The 'decision' that was most called for by our "Supreme" court after
"hearing" this case was not a decision calling for one candidate to be
favored over the other but a call for the aleatory, winner take all, in a
dice throw, a coin toss, a poker game, a pick in a car race, a balloon
race, a football game, anything decisive of which the outcome was uncertain
so each had their EQUAL chance (as in Nietzsche's "Lord Chance") -
otherwise - Supreme inequality, supreme disdainment.

Kenneth