Quote:
Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
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'm suggesting that the DEMs had a choice - Concede the election or fight under a colorable, though perhaps not likely argument.
Remember, Gore was going to give a concession speech and then pulled back. I think what happened was that word came down that there were grounds under which a challenge could be made, and Gore decided to fight it out.
Quote:
|
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.
|
Except for the upteen audits done by nearly every news organization in the country, many of which done in conjunction with Big 4 auditing firms.
