interesting. I have never seen this interpretation. You sure about
that part about the partial recount not being allowed by the
constitution of Florida?
Not saying you're wrong :) just never seen that.

----- Original Message -----
From: Nick McClure <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 19:39:34 -0400
Subject: RE: Electoral College/DNC
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

When the ballot is not clear you are allowing the ballot to be interpreted
by people who may have an agenda. The laws in the state of Florida only
allow for a full statewide recount, Gore didn't request a full statewide
recount, and he only requested a recount in certain counties, which the
Florida laws do not allow. The Florida Court said that the laws didn't
matter, and that voter intent should prevail.

The US Supreme Court found that counting votes in one county differently
than another county was wrong, and if they were to apply a closer look in
known democratic counties then the Electors for Governor Bush would have
been

  _____  

From: dana tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 5:49 PM

To: CF-Community
Subject: Re: Electoral College/DNC

All of the votes were not counted.

If Democrats caused votes to not be counted, that is wrong. If
Republicans caused votes to not be counted, that is wrong.
If Florida law said the intent of the voter is the standard then
Florida law should have been followed. If the Supreme Court decision
prevented the implementation of the applicable provisions of the
Florida Constitution then that is wrong.

My understanding of that election result btw is that if Gore had won a
recount in the areas where he asked for a recount he would still have
lost. However if he had asked for a recount statewide and not just in
the areas where he thought the recount might go his way then he would
have won.

So I am open to the idea that the Gore camp tried to get cute. And
apparently it cost him. Nonetheless, the votes were not counted
properly and the proximate cause was a Supreme Court decision that
does not stand up to scrutiny.

imho :)

Dana________________________________
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]

Reply via email to