What I didn't know about Florida recount

[kwolf68]

Saw some info that I don't know about.

Were the Democrats looking to recount the entire state or just certain districts?

Plus, the Democrats were trying to have overseas ballots not counted.

I am told the Republicans didn't mind a recount just so all the state was recounted.

If this is true, then what are we bitching about here?

[tkmorris]

1. You're info is wrong

Some is downright false, some is just spun badly. I am dying to know what your source for this "info" was.

[freetobegay]

2. I'm dying to know that source also.

[kwolf68]

3. This quote

Not really a source...just some asshole. I'm now looking things up. Was wondering about things here.


You mean the recount of only 3 counties that the dems were trying to sneak in, which WAS the violation of state law. The Republicans were fine with a recount, following state law, that the entire state gets recounted. The dems didn't want that, they only wanted to recount votes in 3 heavily democratic counties (while trying on the side to keep the military votes of servicemen stationed in Florida from being counted at all - talk about hypocracy), which was against state law. When the lefty FSC okayed the dems illegal recount scheme, that's when the Republicans went to the USSC and appealed the decision of the FSC. The USSC ruled 7-2 that the FSC was acting outside the law and it's jurisdiction and that any recount had to include the entire state, which was what Florida state law said.

Those are the facts, but you can now continue to listen tot he lefties in looneyland as I'm sure you will.

[Catch22Dem]

4. Illegal military votes

Just making sure I point that out.

[ronabop]

11. To clarify:

The democrats were challenging overseas votes that had no postmark, no signature, etc. Votes that would be resonably, legally, dismissed.

The Rethugs took this issue, and spun it as "Democrats are against counting military ballots!", ignoring that an illegal ballot is an illegal ballot, and that not all overseas ballots were military.

Watch that spin!

-Bop
edit: grammar

[Catch22Dem]

18. Egggggggggs-Actly

That's what I'm talkin' about, my friend!

[SoCalDem]

36. and there were soldiers ON RECORD as saying that

AFTER ELECTION DAY, they were told to send them in anyway..even though the election was OVER...

also SOME ballots sent to soldiers TWICE, and they sent in BOTH.. (that would be why some were missing signatures, witnesses, etc)

[cosmicvortex20]

26. I personally find this pretty slack...

I want everyones vote to count. If we can let felons vote, then we should be ok with a vote thats postmarked incorrectly. I dont want anyone disenfranchied and I think the dems had the losing ground on this count.

[Lefty48197]

32. The question wasn't about legitimate votes

there were those in the military who were helping to gather "votes" long after the official voting period had ended. Those aren't legal votes. It was scandalous that the Republican party supported the illegal votes.

[cosmicvortex20]

34. And my point was if the papers got in late because of some...

snafu by the management, then we morally cant really throw away ballots that were casts within the appropriate time, but delivered late. Its not the voters fault if someone mishandles their votes and their voices deserve to be heard too.

Im not going to be the one that tosses anyones vote out just so I can play little mr rule stickler.

[LiberalFighter]

35. Remember the email that went out to scrounge up those ballots?

After the deadline!!!

[Lefty48197]

31. Everybody already knows this right?

apparently NOT! Morans.

[Hamlette]

6. complete bullshit

Gore asked to HAND count 4 counties. That was in part because it was believed the entire state had been machine counted twice (a lie).

Bush wanted NONE of the state recounted. Had Bush said "let's hand count the entire state" Gore would have gone along in a heart beat.

Were you not there? Did you not read the papers every day? This was VERY well publicized. It always shocks me when people who lived through an event can't answer charges that are false. No wonder the GOP gets to rewrite history. It is our job to remember this stuff.

[kwolf68]

7. I seem to remember

But you gotta remember I voted 3rd Party back then.

[Hamlette]

21. ahhhh

you weren't a player. That's way. Welcome to the real world.

(Sorry for sounding so glib but third party votes are a sore spot for me. I'm sure you can understand why.)

[SharonAnn]

9. That quote is false. The FSC required a recount of ALL votes,

in ALL counties, including absentee and military ballots. It specifically required recounts of OVERVOTES and UNDERVOTES.

My personal belief is that it is the OVERVOTES that scared the GOP because in the optical scan voting systems in the minortiy districts there were many overvotes because people marked the box for Al Gore and then wrote in Al Gore on the "Write-in" line. Those were thrown out as overvotes.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

12. Gore asked for a statewide recount in his first or second televised

address to the nation after the election. Bush declined. The only votes they tried to exclude were those POSTMARKED after Nov 7 (? election day), which was according to FLA election law.

[Birthmark]

15. Frankly, it doesn't matter what the USSC said

The case should never have been heard by them. It is outside of the USSC's jurisdiction. If the FSC had interpreted the law to mean that ONLY the Democrat could win, then that's they way it is. Of course, the FL Legislature could have and would have overruled by choosing electors themselves. It always amuses me to hear conSERRRRRRRvatives babble about "activist judges" and States' Rights while supporting the USSC's blatantly unConstitutional interference in FL's choosing of Electors.

That will no doubt continue.

[seabeyond]

5. they were refusing a full state

so dems said do these areas, then saying well if doing it gotta do them all and we cant recount whole state and dems saying no do these.

on the military ballots overseas too, if they were repug and not signed or totally filled or late, then they took where as they were trashing the democrats, and dems did try to stop ballots being counted that came in late. there was a lot of dishonesty and criminality found with military and overseas votes

if i remember correctly?????

there was a time limit on the count. and kathy harris was delaying big time, and courts and repugs and so to count whole state wasnt possible with the time limit. she could have extended time and wouldnt and think that is what they were trying in state supreme court

[lanparty]

22. Agreed ...

The Democrats were put in a difficult position of sticking up for convicted felons who were LEGALLY entitled to vote, but denying military ballots that didn't adhere to the law.

The fact of the matter is that the DEMOCRATS are the one's who followed the law to the letter. Thats what Democracy is all about. The Democrats appealed in counties where they thought there were serious problems .... THAT was the law. Once it got to the Florida Supreme Court, the issue was really out of their hands.

The Florida Supreme Court (in round two) wisely decided to order a statewide recount in order to head off claims of equal protection for ALL Florida voters.

This is the difficult part that most Republicans don't understand. That in serious issue where the law is foggy or ambiguous, or where a legislature REFUSES to legislate in a constitutional manner that the courts have to fill in the gaps.

BTW, there was a also another little scandal in Florida 2000 (BTW, for a fairly complete list read "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" by Greg Palast). Florida's laws about gauging the intent of the voter were VERY well defined and VERY strict. It was SO strict that absentee ballots which COULD NOT be read by machines had to be RECREATED, so the machines could read them.

In the Republican's eyes, it was OK to take a mangled ballot and recreate it on fresh paper. But in the case of punch-cards, it wasn't OK to look at the ballot to discern the voters intent. BTW, a lot of spoiled ballots were caused by counting machines that either marked or teared ballots. Indeed when absentee ballots got stuck in mechanisms, those ballots were diligently hand read and recreated.

Finally, the Republicans talk about counting and RECOUNTING the votes. This is one of the big problems. The law doesn't allow for hand canvassing spoiled ballots ONLY. You have to recount THE WHOLE LOT, even the ones that the machines accepted.

Read Greg Palast's book for a good accounting of what happened.

[kixot]

8. mis-leading facts.

November 10: The Florida machine recount is completed. Unofficial results, gathered by the Associated Press, give Bush a lead of only 327 votes out of nearly 6 million cast.

November 12: Palm Beach County officials vote to conduct a full hand recount of presidential votes; Volusia County begins its own hand count; Bush's legal team, headed by former Secretary of State James Baker, goes to federal court seeking to block manual recounts. As the days go by, numerous lawsuits from a number of parties spring up in state and federal courts, seeking to block or allow the counts and certifications, seeking access to the ballots, or raising questions about the legal validity of absentee ballots in some counties.

November 13: Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris says she will not extend a deadline of 5 p.m. EST on November 14 for receiving all state election results except for absentee ballots coming from overseas. Gore's team promises a legal challenge. A federal judge turns down the Bush team's attempt to stop manual recounts.

November 14: Palm Beach County votes to temporarily suspend its hand recount; Dade County begins a selected hand recount of only about 1 percent of its votes in questioned precincts. Harris delays certification of the state's votes until 2 p.m. EST November 15 so three heavily Democratic counties can explain why they should conduct hand recounts of their ballots.

November 15: Harris says she will not accept further hand recounts and asks the state Supreme Court to order the halt of manual recounts; Broward County decides to begin a hand recount; AP estimates shrink Bush's lead to only 286 votes.

November 16: Lawyers for Bush submit written arguments to the U.S. federal appeals court in Atlanta to end the recounts. Democrats also filed papers with the federal court to oppose the Republican bid. Attorneys for the Gore campaign file an emergency motion in Leon County state court challenging the certification of the results of the Florida presidential election. The Florida Supreme Court rules Palm Beach County can proceed with a manual recount of ballots.

November 17:The Florida Supreme Court blocks Harris from any vote certification until it can rule on the Democrats' motion to allow hand recounts to be counted. The midnight deadline strikes for counties to receive overseas absentee ballots. Miami-Dade County reverses an earlier decision and votes to conduct a full manual recount. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals denies GOP request to stop manual recounts on constitutional grounds.

November 18: After absentee ballots are counted, uncertified results show Republican George W. Bush leads Democrat Al Gore by 930 votes.

November 20: The Florida Supreme Court holds a hearing on whether Harris should consider hand-recounted ballots before she certifies results of the presidential election. Circuit Judge Jorge Labarga says he lacks authority under the U.S. Constitution to order a new presidential election in Palm Beach County.

November 21: The Florida Supreme Court orders hand counts to continue, and gives counties five days to complete them.

November 22: Bush running mate Dick Cheney suffers a mild heart attack, his fourth. He undergoes surgery to open a constricted artery at a Washington hospital and is released two days later.

November 23: Miami-Dade County officials stop the hand recount there, saying they will not have enough time to complete it before the deadline given by the Florida Supreme Court. Democrats blame the canvassing board's decision on a raucous Republican demonstration, accusing the GOP of intimidating the board into quitting -- a charge Republicans deny.

November 24: To the surprise of many observers, the U.S. Supreme Court agrees to hear Bush's appeal of the Florida high court ruling allowing hand recounts to proceed.

November 26: Harris certifies the results of the Florida vote after the state Supreme Court deadline expires, giving Bush a 537-vote lead over Gore. Harris does not include results from Palm Beach County, which completed its manual recount about two hours after the deadline. Bush says his transition team, led by Cheney, will move forward with planning an administration.

November 27: Gore's lawyers move to contest the Florida result in a circuit court in Tallahassee. Gore tells the nation the result Harris certified wrongly excluded thousands of votes that were never tallied. Meanwhile, the General Services Administration announces it will withhold the funding and office space for planning a transition until the election dispute is resolved.

November 28: N. Sanders Sauls, the judge hearing Gore's election contest, refuses Gore's request for a speedy resolution and sets a December 2 hearing on the case.

November 29: A committee of Florida lawmakers meets to consider whether to convene a special session of the state Legislature to appoint electors on its own. Sauls orders all ballots from Palm Beach and Miami-Dade counties -- more than 1 million -- shipped to Tallahassee for possible hand counts in Gore's contest.

November 30: Florida lawmakers vote along party lines to recommend a special session to name electors if the election contest is not resolved by December 12, six days before the Electoral College meets. The Republican-led legislature is expected to name electors pledged to Bush.

December 1: The U.S. Supreme Court hears oral arguments over whether the Florida Supreme Court overstepped its authority by ordering Harris to include the manual recounts in certified state results. Meanwhile, the Florida Supreme Court upholds Sauls' ruling putting off a hand recount in Gore's contest.

December 2: Sauls opens two days of proceedings on Gore's challenge to the Florida results. The vice president asks for a count of about 14,000 "undervotes" from Palm Beach and Miami-Dade counties.

December 3: With Gore's election contest in court in Tallahassee, Bush meets with Republican congressional leaders at his Texas ranch to discuss the transition.

December 4: Sauls rejects Gore's contest to the Florida results, finding the vice president failed to show that hand recounts would have affected the results. Gore appeals to the Florida Supreme Court. Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court asks the Florida Supreme Court to explain its reasoning in extending the hand recounts, returning the case to Tallahassee and putting off any action in Bush's appeal objecting to the recounts.

December 6: Two lawsuits asking judges to toss out some 25,000 absentee ballots in predominantly Republican Seminole and Martin counties go to trial in Tallahassee. Florida House Speaker Tom Feeney and Senate President John McKay, both Republicans, announce the state Legislature will convene to select electors.

December 7: Gore's legal team argues before the Florida Supreme Court that Sauls was wrong to uphold the certification of Florida's election results. Bush's attorneys urge the seven-member panel to let Sauls' decision stand.

December 8: Divided 4-3, the Florida Supreme Court orders manual recounts in all counties with significant numbers of presidential undervotes; Bush appeals the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court and seeks injunctive relief to stop the hand recounts. The Florida Legislature meets to begin the process of choosing electors on its own. Circuit judges in Tallahassee rule against Democratic challenges to absentee ballots in Martin and Seminole counties.

December 9: The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 ruling, halts the manual recounts and sets a hearing on the matter two days later.

December 11: Bush's lawyers argue before the U.S. Supreme Court in that the Florida high court again overstepped its bounds by ordering a manual recount of undervotes in Gore's election contest. Gore's lawyers argue that the U.S. Supreme Court has no reason to intervene in the state court contest.

[tom_paine]

10. Man, those are two LIES and one-half truth

Were the Democrats looking to recount the entire state or just certain districts

This one is the half-truth. Yes, the Dems started out that way, a mistake. By the time they got around to requesting a statewide recount it was too late. They should have asked for that first.

Plus, the Democrats were trying to have overseas ballots not counted.

No, allegations of Busheviks soliciting post-election ballots sent without postmarks (apparently this is possible overseas with military mail) and the subsequent arrival of non-postmarked overseas ballot suggested the fraud that is so very common among the Imperials. Democrats rightly contersted the questionable ballots, but backed down when the Bushevik Party-Loyal Sub-Media opened up on them with their usual barrage of lies, half-truths, and screaming obfuscations designed to make people throw their hands up in confusion.

The Democrats shopuld have done MUCH MORE to contest the widespread Bushevik Vote Fraud, not less.

I am told the Republicans didn't mind a recount just so all the state was recounted.

This is simply an outright lie.

What we are bitching about here is the Death of the Old American Republic we grew up in and loved, submerged in this dark Totalitarian "Managed Democracy" the Busheviks have likely been midwifing since the Raygun days and before.

I don't know how YOU feel about living in a Totalitarian Nation with no Free Press, no law for Imperial Party members, swimming in a sea of lies and disinformation, Big Brother surveillance (except for Imperial Party Members), and a Scripted "Reality" that often resembles Stalinism except less violent (for the moment) and with different economic policy.

If you don't know what we are "bitching about", then perhaps you neevr will.

Here's what Samuel Adams had to say about YOU back when you were asking what the Colonists were "bitching about":

"If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
-—Samuel Adams

Can you hear him? He's talking to YOU!

[kwolf68]

14. Yes

Debate is on right now

[tom_paine]

17. Sorry I got so hot. here's a refernce to help you

http://www.legitgov.org/index_hot_April5.html

Don't forget the Phony Brooks Brothers Riot staged by the Busheviks in Miami-Dade.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2002/080502a.html

[Toots]

23. If I am not mistaken Florida Law was pretty specific on just what

Gore could and could not do. I believe his hands were bound by Law and that he could only ask for recounts in certain counties and then have a good reason for it. Only the Florida Supreme Court could make the entire state do a recount. Gore could not by Law ask for a Statewide Recount.

[tom_paine]

25. Possible. I didn't know that, if true.

[fob]

28. You are correct. I don't have the Florida election law but I believe

if you look it up it mandates what happens after an election is so close. Something along the lines of; If an election ends within a 1% difference a recount is MANDATORY and the persons involved can choose 4 (number may be different but I'm pretty sure it's spelled out) counties to hand recount. There is no provision for a statewide recount as implied by the posters misinformed debate partner. They also turn around reality, it was Al Gore that made a public, widely-televised speech where he challenged bush* to accept a statewide recount. bush* pussied out.

Somewhere the overseas issue is covered too. repukes were simultaneously counting questionable ballots in repuke strong counties AND pushing for ballots to be tossed in Demo strong counties.

Oh why do repukes hate America?

[cosmicvortex20]

27. Somehow I dont think Samuel Adams would agree with most of

what our country has become... they revolted over a tax so small and slight we in this time and place cant even imagine what all the chaos was about.

Adams would have choked on the idea of ANYONE paying over a 5% tax rate.

[tom_paine]

29. He probably would have disagreed with freeing the slaves, too.

So?

What he WOULD have choked on, perhaps moreso than the tax rates, was the rise of a corrupted Totalitarian Press modelled after Nazi ansd Soviet media, full of lies and disinformation.

And an apathetic lazy populace that seems to largely welcome despotism.

Oh, he'd be in Gitmo right now if he was here.

And no one would give a man...

[LiberalFighter]

37. And it didn't help to have that brain lawyer David Dubois???

representing Gore. He didn't know what he was doing. You have to have someone that understands election laws.

Not sure about the lawyer's name but he was the one prosecuting MicroSoft.

[RodneyCK2]

13. Here, read this... very interesting.

http://www.iknowwhatyoudidlastelection.com/bush-supreme-court.htm

Also, tell your friend to rent or buy "Unprecedented - 2000 Presidential Election", a great documentary that covers the whole debacle. I was so mad after viewing it, much like Moore's Fahrenheit 9/11.

[kwolf68]

16. Stay cool guys

This is something I didn't know much about.

I have come back with some comments and used some info from the website and the guy has vanished. LOL

[liveoaktx]

19. Recommended DVD: Unprecedented - if you order it today, you'll

have it within the week. It's a documentary about the travesty that went on in Florida. Same producer as the guy who did Outfoxed and Uncovered.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0001Y4LZA/002-9223233-0226416?v=glance

[Elidor]

20. Jews for Buchanan, by John Nichols goes into extreme detail on this

I'm at the office right now or I'd post a couple of salient details about the republican double-standard in determining which overseas ballots to challenge and which they fought for. It's a must-have book for anyone interested in the 2000 fiasco.

[Rageneau]

24. Florida Was A Ripoff!

You posited three sentences that supposedly apply to the 2000 Florida election. All three indicate you have been misled.

(1) Were the Democrats looking to recount the entire state or just certain districts?

The LAW in Florida provided (in close situations) for the challenger to challenge the counting in FOUR precincts to see if there was enough disparity to require a full, statewide recount. The Gore campaign picked their best precincts to recount -- but they were not allowed to complete that four-precinct recount because the GOP (knowing they would lose an honest recount) immediately started doing all they could to muck things up. That's what all the chad nonsense was about, and that's why the GOP sent paid operatives from Washington down to Florida to bang on doors (pretending to be Floridians) and intimidate the recount workers.

So the truth about your first statement is that the Democrats (stupidly) were trying to follow the preordained process for a recount. It was the Democrats who WANTED a statewide recount -- the Republicans went to court to stop that. When the Florida Supreme Court ordered a statewide recount anyway, the GOP went to the USSC. Now, the U.S. Supreme Court has NO constitutional role in what happened in Florida, but the constitution never gets in the way of Republicans and something they want. So the SCOTUS (or five of them) broke the rules. There is an established procedure to follow every step of the way in situations like Florida. It was the Republicans who didn't want to follow that process; they wanted to win at any cost -- regardless of what the election results actually were. The Supreme Court was operating in defiance of both the letter and the spirit of the law when it made its ruling (which is why they wrote WITHIN their opinion that no other case could ever be judged the same way by the same criteria. IOW, the Supreme Court established a precedent that applied only once, and only in one unique situation -- the Florida mess. Their ruling was so outrageous that even the five Republicans who wrote it admitted it could never be used again. It was a special ruling -- a payback ruling, a political ruling, a disgraceful ruling.

(2)Plus, the Democrats were trying to have overseas ballots not counted.

This is not true. As for overseas ballots, the Democrats never -- not ONCE -- challenged the legitimate ballots of service people coming from overseas. What they challenged was the fact that Katherine Harris was allowing incomplete (therefore illegal) ballots from the military (and from Republican counties) to be counted while at the same time rejecting absentee ballots from Dem counties because of "technicalities." As the result of the wimpiness of Gore and Lieberman, the aggressiveness of the GOP and the usual incompetence or collusions of the media, this point was never made. As a result, not only were many legitimate Dem absentee ballots tossed away, GOP ballots that SHOULD have been tossed away were counted anyway. Using the military cudgel, the Florida GOP even made it possible for military absentee ballots that arrived AFTER the voting deadline to be counted. The upshot of all this is that the GOP got MORE military (absentee) ballots than they ordinarilly would have, while the Dems got less. Had JUST THE ABSENTEE ballots been subjected to the same strict rules -- wheher GOP or Dem -- Bush would have lost before there was any talk of a recount.


(3)I am told the Republicans didn't mind a recount just so all the state was recounted

You were told wrong. Probably by Republicans. They do that a lot.

The GOP ALWAYS opposed the idea of a statewide recount. They sued and sued to stop it from happening. Look it up.

The truth about Florida is that the Democrats -- over and over again -- were trying to find out what the ACTUAL vote was, while the GOP did all it could (including the USSC) to ensure that the "original" outcome of a 537 vote Bush advantage would not be changed. Note that the Florida vote DID come out exactly as the GOP wanted it to -- a 537 vote Bush advantage.

The GOP did not WANT to know who the people had actually elected; they wanted their boy in there by any means necessary. -- screw the people, screw Florida's constitution -- screw the U.S. Constitution -- screw fairness and honesty and the will of the people.

In other words, none of your premises is. For the real FACTS about Florida -- dissected in such detail that there can be no doubt -- do what the press will not do (because they'd have to admit how big they screwed up)and read Greg Palast's book "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy."

Don't get your facts from the GOP. They are liars under the thrall of the Father of Lies. Do your own reserarch!

[kdmorris]

30. And let's not forget the 97,000 on the "Felons list"

Who happened to be mostly African American that never even got the chance to vote because they were illegally disenfranchised before the election. And many of them are still trying to prove that they are not felons so that they can vote this year.

And Kwolf68, "what are we bitching about here?" is quite frankly the fact that this President STOLE the election with the help of his brother and Katherine Harris and his Right Wing friends on the USSC. I LIVED through that election, in Palm Beach County, FL. I VOTED ON the butterfly ballot and watched the recount on C-SPAN for days. And I also watched as the Republicans spun and lied and did everything they could to STOP votes from being counted. At the time, the Florida law stated that a legal vote was ANY vote where the intent of the voter could be seen (so, yes, a dimple in the chad was "intent"). But the Republican guard made it seem like Gore was "using magic" to recount. Find a copy of and read Greg Palast's "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy".

Maybe you will remember the famous "The votes have been counted and recounted and counted again, sometimes 4 or 5 times. How many times do we have to recount? Until Gore gets the number he wants?". The truth is.. The votes were machine counted 1 time and no other recounts were ever certified by the state. But, hey, if you say it enough times on CNN, it's the truth, right?

Oh hell, why am I even responding to this crap when we have the Convention to watch? It's been a wonderful week!!!

[never_get_over_it]

33. I haven't read the whole thread so forgive me if

someone explained this

Al Gore asked for only a certain counties to be recounted

There were some funny things going on with absentee overseas ballots like folks mailing them out after the election - and Gore questioned this until he got too much flack for being against the military which is BS

The whole thing ended up in FLORIDA Supreme CT who said the WHOLE STATE had to be recounted

Bush took this to the Supreme CT of the US Bush v Gore - not Gore v. Bush - so if your friends are telling you that Bush agreed to a full state recount they are full of shit.

The Supreme Court of the US said nothing had to be re-counted

Bush is in the White House

[vision]

38. some info

Each county had to be contested individually. There was not in place a way to challenge the whole state in the "contest" stage but could be in the "certification" stage which is why his advisor's told Gore to hurry up to the next stage.

Yes initially the Democrats did challenge some oversee ballots because they were not stamped or/and signed. But they backed off, meanwhile in Republican counties the Repubs did everything that they could to disqualify oversea votes that were for Democrats.

Gore offered to have all the votes counted, Bush refused and was the one to go to the Supreme Court to stop vote counting.

Democrats.com has some good information.
http://democrats.com/display.cfm?id=248