Or if the recount was allowed to take place. SCOTUS decided for Florida that it would not be able to complete the recount in time thus handing the presidency to Bush.
SCOTUS new what they were doing was wrong. Why else would they explicitly say in the decision that it set no precedent and was never to used to argue another case.
Look, all I'm saying is that SCOTUS took away the peoples choice. Had the recount happened and Bush still won, fine. Had SCOTUS ruled in favor of Gore I'd be just as upset with them as I am that they ruled for Bush. I just wish that they would have stayed the hell out of it.
Evidently you are a product of the public school system. (1.) the recount was void when Gore chose to be selective as to the counties he wanted the recount to take place in. (2.) A statewide recount of election results, after the debate was rightly ended by the USSC, conducted by the NY Times and the LA Times showed that Bush still won the election despite wholesale fraud by ACORN in Broward County
(3.) The USSC did not rule for Bush, it ruled against the governor of Florida (a Democrat) and the Florida State Supreme Court (the majority ruling coming from Democrat appointees) in abrogating the written law enacted by the Florida legislature. The USSC told the State of Florida that it had to follow the law as enacted, not how the State wanted it to be.
You really need to use your brain rather than come from the emotional aspect,