I’ve been thinking a bit about Gerry Nicholls’ latest in The Hill Times, and I’ve concluded that his thesis applies to American national politics as well. Certainly, the jackass and the elephantine champions spend more time slagging each other than extolling themselves, and that leads to a disturbing thought:
The possibility exists that, come election day in November, the margin of victory in the popular vote will be narrower than the margin of error. In other words, the situation that arose in the 2000 presidential election.
You remember the 2000 election, right? Al Gore rescinding his concession, massive recounts, accusations of theft and cheating on both sides, “chad” entering the language, the Supreme Court ruling to stop, the left whining about George W. Bush stealing the election. The whole affair bordered on farce, and I suspect there aren’t that many folks in the political spectrum willing to repeat the experience.
I’m wondering if folks out there have that same thought. Hence this challenge.
Pingback: Blogging Tories Challenge: Will Obama-Romney Be the New Bush-Gore? | The Wellington Street Post
Well with all those voters without I.D. voting it should be close.
You should add another option: I want Romney to win, but it will be close.
Obama should NOT trust anyone but ACORN to count the votes, or we may have that Florida “chad” thing all over again.
I’m no fan of Romney, liked Herman Cain, Gary Johnson best, but I’d vote for ANY of the Republican candidates over The Amateur. Hell I’d take Bill Clinton again for a third term over Obama, anyone BUT Obama.