies) The question is how much of this mindset filters its way down the ladder.

One exception to this rule I heard today, (wring pay attention to this part) was a democrat who drew attention to the fact that there were several Bush ballots in the Gore pile. He stated that the pile seemed different today than it had yesterday, and questioned if it was intentional or an accident.

[RTFirefly]

Thought I’d stick my nose in here, not that it will make any difference in the outcome:

1. Especially after hearing panzerman’s description of how military mail works, I fully agree that the overseas military absentee ballots should be counted, with or without postmarks, if they arrived in FL by yesterday.

2. While the partisanship of the observers the Democrats imported doesn’t surprise me (and I fully expect the Republicans have obeservers in place to do the same thing, only with sides reversed), I would be a hell of a lot happier if they simply went in with the attitude that, if the votes are there, then they’re there, and if not, they’re not, and actually tried to find the truth. But I suspect that expecting nonpartisanship from that sort of group of operatives is like asking James Baker or Karen Hughes to say that Gore has asked for one manual recount of four counties, rather than saying Gore wants Florida to be counted ‘over and over again’.

3. Those that want ‘the rule of law’ in FL, however, are hereby expected to acknowledge that ‘the rule of law’ requires the postmarks on absentee ballot envelopes. And the intent, and perhaps the letter, of the FL anti-election-fraud law is somewhat undermined by providing to third parties, such as the FL GOP, the info (such as voter IDs) that the voter him/herself is supposed to supply in order to prevent absentee ballot fraud.

If the letter of this law was violated by that action, Freedom2, is your stance going to be that any ballot where the FL GOP filled in the voter ID should be thrown out? I look forward to being pleasantly surprised.

4. I’m not sure if I said it here or somewhere else about a week ago, but I’ve felt that Gore really had to choose between challenges: he could challenge the votes apparently lost to Buchanan or Gore/Buchanan double-punches on the Palm Beach ballot, or he could go for the hand recounts. I basically believed the American people would give the benefit of the doubt to one reasonable challenge in a race this close, but not to two. I still feel that way.

As many of you have probably gathered, I felt the moral (and statistical) high ground was with the challenge to the Palm Beach ballot. The Gore votes apparently lost there still completely eclipse the fluctuations in Bush’s lead through the machine recount and absentee ballots. But if the manual recounts fall short (or if the FL Supreme Court decides the state can choose to reject their results), I would be strongly opposed to Gore’s pursuing any sort of challenge over the Palm Beach ballot: there comes a time to say enough is enough. And I would expect Gore to go beyond that - to publicly issue the strongest possible request to anyone else challenging the Palm Beach ballot (Alan Dershowitz, People For the American Way, whoever) that they should drop it, for the good of the country.

And then, of course, he should concede the race with as much grace and good cheer as he can muster.

5. If Bush indeed is the winner after the manual recounts (assuming the FL Supreme Court requires the state to include the results, which is hardly guaranteed), I believe his presidency will be much more widely accepted as legitimate for the inclusion of the hand tallies.

I personally can’t stand the little…(terms edited out by RT to keep this in GD)…but if he’s ahead after the hand counts, then he’s the president, and that’s the breaks. I won’t be happy about it, but I won’t put a bumper sticker on my truck that says my president is someone else besides him.

[Freedom]

Again…FOX news talked to the REPUBLICAN JUDGE on the PBC canvassing board, and he said that the BUSH camp allegations are CRAP.

Cite please.

If you are talking about Burton he is a democrat.

He also tried to explain that the tape found on certain ballots came from absentee ballots. It is my understaning that the absentee ballots are different than the punch cards and do not have chads. If so he was lying.

[Tejota]

*Originally posted by yosemitebabe *
But I don’t hear them chanting “fair and accurate” everywhere… **

Good point. And why is that?

What happened to “I’m for ending partisan politics?”.
what happened to “I’m a uniter not a divider?”.

Yosmite If your point is that everyone is spinning this thing. Then yes you are right. But you seem to be making the point that ONLY the Dems are spinning. In that you’re wrong.

In fact, I’d consider that Bush, since he claimed to be the one to bring Honor and Dignity to the White House. Is the one with the MOST responsibility to act fairly.

Gore made no such claim. His promise was to fight for the little people.

Now since the Bush observers are NOT going to try and get every Gore vote counted, having the Gore observers behave impartially would only slant the process toward Bush. And that would not be fair.

Instead, the Gore observers are trusting the Bush observers to be good partisans so that a counting team as a unit is balanced. This is about as fair as it is going to get.

tj

[Freedom]

If the letter of this law was violated by that action, Freedom2, is your stance going to be that any ballot where the FL GOP filled in the voter ID should be thrown out? I look forward to being pleasantly surprised.

If the remedy that the law provides in this case is for the ballots to be thrown out, then so be it.

I have been looking all over to try and determine if the absentee ballots for PB could have been punch cards. Surprisingly(to me) it seems that many counties in Florida send not only a punch card and poker along, but include some styrofoam as well to use under the ballot while you are punching.

The judge is a democrat, however, his explanation of the absentee ballots looks possible.

I won’t be happy about it, but I won’t put a bumper sticker on my truck that says my president is someone else besides him.

Funny…I had been considering one of those if Gore won:)

[wring]

*Originally posted by yosemitebabe *
**No, I don’t think the Republicans are delighted to see a Gore vote. But I don’t hear them chanting “fair and accurate” everywhere… **

Ok, but… Ms. Harris has apparently used her position and office computer to forward on joke e-mails against Gore
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20001118_1146.html
all while contending to perform her elected duties in an unpartisan manner.

And, for horrifying, how 'bout this quote from my own Govenror Engler, who complained that the hispanics, blacks and unions prevented him ‘giving’(he promised before the primaries to “give the state” to Bush) the state to Bush, also said “where a general election could be taken away right before our eyes. So there is that sense of fear that the Gore team is so insidious that they could actually steal this in front of the whole nation.” How aboutthat for unsubstantiated, character assasination that could potentially do damage, and over the top rhetoric?
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20001118_1147.html

Yes, and Spoke is correct in that the person quoted (although I still deplore the sentiment) is in fact charged with the duty to protect democratic interests.

Now, how about this comparison:

Candidate G’s team, behind by less than 2000 votes, discovers that in one county, the ballot was poorly designed, and the voters confused and this lead to the disallowing for some 14,000 ballots in an area where he was the leading candidate by a wide margin. Candidate B’s team, said “so sorry, the ballot was approved before the election, if your folks were too stupid to vote correctly or demand changes in the ballot beforehand, too bad, you can’t change the rules in the middle of the game, besides, how do you know they would have gone for you anyhow”

Flash forward a week. Candidate B’s team, ahead now by 900 votes, discovers that about 1000 overseas ballots are being disallowed because the voter didn’t follow the directions on how to use the ballot or there was no post mark. They contend that they normally would win by a wide margin in these ballots. and Candidat G’s team responds, pretty much the same arguement “so sorry, you knew the conditions before the election, if there were problems with postmarks, you had ample time to request changes BEFORE the election, and if your folks couldn’t follow the directions, oh well, and besides how do you know they were for you anyhow.”

First of all, I think the arguement presented of “you knew ahead of time, errors by voters don’t matter” is valid. So, in both cases the votes are correctly disallowed.

BUT. In the first case, the Dems would have been ahead, significantly, and instead were called “whiners”, while in the second scene, the only difference would be that the rep. would be ahead at best, by 1900 instead of 900.

Bah to both camps.

** Freedom** I mentioned MY SoS as having the presumption of objectivity in her decisions. Ms Harris has lost hers. that was the only point.

and if you consider (from your link) "Bush communications director Karen Hughes said: ``We now have clear and compelling evidence from eyewitnesses that this manual recount process is fundamentally flawed and is no longer recounting, but is distorting, reinventing and miscounting the true intentions of the voters of Florida.’’ to be clear, non partisan evidence, wow. What I’m looking for from you is evidence that some one COULD possibly under the scrutiny going on manage to find the required number of Bush voted cards and do something to them to make them invalid and or find the required number of unmarked ballots and some how mark them, all under intense media and bipartisan scrutiny. Boxes on floors etc. doesn’t do it.

You’ve made a serious allegation of felonious behavior. Your proof so far is along the lines of the quote above by Bush officials. You and I can disagree, but, I would hope that we could agree that accusations are not facts. Could you perhaps describe to me exactly how the level of shenanigans you’re accusing could occur under the intense conditions there?

The conclusions I’m drawing about those disallowed ballots has to do with the difference tween the 13,000 in PBC, and the 1000(at the time I posted originally, I saw 100) overseas ballots. The 1000, if allowed wouldn’t have changed the outcome. The 13,000 would have.

And talk about frustrating. Geez. Your guy is going to win. And there’s STILL this level of grousing??

[yosemite]

*Originally posted by Tejota *

Gore made no such claim. His promise was to fight for the little people.

Your point? Do you mean “the little people (who vote Democrat)”? Those seem to be the only votes that count right now. At least that is what the people (cited in the L.A. Times article) are being told to look for.

But, oh. Every vote must be counted.

Now since the Bush observers are NOT going to try and get every Gore vote counted, having the Gore observers behave impartially would only slant the process toward Bush. And that would not be fair.

Please provide a cite where it clearly says that Bush people are being coached to “keep your lips sealed” when they see a Gore ballot. I am not saying that the Repubs are perfect, I know they are not. But I don’t see evidence of this sort of organized effort on their part, as described in the Times article. But I could most certainly be wrong. I’d appreciate a cite to prove me wrong.

[Sam_Stone]

I can agree that ballots without postmarks should not be counted, but even here there are marginal cases, like a postmark where all the ink didn’t register on the paper, a ballot that isn’t inside its ‘secrecy’ envelope, etc.

I heard on CNN that the regulations surrounding these ballots are intricate and arcane, and it’s very easy to miss a step along the way when filling out your ballot. Many of these do not invalidate the ‘clear intent’ of the voter, yet they are being disqualified. The difficulty in correctly registering your vote from overseas makes the ‘butterfly ballot’ look like a marvel of user interface design.

My opinion has been shifting back into the Bush camp. There are just too many allegations of impropriety coming out of Florida.

What happens if the hand recount goes through, and shows Gore the winner by 20 votes? Can Bush demand another count? After all, it’s a virtual certainty that after counting several million votes there will be at least 20 errors one way or another.

So what if he gets a recount, and now he’s shown as the winner by 3 votes? Count 'em again?

Does anyone doubt that if the Recount shows Gore leading by even a handful of votes that suddenly they’ll be screaming for ‘closure’, and claiming that all the counting is done and it’s time to declare a winner?

This is why Florida had that Tuesday deadline in the first place. They recognized that without some hard limits, a close election could be mired in the courts forever. Which is exactly what’s happening. And also, the farther we get from election day, the more likely it is that the ballots become contaminated either through error or intentional mischief.

[Freedom]

Flash forward a week. Candidate B’s team, ahead now by 900 votes, discovers that about 1000 overseas ballots are being disallowed because the voter didn’t follow the directions on how to use the ballot or there was no post mark.

I have no idea how many absentee ballots were thrown out because of the post-mark, and how many were thrown out because of error.

If there was an error, then sorry, the ballot goes in the garbage.

On the post mark.

It seems that Federal law specifically exempts military votes from being postmarked when it comes to an election. State law reqires it. There could be a legitimate issue here to decide if this whole issue goes forward.

Does Federal law trump State law in this case? I’m not a lawyer, I don’t know.

Right now I think it is a moot point. Bush has won the election. He won the recount. He won the absentee ballots. The SOS wants to certify the election, but is being restrained from doing her legal duty.
The whole thing should be over at this point.

IMPO:)

[Freedom]

My opinion has been shifting back into the Bush camp. There are just too many allegations of impropriety coming out of Florida.

Keep on shifting. The arms are wiiiiiiiiiiiiiides open over here:)

(from a libertarian supporting Bush)

[wring]

please note ALL of the “allegations of misconduct” are coming ONLY from Bush team members. Not the media. No other observers. and see this link for some explanations about the “taped” ballots (there were 3, they were absentee ballots, where another punch had been made for another candidate, the suspicion is that the original voter made a mistake and simply taped the chad back. again, think about how in the world could a pollster DO this under the scrutiny - I can barely tape a piece of tape 2 inches long onto a wrapped paper without the glare of cameras et al).

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20001118_1217.html

and while I"ve got the floor, let me readjust those #'s again - it was 19,000 ballots tossed out in PBC (according to the link provided).

So, ** Yosemite**- you cringe over Gore’s team carefully scrutinizing the ballots, but a governor making an allegation of felonious behavior without substaniation is ok?

and Sam I understand your concern over the military ballots. I think it’s appaling that the States’ law did not adequately protect them (kinda like the state’s law didn’t adequately protect voters in PBC). Honest, I DO sympathize. But that sword of “they shoulda” cuts both ways. And, as I recall, the Bush side was fairly smug about arguing the “laws of the land” in the former case.

I think all of that kind of squabbling is petty. At this point, choice is either agree simply “law of the land” for all or revote the whole state (and I think the latter would be unconstitutional and a REALLY bad idea).