From: Dehede011@aol.com
Date: Fri Mar 14 2003 - 07:02:53 MST
In a message dated 3/14/2003 7:07:18 AM Central Standard Time,
MaxPlumm@aol.com writes: I would respectfully disagree with this position. As
Lee illustrated, the popular vote has never been the final arbiter of
decision in an American election.
Max,
I paid a lot of attention to the back and forth charges of the past
Presidential election. There were also some explanation of the mechanics of
vote counting.
According to all explanations I saw, the vote is tallied state by
state. As soon as the uncounted vote is small enough that it cannot possibly
change the current standing in that state then the vote counting is
discontinued. In other words pretend that in Illinois the vote for President
stood at:
Plumm 5.4 Million
Harrison 5.0 Million
Uncounted 0.3 Million
Under our system the counting would stop. Even if all 3 million of
the uncounted vote went for Harrison then Plumm would still win. So, it is
pointless to continue counting. The uncounted votes would be thrown away and
no one would know what the final was on the popular vote. We would only know
state by state who had won the electoral vote. In the example cited that
would be Plumm.
New bureaus and various politicians would add state by state all the
electoral votes to see who had won. They would also analyze the popular vote
in minute detail down to each individual polling place to see what lessons
they can learn from the distribution of the vote. However for the
Presidential contest literally millions of votes would go uncounted.
The result is that we can only truthfully say that at the time the
voting stopped Bush had won the electoral vote and Gore was ahead in the
popular vote.
However you will find some disappointed people that will seize on
their candidate being ahead in the popular vote. They will and do blur the
distinction between ahead and having won the popular vote.
But Max, like many people I worked in that election and I know how
psychologically sensitive a person can become to the election's outcome after
that person has invested hours of volunteer time to helping their party and
its candidates. Consequently when some person from another party (different
from my party) makes a statement that is slightly irresponsible or off the
mark I don't begrudge that person their feelings. In a sense it is a bond.
They cared deeply enough to invest their time in the election just as I did.
If I whipped them this time that is not to crow about -- they have whipped me
often enough and will again. The people in their wisdom throw us all out
from time to time. <G>
However, as a Republican that is first an American there is one thing
about the situation in Florida that must never be forgotten IMHO. In a very
real sense George Bush did not win because of the U. S. Supreme Court's vote.
He won because election workers and judges of state courts in Florida that
were Democrat voters in their private capacity ruled time after time in favor
of George Bush. I am saying that those people faced with making a ruling
time after time did the ethical thing and followed the law.
Allow me to trust my memory to provide you one example -- I believe
the Bush/Gore contests were tried in whole or in part before six different
Florida State Courts. All six courts were controlled by judges that in their
private capacity were Democrats. It is said the Chief Justice of the Florida
Supreme Court was a Clinton Campaign Contributor. Yet, five of the six
courts ruled in favor of Bush.
I won't go into the actual counting except to say I believe election
judges from the Democrat Party finally said enough is enough and refused to
help Gore past a certain point. I can't prove that but having watched
closely it is the only interpretation that I can make fit what I saw.
Let me summarize a very lengthy rant. LOL There are crooks aplenty in
politics. But I have seen political workers willing to watch members of
their own party get defeated because with their insider knowledge they knew
that particular candidate to be a crook. I believe the system works only
because many very decent people work to operate the system legally and
fairly.
Ron h.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 14 2003 - 07:10:03 MST