On Thu, Nov 16, 2000 at 07:30:02PM -0500, John D. Giorgis wrote:
> Was it "right and patriotic" for Gore to wait eight days before making
> this deal?
This is irrelevant. Also, possibly inaccurate, unless you have proof
that Gore "waited". Can't he change his mind about what is right?
> Was it "right and patriotic" for Gore to offer his opponent a deal on
> national television that his opponent may have no legal means of accepting?
Yes. Bush could have said, "provided there is a legal way to do a statewide
recount, I accept your offer".
> Was it "right and patriotic" for Gore to select only the most heavily
> Democratic counties for a recount, rather than the ones with the highest
> number of uncounted ballots?
Gore offered a statewide recount, and unless that is definitely
impossible, the above is irrelevant.
> Was it "right and patriotic" for Gore to select the most heavily
> Democratic precincts in these counties for the "test counts", rather
> than the precincts with the highest number of uncounted ballots?
Irrelevant.
> Was it "right and patriotic" for Gore to go on national television
> to call upon both sides to improve "the tone", when his own press
> secretary has referred to one Republican Official as a "Commissar?"
Yes. Key words: "both sides"
> And finally, I am very curious as to why you think this offer *shuold*
> have been made in public, before the cameras of the evening news.
Should deals that affect the entire country be negotiated behind closed
doors or openly for everyone to hear?
> Do you think that human beings are more or less likely to accept
> deals under the lights of TV Cameras with millions of people watching?
A good Presidential candidate should be able to handle that sort of
pressure without breaking a sweat.
--
"Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.com/
