I’ve heard/read that the actual, certified count of the votes still has Bush in the lead by 1700+ votes, but the Associated Press (AP) is reported something around 229. Is that [still] true?
Yes, the “oficials” who do the count (and, BTW, do you believe that people can count better than a machine?), are terrible liars. Only AP knows the truth. And reports it. The more the difference, the merrier: the ratings go up, the AP can charge advertisers more money. Remember, that reporting only fills these dull pauses between the commercials.
Despite peace’s asinine response there is a logical explanation.
The AP sends observers in to watch the count, they then report on their own observances. The official count is just that…official. It is the count that is certified by the county. That is why the official is behind the unofficial AP count (i.e. AP reports 64 out of 67 while the official count is 60 of 67).
Therefore nothing is “true” until it is official.
What was particularly cute was that the AP count wasn’t all that unofficial either. They just went to every one of the various counties little press conferences announcing their particular recount numbers.
So I saw the Palm Beach County recount numbers on MSNBC live, and the county supervisor seemed to announce them pretty officially, but that’s the one county that is not in the “official” count.
peace, please don’t post assinine BS if you don’t know what you’re talking about. The AP does not sell advertising space, nor does it air commercials. They are a wire service, like Reuters, who provide information to the press, including television, radio, and newspapers. They also have field photographers all over the world and sell photographs to newspapers and magazines.
Friedo, AP was mentioned in that post. I have nothing in particular against AP. My only mistake was saying that AP “charges advertisers”. Sorry. AP does not charge
advertisers directly. It only sells “news” to brodcasters, charging more or less for the news. You know this, don’t you?
I just was surprised how gullible some people are. These counting places are full of observers, from both sites. AP may have “observers” there, too, but not counters. And certainly, not the people who tally the results. So, how come AP can know better than “officials”? I saw a lot of criticisms, media protection, but no answers.
The AP observers watch the counters and get unofficial numbers from them. The numbers are not official until the counting has been certified by the county government, a legal process which takes some extra time. The reason the AP numbers are ahead is because the observers in some counties are reporting numbers before they are officially certified. Chances are excellent that the certified result will not different from the unofficial result.