WSJ.com - Clinton v. Obama: The Lawsuit

Powered by           How ironic. For over seven years the Democratic Party has fulminated against the Electoral College system that gave George W. Bush the presidency over popular-vote winner Al Gore in 2000. But they have designed a Rube Goldberg nominating process that could easily produce a result much like the Electoral College result in 2000: a winner of the delegate count, and thus the nominee, over the candidate favored by a majority of the party's primary voters. We all know full well what could happen next. The array of battle-tested Democratic lawyers who fought for recounts, changes in ballot counting procedures, and even re-votes in Florida courts and the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000 would separate into two camps. Half of them would be relying on the suddenly-respectable Supreme Court Bush v. Gore decision that overturned the Florida courts' post-hoc election rules changes. The other half would be preaching a new-found respect for "federalism" and demanding that the high court leave the Florida court decisions alone.             Click the following to access the sent link:       WSJ.com - Commentary: Clinton v. Obama: The Lawsuit* This article will be available to non-subscribers of the Online Journal for up to seven days after it is e-mailed.                 Get your EMAIL THIS Browser Button and use it to email information from any Web site.           *This article can also be accessed if you copy and paste the entire address below into your web browser. http://online.wsj.com/wsjgate?subURI=%2Farticle%2FSB120269002843257513-email.html&nonsubURI=%2Farticle_email%2FSB120269002843257513-lMyQjAxMDI4MDEyMTYxOTEwWj.html