smooth

I find your perception of our legal structure perplexing.

How do you come to the conclusion that federal appellate and supreme court decisions aren't binding on state affairs?

The Supreme Court stepped in to rule whether the lower, State court's ruling was in accordance with the laws governing the nation, as a whole.

That decision went through the same process this one is going through--case filed with a regional court, appeal filed with the state appellate court, reviewed and decided by state supremt court. Appeal filed with federal appellate court and, ultimately, decided on by the Supreme Court of the land.

The ramifications of that supreme decision declared that the polling devices that were used in Florida had to be replaced by the next election. That recent supreme decision supercedes our early 1900's referendum to hold recall elections within X days from certification of the signatures.

You didn't even answer the underlying question--how do you justify arguing for an election a few months before the scheduled replacement of machines that were already judged by the highest court in our country to undermine voting principles and fairness?

The number of candidates on the ballot exacerbates the dilemma. The fact that our fiscal crisis is causing polling stations in various counties to close should also be a matter of concern to those desiring fair election processes. You should also know that we already had an election scheduled in March.