There is currently no debate over Missouri's votes because Gore does not plan to contest them. My speculation (and yes, it is speculation, although this is exactly how I would do things in this position) is that the voters who were turned away will protest. This will result in a rather prolific class-action lawsuit against the US Government for infringing upon the constitutional rights of many citizens of Missouri. This is the basis for my previous theory about Missouri's electoral votes becoming null and void.
It is possible for Oregon's votes to matter; it is not unheard of for a couple electors to vote for someone besides the person they were picked to vote for. For example, Ronald Reagan received electoral votes in 1976 because of people not liking Gerald Ford. Were this situation to occur, and two of the Republican electors voted against Bush, and Bush wins Florida, but not Oregon, Bush will have 269 votes and the election will go to the House. This is an EXTREMELY unlikely scenario, but I did want to make it clear that there is something of a precedent for it, even if an election has never hinged upon it.
Cateran Emperor, it appalls me that someone with your intellect made two significantly erroneous remarks in your recent postings. First and foremost, with Congress set up the way it is now, the President is more powerful; the 2/3 vote to override a Presidential veto does not exist in either house of Congress, much less both of them. This makes the President more powerful. Additionally, you are forgetting the third branch of the government: the Supreme Court. If Bush is elected, he will most likely appoint 4 of the 9 justices. Granted, they are slight variables, but it is another example of the power of the President. And don't pull this "advice of Congress" thing on me, the President appoints whoever he wants.
Second of all, the gridlock during the Clinton administration was very nearly nonexistant except for the budget one time. The very fact that the houses of Congress have nearly equal representation means that gridlock will be a far lesser force in the next couple years; do you really think that the Republicans will continually fight Gore when they KNOW that they could easily lose majority in 2002 if they do so? Likewise, will the Democrats be willing to fight the Republican majority tooth and nail when they are well aware that they could lose their minor upswing during the next Congressional election?
On my obligatory final note on Missouri: Carnahan's seat is fairly unimportant in the matter of the Presidency; it seems as though that may not have been clear, given some of the responses I received. I merely mentioned it as an interesting side note.
