Reply #29: He has gone beyond sticking to the facts, if you ask me.

[eomer]

Here is Hertzberg replying to garybeck in April '05 (emphasis mine):

You also say, "we also know the recount was done illegally; the hand counts were not selected randomly." My response: While ESI and the American Statistical Association offered to help every county in Ohio with their precinct selection for the recount on a pro-bono basis, the random selection was not done "illegally", as you state. The law in Ohio does not define the term "random" and thereby gives the election officials a tremendous amount of flexibility here. However, I agree that the recount procedures need to be re-evaluated and improved.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=353045#360660

He ventured into "words have no meaning"-land rather than admit that the Ohio recount did not follow the law. If he wants to be a stickler that is fine but somehow he lost his stickler-iness rather than admit there was something wrong with that election. A person who is careful to not lean toward either party would still have to admit that the recount was not according to law, if that person is honest.

I looked at his recent report and agree that it is critical of flaws in the system -- the same flaws we will be critical of -- and has a lot that is helpful to our cause. It also has a bit too much of stevenstevensteven (his DU name) and of ESIESIESI for my taste (self-promotion, IOW) but we can't make that a disqualifier or else we will lose too many soldiers.

I'm hopeful that Hertzberg may be more on our side than I originally thought and that he will fight for fair and reliable elections. But I'll continue to be wary, maybe even suspicious. That's just the world I live in.