No doubt this is at least part of the reason. But anyone opposed to anything, especially in one of these legal disputes, would fight it every step of the way. If the manual count can be headed off at the pass, it definitely will not be counted. If it cannot, then it is one step closer to deciding the election.
Is it possible that this is only true where (relatively) unbiased persons are doing the manual recount? In this instance, ballots are being subjected to the judgement of people who know full well that their preferred candidate’s only shot at winning is to declare as many ballots as possible to be votes for him.**
Hey, if you own stock in a company that manufactures these punch card ballots - sell immediately!!!
[QUOTE]
Why not? Because if she can get those written explanations in hand by tomorrow, she can pre-emptively announce that the reasons aren’t good enough, and thereby try to keep the recount from ever taking place.*
and this…
spoke, I’d like you to start picking my lottery numbers.
Not five minutes ago, Ms. Harris stated that she’s rejected the counties’ requests, and will not accept the results of the hand recounts. Of course, she stressed her impartiality and independence.
Okay, so I was deluding myself. Part of me still wants to believe that it’s not a partisan thing, but it’s getting harder and harder. I mean, the results of the election of the President of the United States literally rested in her hands, and it’s no secret that she’s a Bush supporter. If that’s not power, I don’t know what is.
This needs to be looked at very carefully. Honestly, I’m a little frightened. Not of Bush–if he comes out the winner, I’m sure he’ll do at least an adequate job. But if it turns out that Ms. Harris has decided the presidency for us, regardless of the actual vote count, well, something is wrong. Really, really wrong.
While I would like to claim that I have some great mystical foresight, the truth is that Ms. Harris’s actions were as predictable as the rising of the sun.
Oh yeah, and Ms. Harris’s reason for trying to consolidate all of the litigation and move it to Tallahassee is that there are more Republican judges in Tallahassee, and Bush is more likely to get favorable rulings there. The bench in Palm Beach, on the other hand, is populated by Democratic leaning judges, and in particular a judge who has already stated that he will not allow Ms. Harris to reject the recount arbitrarily.
Other notes for those on the lookout for judicial partisanship:
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which will hear the appeal of the Bush camp’s federal challenge to the recount, is comprised primarily of Bush and Reagan appointees.(This court challenge is based on the alleged unconstitutionality of the Florida recount laws.)
Meanwhile, the Florida Supreme Court, which would hear the appeals of the cases filed in Florida’s state courts (including the ruling that Ms. Harris can’t reject the recounts arbitrarily), is almost unanimously Democratic. (All were appointed by Democratic governors, though one is a registered independent.)
