The recent presidential election was the closest in almost 100 years. The media, including your editorial of Dec. 14 (“Still doubt over Bush win, but let’s move on”) continues the liberal tilt by media at-large. There were close presidential contests
The recent presidential election was the closest in almost 100 years. The media, including your editorial of Dec. 14 (“Still doubt over Bush win, but let’s move on”) continues the liberal tilt by media at-large.
There were close presidential contests in several states, New Mexico included, where recounts were requested by the candidates within stated time periods. They were duly carried out by the respective electoral bodies, and Gore was declared the winner by a few hundred or several thousand votes. He carried those states without further ranging.
The case of Florida – oh, no! Al Gore has nobody but himself and his lawyers to blame. Had he simply requested a statewide manual recount during the statutory period for doing so, and not pressured and sued Democratic canvassing boards to apply the most radical dimple-counting standards, he almost certainly would have had a complete manual recount of all undervotes, as he claims to have wanted.
Instead, Mr. Gore and his lawyers engaged in the sort of legal gamesmanship from trial lawyers, including – probably for the first time in American history – to demand selective manual recounts only in three Florida counties to which they won overwhelmingly. The result: The issue finished up in the Supreme Court of the United States, where, as we citizens expect, seven out of the nine justices rightly defended the Constitution of the United States. More power to them.
Bill Harper, Kalaheo
