Peace, given your negative comments about taking things to court, you might try turning on the news to find out which campaign is the first one to jump things into the courts. 
Jshore,
I followed you kind advice: They said that G.Bush campaign complained about possible unconstitutional tactics employed by Algore and asked for court protection. NPR said nothing about G.W.Bush attempts to win presidency through courts.
Did you hear otherwise? I’m interested to know.
In geheral, it’s sad. I think that the time came to abandon our archaic system, invented in the 18th century by bright wise man who could not see the world beyond 200 years :-).
If the results were decided by simple majority (rather than being dependent on citisens’ domicile), we would not hsve been in this mess.
On the other hand, what would you and I dog on this Sunday morning?
Is it possible for either candidate to actually win the presidency through the courts? I’m no legal expert. What can the courts actually do, besides determine whether or not recounting is necessary?
I keep hearing the Republicans saying that Gore is just going to keep recounting until “he gets a result that he likes.” I’m not seeing this. The first recount was automatic, per Florida election law, and Bush still took it. I understand that Gore requested the first manual recount, but after the manual recount of four precincts in Palm Beach, the committee overseeing that recount, not Al Gore, determined that yes, they need to recount the entire county. Now, both candidates picked up votes in that manual recount. Seems to me like it would be in the best interests of both candidates to do the manual recount.
While it is supremely frustrating to me, as a voter, to have to wait this long to find out who our new president is going to be (hell, even MSNBC has taken to calling this “Indecision 2000”), I personally think that a manual recount is the best thing to do right now. Who our next president is going to be hinges on getting a correct count. I would like to think that both candidates see this.
The ballots, that is.
From a personal standpoint, I want any ballot that doesn’t conform to the stated standards thrown out. Not only the 19,000 in Democratic Palm Beach county, but the 44,000 in Republican Duval county and all others, too. The manual recount subjects the voters to subjective interpretation of biased individuals. It is impossible for a reviewer to know the thoughts of the voter and always make positive determination that the voter intended his support in a particular matter.
Subject the ballots to a hundred electronic recounts if that will make anyone feel better about the system, but under no circumstances do I want human emotions added to the process – things are uncertain enough already.
There are legal arguments on both sides, but it appears that with the Democrats dropping the suits that were to be argued before Republican judges, and the sole remaining suit being argued in front of a Clinton appointee that declined to recuse herself, the Republicans are going to have this stolen from them in court.
SS, I agree with you. Moreover, I think that Algore counts on “Clinton’s appontees”.
Although I fully realize that “court avenue” is provided by the Constitution, it should be reluctantly used as last resort. Elections and democracy is not about courts and sleazy lawyers.
Besides, there are intangeable things, like ethics and decency. The fact, that you can legally go to court does not mean that you should.
And I firmly believe that machines can count better than people. That’s why they were invented. Reverting to manual count defeats the purpose, doesn’t it? Machines are not judgemental. All uncertain punctures will be counted “equally” by a machine. Without analyzing causes: political hesitation or shaky voter’s hands.
I’m sure he would like to do so. What I’ve seen just as much (if not more) is the Bush camp wanting to stop while they have a result they like.
What I can’t believe is that people are ascribing altruism to either side. Both sides are going to do everything in their power to get their guy in office, no matter how ugly it might get. If the same people were on the opposite sides, they would be doing exactly the same things, and reacting in exactly the same ways.
As I’ve said before, I don’t know how anyone can say that either side “won” this election. It’s a tie. Split the votes.
Dr. J
I say just throw out all Florida votes. The constitution doesn’t say you need 270, but just a majority. Votes have been thrown out before, so I don’t see why we can’t just throw the whole state of Florida out. I’d like to let them all revote but it’s against the constitution.
And, she is supposed to recuse herself why exactly? So that the case can be decided by say someone appointed by George W.'s father or by the President that his father served as Vice President with? If you are going to want to recuse judges on the basis of who they were appointed by, I don’t see how you are going to find a “fair” one!
Oh, never mind, now I understand…When G.W. goes to court it is for protection against “possible unconstitutional tactics employed by Algore” while when Al Gore goes to court it is an “attempt to win presidency through courts.” How silly of me to fail to realize this important distinction! 
A possible solution…but since, barring changes due to recounts in other states, this has the effect of giving the election to Al Gore, I doubt the Republicans would be happy with this. And, to be fair, I am not sure they should be.
Jsore, the distinction seems important to me.
Behind your irony I feel deep love for Algore. Or whatever. I do not admire GWB or whatever. But I do not think “anything goes” and I think the field should be even.
I ain’t a great admirer of R. Nixon either, but he decided that “at any price” was not worth it. And one more thing: regardless of the outcome, it does not help Algore’s popularity. Name recognition he will have.
The Constitution specifically states that EVERY STATE must name a slate of electors equal to the number of Senators and Representatives the state has in Congress. For Florida to not name electors would be illegal.
peace:
perhaps you need to read the news yet again? Neither Al Gore, nor his campaign, have actually taken anything to courts. All suits relating to Florida election irregularities have been brought forth by individual citizens and voters. The only lawsuit that has actually been brought forth by one of the sides is the one the Republicans filed asking to stop the hand recount.
Peace, my “deep love” for Al must also contain an ambivalent mix of other emotions considering that I didn’t vote for him…I voted for Nader. (Admittedly, I would have voted for Gore if I lived in a swing state…But, if that’s your definition of love, I would hate to be one of your romantic interests! Deep hatred of Bush? Closer to the truth!)
You might want to re-read the history on the whole Nixon thing…The facts are apparently more different than this time. Some examples: The margin in Illinois was greater than it is this time in Florida and Nixon would have had to have gotten both Illinois and Texas reversed to change the result.
I also agree that winning at any price is not worth it. This is why I have consistently critiqued those who have proposed simple solutions such as “Why not just have Florida send no electors?” (see above) or “Why not simply allow Palm Beach County to re-vote?”…Two proposals that would almost surely throw the election in Gore’s favor. (I have argued in Gore’s favor on the factual question of whether a substantial number of the votes cast for Buchanan were made in error…because the data is pretty clear on that. Even Buchanan feels that.)
They should be treated in the same manner in which they have been treated in every other Florida election, of course. And in every other Florida election, a group of clearly partisan individuals didn’t attempt to ascertain voters’ intent. If the ballots weren’t proper, they weren’t counted.
Just as hundreds of thousands of ballots across the United States that were similarly invalid have not been counted. (Like the 150,000 ballots in the county that’s the home of Bill Daley, the Gore campaign manager who has been stirring the pot more than anybody. He’s strangely silent about those, though.)
One of the most troubling things about this whole situation is everyone’s apparent willingness to treat the votes of one state (and one COUNTY in one state) in a much different, extraordinary fashion than the tens of millions of other votes that were cast nationwide.
Because it’s close there? Because they happen to be counting last? It’s not right. My vote in northern Michigan counts as much as any blue-hair’s vote in Palm Beach County. And if I cast my ballot in an improper way in accordance with election law, I would fully expect it to be rejected.
with regard to ‘throwing Florida out’ … from what I’m hearing, if this isn’t resolved by the time the electors vote nationwide in mid-December Florida will be thrown out.
I think it should be resolved before then, not because I think Bush should win and he definitely wouldn’t if it came to the above scenario; but because cutting Florida out of the choosing of our nation’s president would be highly unfair to Floridians.
IIRC, the re-counting is to be monitored by representatives from both campaigns.
If those thrown-out ballots 1.) seem to have been overwhelmingly intended to be votes for one side or the other, and 2.) could possibly make the difference in the state and thus the election, then they should be more carefully examined.
If there are counties or precincts with irregularities in Gore’s favor, Bush should have been looking into a recount in those precincts instead of congratulating himself, announcing his Cabinet choices, and otherwise counting his proverbial chickens. Even so, I think he should still be allowed to request recounts in any such precincts, since I am more interested in doing this fairly than getting one or the other of the bozos in office.
Dr. J
Dr. J
Milossarian
It seems to me that you have said this before. Are you really trying to support the claim that there has never been a hand recount in any Florida election? That is the only way your statement could be correct.
BTW – thehand recount examines the ballot to determine the expressed intent of the voter. The expression is the key. The machine recount, actually, does the same thing. It is simply more limited in the expressions that it can recognize.
After all, what is any ballot but teh expressed intent of a voter. That expression may not match the voter’s true intention [sub](ref: Buchanan votes[/sub]), but it is the only instrument we have.
I find it amazing that in a system that is so complicated and convoluted – electoral votes, different voting systems in every state and indeed in every county! – that people are still making a point of the poor folks in Palm Beach having not followed the rules! As far as I know, elections are not supposed to be eyesight tests or tests of attention to detail (and not intelligence, which assuredly wasn’t the problem with the mistaken ballots.) In fact, I think it’s time people stop putting the Palm Beachers down. I personally don’t think the ballot was at all clear myself.
In other words, the process failed, especially in certain parts of Florida, and it would be inherently undemocratic to deprive those people of their say.
And there were quite a number of additional factors casting shadows on the legitimacy of the vote in Florida.
Conclusion: either remedy the situation through a rerun of the election, or chuck the whole Florida results out and forget about it. It’s a virtual tie anyway, and it is nearly impossible to ascertain who has more now, no matter how many recounts and statistical surveys will be conducted. It’s now clear that Florida was not able to get its vote tally right, so what is the point of arguing about it?
As for the higher repercussions of the problem, i.e. the national vote, don’t forget what everyone keep emphasizing – there is no national vote, each state having its own “right” to maintain its own election. Then again we just have to say, Florida didn’t play its role properly.
So who should be president now? (Neither of the candidates involved, if you ask me, personally.)
But who will become president now? Looks like it will be a random decision based on the whims of the courts and the various election authorities.
Final conclusion: scrap the ludicrous system and introduce a proportional, national vote with a 2-5% barrier for parties to enter a national assembly to elect a president like in really democratic systems.
I can understand the bitterness and desperation of Algore: to win a popular vote and to loose by … what? 300 votes? Lust another reason to change the system. But next time, not after you lost playing by the rules you agreed (really, were more than eager) to play by. And, incidentally, I do not think that sheer numbers stopped R. Nixon, but it’s a moot point now.
We do not know the exact reason(s) for P. Buchanan “luck” in Palm Beach. Are there more blind, confused or drunk people there or was it the result of “vote swapping” so many people on this BB liked. I know one thing: if anything is done about it now, this and other “Palm Beach” “irregularities” will happen all over the country. Let’s say, the same duo, God forbid, runs again in 2004. GWB supporters in Oregon, which was narrowly won by Algore, will simply “spoil” a few thousand ballots, and the results of the voting will be “reviwed”.
Finally, the counting machines were invented not only to free people. They do not make mistakes,count faster, uniformely, unemotionaly, do not analyze “intentions”, do not “interpret” unclear puches. They reject all unclear punches UNIFORMELY, no guessing. Why does manual count superseeds?