SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: moby_dick who wrote (70070)11/11/2000 1:52:39 PM
From: Selectric II  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769667
 
You missed the point of the hand count, at least as I understand it. The counters supposedly will be looking for things on the ballot other than just whether one, two, or zero tabs are punched out for president. They're looking for other things, whatever they might be, that might indicate "the will of the people." Hand counting is subject not only to human error and bias, and by using a small sampling and extrapolating, any small error will be magnified greatly. Also, even if you are right in claiming it is more accurate, why should this one county's votes be counted more accurately than 100,000,000 other votes around the country? Shouldn't everyone's votes be counted accurately? Aren't these people's votes being shown favoritism, thus in a close election like this possibly DISENFRANCHISING 50,000,000 people?



To: moby_dick who wrote (70070)11/11/2000 2:24:53 PM
From: Scrapps  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769667
 
The argument is that they will be attempting to determine the voters intent if the ballot isn't punched completely. It very well could be that the voter decided not to vote that spot and changed their mind, thus they didn't punch clear through as required. For someone to determine intent of another voters ballot is outrageous. The ballot if voted as instructed should be as clear as can be and present no doubt what so ever. An unpunched hole is just that, and a punched hole should be obvious...if not the ballot doesn't get counted.



To: moby_dick who wrote (70070)11/11/2000 3:05:50 PM
From: Brumar89  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769667
 
Actually a manual recount could swing the vote randomly in either direction. Not that I'm opposed to a manual recount. Given the closeness of the election it might instill more confidence. I'd only be opposed to a revote.

The overseas absentee ballots which haven't been counted yet could also swing the vote in either direction.