The real question to ask about the election in 60 is not who won but would you rather have had Nixon in charge during the Cuban missile crisis? In my opinion none of us would be here to argue over this if Nixon was, Nixon was a lot of things but calm and collective were not one of them. Unlike Kennedy who was able to backdown some of the more militant members of his cabinet Nixon would have let them have there wish. Nixon would most likely had similar militant segments in his cabinet as all presidents do. These generals, in Kennedy's cabinet, wanted a full scale invasion of Cuba which would had lead to WWIII. Plus, we would not have had Adlai Stevenson IV as UN ambassador. A truly unsung hero of those chaotic days. Who stood down the Russians at the one of the most critical of points in our history.
In regards to the Florida debacles it is closed and done and needs only to be brought up as a lesson for all patriotic Americans. The disenfranchisement of legitimate voters has no place in our republic. Katherine Harris is a deplorable person who got hers in that beat down she received against Bill Nelson. My advice for what little it is worth is that anyone who fixate on the past is doomed to become obsessed with it. Ultimately, any obsession will destroy you it is better to learn from the past and make sure it does not happen again.
To the question originally posted, no he should not. Let alone the fact that he does not need the money. However dubious the legal challenge put forth by Coleman's campaign the were within the letter of the law. Hopefully Coleman pays electorally for the delay of the rightful winner by never being able to hold another public office in Minnesota. Still he was within his rights to put forth the legal challenge.
Sorry if that too long but as my friends would all tell you i am a long winded person. It can be a good and bad thing.
top prospect
Poll
