"and no matter how accurate the machinery, the margin that one or the other has led by has always been within the 'acceptable' margin of error for even the best of machines... "

There is no reason why a manual count done fairly and carefully should have any margin of error at all. There is only one objectively correct answer, and it is lying there in the piles of ballot papers, waiting to be identified.

If the paper is flat at the relevant point, it's not a vote; if it's pushed in so that the people counting - representing both parties - can agree that the voter pushed that button, it's a vote. For Gore or for Bush. Or for Nader or whoever. It's not that difficult.P>

But paper and pencil and a mark against the candidate's name is so much easier to count. Human being are still best when it come down to it.

Still I gather it's anticipated that the Florida state assembly is in fact going to ignore the actual voting, and appoint its own electors to vote for Bush. Unless of course it turns out that, when the counting of the popular vote is finished (assuming they haven't found a way of stopping it being done), it shows that Bush did actually win. But clearly they think it's more likely that in reality he lost.

Which means it'll all be down to Congress one way or anther. Or of course some of the electors might decide to break ranks...

In another thread I was wishing that Mark Twain was around to comment on all this. It's occurred to me that he was around back in 1876, the last time something like this happened - so does anyone know what he had to say about it then? I suspect he was fairly rude about it all.