Bush v Gore Redux

Digby, as he so often does, hits the nail on the head with a long piece about Bush v Gore 2000 and the likelihood of something similar happening in 2004. I agree with him that if the election is at all close then a raft of lawsuits will follow.

In 2000, the concept of waking up the morning after election day and not knowing who was elected was new and in a way a little exciting. It was uncharted waters, and back then, we didn’t know how much the fix was in. Call it naive, call it willful blindness, call it an inability to accept that the other guy is less honorable than you are — all true. We went to a rumble without a knife, and the whole world is paying for it.

Like Atrios, I can’t quite bring myself to this point, but I can’t say Digby’s totally wrong either:

Foolishly, Gore thought that being modest and fair still meant something. He was not prepared for a streetfight. And, looking back I realize that I wasn’t either. Like a green youth I didn’t believe they’d actually go that far. Even after the impeachment sideshow, an event that solidified my belief in the lethal, fascistic nature of the modern Republican party, I was not fully prepared for the no holds barred approach they would take in this situation.

It is what led me to the point at which I am able to say without any sense of restraint or caution that I would put NOTHING past them — even a staged terrorist attack. This is because every time I think they have some limits, they prove me wrong. As the old saying goes, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice…won’t get fooled again….

No, I do not believe they would stage a terrorist attack. But when it comes to internal domestic matters, especially ones pertaining to winning elections, yeah, there’s not much they wouldn’t do or try to do. We just have to find a way to keep them from doing it again. Hopefully while still holding on to what makes us better than them.