Re: R: Re: CHAT (POLITICS!!!): Putting the duh in Florida

Hey, Carlos, this is what my father says:

'If such a thing was happened here over, those silly Americans would now
deem us a primitive country. Now we are here laughing and scorning them...
there *is* Justice in this world!'

Luca

P.S.: the word 'silly' is not intended to offend. It's only a little
euro-revenge against your cultural and economical colonialism : )

> En respuesta a Chrisophe Grandsire quien escribió:
>
> <<<
> Well, that post gives me the opportunity of asking a question about
> all this. I
> know it's way off-topic, but it's only a genuine question from a
> French point of
> view. Well, if I understood correctly, not only the machines didn't
> count votes
> correctly, but also the vote ballots themselves were ambiguous and the
> whole
> thing went wrong in some counties of Florida. So, my question is:
> instead of
> endlessly counting and recounting ballots, which each time gives a
> different
> result, and is subject of all those political and judiciary problems,
> why didn't
> the authorities of the counties where the problems appeared consider
> simply that
> the vote process had been irregular, and that they would organize a
> new voting
> day? If they had done that as soon as the first week, by now the
> elections could
> have been done again and the results (this time undebatable) would be
> known by
> now and not subject to those endless complains. This already happened
> in some
> places in France for MP elections, and the problems were solved simply
> this way.
>
> Well, don't take me wrong. I'm just asking why this seems not to be
> even a
> possibility. Is there a constitutional or legal reason why they cannot
> even
> propose such a solution?
> >>>
>
> Well, with so close margins a new elections in some counties in
> Florida would be thought as cheeting: "we already know that the
> margins are close, lets vote again to modify the results" kind of
> thought.
>
> BTW.  This was found in Usenet:
>
> 1.  Imagine that we read of an election occuring anywhere in the third
> world  in which the self-declared winner was the son of the former
> prime minister  and that former prime minister was himself the former
> head of that nation's  secret police (cia).
>
>
> 2.  Imagine that the self-declared winner lost the popular vote but
> won based on some old colonial holdover (electoral college) from the
> nation's pre-democracy past.
>
>
> 3.  Imagine that the self-declared winner's 'victory' turned on
> disputed votes cast in a province governed by his brother!
>
>
> 4.  Imagine that the poorly drafted ballots of one district, a
> district heavily favoring the self-declared winner's opponent, led
> thousands of voters to vote for the wrong candidate.
>
>
> 5.  Imagine that that members of that nation's most despised caste,
> fearing  for their lives/livelihoods, turned out in record numbers to
> vote in  near-universal opposition to the self-declared winner's
> candidacy.
>
>
> 6.  Imagine that hundreds of members of that most-despised caste were
> intercepted on their way to the polls by state police operating under
> the  authority of the self-declared winner's brother.
>
>
> 7.  Imagine that six million people voted in the disputed province and
> that  the self-declared winner's 'lead' was only 327 votes.  Fewer,
> certainly, than the vote counting machines' margin of error.
>
>
> 8.  Imagine that the self-declared winner and his political party
> opposed a  more careful by-hand inspection and re-counting of the
> ballots in the disputed province or in its most hotly disputed
> district.
>
>
> 9.  Imagine that the self-declared winner, himself a governor of a
> major  province, had the worst human rights record of any province in
> his nation and actually led the nation in executions.
>
>
> 10. Imagine that a major campaign promise of the self-declared winner
> was to appoint like-minded human rights violators to lifetime
> positions on the high court of that nation.
>
>
> None of us would deem such an election to be representative of
> anything other than the self-declared winner's will-to-power.  All of
> us, I imagine, would wearily turn the page thinking that it was
> another sad tale of pitiful pre- or anti-democracy peoples in some
> strange
> elsewhere."
>