Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Discerning Voter Intent in the Minnesota Recount

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-23-08 04:41 PM
Original message
Discerning Voter Intent in the Minnesota Recount

Discerning Voter Intent in the Minnesota Recount

By Ed Felten

November 21st, 2008

Minnesota election officials are hand-counting millions of ballots, as they perform a full recount in the ultra-close Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken. Minnesota Public Radio offers a fascinating gallery of ballots that generated disputes about voter intent.

A good example is this one:



A scanning machine would see the Coleman and Franken bubbles both filled, and call this ballot an overvote. But this might be a Franken vote, if the voter filled in both slots by mistake, then wrote "No" next to Coleman's name.

Other cases are more difficult, like this one:



Do we call this an overvote, because two bubbles are filled? Or do we give the vote to Coleman, because his bubble was filled in more completely?

~snip~

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/discerning...

Refresh | +1 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
elocs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-23-08 05:08 PM
Response to Original message
1. Just think, the kind of voters who cast those ballots are people you might enounter
while driving on the highways. Filling in an oval is not rocket science, but here in WI we have people who cannot manage to simply connect 2 lines. I just cannot understand how people can screw up something so simple.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-23-08 06:44 PM
Response to Original message
2. The top one does show the intent. The bottom one is questionable as to the voter's intent.
My thought is that it is for Coleman but I wouldn't be 100% sure that was the voter's intent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-24-08 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
3. The finger is clearly pointing to Aldrich!
Those who cast the votes decide nothing! Those who count the votes decide everything, right? :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
emlev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-03-08 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. Beautiful. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-24-08 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
4. Heh
So anyone with a pen can fill in an oval at anytime later? And make ballots overvote?

Problems galore. And what's up with taking so long? Have they ever heard of sort and stack?

It's been what, 5 days of counting? Have the ballots been moved? Stored properly?

Or is it a sinister plot to make sure a hand count never takes place again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 03:45 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Sort and stack is not fast, whatever claims have been made for it
The slow step is deciding which stacks the ballots should be in. The 2004 gubernatorial recount in Washington State took about a month.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-02-08 08:11 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Which stacks?
How hard is it to make the four separate stacks? Not hard.

Then just run each stack through a paper counter. Not a vote counter, a paper counter, just like the banks do. Fast as heck.

So what, in your mind, makes making stacks so hard?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-01-08 11:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Just the opposite
(Or is it a sinister plot to make sure a hand count never takes place again?) The Sinister plot is, they want to make us believe that there is some sort of hand count in place to secure us that the optical scaMMed ballots get hand counted, it isn't working, but it is fun to watch the crooks work..

Get the procedure in place, NOW, that if a voter wants to Hand Count ALL the ballots in a polling place H/She can do it. NO QUESTIONS ASKED!

DREs, Levers automatically ILLEGAL because there is nothing to Hand Count at the polling place.

Georgia....You will ABIDE by the election machine results, why? there are no paper ballots for you to hand count GET OVER IT!

Get the procedure in place, NOW!

PEACE :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Dec-02-08 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yep
They are so sinister that they make like a hand count is gonna show that the machine count was correct so that we give up.

We do need a hand count at the precinct procedure set in place just as you suggest.

What bothers me is the ordeal they have constructed here, there, and everywhere. And that there are so few complaints!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Sep 19th 2014, 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform 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