You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #33: Where would one begin? There was the "heavier" paper made [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
Skarbrowe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-04-07 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
33. Where would one begin? There was the "heavier" paper made
Edited on Sun Nov-04-07 12:36 PM by Skarbrowe
by a paper factory that had been producing the punch card paper for years with no problems. Suddenly, before the 2000 election they were constantly sent the wrong weight of paper. They would reject this paper, but it would end up coming back. The bad paper would cause the stylist to not clearly PUNCH out the whole, leaving those awful things called hanging chads. These batches of bad paper were to be sent to Florida.

Also, the Republican machine in Florida had already systematically disenfranchised thousands of minority voters who never had a chance for their vote to be counted in the first place by wiping all kinds of similar names to criminals off the voter rolls. These people didn't know this had happened to then until the day they tried to vote. They were turned away with no recourse. All phone lines to clear anything up were BUSY.

Also, if some parts of florida where you would mark your candidate on the optimal scanner sheets, you were told to write in the name of your candidate too. If you DID write in the candidate after marking him on the ballot, it was called an over vote and discarded.

After blocking thousands of Democratic votes with tricks like I'm pulling from my memory above, if every ballot had been looked at, ACTUALLY looked at, Gore still would have won. Now, just from the ballots that they did have a chance to go over before the count was unconstitutionally stopped, the weird way they set up how they would look at a hanging chad, one quarter out, half-out, really ridiculous stuff, some people said Bush would have won with the strictest interpretation of the ballot. If they could have just had a chance to read the ballots that had Al Gore's name written on it because that legally fell under voter INTENT, Gore probably had the election with ease.

Edited to point out that while I was taking forever to type all of this, several posters got in some great information with links.

Again, all this is right off the top of my head. I'm sure like people have said, Google should have it all.

Still bugs me to death.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC