This may actually work to Bush's advantage....if he can still win after all this, there should be less Democratic complaining about all the votes didn't get counted....
at first they were saying that the majority of the democratic counties used the vote-a-matic machines, which was causing these dimpled, etc. chads, and the repub. counties seemed to use other voting methods.
well it would be pretty f-ing funny if they recounted them all and bush ended up winning. make the democrats look pretty fuc#king foolish
<< well it would be pretty f-ing funny if they recounted them all and bush ended up winning. make the democrats look pretty fuc#king foolish >>
Actually make the Republicans foolish for putting up such a stink about trying to get a more accurate count of the votes that the machines could not read.
This isnt exactly what I meant by statewide manual recount, but I figure it is the closest thing we are gonna get in the limited time we have. At least they can resolve the vote-o-matic problem, although the chances of the US SC throwing this our aren't that bad... of course, they have to accept the case first....
<< although the chances of the US SC throwing this our aren't that bad... of course, they have to accept the case first >>
A legal commentator on TV here said the Florida SC wrote this decision pretty carefully to show it was following Florida law, so the normally Conservative US SC may not take it, since the usual claim is they don't interfere in states issues.
I really don't care if the recount has a possibility of more votes for Bush. That does not alter the fact that it should NOT be done. It is sending us headlong in to a disaster that will put this thing in the hands of Congress, and undermine the entire system for all time to come.
I hope the US Supreme Court flushes it, even if it gives Bush a 10,000 vote lead. The continuation of this farce creates a dangerous precedent with far reaching consequences.
<< A legal commentator on TV here said the Florida SC wrote this decision pretty carefully to show it was following Florida law, so the normally Conservative US SC may not take it, since the usual claim is they don't interfere in states issues. >>
Yep, and every damned one of the legal "commentators" said the same thing the first time around. We know just how accurate they were then.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.