Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: benwood who wrote (86535)	12/10/2000 4:35:28 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 132070

>>I could envision a limited manual recount in Washington State (all scanned ballots) if there's a strong reason to believe that a certain precinct had a technical problem.<< ben, i'd argue that isn't fair to voters in other areas. why does one county get 100% county while another gets 98% counted? what if the loser loses by 1 vote and there are still tens of thousands of votes skipped due to accepted machine error in other areas? one could try and bring down the error rate in the area with machine problems to the rest of the state. if one could do so perfectly then that would be a solution. however, it IS impossible. nobody would agree and the integrity of the election would be doubted by very reasonable people. imagine your candidate losing by 1 vote b/c an area partial to his/her opponent had a machine problem and was hand counted 100%. now imagine that your area, which is partial to your candidate, had 5,000 under counted votes. would you be happy losing and call it fair? wrt the 800 double punched write in votes for bush, i suspect it happened for gore, too. i heard about these 800 in response to democratic claims of the butterfly ballot confusing people. i did read it and i heardit on tv - it went uncontested by a democratic rep.