Complications:

[Prior to the selection of the President, I urged following the process. It should have ended up in the hands of the electorate, a political process, but endorsed by the constitution. Instead it ended at the hands of the Supreme Court,(a political process) with questions left unanswered as time ran out aided by the court itself. It was an exception to any court precedence].

Letters to the Editor: Seattle Post-Intelligencer November 21, 2000

COMPLICATIONS

Process may be slow but it must be allowed to play itself out


I certainly hope this country doesn't remain divided over this election. But what's wrong with standing up for what's right? Both sides can believe they're right, but they can't both have it their way. That is why we have a constitutional process that's more complicated than just deciding by the popular vote. It's what many have fought and died for.
It's not up to one side to declare a winner before the process has completed. It's the duty of both sides to see it's completed right. But what is right? It's better to make sure this is determined by the legal system than settle for unanswered questions.
It may even turn out that the process needs a correction. But by settling for less, we may never find out. Ending up in the highest court may answer questions about the process and point to problems in it, decades faster than going through the process of a constitutional amendment.
Court decisions may even allow the process to continue and not address the immediate questions. The ugly partisan process may still have to play itself out. But we should respect the process, regardless of who's right. Or many have died in vain.