Let's
talk about the ballots.
As you no doubt know by now, there's talk of suing to have a re-vote
in Florida's Palm Beach county, based on a ballot which has been
claimed to be confusing; because of the layout of the ballot,
it's claimed that at least a couple thousand folks in a heavily
democratic county inadvertently voted for Pat Buchanan instead
of Al Gore (no less a personage than Buchanan suggests this).
Additionally, some 20,000 of these ballots were disqualified because
they carried two votes for President, typically of Al and Pat.
Ergo: The election in Palm Beach should be done over, on the basis
that the will of the vote was thwarted by the design of the ballot.
I
have two points to make here: First, I have no doubt in my mind
that the majority of these contested votes were meant for Al Gore.
The idea that thousands of retired Jews would suddenly up and
vote for Pat "Hey, Them Nazis Kept The Red Menace at Bay" Buchanan
is utterly outside the realm of human comprehension. Bush spokesman
Ari Fleischer's contention that "Palm Beach County is a Pat Buchanan
stronghold and that's why Pat Buchanan received 3,407 votes there,"
is such a transparent and obvious lie that the fact such baldfaced
crap was released as an official press statement is, in and of
itself, ample evidence of why the Bush camp ought not be trusted
with running a charity car wash, much less an entire country.
Second: No do-overs. Yes, they voted for the wrong guy. Yes, if
they had voted for the right guy, Gore would be the President-elect
already, and we could all get on with our lives. And yes, by obvious
inference, Bush will walk away with yet another an election he
didn't actually win, to become the President the majority of Americans
didn't want. But that's what you get for not paying attention
to what the hell you're doing when you step into a ballot booth.
Look,
I've voted using the "butterfly ballot" before. It's not that
difficult -- you follow the arrow, you punch a hole, you're done.
It's not the best design for a ballot, I would agree. However,
it's not impossible to use, and the fact that the large majority
of voters in Palm Beach seemed to be able to handle the ballot
just fine speaks to that fact. The inability to follow directions
does not constitute vote fraud. There was no overt or covert
attempt to disenfranchise voters with this ballot layout, which
was approved, as has been noted, by a Democrat (perhaps the most
reviled Democrat in the country, this sunny morning). As such,
the votes should stand as they are. As for the folks who punched
in two votes for President, well, look -- if I thought I had messed
up my ballot, I would go ask for a new ballot. I wouldn't punch
the damn thing again and assume that was going to work.
There
is an additional wrinkle to this whole ballot thing in that apparently
the Palm Beach ballot is also constructed counter to Florida state
law, which mandate ballots are designed in a particular way. Whatever
-- even if this were true (which it probably is), the question
becomes whether this in itself should invalidate the vote for
the county. I honestly don't think it does, although of course
I'm not a lawyer specializing in election law, and also, I'm not
running for President and can see these 25,000 potential votes
that would make me inarguably the most powerful man in the world.
Be
that as it may, in my opinion Gore needs to let those votes go.
A rather more liberal friend asked me whether I was willing to
have three new Scalias on the bench because I didn't think these
votes should be redone. I emphatically don't want three additional
Scalia-types on the bench. But it's not a question of what I want.
It's a question of what I think is right and ethical regarding
elections, and I don't think stupidity and/or inability to correctly
punch a hole in a ballot requires a second vote.
Let me put it another way: If Bush had lost a couple thousand
votes to Buchanan because of bad ballot design and the inability
of Bush supporters to follow directions, I sure as Hell wouldn't
want them to have a do-over, either. Neither would those
who are currently pushing for a recount. My only solace here is
that my position is consistent no matter who is behind the eight
ball. At a moment like this, I want to be backing the process
of the vote, and not my own political preference. It sucks, but
under what I know now about the situation, Gore should not get
those Palm Beach votes.
***
Notwithstanding
the Palm Beach votes, Gore has gotten as close to winning
Florida as I think he's likely to get. At one point yesterday,
Bush's projected margin was down to 229 votes; right now, it's
back up to a whopping 327. You can expect that margin to widen
again as absentee ballots float in from around the world, most
of them punched by military types who typically lean right more
than they lean left. I expect Bush will eventually add a few hundred
more votes to his tally and may even top 1000 votes. There's
a mandate for you. However, it will likely be more than more than
Gore got; Florida and its electoral vote are Bush's.
I think Gore ought to suck it up and concede. And I think he'll
be glad he did. I thought before that whoever won this particular
election was going to be a one-termer no matter what; frankly,
after eight years of unparalleled (and very unlikely unrepeatable)
economic success, whoever follows Clinton is going to look something
like a toad in comparison. And benign gridlock, while not entirely
bad for the nation, is not something one can really pin a re-election
campaign on.
However,
after the utter and complete mess this election has turned out
to be, the 43rd President, no matter who he is, is flaming crap
on a stick. Which would you rather be: The President who was elected
without the popular vote and whose election came down to the state
where your brother was Governor and claims of voter fraud were
rampant, or the guy who won the Presidency only after he somewhat
petulantly sued to have portions of the election invalidated?
Neither guy is exactly going to get the full and unreserved support
of the other side, you know. Nothing of any importance is going
to get done any time soon. This is not a Presidency worth having;
it wasn't to begin with, but it sure as Hell isn't now.
Gore
at least temporarily has the aura of the right and true victor,
while Bush, when he takes office, comes in as a tainted usurper
of the national will. What Gore ought to do is quietly wring some
concessions from the Bush camp (a deal not put wacky Scalia types
on the Supreme Court would be what I would want, personally, and
I think wouldn't be all that difficult for Bush to agree to),
and then back out with a graceful moral and popular victory. He'll
spend the next four years speaking and lecturing and building
his stature, and then 2004, after the GOP loses control of the
House and the Senate and it's clear Bush is getting nothing done
(and is about as smart as a mug of hot fat), Gore can walk into
the White House with a large popular and electoral victory.
What's
coming up isn't a Presidency; it's a bullet to be dodged. Gore
ought to walk away and be thankful that he can.
John
Scalzi can be reached at
jmsdk200@scalzi.com
To
find out more about John Scalzi and see what else he has to
say,
visit his website at http://www.scalzi.com
