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

Reply #193: The WHOLE thing was fishy. I'm right with you there. [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: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
Usrename Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-05 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #189
193. The WHOLE thing was fishy. I'm right with you there.
The 5-4 and 7-2 thing just makes it impossible to parse.

I just have to explain the FL part a little better. Gore, as far as I know, never contested anything in FL. Under FL law he would have had a right to do so by claiming fraud. He didn't ever do that.

Instead, what happened was a mandatory recount is required by statute in close elections. I think it is something like a half a percent, or may be a quarter percent. It was close enough to trigger the mandatory redo. (Orange County, Orlando area, never even did the mandatory recount. They just recertified the original count rather than run the punchcards through the machines again as required by law.)

If the automatically triggered recounts vary by a certain amount from the original counts, any contestant can request a hand count. This happened in only four counties. Gore requested the hand counts. (We did ours here in Volusia county and I think it changed by like nine votes or something. People had written the name on the balot instead of coloring the dot for the optical scan. LOL)

Now here's the deal. We have counties (rural) that only do hand counts on paper ballots. We have punch cards. We have optical scan. And newly arrived in 2004 we now have vapor votes.

In every case the local election board has always had to deal with it. State law says that a vote must be counted if the intent of the voter is clear. Simple and uniform for the whole state.

In any event, the real problem with SCOTUS was that the record showed that the most accurate method for counting votes is a hand count. Many experts testified in the lower courts and they all agreed on this. Not a single line of testimony disputed this. It may even be well establised law as far as I know. And yet..

SCOTUS even stopped the original four counties from doing the hand count. Odd. Very odd. Something about it would violate equal protection for the other counties that didn't get a hand count. And yet we (here in Volusia, one of the original four) did exactly that and had it certified before the count was halted. Go figure...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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