Agreed. Unless we move to 100% electronic balloting (no paper trail omg) any result that close will have human error. The moment you have the human element you induce error into the equation. The butterfly ballot is an excellent example.

Regarding Bush v. Gore, another hilarious component is that conservatives / loloriginalists are constantly blabbing on about deferring to states, caring about separation of powers, etc., yet in this case they overruled the Florida Supreme Court, essentially without anyone even asking them to do so!

Meanwhile Scalia, who has been spitting fire about how much he hates liberal court decisions for, well, 30 plus years, says only "get over it."

The conservative wing of the Supreme Court is a hypocritical mess of self-contradiction.

They've also come out and said they will keep a lot of the act that they've already implemented in place, i.e. staying on parents' insurance until 26, no rescission except for fraud, no limetime caps, etc.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...5fa_fact_klein

sigh

"What is notable about the conservative response to the individual mandate is not only the speed with which a legal argument that was considered fringe in 2010 had become mainstream by 2012; it’s the implication that the Republicans spent two decades pushing legislation that was in clear violation of the nation’s founding document."

Did you not read the handwavy article by the guy from Heritage? His mandate was totally different because erm it was designed to make deadbeats pay up, not help insure the uninsured.

God's work these republicans are doing.

2/10

Lol it was considered fringe by a bunch of liberals with their head in the sand, but it wasn't actually fringe at all.

Then why did Republicans want to use it as a national model in the 1990s? Were they playing 8-dimensional chess?

Wow are people still butt hurt over the 2000 election?

Here's how it is:

There is >0% and <100% chance Bush got more votes than Gore.
There is >0% and <100% chance Gore got more votes than Bush.

So no matter who ended up getting the official win, there is % chance the wrong guy was getting it.

You can see how this is different than most elections, where it is 100% known who got the most votes.

Given that Bush was ahead after the first count and the official recount, it's pretty clear at that point you just gotta give it to him and accept the fact there is a chance it's the wrong guy, but know that if it had been Gore there still would have been a bigger chance it was the wrong guy.

The thing was a cluster and no outcome was gonna tell you exactly what the truth was.

Oh and I predict 5-4 on the health care crap, either way.

Because the plans never got out of infancy.

To expand a bit further, republicans controlled the House and senate all but two years (when dems held 51 seats in the senate) in between 1995-2005. If the individual mandate was actually a part of the republican platform, you'd expect some sort of actual movement in that direction.

Shockingly,mthat never happened, and now I get to see some awesome revisionist history.

A lot of what the Republicans want never happens. See fiscal discipline for example.

Yep.

Since ObamaCare favors big business, are you suggesting that it's the Democratic nominees that are going to overrule it?