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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (284913)	8/8/2002 3:54:09 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Respond to of 769667

Wow, Tom, that's one of your most coherent posts ever.

To: Thomas A Watson who wrote (284913)	8/8/2002 4:11:58 PM
From: G_Barr	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

Oh, another name caller with little to say. The common sense justification was more like desperation. It was clearly established in the record that different voting machines had different error rate (there were no dimpled chads in the optical machines), not to mention the great discretion of the secretary of state, a short deadline of certification that disadvantaged large counties over small. They try to justify the decision on being a matter of degree, but such is purely speculative, as the court had no way of knowing whether more "legal votes" (votes showing intent) would have been lost under the unsual system or the one proposed by the court. To have a recount one must defined exactly the range of marks or deformations that can be considered and all who will count must be trained and tested to certify that they are qualified to only count ballots so marked. Then a statisical set of test ballots has to be created to monitor and measure human fatique and errors rates. Procedures and testing methods have to be published, reviewed and approved. If this is what was constitutionally required then they should have done it (or at least tried). However, they clearly didn't have to do all this as the system in place didn't have such guarantees.