I was right!!!!!!!!!!

[LawyerRon]

If you followed any of my posts in this forum, you'll know I predicted the Federal Court would decline to hear the Republicans challenge based on lack of Federal Question Jurisdiction:

Quote from the CNN website:

"A federal judge today refused to stop hand recounts in scattered counties in Florida, rejecting a Republican lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Donald Middlebrooks said the question of whether to halt the recounts isn't a matter for federal courts. He says it belongs in state courts".

[Bronco]

No offense ment but even Bush's crew knew that that one wasn't going to fly if they were serious they would have gone to the voteing commision or state court. What did happen though is that the dems. were focoused[sp] on disputing it an a few other things that they may have futzed up on the fact that all counties need to report by Tues. at 5:00pm hand counts or not.

Whoever said that life is a chess game was NUTS, Life is a chess game with ATTITUDE

[LawyerRon]

Hey Bronco,
The way I understand it, the Republicans wanted to get into Federal Court because it's stacked with Republican appointed judges.

However, the threshold issue is always Jurisdiction. A court without jurisdiction is powerless to hear a case. In fact, when you file your complaint, you must put forth your "Statement of Jurisdiction" where you cite the Federal Statute invoking Jurisdiction, and you've got the burden to show the court has proper jurisdiction.

[clydefo]

LawyerRon,
I say that Florida won't be included in the Electoral College vote. 5 will get you 10 if you want to bet.

[LawyerRon]

Clyde,
I don't understand your wager. Explain.

[troysvihl]

I'll seriously take that bet Clydefo. What's the limit you're willing to risk?

[keithr]

I'd take a piece of that too!

How much are we betting?

Keith

[clydefo]

LawyerRon and others,
I say that the Florida Electors of the Electoral College will not vote on December 18th because the court fights will prevent the Florida vote from being certified in time by Bush’s Florida Campaign Co-Chairman, Katherine Harris, who is also Florida’s Secretary of State. My $10 to your $5. paid to you or your favorite charity. Offer stands to the first ten people that might be interested. I couldn’t afford to lose more than that if I’m wrong, being a poor Democrat.

[troysvihl]

I will take that bet.

I place $5 to your $10 that Fla's electoral votes will be included in the final national electoral college vote.

Please confirm Clydefo.

Is PayPal alright with you?

[clydefo]

You’re on, troysvihl. PayPal is fine.

[LawyerRon]

I'm in for $5.00.

[keithr]

Put me down for $5.00 too!

PayPal is fine with me also.

Keith

[glc]

If clydefo is right, the President shall be chosen by the House of Representatives, with each state having one vote. The Vice President shall be chosen by the Senate, one vote per Senator.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitut...ndmentxii.html

I just researched the House and Senate party affiliations. If voting goes strictly by party lines, Bush will take 25 states, Gore 19 states, and there are 6 states that could go either way (tie or independent). Very interesting. My money would be on Bush.

Cheney would win in the Senate, 54-46, if voting goes by party line.

[troysvihl]

clydefo, you said your willing to bet up to 10 people, but if you don't find all 10, I'm willing to increase the wager. I'm willing to take all the remaining "slots" that you can't find anyone to take. So just tell me if your up for it.

Also, I suggest that we get an impartial judge to decide any inconsistencies. I know this is a pretty straight forward wager, and there shouldn't be any problems. But with the way things have been going in this election, who knows?
I was going to suggest LawyerRon, but since he's in on the wager, we should get someone else.

[Edited by troysvihl on 11-15-2000 at 04:46 PM]

[bob]

troysvihl, It is for a donation to charity. You would not receive money even if you win. If you lose, clydefo was probably going to donate $100 to charity anyways. Why would you want to buy all the rest of the "betting blocks"? Would the win be enhanced or would you feel better for your charity?

If he wins he can keep the money.

Best you could do is to donate it to charity that clydefo would not like. That may prove hard to do.






[Edited by bob on 11-15-2000 at 05:19 PM]

[LawyerRon]

Wrong Bob,
Clyde said "you, or your favorite charity". If I win, I want the dough. If I lose, I'll graciously pay the dough.

[LawyerRon]

Also,
I say we pick an impartial arbitrator to rule on who wins his or her decision final with no argument allowed. I agree to be bound by the arbitrator's decision. Otherwise, we might be arguing forever over who one. I vote for glc.

[clydefo]

Just to keep it friendly (and to minimize potential losses), I’d prefer to limit it to one bet per person. Since the situation might possibly resolve itself soon, say with a Bush concession, I’ll stop taking bets at 11:59 pm on Friday 11/17/00. glc is fine by me as an arbiter.

[glc]

I accept the position as arbiter.

Now, is this *exactly* what you are proposing, clydefo?

"I say that the Florida Electors of the Electoral College will not vote on December 18th".

I quote from the Twelfth Amendment:

"The electors shall meet in their respective states and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same
state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall
make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign
and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;"

I will dictate the definition of "December 18". This will be the calendar day, between the hours of 12:01am and 12:00pm Eastern Standard Time (Tallahassee, Florida).

We now must agree on the definition of "vote". Being that clydefo is the issuer of the wagering opportunity, we shall now entertain his definition. The floor is yours, clydefo.

Don't flame me for being anal, I'm being anal on purpose - let's do this right the first time and cover all bases up front, unlike what we are witnessing right now. If we do this correctly up front you will not need my arbitration services - the answer will be obvious.

[LawyerRon]

And like I said, no arguing with the arbiter once he reaches a decision. glc, if you rule against me, I might tell you I "disagree", but I'll promptly pay up.

[glc]

This will be a piece of cake - I can be completely impartial - I don't like Democrats and I don't like Lawyers.

[LawyerRon]

g,
If I had feelings, that comment would really hurt!

[clydefo]

glc,
Thank you, Your Honor, for agreeing to "hold the money" for us. I suppose I should have anticipated some hair-splitting over details, but since I so rarely do that myself, I did not. Maybe I should have had LawyerRon draw it up. At any rate, thanks for seeking clarification.

My proposal is that the Florida votes will not be among those opened and counted by the new Congress. December 18th is the mandated date, but just in case troysvihl might try to get an injunction to delay it one day, let's refer to it as "whenever they vote".

BTW, The way I'm reading the 12th A, the new Congress would choose the President only if any candidate does not have a majority of the votes that were cast by however many Electors showed up to cast their votes. This year, Gore would win since he currently leads in the EC. Bush may regret having taken this to court; the Federal Appeals Court will be doing him a favor when they toss him out of the courtroom tomorrow with only an admonishment for bringing frivolous lawsuits.

From what I've read, the Florida Supreme Court and state law strongly favor remedies that allow the will of the people to be known. If that happens, and Florida goes to Gore, I'll be paying off the bets with a smile on my face.

As I prepared to post this I was listening to Katherine Harris, Bush's campaign manager, denying the Counties their re-count. The last desperate attempt to stop an accurate count and give it to Bush. James Baker looks frantic to me.

[glc]

clydefo: OK, I welcome the simplification. If Florida's electors are not represented in the vote count presented to the joint session of Congress by the President of the Senate *whenever that may be*, you win. Works just fine for me! Any objections, anyone?

"the person having the greatest number of votes
for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of electors appointed;"

I guess this hinges on the definition of "appointed". Will Florida be considered as having "appointed" electors if they do not vote?

Ron - I take back everything I said - I need a lawyer!

[bob]

This whole betting thing must be a joke.

Giving 2 to 1 on a 1 in 50 chance would be quite odd.

PayPal holding bets and paying off the winner- He He


Good luck Clydefo, you will need it.

[LawyerRon]

Hey g,
You're on your own.

[troysvihl]

Ok, just $5 for me then. I also agree that glc is the final word on any unforseen contingencies and there is no crying after his decision.


And should I win, I want the money, not a donation to charity. (I have my own charities to support and I doubt that clydefo makes regular contributions to the NRA, Federalist Society, Cato Institute, or the Libertarian party.)



[Edited by troysvihl on 11-16-2000 at 11:36 AM]

[bob]

"/NRA, Federalist Society, Cato Institute, or the Libertarian party/"

char·i·ty (chr-t)
n., pl. chari·ties.

Provision of help or relief to the poor; almsgiving.
Something given to help the needy; alms.
An institution, an organization, or a fund established to help the needy.

Yep nice charities

[troysvihl]

Those groups help poor people (all people acctually). In fact the policies trumpeted by the Cato institute will help infinitely more than any group giving out provisions.

[clydefo]

glc,
If it please the Court, Your Honor, I would like to announce that the betting window is closed. Thank you troysvihl, LawyerRon and keithr for your bets.

I was looking back over the proposal's evolution and have extracted the main points below:

Original proposal: "I say that Florida won't be included in the Electoral College vote"

Restatement: "I say that the Florida Electors of the Electoral College will not vote on December 18th"

troysvihl's understanding: "Fla's electoral votes will be included in the final national electoral college vote"

clarification requested by glc: "My proposal is that the Florida votes will not be among those opened and counted by the new Congress. December 18th is the mandated date, but ... let's refer to it as 'whenever they vote"'

glc's final statement: "OK, I welcome the simplification. If Florida's electors are not represented in the vote count presented to the joint session of Congress by the President of the Senate *whenever that may be*, you win. Works just fine for me! Any objections, anyone?"

Your observation, sir, that "If clydefo is right, the President shall be chosen by the House of Representatives, with each state having one vote" got me to thinking about the situation. Since it is becoming total war, the Republicans seem to be preparing to selectively and arbitrarily disqualify electoral votes when they reach Congress. Perhaps Florida's if for Gore, and others in order to give the majority to Bush. If this happens, does it complicate determining of the winner of the bet?