Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
The point is that the DEMs instituted a process based on faulty assumptions.
|
A different question that the others: are you suggesting the assumptions were faulty, something that could have been disproven by testing them through the process? Or are you suggesting that there was a malignant or dishonest intent?
I believe these are very different things. Because the Supreme Court chose to value finality over certainty, we will never know whether the Dem's assumptions are faulty.
I won't claim to be a big student of the 1960 election, but I do know this - Illinois sent Kennedy over the top, but he would have won even if he had lost Illinois (just later in the night).
See this link. You've got to overturn multiple large states to change the outcome. Also,
the Republican Party pushed recounts that year in 11 states, and courts cases in a number as well. . So, it's a very different state of affairs. Charging the dems with doing something untoward by looking to be certain of the count when an election is decided by a few hundred votes in one state strikes me as a bit much.
