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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (437719)	12/3/2008 1:03:20 AM
From: combjelly	Respond to of 1574852

"Don't you think it is about time we start having ONE count on election day?" Why? The technology is far from perfect. As long as the record is persistent, what is the rush? "Rather than giving the Dems a second chance to lie, cheat, steal their way into office?" Huh? Why should we let the Repugs control the process? "There is no reason to believe a recount is any more accurate than the first count, and in fact, due to all the manual handling, a strong argument can be made that it is LESS accurate." Give me some examples. All of the machines are prone to error. A manual process with adequate checks and balances should be more accurate. "Hermann Hollerith knew you needed machines for this kind of crap. I don't know why it isn't apparent 120 years later." Like so many of your claims, that isn't accurate. Hollerith addressed the problem that an accurate census was taking longer than the interval between censuses. The Minnesota vote is a perfect example. To hand tabulate a vote in a state as small as Minnesota would take a very long time. Weeks instead of hours. However, there are a certain amount of votes the machines reject for whatever reason. That is where, on a close vote, humans come in. Now, the procedures in Minnesota are pretty anal if you have bothered to investigate it. You should like their procedures, being an accountant and all. There are checks and cross-checks. Both sides, along with independent observers, get input. In fact, you commented on a particular ballot challenged by the Franken team. Per usual, you neglected to acknowledge that Coleman was making equally egregious challenges. If anything, Coleman's team has made more challenges. Again, what is the rush? There is more than a month before Congress get seated. As long as there is an open process for determining the vote, why try to rush it? Other than the obvious, of course.