Straight Dope Message Board

Straight Dope Message Board (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/index.php)
-   Politics & Elections (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/forumdisplay.php?f=34)
-   -   Florida recount (https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=865415)

UltraVires 11-14-2018 03:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Parker (Post 21322805)
As you might imagine, the constitutional jurisprudence on elections is more complicated than that. Often these laws about timing are found to be unconstitutional. There are many reasons why this happens. Common ones are: (1) the law treats similarly situated voters differently; (2) the law was designed to disenfranchise certain voters; and (3) the law lacks sufficient justification given the impact it has on the franchise.

For example, I expect the ACLU of PA to win this lawsuit about timing: http://www.wesa.fm/post/aclu-sues-ov...lines#stream/0

Obviously, you are right that some subset of laws about timing are perfectly constitutional. But that's why we have the courts: to decide which are which.

I understand that, but those cases themselves are based upon racism.

It would be like saying that a 70mph speed limit violates equal protection because white people are responsible drivers but only those wild blacks like to drive their sports cars really fast, therefore, the speed limit has a disparate impact on black people. It's absurd and feeds into the ideas that the KKK would be proud to promote.

RTFirefly 11-14-2018 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21322787)
I think that a cobbling together of many Supreme Court decisions show that there is clearly a right to vote by adult citizens. But like with any human enterprise, including football games, there have to be administrative regulations that set certain boundaries.

I mean, I had a right to vote in the 2012 election, but nobody would seriously argue that I can cast my ballot NOW for that election. Reasonable rules set reasonable deadlines for my vote to count. That's the absurd case.

Agreed.
Quote:

Why couldn't it be argued that by mailing in a ballot, one takes the risk that the ballot will be lost in the mail or delayed due to unforeseen consequences?
There is that risk. And if the ballots had shown up after all the counting and recounting had been completed and the results certified, I'd agree that even if those votes would have tipped the outcome my way, it's too late and life just sucks sometimes.

But we're talking about an election where the counting is in progress. There's no reason, other than an excessive devotion to arbitrary rules, to not count those ballots.
Quote:

Now, maybe there should be a law that says that in exceptional circumstances like a bomb threat at the post office, late arriving ballots shall be counted. Maybe not. Does the Constitution really require such a law? That seems specious at best.
Who needs a law to say that? It should be just the standard default: if counting isn't done, and legitimate ballots are still turning up, you count them. Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.

Stuff like this is going to happen, as long as we have the jerry-rigged voting system we have, dependent on 3000 different counties' ways of doing things, and an army of volunteer and/or trivially-paid temporary election workers. Every election, for instance, boxes of ballots turn up in the trunk of an election worker's car.
Quote:

Likewise with recount deadlines. You know on election night that there may be a recount, so it is up to the officials to gather staff and machines to make sure that the counting is done by the deadline. If they fail to do that, is that a Constitutional violation? That starts down the slippery slope because the deadlines are there exactly so the government officials complete their tasks in an efficient manner. If you hold that the deadlines violate a Constitutional right to vote, then you encourage or allow sloppy behavior by election officials.
Well, of course an insistence on not allowing election officials any slack in their schedule should take precedence over voters' rights to have their votes counted properly. Gotta have our priorities properly aligned!
Quote:

I simply cannot see how these regulatory and facially neutral laws like deadlines are a violation of the right to vote. You have a right to vote, you just must do so in a timely fashion.
Sure, one must vote, or at least be in line to vote, by the time the polls close on election day. I've got no problem with that.

But what does that have to do with administrative deadlines, where compliance is completely outside the control of the voter? Why should the fate of my vote be caught up in squabbles between the state and the county? What does that have to do with the legitimacy of my vote? Once I vote, their job is to make sure it's counted properly, no matter which 'they' we're talking about.

manson1972 11-14-2018 04:26 PM

That PA lawsuit doesn't seem to be based on racism. But on the effect the law has the voting process itself.

Fiddle Peghead 11-14-2018 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21322797)
Most rules are arbitrary. I can drive 70 on the interstate, but not 71. Is there any measurable degree of increased harm to other motorists because of one measly mile per hour? No. But you could argue that all the way up incrementally by 1mph to 200mph.

There has to be a deadline for votes to come in and one time is just as good as another.

Has the deadline ever been an issue in Broward? That is, has the date as currently set ever been tested as to whether it is appropriate and fair? In any case, given that the winners in the elections at hand won't be sworn into office until next year, then why not extend the deadline to ensure that all votes are counted accurately?

nelliebly 11-14-2018 06:23 PM

How I love these authoritarian, "If you make a mistake, you're out" pontifications. Have you ever watched an optical scanner in operation? I have--not on votes, but on standardized tests. Those suckers are sensitive, and sometimes they screw up. Should all ballots that are rejected by a machine the first time through not be counted, even if it turns out to be machine error?

Furthermore, if some poor schmuck doesn't get his pen mark completely within the oval on one race, do you really think his votes on all the other races shouldn't count?

A cop who taught at the state police academy told me that all drivers break the law many times per day. Think about your driving today. Did you turn on your blinker precisely 100 feet before the turn? Did you make a right-hand turn into the left lane? Did you stop 4 inches into the crosswalk? Tut-tut. If you can't follow all the rules perfectly, you shouldn't get to drive.

adaher 11-14-2018 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTFirefly (Post 21321837)
Let's say there's a state statute that says: in between the voting and the counting, the election officials are to choose one ballot in each race which they should choose as they see fit, and throw the rest in the incinerator.

What you're saying is that this statute would be perfectly legit because nowhere in the Constitution does it mention a right of citizens to have their votes counted.

That's an interesting stance, to put it mildly.

Dates and deadlines do not present constitutional issues though. States can have early voting or they can mandate voting on the first Tuesday of November. They have to certify results in time or else they lose representation when the next Congress opens, so they need a deadline for that.

adaher 11-14-2018 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTFirefly (Post 21321856)

We really need a nationwide uniform ballot for voting for Federal offices: President/VP, Senator, Representative. The states would determine what names are on it, same as now, but the structure of the ballot would be the same everywhere, and would be tested within an inch of its life. None of this nonsense where each state, and in some states each county, can have a totally untested ballot design that nobody else has, at least not for Federal offices.

That's a terrible idea because if the design is poor you've screwed up all of the elections in the country. And there's no way to know for sure that a design won't confuse a small percentage of people.

Fiddle Peghead 11-14-2018 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher (Post 21323256)
That's a terrible idea because if the design is poor you've screwed up all of the elections in the country. And there's no way to know for sure that a design won't confuse a small percentage of people.

Hence, "tested".

Chisquirrel 11-14-2018 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher (Post 21323252)
Dates and deadlines do not present constitutional issues though. States can have early voting or they can mandate voting on the first Tuesday of November. They have to certify results in time or else they lose representation when the next Congress opens, so they need a deadline for that.

"The Constitution says you can vote, but it doesn't say your vote has to be counted correctly."

adaher 11-14-2018 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead (Post 21323284)
Hence, "tested".

Given the small percentages involved, you'd need to test it on thousands of people to get an answer on whether the ballot is good or not. Or, you could just use a little common sense and assume that voters have common sense.

adaher 11-14-2018 11:14 PM

BTW, Palm Beach County asked for an extension of the deadline, but it doesn't look like there's much effort.

https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/po...t/67-614703354

So at what point should there be a deadline enforced?

Chisquirrel 11-14-2018 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher (Post 21323665)
BTW, Palm Beach County asked for an extension of the deadline, but it doesn't look like there's much effort.

https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/po...t/67-614703354

So at what point should there be a deadline enforced?

Relevant piece suspiciously ignored:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cite
"when its machines overheated"


UltraVires 11-15-2018 12:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTFirefly (Post 21323014)
Agreed. There is that risk. And if the ballots had shown up after all the counting and recounting had been completed and the results certified, I'd agree that even if those votes would have tipped the outcome my way, it's too late and life just sucks sometimes.

But we're talking about an election where the counting is in progress. There's no reason, other than an excessive devotion to arbitrary rules, to not count those ballots. Who needs a law to say that? It should be just the standard default: if counting isn't done, and legitimate ballots are still turning up, you count them. Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.

Stuff like this is going to happen, as long as we have the jerry-rigged voting system we have, dependent on 3000 different counties' ways of doing things, and an army of volunteer and/or trivially-paid temporary election workers. Every election, for instance, boxes of ballots turn up in the trunk of an election worker's car. Well, of course an insistence on not allowing election officials any slack in their schedule should take precedence over voters' rights to have their votes counted properly. Gotta have our priorities properly aligned! Sure, one must vote, or at least be in line to vote, by the time the polls close on election day. I've got no problem with that.

But what does that have to do with administrative deadlines, where compliance is completely outside the control of the voter? Why should the fate of my vote be caught up in squabbles between the state and the county? What does that have to do with the legitimacy of my vote? Once I vote, their job is to make sure it's counted properly, no matter which 'they' we're talking about.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiddle Peghead (Post 21323034)
Has the deadline ever been an issue in Broward? That is, has the date as currently set ever been tested as to whether it is appropriate and fair? In any case, given that the winners in the elections at hand won't be sworn into office until next year, then why not extend the deadline to ensure that all votes are counted accurately?

You both make excellent arguments as to why the law should be different. But the fact remains that the law is not what you prefer, or what I prefer. I think it is only fair to count these ballots in Opa Locka. There is no indication of fraud and these voters did nothing dilatory or wrongful by mailing them.

But the law says they must arrive at the county election center by 7 p.m. on election day. They did not so arrive. Therefore, they should not be counted. The Legislature should amend that law. That doesn't change the fact that the law is what it is. It is facially neutral and does not have disparate impact on Republicans, Democrats, whites, blacks, or gay people. I do not see how it could be considered unconstitutional.

Since we are still in the counting process, can a Florida voter who did not vote stumble out onto A1A and yell, I vote for Rick Scott for Senate! and have his voted counted? I mean, the intent of a legal voter, right? Isn't it fair that we count his vote?

Monty 11-15-2018 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chisquirrel (Post 21321811)
Are you insinuating that I would DARE impugn the morality and righteousness of Republicans, implying that they did something illegal during a very close election, via sarcastic incrimination?

Because I absolutely did. The party crying about voter fraud is actively committing voter fraud. I'm sorry the sarcasm didn't carry.


:D

Excellent!

RTFirefly 11-15-2018 05:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21323730)
You both make excellent arguments as to why the law should be different. But the fact remains that the law is not what you prefer, or what I prefer. I think it is only fair to count these ballots in Opa Locka. There is no indication of fraud and these voters did nothing dilatory or wrongful by mailing them.

But the law says they must arrive at the county election center by 7 p.m. on election day. They did not so arrive. Therefore, they should not be counted.

This is why we regard the right to vote as a fundamental right that can't be overruled by laws. Because the laws would prevent voters' votes from being counted, even though they voted legally, because some minor civil servant screwed up.

To apply the law as written would deprive people of their franchise after they'd done what they needed to do to exercise it. And that's why the courts are telling the law to back off and give a bit more room to get the counting done.
Quote:

The Legislature should amend that law. That doesn't change the fact that the law is what it is. It is facially neutral and does not have disparate impact on Republicans, Democrats, whites, blacks, or gay people. I do not see how it could be considered unconstitutional.
While processes that had disparate impacts on one protected group or another would also be subject to challenge, those are not the only grounds, are they?
Quote:

Since we are still in the counting process, can a Florida voter who did not vote stumble out onto A1A and yell, I vote for Rick Scott for Senate! and have his voted counted? I mean, the intent of a legal voter, right? Isn't it fair that we count his vote?
You keep bringing this up. Could you explain what it has to do with my argument? I've been clear that voters must vote, or at a minimum be in line to vote, by the time the polls are supposed to close. But once they've voted, every effort must be made to count their votes, and count them correctly.

Bijou Drains 11-15-2018 07:52 AM

and I guess it's OK for the GOP to stop vote counting with a lawsuit?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...ections-991278

RTFirefly 11-15-2018 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bijou Drains (Post 21323985)
and I guess it's OK for the GOP to stop vote counting with a lawsuit?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...ections-991278

But only in the county where her opponent has most of his support.

Gyrate 11-15-2018 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by galen ubal (Post 21319726)
Huh. I just had a look at my ballot info (I live overseas, and vote out of Marion County, FL), and it tells me my ballot was tabulated. They received it on October 5 - wonder when they counted it?

Wondering the same thing - Pasco County notified me of receipt long before election day, but I have no idea when (or indeed whether) it was actually counted.

RTFirefly 11-15-2018 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gyrate (Post 21324057)
Wondering the same thing - Pasco County notified me of receipt long before election day, but I have no idea when (or indeed whether) it was actually counted.

Found this blurb on the Sun-Sentinel website:
Quote:

Mail-in Ballots

First, head over to the Division of Elections website to look up your voter information at Registration.elections.myflorida.com/CheckVoterStatus. There, you’ll enter your full name and date of birth. After clicking on “submit,” you’ll be taken to a new page that lists all of your voter registration information — your address, voter ID number, political party and the date you first registered at this address.

Scroll down a bit and you’ll see a link for “Ballot and precinct information.” Click that, and it will take you right to your county supervisor of elections website, with all your information already filled in, and a listing of when the ballot was sent to you, when it was received by the elections office and whether it’s been tabulated.
If it isn't showing as tabulated, you have until 5pm Saturday to fix that. Don't have the info on that handy; I'll try to dig that out later.

ETA: Please share this widely - make sure any Floridians you know who might have voted by mail has this info!

Fiddle Peghead 11-15-2018 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher (Post 21323660)
Given the small percentages involved, you'd need to test it on thousands of people to get an answer on whether the ballot is good or not.

Yes, exactly. More testing is better than less. Sounds easy enough.

DSYoungEsq 11-15-2018 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21323730)
But the law says they must arrive at the county election center by 7 p.m. on election day. They did not so arrive. Therefore, they should not be counted. The Legislature should amend that law. That doesn't change the fact that the law is what it is. It is facially neutral and does not have disparate impact on Republicans, Democrats, whites, blacks, or gay people. I do not see how it could be considered unconstitutional.

You are grounded enough in the basis of English common law systems to know that the limit of what courts can/should do is not the specific letter of a given statute. If that were the case, many legal disputes in the US would be much, much easier to deal with.

Not saying whether or not I believe what is being done is right, just that you cannot go: "The statute says X, so tough titties!" and have that be the final say on court authority.

Fiddle Peghead 11-15-2018 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21323730)
You both make excellent arguments as to why the law should be different. But the fact remains that the law is not what you prefer, or what I prefer. I think it is only fair to count these ballots in Opa Locka. There is no indication of fraud and these voters did nothing dilatory or wrongful by mailing them.

But the law says they must arrive at the county election center by 7 p.m. on election day. They did not so arrive. Therefore, they should not be counted. The Legislature should amend that law. That doesn't change the fact that the law is what it is. It is facially neutral and does not have disparate impact on Republicans, Democrats, whites, blacks, or gay people. I do not see how it could be considered unconstitutional.

Since we are still in the counting process, can a Florida voter who did not vote stumble out onto A1A and yell, I vote for Rick Scott for Senate! and have his voted counted? I mean, the intent of a legal voter, right? Isn't it fair that we count his vote?

Thanks for responding. I've got nothing more to add, really, to what others have said. DSYoungEsq's "tough titties" argument pretty much sums it up for me.

Gyrate 11-15-2018 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTFirefly (Post 21324156)
Found this blurb on the Sun-Sentinel website:
If it isn't showing as tabulated, you have until 5pm Saturday to fix that. Don't have the info on that handy; I'll try to dig that out later.

ETA: Please share this widely - make sure any Floridians you know who might have voted by mail has this info!

Excellent, thank you! I've used the site to check my registration but the ballot-specific link doesn't exactly jump out at you.

Ballot was recorded received October 22 and was tabulated. Can't ask for more than that.

adaher 11-15-2018 02:57 PM

Apparently, the deadline extension will be the only one:

https://www.wsls.com/news/politics/p...count-deadline

I'd note that this is not disenfranchising anyone. It's a recount, which is no more accurate than the first count, it's just a different count. There is no constitutional right to a recount. All recounts are done within time limits and if they fail the first count is the final count.

RTFirefly 11-15-2018 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gyrate (Post 21324389)
Excellent, thank you! I've used the site to check my registration but the ballot-specific link doesn't exactly jump out at you.

Ballot was recorded received October 22 and was tabulated. Can't ask for more than that.

Yay!!

UltraVires 11-15-2018 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTFirefly (Post 21323890)
This is why we regard the right to vote as a fundamental right that can't be overruled by laws. Because the laws would prevent voters' votes from being counted, even though they voted legally, because some minor civil servant screwed up.

To apply the law as written would deprive people of their franchise after they'd done what they needed to do to exercise it. And that's why the courts are telling the law to back off and give a bit more room to get the counting done.
While processes that had disparate impacts on one protected group or another would also be subject to challenge, those are not the only grounds, are they? You keep bringing this up. Could you explain what it has to do with my argument? I've been clear that voters must vote, or at a minimum be in line to vote, by the time the polls are supposed to close. But once they've voted, every effort must be made to count their votes, and count them correctly.

Then all you have is a court setting another arbitrary deadline. The law says that the ballots must arrive by 7 p.m. Tuesday. My ballot arrived on Wednesday. I present your argument and the court agrees that this is close enough. The next guy whose ballot arrived on Thursday makes the same argument and he wins.

At some point the court will have to say no to these requests (lest the deadline stretch until eternity) and say that Sunday is the latest day for ballots to be received. Gavel bangs. Well, Sunday is not objectively better than Tuesday. Such a thing is not based upon any meaningful legal principle such as the right to vote. All you have now is a court using its imperial power to displace the rules made by the people's representatives in the Legislature.

To your second point, what exactly does it mean to "vote"? If I stand in line at the polls and mark an x on my ballot when I should have filled in the bubble, then did I actually vote? I would say no because the machines will not count my vote. I think you would say yes because even though I did not correctly follow the procedure, my intent can be gleaned by the X next to a candidate's name.

But if we allow that, why not allow a voter to verbally declare in the streets his vote? It is against the rules, but so is making an X. Why shouldn't these emailed in ballots count in the Panhandle? Is your point that the voter can screw up the voting process a little bit, but not a lot? Who determines that? A judge again?

How about we just follow the rules? Yes, they can be unfair at times, but so is any human endeavor. But what it guarantees is at least an agreed upon process and not one where people can actually claim unfairness because the rules changed in the middle of the game.

Yes, there seems to be a Constitutional right to vote, but how is that stifled by saying that you must vote by 7pm on Election Day? Things get lost or delayed in the mail. The federal government cannot guarantee that every single piece of mail always arrives at its destination on time or even at all, and a voter who places his ballot in the mail is aware of this possibility.

How is it a denial of you right to vote by requiring that the ballot be filled out correctly? To me, that would be like saying that you were denied your freedom of religion because you made a wrong turn and were late in arriving at church.

I would agree with your points if the government intentionally made the ballots confusing or intentionally refused to deliver the mail, but there is no evidence of that here.

nelliebly 11-15-2018 04:21 PM

The remarks of Mark Walker, the US District judge who refused to extend the deadline for Palm Beach county are particularly relevant to this discussion. All bolding is mine.

Quote:

Earlier in the day, Walker slammed Florida for repeatedly failing to anticipate election problems, and said the state law on recounts appears to violate the U.S. Supreme Court ruling that decided the presidency in 2000.

"We have we have been the laughing stock of the world, election after election, and we chose not to fix this," Walker said in court.

Walker vented his anger at state lawmakers but also Palm Beach County officials, saying they should have made sure they had enough equipment in place to handle this kind of a recount.

The overarching problem was created by the Florida Legislature, which Walker said passed a recount law that appears to run afoul of the 2000 Bush v. Gore decision, by locking in procedures that don't allow for potential problems.
There's no excuse for any of this. Can the lawsuits be resolved, corrective legislation enacted, and systems changed before the 2020 election?

Chronos 11-15-2018 04:38 PM

Yes, adaher, a nationwide ballot design would require thousands of testers. Which makes it much easier than the current system. There are over 3,000 counties in the US. Thousands of testers for one design is much easier than thousands of designs.

nelliebly 11-15-2018 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21325084)
Then all you have is a court setting another arbitrary deadline. The law says that the ballots must arrive by 7 p.m. Tuesday. My ballot arrived on Wednesday. I present your argument and the court agrees that this is close enough. The next guy whose ballot arrived on Thursday makes the same argument and he wins.

At some point the court will have to say no to these requests (lest the deadline stretch until eternity) and say that Sunday is the latest day for ballots to be received. Gavel bangs. Well, Sunday is not objectively better than Tuesday. Such a thing is not based upon any meaningful legal principle such as the right to vote. All you have now is a court using its imperial power to displace the rules made by the people's representatives in the Legislature.

To your second point, what exactly does it mean to "vote"? If I stand in line at the polls and mark an x on my ballot when I should have filled in the bubble, then did I actually vote? I would say no because the machines will not count my vote. I think you would say yes because even though I did not correctly follow the procedure, my intent can be gleaned by the X next to a candidate's name.

But if we allow that, why not allow a voter to verbally declare in the streets his vote? It is against the rules, but so is making an X. Why shouldn't these emailed in ballots count in the Panhandle? Is your point that the voter can screw up the voting process a little bit, but not a lot? Who determines that? A judge again?

How about we just follow the rules? Yes, they can be unfair at times, but so is any human endeavor. But what it guarantees is at least an agreed upon process and not one where people can actually claim unfairness because the rules changed in the middle of the game.

Yes, there seems to be a Constitutional right to vote, but how is that stifled by saying that you must vote by 7pm on Election Day? Things get lost or delayed in the mail. The federal government cannot guarantee that every single piece of mail always arrives at its destination on time or even at all, and a voter who places his ballot in the mail is aware of this possibility.

How is it a denial of you right to vote by requiring that the ballot be filled out correctly? To me, that would be like saying that you were denied your freedom of religion because you made a wrong turn and were late in arriving at church.

I would agree with your points if the government intentionally made the ballots confusing or intentionally refused to deliver the mail, but there is no evidence of that here.

You keep referring to RULES when they're actually INSTRUCTIONS. There's no law that says voters must fill in the oval completely; they're simply advised to do so to reduce the possibility of a machine misread. (When ballots were still hand-counted, the X in the oval would not have been rejected.) So yes, if you put an X in the oval, you have marked your ballot and have in fact voted. And that vote should count. The machine is the servant, not the master.

As for your take-it-to-extremes hypothetical, shouting in the street wouldn't count because a vote by definition is a formal or official indication of a choice between candidates (initiatives, referendums, propositions, etc.). Unless you live in some strange and mythical land where officials sit at a table on the street and voters approach them and yell out their votes, which are then recorded, in which case, yeah, I guess, because that's formal and official. Get it?

UltraVires 11-15-2018 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nelliebly (Post 21325114)
The remarks of Mark Walker, the US District judge who refused to extend the deadline for Palm Beach county are particularly relevant to this discussion. All bolding is mine.



There's no excuse for any of this. Can the lawsuits be resolved, corrective legislation enacted, and systems changed before the 2020 election?

I agree with adaher, above. I do not believe that this is any sort of failure at all. When you have millions of votes and the election is so close as to fall within 1/4 of 1%, you are simply asking for too much precision of human beings to see who actually won.

As he noted, why do we have more confidence in the results of a recount than we do the initial count?

I would guess that things like this happen in every election in every state every single time. It is just that Florida has been unlucky enough to have two such extremely close elections where looking for handfuls of votes here and there could possibly make a difference.

I'm sure that in West Virginia, for example, we could find that votes were mishandled or improperly counted or not counted, but the margin was wide enough to not make a difference so there is no outrage.

RTFirefly 11-15-2018 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21325084)
Then all you have is a court setting another arbitrary deadline.

Then all you have is a courtsetting another arbitrary deadline., who is an actual person, taking into account the particular circumstances of this situation in applying the Constitution and the laws.

FTFY again.

Quote:

To your second point, what exactly does it mean to "vote"? If I stand in line at the polls and mark an x on my ballot when I should have filled in the bubble, then did I actually vote? I would say no because the machines will not count my vote.
I'm sorry, but you're wrong. That's not what you would say.

I leave it to you to figure out why - but you've said over and over again that that isn't what you'd say. Damned if I know why you're now saying that IS what you'd say. But it flies in the face of practically everything you've said in this entire thread. Go figure.

Fiveyearlurker 11-15-2018 08:14 PM

Broward county missed the deadline by two minutes, so the recount will not count. Apparently the election in Florida is run by magical fairies.

Chisquirrel 11-15-2018 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21325189)
I agree with adaher, above. I do not believe that this is any sort of failure at all. When you have millions of votes and the election is so close as to fall within 1/4 of 1%, you are simply asking for too much precision of human beings to see who actually won.

As he noted, why do we have more confidence in the results of a recount than we do the initial count?

I would guess that things like this happen in every election in every state every single time. It is just that Florida has been unlucky enough to have two such extremely close elections where looking for handfuls of votes here and there could possibly make a difference.

I'm sure that in West Virginia, for example, we could find that votes were mishandled or improperly counted or not counted, but the margin was wide enough to not make a difference so there is no outrage.

Sweet, you'll be ok with us just putting Gillum in the Governor's mansion, then? After all, no need for actual results, let's just do whatever the fuck we want!

kaylasdad99 11-15-2018 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher (Post 21319105)
I'm arguing that the purpose of an election is to determine the will of the voters. If an election is this close, that cannot be done. Things happen, like 20,000 voters failing to find the Senate race on their ballots, or weather keeping people from the polls, or lack of machines. None of this is enough to flip a race that's decisive, but in close races it makes the result suspect. Let's end these suspect results and just declare a tie, and then have tiebreaker rules, which could mean runoffs, incumbent party always loses, each candidate serves half the term, or even a coin flip. But stop doing these damn recounts because they always end in hard feelings and mistrust. Either the first result is the result, or declare ties in close races.

There is zero evidence that the recount will produce a more accurate result than the first count did. It certainly can't make up for the other errors in the system, such as 20K voters not voting in the Senate race in Broward.

It is safe to say, at least in the Senate race, that it is impossible to determine the will of the people. CAn we all agree on that? And if so, what's the best way to handle that problem?

For the sake of argument, sure. And the best way to handle the problem? That's an easy one:

Given the fact that holding elective office as a Republican is indistinguishable from a crime against humanity*, the BEST way to handle the problem is to give it to the Democrat.

Or A Democrat. Any Democrat will do. The one who appeared on the ballot would probably present the fewest difficulties, though.


*And this IS a given, BTW. Don't think that, being unable to argue against my logic, there is any recourse to be gained by denying my starting premises.

UltraVires 11-15-2018 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker (Post 21325455)
Broward county missed the deadline by two minutes, so the recount will not count. Apparently the election in Florida is run by magical fairies.

And the receiver was only out of bounds by two inches. Two minutes late is not on time.

Fiveyearlurker 11-15-2018 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21325660)
And the receiver was only out of bounds by two inches. Two minutes late is not on time.



This isn’t a game. This is finding out who the people wanted to represent them.

UltraVires 11-15-2018 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTFirefly (Post 21325431)
Then all you have is a courtsetting another arbitrary deadline., who is an actual person, taking into account the particular circumstances of this situation in applying the Constitution and the laws.

FTFY again.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong. That's not what you would say.

I leave it to you to figure out why - but you've said over and over again that that isn't what you'd say. Damned if I know why you're now saying that IS what you'd say. But it flies in the face of practically everything you've said in this entire thread. Go figure.

The Constitution requires Saturday instead of last Tuesday? Only a radical activist judge could hold that way and that judge should be impeached for his ridiculous reading of the Constitution.

nelliebly 11-16-2018 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21325189)
I agree with adaher, above. I do not believe that this is any sort of failure at all. When you have millions of votes and the election is so close as to fall within 1/4 of 1%, you are simply asking for too much precision of human beings to see who actually won.

As he noted, why do we have more confidence in the results of a recount than we do the initial count?

I would guess that things like this happen in every election in every state every single time. It is just that Florida has been unlucky enough to have two such extremely close elections where looking for handfuls of votes here and there could possibly make a difference.

I'm sure that in West Virginia, for example, we could find that votes were mishandled or improperly counted or not counted, but the margin was wide enough to not make a difference so there is no outrage.

We're asking too much of humans to find out who actually won? Wow. If finding out who actually won is impossible, let's just estimate and skip counting. If a Democrat leads by a razor-thin margin in any future election, you'd better stick to your guns on the futility of determining who actually won.

Why do we have more confidence in the recount? Because it's actually an audit. It's carefully watched by observers from both sides, and it's conducted with much less haste and more deliberation.You might logically argue that the original count should be done this way, and I'd agree with you. So we wouldn't know election results within hours. So what? It's not like terms expire and officials have to be sworn in within days.

RTFirefly 11-16-2018 04:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21325680)
The Constitution requires Saturday instead of last Tuesday? Only a radical activist judge could hold that way and that judge should be impeached for his ridiculous reading of the Constitution.

It would help if you made it clear which of my remarks you're responding to.

RTFirefly 11-16-2018 04:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UltraVires (Post 21325660)
And the receiver was only out of bounds by two inches. Two minutes late is not on time.

Because it's just a big old game, right?

Anyway, Rick Scott:
Quote:

Last week, Florida voters elected me as their next U.S. Senator and now the ballots have been counted twice. I am incredibly proud and humbled by the opportunity to serve Florida in Washington. Our state needs to move forward.
and now some of the ballots have been counted twice.

FTFY, Rick. :)

adaher 11-16-2018 05:23 AM

Actually, the recount in Broward added votes for Scott, so going back to the original count was not only better for Nelson, but I believe quite intentional.

adaher 11-16-2018 05:25 AM

The recount was less accurate than the original count:

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/pol...221709445.html

Scott gained 700 votes because they screwed up with 2500 ballots or so. See how awesome recounts are?

Chisquirrel 11-16-2018 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher (Post 21325919)
Actually, the recount in Broward added votes for Scott, so going back to the original count was not only better for Nelson, but I believe quite intentional.

Any reasoning behind that, or just feel it in your gut?

Gyrate 11-16-2018 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher (Post 21325920)
The recount was less accurate than the original count:

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/pol...221709445.html

Scott gained 700 votes because they screwed up with 2500 ballots or so. See how awesome recounts are?

Yes, why count votes at all? Some mistakes were made, therefore let's burn down the entire democratic process.

Also, we all enjoyed your little unsupported insinuation of malfeasance.

DSeid 11-16-2018 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RTFirefly (Post 21325900)
Because it's just a big old game, right? ...

I personally think that precisely because it is not a game it is even more important to have the rules be clear ahead of time and to have them enforced consistently, not at someone's discretion.

Broward county's lack of ability to do this stuff right has hurt "my team" consistently. I think the rules should be inclusive of not having such local incompetence (such as crap ballot designs) be able to impact results as much as it does. Should be changed for the future. But the rules are clear and the fact that they fall against my desired result does not change that.

EarlGrayHot 11-16-2018 08:25 AM

I agree. The need for a recount should have a time limit! It is important that everyone's vote is counted. Anything that interferes with that (such as having an artificial deadline) should be ignored.

ElvisL1ves 11-16-2018 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher (Post 21325920)
See how awesome recounts are?

Do you have a reason for trying to undermine public confidence in democracy? Other than the obvious one, that is.

RTFirefly 11-16-2018 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adaher (Post 21325919)
Actually, the recount in Broward added votes for Scott, so going back to the original count was not only better for Nelson, but I believe quite intentional.

On whose part? Who decided to be a stickler about those 2 extra minutes? Guess it was deliberate self-sabotage by the Republicans controlling the state government.

RTFirefly 11-16-2018 10:24 AM

Not that it matters: it looks like Broward's turning up a shit-ton of 'no vote' ballots in the Senate race. So it's almost certainly over.

RTFirefly 11-16-2018 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSeid (Post 21326026)
I personally think that precisely because it is not a game it is even more important to have the rules be clear ahead of time and to have them enforced consistently, not at someone's discretion.

Broward county's lack of ability to do this stuff right has hurt "my team" consistently. I think the rules should be inclusive of not having such local incompetence (such as crap ballot designs) be able to impact results as much as it does. Should be changed for the future. But the rules are clear and the fact that they fall against my desired result does not change that.

I think there should be clear rules about when and how to vote. But after that, IMHO it's the duty of the state to count the votes.

The counties are legally creations of the state, so what we really have here is part of the state enforcing arbitrary rules on other parts of the state, with the voters being bystanders to the whole thing. Squabbles amongst those entities, and deadlines that one entity imposes on another, shouldn't be detrimental to the voters or the candidates they voted for.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:56 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright 2019 STM Reader, LLC.