Election 2000 Redux

[pjorourke]

Is anyone else having flashbacks to the chad counters in Palm Beach when they read the news about Torricelli's "dropout"?

Same exact deal. Clear election rules -- can't change the ballot after 48 days before election. Activist state Supreme court lets home team (i.e., the Dems) change rules in order to provide "a full and fair ballot choice for the voters". (The Dems had a candidate, he was loosing because news was coming out about what a crook he was, so lets change horse mid-stream.) Why do we bother even having election rules. Lets just make them up as we go along. Looks like the adults at the SCOTUS will have to whack the kids knuckles again.

I just hope the folks from New Jersey are as embarrassed by this as we Floridians were by our fiasco.

 

[Reel Deal]

This opens up a National can of worms...

So here it is...a little more than a month before a close election. Something ~bad~ happens (scandal, bad debate, faux pas, whatever), and suddenly I am-and my party is-behind, based on polls.

Easy solution-pull me, and run someone else who may do better in the polls; a potential win is thusly preserved.

What a bunch of B*** S***.

If the SCOTUS lets this happen, our whole election process will be forever compromised.

(My suggestion: polls show that Christine Todd Whitman could do better than Lautenberg in the Senatorial election. I say let the GOP candidate resign, and let CTW take HIS place. Fair is only fair).

PJ-the difference between this and the 2000 FL election, is that the FL Supremes followed the letter of the law exactly-even though they "punted" it upstairs. They did not "make it up as they went along". And the SCOTUS agreed with them.