If you consider the recount abstracted from all other phenomena, then this may be a reasonable point of view.<p>But voter suppression by Republicans in the South is well-known and widespread, because the GOP wins more elections when the turnout, particularly black turnout, decreases. Florida has a long history of voter suppression, which has been documented on numerous occasions: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com&#x2F;2012&#x2F;04&#x2F;05&#x2F;florida-how-quickly-we-forget&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com&#x2F;2012&#x2F;04&#x2F;05&#x2F;florida-ho...</a><p>So, in the Supreme Court vote, we have a majority conservative court that includes Scalia, a Reagan&#x2F;Bush era appointee, who happens to favor the side of the coin that puts another Bush in the White House.<p>Scalia admitted that a recount was potentially prejudicial to Bush, and decided it was best to quash it. His action takes place in a sequence of many actions designed to bolster the GOP. Coincidentally, Scalia helped roll back the Voting Rights Act, once a milestone for Civil Rights.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;articles.latimes.com&#x2F;2013&#x2F;jun&#x2F;25&#x2F;local&#x2F;la-me-ln-scalias-twisted-views-reflect-supreme-court-voting-rights-case-20130625" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;articles.latimes.com&#x2F;2013&#x2F;jun&#x2F;25&#x2F;local&#x2F;la-me-ln-scali...</a><p>Every single one of his positions may be impeccably argued, but it&#x27;s a striking coincidence that he toed a clear ideological line on abortion, gun control, affirmative action and gay marriage, among many other issues.<p>I do not believe his stance on Bush v. Gore was neutral. He had a horse in the race; his horse won; and America was the worse for it. Good riddance.