JOHN FUND'S POLITICAL DIARY
The Myth of
Gore never had a treasure trove of uncounted
votes in Dade County.
Sunday, November 26, 2000
7:20 p.m. EST
Al Gore will address the country
tomorrow to explain why he is still contesting the
election. NBC News reports that one of his main arguments
will be that a "complete" recount of Miami-Dade County
would net him between 500 and 600 votes, enough to
overtake George W. Bush as the winner in
Mr. Gore and other Democrats are busy creating a myth
that they would have clearly won the Florida recounts
if only Miami-Dade County hadn't reversed course and
cancelled its planned manual recount last Wednesday.
Frustration on the part of grass-roots Democrats is
understandable, given the steady diet of incomplete information
they've been fed on how many Gore votes were likely to be
found in a recount of Miami-Dade's 10,750
"questionable" ballots. But senior Democrats probably know
better. Some are keeping the "myth of Miami" alive in
part to keep up morale and so they can have something
to litigate. So long as Miami-Dade's votes aren't
hand-counted, the Gore people can believe they won
David Boies, Mr. Gore's top trial lawyer, says that the
end of Miami-Dade's manual recount "disenfranchised
the vote of every voter who was not counted" and a
full count would ensure a Gore victory. But a Sunday
Los Angeles Times analysis by Ron Brownstein
concludes that "if Miami-Dade County had been compelled to
keep counting, it might have helped Gore, but probably
not as much as is commonly believed." Brownstein
quotes a senior Democrat who agrees: "Dade was never
going to yield huge numbers." Democrats told him they
only expected to pick up between 100 and 200 votes
overall in Miami. Republicans were looking at a wash,
with no overall change.
Unlike Broward and
Palm Beach, which gave Mr. Bush only 30% and 35% of
the vote respectively, Dade was much more evenly
balanced. Mr. Gore won on Election Day with only 53% of the
vote, in part because six out of seven Cuban-Americans
voted for Mr. Bush. This means that in any recount, Mr.
Bush would likely have won about half of the
"undervoted" ballots, those in which no clear choice for
president was tabulated by the machine recount.
Democrats respond that the Miami-Dade manual recount was
clearly picking up a lot of votes for Mr. Gore before it
was cut off last Wednesday. In the 135 precincts (out
of 614) that had been recounted, Mr. Gore had picked
up 157 votes. Democrats reasoned that at that rate
they were on their way to adding between 700 and 900
votes to Mr. Gore's margin in the
<><><>Source: Wall Street Journal website(www.wsj.com)
Don't know about the rest of you, but I've turned
on the "ignore this user" feature for xion_2K and
have reported him/her for board abuse.
board is already suffering enough with the "normal"
So you have a major long-term
position in IDEC. Who are you to call anyone un-American?
And even if the outcome of the election would have an
effect on the market (and IDPH value), so do other world
events like stability in the middle east, price of crude
oil, etc. Are you going to start spewing BS about
those topics too? Give me a break.
OT message to Sass-
The last hint was not enough.
Too many Bill's at IDEC.
I have not responded previously to any of your
post. I have been a shareholder since July of 98. Have
never sold. Have no immediate plans to either! If you
are a shareholder, congratulations. As stated by
others, this is a message board for IDPH!
THAT's the reason why!
I have a MAJOR
long-term position in IDPH, which I would prefer to not
have devastated by an un-American, vitriolic viper, in
the personage of Al(Win At ANY Cost)Bore, understudy
of the nefarious, cunning, predatory, iniquitous,
savage-of-the-century, Wild "hit Man" Bill.
Sorry if you
disagree, but this stuff IS relevant and crucial to IDPH
and the market, IMO.
if the votes in miami were such a myth why have
the bush people all but killed themselves to stop
handcounting? No not because they think there is chicanery and
mishief going on, that's just gruel to send to the hungry
partisans, but because they think they will lose.
not they would confidently say count the votes. But
they know better.
That's all right Bush lost
the popular vote, not even counting the 2+million
that voted for Nader, he has a bizarre "victory" in
Florida and is so ill suited to be President it is a
joke. Right he is a uniter not a divider.
luck america we will need it. Just please get Jim
Baker off TV already.
November 28, 2000
An enabling act for
The Florida Supreme Court must be severely punished
for participating in vote fraud. Impeachment is too
good for the Gang of Seven. Arrest, indictment and
trial are the best response to the court's misuse of
judicial office to facilitate the attempted theft of a
Florida is a state where
Republicans have been overwhelmingly elected to legislative
and executive office. In a state where Republicans
hold the balance of power, why would partisan
Democratic justices so audaciously and confidently overstep
their authority and ignore statutory law in order to
help Democrats revote ballots to Al Gore's
The answer is that for almost a half-century � ever
since the 1954 Brown decision of the U.S. Supreme Court
� the judiciary has been gradually appropriating
the legislative role, adding the power of lawmaker to
its assigned role of law
Unlike the Florida Supreme Court's brazen decision to
assist the Democrats in stealing a presidential
election, the Brown vs. Board of Education decision was in
behalf of a noble cause � desegregation of public
The Brown decision remains sullied by the means
through which it was obtained � an unethical ex parte
collaboration between a sitting justice, Felix Frankfurter, and
a litigant, Justice Department official Philip
Elman. The plot achieved its goal of abolishing
segregation, but the means usurped legislative authority and
created a precedent inimical to democracy. The judiciary
learned that whenever it can get away with claiming the
moral high ground, it can legislate.
factors have contributed to the judiciary's rising power.
The larger government grew, the more involved
"special interests" became in politics in order to defend
and advance their interests. In the public's mind,
campaign contributions and interest group politics
gradually undermined the authority of the legislative
branch. A tainted and sometimes stalemated legislature
permitted the judiciary to make inroads into the
The Washington Times website
Riverview, there is a BIG difference between vote
counting and VOTE MINING. You know, even with MAXIMUM use
of "AFFIRMATIVE ACTION" for Al(I'll do ANYTHING to
win)Bore, he lost! Liberals believe that Liberalism(their
religion) makes them SO SUPERIOR, that they feel empowered
to read the mind of, and divine the intent of, every
voter. Enter magnifying glasses, biased democratic
canvassing boards for making final decisions, and fleeting,
barely discernable, dimpled chads. But, no matter. Bush
I believe Bush actually WON the
popular vote. Please read messages# 3324, 3325, and 3326,
along with the following article I include with this
post. When the congressional investigations are
complete, I expect the discovery of a highly organized and
widespread NATIONWIDE DISENFRANCHISEMENT of overseas
military voting personnel(who overwhelmingly vote
Republican, and who also privately despise the Clinton/Bore
regime). Coming soon: dirty tricks galore. Believe
Some Navy personnel unable to
new commander in chief
By Jon E. Dougherty
� 2000 WorldNetDaily.com
Members of the military who are currently stationed
overseas have complained that the Pentagon has not yet
sent out absentee ballots this year, meaning they will
not get to vote for a new commander in chief on
Specifically, members of U.S. Navy aboard
ships supporting the USS Cole -- the destroyer recently
attacked by terrorists while it was undergoing refueling
in the port of Aden, Yemen -- have either not
received ballots or won't get them in time because of
current deployment circumstances, Pentagon officials said
"I've heard about this within the past
week," said Lt. Dave Gai, a Defense Department
spokesman. "We are trying to get more information. We don't
know if they were delayed through the mail."
He added that due to current deployment
considerations, some military members overseas likely would not
get their ballots in time.
"The support team
for the USS Cole may not get their ballots due to
intermittent mail," Gai said. "Some ballots could very well be
delayed for a number of reasons."
resident -- who asked not to be identified -- said her
Navy daughter who is stationed in Tokyo has received
her absentee ballot for every election except this
"No one at the base will be voting
because all the absentee ballots are missing," she told
Navy officials were also contacted but
did not return phone calls.
suggested that the Clinton administration may have
purposely delayed sending absentee ballots to military
personnel overseas because most, according to recent
surveys, will vote Republican. The White House has denied
According to Gai, officials with
the Federal Voting Assistance Program -- which helps
manage balloting for overseas service members -- "was
not aware of any group non-delivery."
said depending on the home state of the member,
ballots can be sent via Standard Form 186, which is a
write-in ballot. States have different deadlines for such
ballots, he added.
Each ballot "is unit specific
and handled individually," he said.
This is specious. Brian Kalt, an assistant
professor of law at Michigan State University, has closely
followed Miami-Dade's recount. He notes that by beginning
in numerical order, it proceeded first through
heavily Democratic precincts, many of which had gone for
Gore by as much as 9 to 1. The 135 recounted precincts
as a whole gave Mr. Gore 74% of the vote, compared
with only 53% countywide. That means that the
remaining precincts as a whole went for Mr. Bush, and would
have delivered far fewer additional votes for Mr.
"The count was just about to move into heavily
Republican and Cuban areas," says Mr. Kalt. "Given how the
rest of the precincts would have voted, I don't see
how Gore would have picked up votes. If the trend had
continued, an admitted if, Bush would actually have gained
400 votes countywide."
Mr. Kalt's analysis
squares with that of other political observers I spoke
with. But such realities don't fit easily into the
"spin rooms" of cable television, where even the
anchors are parroting the line that Miami-Dade would have
been a "gold mine" of Democratic votes. No one
mentions that the Miami-Dade board originally had voted
unanimously not to have a manual recount on Nov. 14, after a
sample recount of three overwhelmingly Democratic
precincts turned up only six extra Gore votes. The board
voted to hold a recount only after it came under
intense political pressure from Democrats and became the
target of several Democratic lawsuits.
of Miami is now being extended by Democrats into
other areas of controversy. Six Democratic congressmen
have demanded that Janet Reno's Justice Department
investigate whether some 100 Republican demonstrators
"intimidated" the Miami-Dade board into halting its recount
last Wednesday. Rep. Jerry Nadler says the
demonstrators, none of whom were detained by police or touched
anyone, represented "a whiff of fascism in the air." But
none of the three members of Miami-Dade's election
board were intimidated. One member of the board, David
Leahy, says he saw only "a noisy, peaceful protest." He
told the Los Angeles Times, "I was not intimidated by
that protest. I saw it for what it was."
Democrats have every right to use legal arguments to fight
Mr. Gore's defeat in Florida. But having lost in four
separate counts of the ballots--the original count, the
machine recount, the overseas absentee count and now a
selective recount of two Democratic counties--their claim
that Mr. Gore won Florida is ringing increasingly
hollow. The myths they're spinning may keep hope alive
among their troops. But they have very little basis in
Wall Street Journal website(www.wsj.com)