What SCO Wants, SCO Gets (Forbes)
Posted Jun 19, 2003 14:05 UTC (Thu) by GreyWizard
In reply to: What SCO Wants, SCO Gets (Forbes)
Parent article: What SCO Wants, SCO Gets (Forbes)
He implied that if the Supreme Court hadn't appointed the President, then the popular vote would have produced the opposite result.
No, sorry, he didn't. He implied that if the Surpreme Court hadn't intervened a different set of electors would have been in place and that enough would have chosen Gore to change the outcome. Regardless of whether that's true there is nothing in ncm's post about the popular vote of the nation as a whole (which did favor Gore but doesn't affect the election under present law). Your churlish demand that he search Google for "electoral collage" remains both impolite and irrelevant.
And as for your latest witterings, they are wrong on both counts. Not only is there no reasonable chance that Democratic electors in Florida would have voted for Bush (they are partisan flacks who are as likely to be "appalled" by the antics of their party as Republican electors), but this is unrelated to the point ncm was making. That point, since you clearly failed to read the message you replied to, is that conservative interests do indeed run to the courts when it suits them -- a fact you haven't yet been foolish enough to dispute.
to post comments)