🚀 go-pugleaf

"Baxter" <lbax01.spamguard@baxcode.com> wrote in message
news:100hkj8rfm3bv6f@corp.supernews.com...
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Free software  - Baxter Codeworks  www.baxcode.com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> "WitchDr" <Witch--Dr@usa.nojunkmail.net.ru> wrote in message
> news:TD2Ob.4503$%86.2311@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
> >
> > "Russell Senior" <seniorr@aracnet.com> wrote in message
> > news:86ptdjw92t.fsf@coulee.tdb.com...
> > > >>>>> "Brian" == WitchDr  <Witch--Dr@usa.nojunkmail.net.ru> writes:
> > >
> > > Brian> Here's a FACT
> > >
> > > Brian> George W. Bush is the President of the United States.
> > >
> > > I never disputed that.
> > >
> > > What I said was that Bush had a disregard for the legitimacy of
> > > democratic institutions (like elections).  Bush didn't care who had
> > > more _actual_ legally cast votes, only that he "win".  Well, by hook
> > > and by crook, he did "win".  I dislike him because he didn't care
> > > about the votes.  To me, someone who cares about democracy, not caring
> > > about something so fundamental is worthy of contempt.  I'd feel the
> > > same way if the tables were turned.
> >
> > Actually he did care about the votes, that's why he went to court.
>
> Bush went to court to stop the count.  I suppose you're going to tell us
> black is white next?

Bush went to court to stop ILLEGAL PARTIAL recounts. It was Bush who argued
that the recount should be of all ballots statewide, it was Gore who argued
that all ballots need NOT be counted.

From the order, Gore vs. Harris, Florida Supreme Court,
12/8/2000....."Appellees contend that even if a count of the undervotes in
Miami-Dade were appropriate, section 102.168, Florida Statute (2000),
require a count of all votes in Miami-Dade County and the entire state as
opposed to a selected number of votes challenged. However, the plain
language of section 102.168 refutes Appellees' argument."

The Appellees in this case was Katherine Harris. Her argument to the court
was that if you are going to order a recount, it should be of the entire
state. But of course that is not what Gore wanted.

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/election/OP-SC00-2431.pdf

From the transcript of Bush vs. Gore:

JUSTICE REHNQUIST: Mr. Boies, one of the dissenting justices on the Supreme
Court of Florida said that meant 177,000 ballots. Was he correct, in your
view?

MR. BOIES: No, that is a result of adding the so-called undervotes that were
mentioned and the so-called overvotes that were mentioned.

Either an undervote, where no vote registers for president, or an overvote,
where two or more registers for president, are discarded because you can't
vote twice, and if you vote not at all -- under either circumstance, your
vote doesn't get counted.

CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST: So, if you disagree that 177,000 ballots will be
involved in this recount, how many do you think there are?

MR. BOIES: It's approximately 60,000, I think, Your Honor. It turns out to
be less than that because of the recounts that have already been completed.
But I think the total sort of blank ballots for the presidency were about
60,000.

The protest period

JUSTICE STEVENS: Mr. Boies, can I ask you this question; does that mean
there 110,000 overvotes?

MR. BOIES: That's right.

JUSTICE STEVENS: And if that's the case, what is your response to the chief
justice of Florida's concern that the recount relates only to undervotes and
not overvotes?

MR. BOIES: Well, first, nobody asked for a contest of the overvotes. And the
contest statute begins with a party saying that there is either a rejection
of legal votes or an acceptance of illegal votes --

JUSTICE KENNEDY: But as a matter of remedy, it's ordered a statewide recount
in counties where the ballots were not contested, and that's where I'm
having some difficulty. And it goes back in part to your answer that you
gave to Justice Stevens -- Justice Scalia about Broward County, and in part
to the answer you're giving to Justice Stevens now.

Why is it that you say on the one hand to Justice Scalia, "Oh, well these
weren't part of the contest", but now all of a sudden we're talking about
statewide that are not -- well, all of which are contested, but we're not
talking about the overvote?

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/election2000/scotus/boies_12-11.html