[EL] Accepting the results of the election

[JBoppjr at aol.com]

Thank you Steve and yes I honestly believe that Trump meant the results of  
the election on election day. Fortunately for you, me and Mrs. Clinton, we 
are  all lawyers and have spent out lives parsing words.  It is perfectly  
obvious that Trump has not.  His speech is halting and disjointed and he  
often misuses words in incomplete sentences.  As a lawyer, I find this  
disconcerting but many find it part of his charm and attractiveness. So when  
Wallace said accept the "result" of the election, it is perfectly understandable  
that a layman would understand that to be the result of the election on 
election  day.  Jim Bopp
 
 
In a message dated 10/19/2016 11:59:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
SVladeck at law.utexas.edu writes:

 
Jim: The  question Chris Wallace asked was not whether Mr. Trump would 
accept the  “election day count”; it was whether he would accept the “result” 
of the  election. I suspect we would all agree that the “result” of the 
election is  not necessarily what the TV networks report on election night, but 
rather the  result when totals are certified, any available and appropriate 
legal  challenges thereto are complete (which was the net consequence of 
the Supreme  Court’s ruling in Bush v. Gore), and the Electoral College does 
its  thing. That’s the result Al Gore accepted in 2000 – and a result I’m 
sure he  would have been willing to say he’d accept if asked at the final 
debate, at 3  a.m. on election night, or anytime thereafter. 
Perhaps  Jim honestly thinks Mr. Trump meant the former, and intended to 
leave open the  possibility of appropriately challenging recounts in states in 
potentially  dispositive in which they’re automatically triggered, a la 
2000. Given what  else he has said on the campaign trail on the topic, it seems 
fairly clear to  me that that’s not what Mr. Trump meant, and that to 
compare his  remarks tonight to 2000 is therefore specious. 
-steve 
 
 
From:  law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu  
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of  Larry Levine
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 10:52  PM
To: JBoppjr at aol.com; rhasen at law.uci.edu;  law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Accepting the results of the  election

If I recall, Gore  was on his way to make his concession speech, when the 
secretary of state in  Florida announced the result was within the margin for 
a mandatory recount.  That was when both sides dug in their heels for the 
fight.   
Larry 
 
 
From: _law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_ 
(mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu)   
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu]  On Behalf Of _JBoppjr at aol.com_ (mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com) 
Sent: Wednesday,  October 19, 2016 8:06 PM
To: _rhasen at law.uci.edu_ (mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu) ; 
_law-election at uci.edu_ (mailto:law-election at uci.edu) 
Subject:  [EL] Accepting the results of the election

 
 
 
Some  of those on this list serve may have taken note of this exchange:
 

 
Chris  Wallace: "Will you accept the result of this election?"
Donald Trump: "I  will look at it at the time. ... I will keep you in 
suspense."
Hillary  Clinton: "That's horrifying."
 

 
Let  me say that I think that Clinton's reaction was as phony and as it was 
absurd.  Al Gore did not accept the results of the 2000 election. He sued 
for a recount  in Florida which was not resolved until early December by a 
decision of the US  Supreme Court. Only then, when no other legal recourse was 
possible, did he  accept the results of the election. This, of course, was 
Gore's legal right to  do. It would be ridiculous for Trump to say in 
advance that he will accept the  election day count, if it would be appropriate to 
institute a recount.    
 

 
State  laws provide legal remedies to contest election or ask for recounts 
under  certain circumstances. It is perfectly appropriate for a candidate to 
use  these if legally available. Jim  Bopp





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20161020/ab34ec87/attachment.html>