Alleged chicanery

[Michael McConnell]

Maybe it is pointless to continue the metadiscourse about the rhetoric used
in discussing this highly inflammatory issue, but Paul's otherwise
reasonable arguments are marred by statements like "two Govs. Bush who stole
the election," which we know, beyond all doubt, to be untrue. Paul makes a
perfectly legitimate argument that a confusing ballot led to a miscarriage
of the popular will, and that this should be corrected by a revote. But it
would be far better if he acknowledged that this was the unintended
consequence of a decision made in good faith by a Democratic official. More
importantly, it would be far better if the Gore campaign made such a
statement, loud and clear. Don't they realize that accusations of bad faith
both make it less likely that the other side will yield, and more likely
that genuine damage will be done to the fabric of American democracy?


Michael McConnell
University of Utah College of Law
332 South 1400 East Rm. 101
Salt Lake City, UT 84112

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Finkelman [mailto:paul-finkelman at UTULSA.EDU]
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 10:05 AM
To: CONLAWPROF at listserv.ucla.edu
Subject: Re: Alleged chicanery


Fair enough; and so I will return to Michael's question of some days ago.
You asked how would we "prove" that there had been confusion among voters;
at the time no one knew the extent of the double voting for president and
the extent of the spoiled ballots.  Now that we do know that it was very
large, does that, in-and-of- itself not raise a presumption, which a court
should investigate?  And, second, do the voters -- not the candidates --
have an equal protection and due process right to a clear ballot that they
can understand and vote, with the expectation that their votes will be
counted?

I do not, by the way, think a revote in the country will give Gore Flordia;
my guess is that a revote will have a lower turnout that before, and that
Gore, even if he wins a gerater % of thevotes will have fewer total vote;
but then Bush can take office without the cloud of an "unfair" or "stolen"
election; if I were a Democratic top official, which I am not, I would
accept the outcome and use it to make the case for the corrupt Republicans,
led by two Govs. Bush who stole the electon in Florida.  With Gore having
the popular vote, and an odd co-alition of old white and Jewish folks  along
with Blacks screaming the election was stolen, it will resonate well in much
of the country.  The Dems. then take Congress big in the mid-term elections
and sweep into the White House in 2004, as Andy Jackson did.  A revote would
avoid this, and probablay put Bush in the White House.  But, it would make
the process fair.


Michael McConnell wrote:


 I have not questioned Paul's motives, but only suggest that all of us
confine our discussion to the facts. Michael McConnell
University of Utah College of Law
332 South 1400 East Rm. 101
Salt Lake City, UT 84112

--
Paul Finkelman
Chapman Distinguished Professor
University of Tulsa College of Law
3120 East 4th Place
Tulsa, Oklahoma  74104-2499

918-631-3706 (office)
918-631-2194 (fax)


paul-finkelman at utulsa.edu


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/private/conlawprof/attachments/20001110/b06252c6/attachment.htm