Well here is what I would call an honest and reasoned take containing no
spin.
Kakki
> Just for everyone's information, I voted in Chicago on the butterfly
ballot. It was VERY confusing! It was only for the judges, but I am a
maniac and vote fairly informed on those races as well. I had 3 or 4 judges
I definitely needed to retain. One was a gay brother who can always use a
vote. I had every intention of complaining, once the election was over, to
the powers that be. I do not care how long it takes, nor do I care if
three or four more states warrant recounts - DO IT ! Get it right and
nobody can bitch about it. I am wavering on a re-vote, although I know it
would probably
> help my candidate. I believe that in 1996 there were over 14,000 votes
disqualified, but this is still a significant increase in an election that
may be won by less than one half of one percent. This is a 40% increase in
disqualifications, that is important. I also think only those that voted
the first time should vote this time and I would limit it to the county in
question. My feelings against a re-vote is legally really is no precedent
and I also don't want to be a sore loser.
> Finally, at this point also no matter who wins that candidate must
bring the country together since this was a virtual heat. That would be the
responsible thing to do. I am betting that unless that person is through
the roof popular and successful, we'll see a new president in four years.
Especially if Gore wins, I don't think Americans will vote
> for the same party to be in office for a 16th year in a row. Just like
the market, politics are also cyclical.
> Anyway, my fellow Americans lets keep our wits about us. If we can't
pick between these two perhaps I should just be appointed or anointed - you
choose!
