>True, perhaps, but the high road, albeit not the path of least >resistance,
is to fight to have all legal votes counted. Win or >lose.
I don't know I think it would be more noble to expose voter fraud, but maybe
it would not be so good politically because it would disenfranchise the
majority of innocent Florida voters.
>Go ahead and count all those fraudulent republican >absentee ballots, I
say. They all would've probably voted for >Bush anyway, right? And it
wasn't these voters' fault that >their ballots were tampered with.
No, if the court finds that they are fraudulent, then the law should be
followed and they should not be counted.
> But illuminate how republican party operatives >transgressed, and make
sure it never happens again.
>From a legal standpoint, the case has not been decided yet, but some legal
scholars think the transgression of filling in a number on the application
is not in the same legal ballpark as tampering with the actual ballot
itself.
> And count all the overseas votes of those who were duly ><registered and
got their ballots in on time, postmark or no.
Yes, I agree, but it's not going to happen now - the canvassing boards' who
had the discretion of throwing them out did so, and it is too late to count
them now - the vote has been certified.
> But also count every vote turned up in hand counts, which >are quite
legally appropriate under these circumstances, and >count all discernable
votes that computers couldn't count for >whatever reason.
Part of the problem and reason why there is so much legal wrangling going on
now, it that there have been no clear standards of what counts as a vote,
dimple, etc. Unfortunately fact: Gore's lawyer Mr. Boies, misrepresented
the Illinois case re: dimples and such to the Florida Supreme Court at the
outset, causing their initial ruling to be flawed (which opens up a can of
worms and which potentially gives the USSC something to hang their hat on.
The FSC has been denying Gore's subsequent appeals for a revote and for
another recount.
>We simply need to count the ballots of everyone who voted legally, however
long it takes.
I agree, but would have rather it would have been every state who ensured
that every legal vote was counted, however, long it took. I don't understand
the reasoning of "count every vote, but only for me in the select places I
want counted." I truly don't understand the fairness of that and the
argument that "but this is the place where it is most important" - what
about the rest of American voters?
On the other hand, this situation hopefully will result in widespread
election reform and it's probably long overdue.
And before you all want to start the kindling at the stake for me, I have
not voted for Republican presidential candidates in 5 past elections.
Kakki
