...more recent posts
Here's a PDF (via megnut) from an MIT professor detailing the statistical probability that Buchanan really got as many votes as he did in Palm Beach (answer: 1 in 3,000,000,000,000,000.) That seems significant, but still the question remains as to what does the law say about situations of this sort. Lawrence Tribe (Harvard constitutional law professor with ABC news affiliations) was on TV last night making a very strong case for the legality of a Gore challenge in Florida. There is definitely precedent in the state for adjusting the vote count. It happened in a Miami mayoral election. Tribe even pointed to a recent Florida supreme court decision that seems to mandate adjustments to the vote count in such cases. He didn't exactly seem unbiased, but he is a heavyweight.
Maybe this is a good time to start looking into the purchase of your own private island.
I'm actually kind of intrigued by this election. I can't help feeling like Bush and Gore are two different versions of the same underlying thing, and so America just tossed a coin to pick it's next President. And it landed right on its edge. That's something you don't see every day. Feels about right too. I don't want either of those jokers as President, so maybe we can just drag this recount out for four years and be done with it. I keep hearing from the news media that this is an historical moment, but isn't it just that neither candidate could generate even one bit of interest or momentum, and therefore it was only a "close race" in the sense that two winless teams fighting to stay out of last place is a "close race" - it's close, sure, but that doesn't make it interesting, nor does it make it a good game.