That is not what I meant by looser- whether it is more accurate or not, I don't know because of the possibility of human error- but I do know that it will pick up missed votes. MAybe more lenient would be what I mean? Under the manual decision, a chad that is missed by the machine because it seems to be intact, but has one corner separated, will be counted as a vote. Thus more votes will be acceptable for both parties, but as stated, the increase will favor the majority party of the precinct.
More disturbing, it seems that partially into the count, according to a story just on TV, the standard for this was changed in PB. Originally, they were employing the "light test", but then decided to go with the "one point separated" test-- a lower standard that will further increase the votes accepted. The official trying to explain this never should have...he was confused and confusing and it left one wondering what the hell was going on there.
I don't think arrogance was involved at all--- the Bush campaign knows how tight the race was. It's a shame that ALL the votes weren't declared uncertified, rather than just the ones the Dems wanted to recount. OF course, the BUsh people were too busy trying to get everything certified so they could win. Neither side gives a damn about the "will of the people" and I am extremely sick of them all. |
