# Bush wins! Again! **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 26, 2001, 8:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906 "2001-02-26T08:21:55Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![kiffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/d78d45/32.png) [@kiffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kiffa)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2001, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/181 "2001-03-04T17:23:51Z")
You have the perfect right to accept or reject anything written by an organization that you feel is too political or of dubious reputation. Please read on… let’s have some of your feedback. wring: thanks for the good news sources. As one can see, there’s a lot that has been written by various sources. And it is quite clear that the Nov election results will not be taken back. The question remains, and not only for Florida, how can we run fair, equitable, almost fraud-free and reliable elections. The first step is to identify the problems and come up with viable solutions. That is why it is so important to look into allegations, witness testimony, voting statistics, reliable voting technologies. ---
**Author:** ![milroyj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@milroyj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/milroyj)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2001, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/182 "2001-03-04T18:02:58Z")
> [@](#): > > And I notice that while wring and kiffa have provided a whole lot of cites backing up the assetions (which was never mine, btw) about voter intimidation Too bad wring’s “cites” weren’t from legitimate sources. The World Socialist Web Site? bahahahahaha As for the Fl election judge, I’ll do some searching and get back to you. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2001, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/183 "2001-03-04T18:08:32Z")
The fact is, this election was a statistical tie. You guys can argue about counting a few hundred votes here or there, but it won’t make the result any more ‘legitimate’. If this were approached scientifically, we’d simply have to say that the data was inconclusive. When an election involving millions of people results in a difference of only a few hundred votes, it’s simply beyond the resolving power of the electoral system. Nothing is going to change that. You can find all kinds of potential votes for Gore and Bush, but unless the difference between the two rises into the range of thousands of votes, we’ll never know who won. The root of the problem here is that reality disconnected from politics. It was politically impossible to say, “We don’t know who won”, but that’s what happened. That’s why the election wound up being decided by legal manoevering. Really, if all these recounts wind up showing that Gore would have ‘won’ by 150 votes, do you really believe that that is any more reliable than the current result? We already know of many areas of potential disagreement that would result in swings of hundreds of votes. For one thing, the recount in Palm Beach County (which is part of the ‘official’ tally) is highly suspect. No recounts since, including the ones the newspapers are doing now, used such a lax standard. And no other recount has picked up anywhere near the number of net votes for Gore that that one did. Then there are the military ballots that were thrown out, which supposedly would have gone heavily for Bush. Then there were the irregularities with the felon list. Then there was the case, early on, of the staffer who ‘found’ a whole box of ballots in the trunk of his car. Every time we turned the spotlight on a specific district, we found irregularities favoring one candidate or the other. Think about all those other counties that weren’t part of the recount process. How many ballot boxes went missing? How many closed a few minutes early and disallowed a handful of voters? How many closed LATE and allowed votes that shouldn’t have been allowed? Bottom line: In a data-collection process as large and complex as an election, to think that you can determine the ‘true’ result within a couple of hundred votes is ridiculous. Bush got lucky. He happened to come out on top of what was essentially a coin toss. But nothing then or since was going to give a ‘more valid’ result. We just need to learn to deal with that. Perhaps there should be a law demanding a new vote when the election is that close, but that would never be politically acceptable. So there will continue to be a disconnect between reality and politics. ---
**Author:** ![milroyj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a88e57/32.png) [@milroyj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/milroyj)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2001, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/184 "2001-03-04T19:00:50Z")
Minty, the election judge in question was Carol Roberts in Palm Beach County. So far, my search has been unsuccessful, as most of the links to news articles are no longer active. If I do find something, I’ll post it, otherwise, I withdraw that part of my argument. ---
**Author:** ![ExTank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@ExTank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ExTank)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2001, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/185 "2001-03-04T19:13:37Z")
What **Sam Stone** said makes more sense than anything else in all the election threads combined; maybe I’m jumping on it beacuse I’m tired of the partisan BS. **Wring, Minty:** I’m not saying that there weren’t _allegations_ of irregularities, I’m more than willing to conced that there are significant, even criminal allegations. I’m also conceding that they need to be investigated, and if these allegations have any merit, that the offending party(s) be prosecuted. If enough allegations prove to be true, and a credible case can be made for a conspiracy charge, then by all means, prosecute those fuckers too. And if the conspiracy reaches all the way to the Oval Office? Well, then **W** would be facing impeachment, wouldn’t he? And if it _is_ so, I’ll be right beside you calling for his impeachment and removal from office, even though I voted for him. _But allegations, whatever the source, aren’t evidence._ “Innocent until proven guilty” ring a bell? Even if offending party(s) are charged, they are still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Until the system of investigation, arrest, arraignments and indictments, trial and sentencing happen, you’re shooting rubber bands at the stars in trying to convince me and others that you are right just because you feel cheated. You may have been cheated; every one of your arguments/charges may be proved to be true in the course of time and investigation, an investigation that I wholeheartedly agree need to be conducted on the basis of the allegations. I hope these allegations are not true, for the sake of the country. But if you are correct, bringing it to light and dispensing justice will be better than this festering rancor. But right now, today, your saying it is so doesn’t make it so. I may drop back in to read any further discussion, but as far as “debating” goes, I’m outta here. ---
**Author:** ![kiffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/d78d45/32.png) [@kiffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kiffa)\ **Post date:** [March 4, 2001, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/186 "2001-03-04T19:17:03Z")
Extank: I voted in Duval County, Florida and yes, the ballot was a bit confusing; I never heard of “Vote for Group” on a ballot before. Nor could I look at my ballot afterwards to see who I voted for; there was nothing but a bunch of numbers and, happily, no hagging or pregnant chads because I voted early in the morning. As to your question about having the shoe on the other foot: I would certainly yell and scream if it was clear that the voting procedures and results were similar but for Democrats in the end. Look at the [http://www.folioweekly.com](http://www.folioweekly.com) 11.21.00 article. Enough crazy results to motivate any individual interested in assuring democracy. Minty Green: an overvote cannot legally be counted even if a ballot has a punch or check after one candidate and his or her name written in. It is considered an illegal double vote. I haven’t heard of any precinct counter or Supervisor of Elections accepting this type of ballot, although I may be wrong. Please let me know if you have anything substantial, ie: witness testimony or news article. Ditto the election judge who granted all votes to Gore. I haven’t seen anything on this anywhere. Please give more information. Sam Stone: The military ballots which did not have a stamped date [required by election law] were judged to be ok for counting purposes. Both Bush and Gore legal teams back this up. The military ballots in questions were included in Harris’ certified count. The notorious felons list, compiled by a Texas accounting firm, included a wide variety of nonfelons and dead folks because the company included misdemeanor violators which included one of the southern county Supervisor of Elections for outstanding parking tickets. She had herself removed from the list by her office. It was a pathetically poor job completed by a group who had little understanding of where to get their information that was applicable to Florida. I agree that it is totally impossible to have a 100% truthful and accurate election count. AND the US has made significant progress in curtailing election fraud. This should not devalue any and all efforts to make the system more workable so that all citizens have the right to vote and have their vote counted. I think you do your fellow Republicans a dishonor to think that all Republicans were completely happy with the election process. They are not. It’s not a Republican vs Democrat issue; the poor election performance is a clarion call for action to make the system better, equitable, reliable and accurate for a country that considers itself the leader of the free world and the prime example of democracy in action. ---
**Author:** ![Hazel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hazel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazel)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/187 "2001-03-05T00:22:21Z")
Milo, you said, “It’s not a vote. More than one candidate is marked. It’s spoiled. It can’t be counted.” But the situation is that a voter punched the hole for Gore AND wrote in Gore in the “write in candidate” space. That’s NOT voting for more then one candidate. That’s voting for the same candidate extra-emphatially. Re the “the intent of the voter” standard. Ideally, things might be spelled out in detail – but “the intent of the voter” is the standard in more then half the states. ---
**Author:** ![Hazel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hazel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazel)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/188 "2001-03-05T00:38:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by milroyj \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > What if both votes are for the same person—i.e., a punch plus a write-in with the name of the candidate punched? What’s “nonsensical” about that? According to some reports, about a fifth of the Florida overvotes contain two votes for the same person, and I don’t see at all why such clear indications of a voter’s intention “CANNOT be counted.” > > Because a ballot with two votes is invalid. Period. Consider the following ballots: > > 1. Punch for Gore, write-in Bush. > 2. Punch for Gore, write-in Lieberman. > 3. Punch for Gore, write-in Mickey Mouse. > 4. Punch for Gore, write-in Gore. > 5. Punch for Bush, write-in Bush. > > They are all _spoiled_ ballots. Why should 4 be treated any differently? And would you count 5 as well? 🙂 > > \*\* YES, I would count both 4 and 5! The voter’s intent is totally clear! Both are valid votes which cannot be read by the machines, but CAN be read by a human in a hand recount. There is no ambiguity. This is one reason why hand recounts are vital in a close election where punchcards or paper ballots were used. ---
**Author:** ![Hazel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hazel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazel)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/189 "2001-03-05T00:50:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by milroyj \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > gotcha. yea, that’s much better than, oh…counting valid votes. > > But that’s exactly the question. Who determines what a valid vote is? Florida law takes into account the “intent of the voter”, but there are no provisions stating _how_ that is to be determined. Thus the chaos that ensued. > > So I see two choices: > > 1)Change the laws to explicitly state what votes are to counted as valid. These standards should dictate how overvotes, undervotes, hanging chad, dimpled chad, absentee ballots, overseas (military) ballots, ad absurdum, should be counted. > > 2)Change the law to state that only properly cast ballots should be counted. > > Occam’s razor suggest #2. > > \*\* I think there is a 3rd possibiliy: voting reform. To give just one example, if we discontinue the use of the notorioulsy high-error-rate punchcard ballots, we won’t have to be concerned with chads at all. ---
**Author:** ![Hazel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e56c9b/32.png) [@Hazel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hazel)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/190 "2001-03-05T01:19:36Z")
“It’s not a Republican vs Democrat issue; the poor election performance is a clarion call for action to make the system better, equitable, reliable and accurate for a country that considers itself the leader of the free world and the prime example of democracy in action.” ``` --Kiffa ``` ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/191 "2001-03-05T01:25:49Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by kiffa \* > **No political party is going to control the final outcome like Sec State Katherine Harris whose office is being phased out.** Or like the Fl. State Attourney General (Democrat) whom actually oversaw the recount, as required by law? > [@](#): > > \*\* I hope to see the post of Supervisor of Elections to be a nonpartisan elected official who must be responsive to the voters in his/her area.\*\* Please tell me how to _elect_ a nonpartisan person to office. > [@](#): > > \*\*I hope that some other SDMB member will see this post… \*\* Seen, and by someone who until recently was an inhabitant of J’ville/Duval. **BTW:** I don’t disagree with your points, _per se_, just looking for a little ballance & clarification. ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/192 "2001-03-05T01:40:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Hazel \* > \*\*“It’s not a Republican vs Democrat issue; the poor election performance is a clarion call for action to make the system better, equitable, reliable and accurate for a country that considers itself the leader of the free world and the prime example of democracy in action.” > > ``` > --Kiffa ** > > ``` Hurray! I’m not the only voice calling for reason! ---
**Author:** ![kiffa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/d78d45/32.png) [@kiffa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kiffa)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/193 "2001-03-05T03:06:22Z")
Carol Roberts is a county commissioner of Palm Beach. She was also a member of the Election Canvassing Board and a Democrat who tried her best to get more votes for Gore. I guess you could call her a mini-Katherine Harris of Palm Beach. Anyway, those votes were never counted. Unfortunately the Palm Beach Post requires payment to view their archives! this is the first time I have seen that! Thought you might want to know. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/194 "2001-03-05T13:04:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by milroyj \* > \*\*Too bad wring’s “cites” weren’t from legitimate sources. The World Socialist Web Site? bahahahahaha > . \*\* And too bad you didn’t read the sites (all of them). Yes, I posted one from the Socialist Web, but only for the short listing of which states allowed felons to vote and under what circumstances. I also provided cites from other places with the same information and a significant number of cites from news sources. You have a tendancy to be very selective about reading the cites provided. For instance, you quoted the news source I cited, with a ‘pity’ comment slamming a pastor who was quoted, but passed right by the comments by the police **who admitted they’d done roadblocks** and now will only look at the header of one of the many cites I’ve provided. **Tank** yes, of course we remember ‘innocent til proven guilty’ however: 1. We made statements that irregularities went on during the vote. Also several people here (can’t recall who) made allegations that irregularities went on during the count (specifically that a “judge” counted every disputed vote for Gore. 2. **Milroy** (and perhaps you as well, I can’t remember) challenged us to provide proof that irregularities went on. We challenged for proof of the allegation about the irregularities about the count. 3. We provided many cites with specific information about **investigations** going on regarding irregularities in the vote. Nothing from the person who alledged irregularities about the count. Our burden is met - a finding of guilt in a criminal court is not necessary to conclude at this point that there were problems. Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush admit there were problems and have set up a task force to deal with them. To say you need more proof than this is odd. To have a finding of guilt in a criminal court would indicate criminal action. I don’t know, nor have I suggested that there was a criminal conspiracy. There were a series of events that impacted minority and, since those counties were heavily democratic, by extension, the democrats vs. the republicans. The governor and Secretary of State of Florida **admit** there were problems significant enough to warrant a task force. The Civil Rights Bureau is concerned about the irregularities enough to launch an investigation. So, the balance is: We’ve said there were irregularities that impacted minorities (and by extension) democrats more. On our balance of proof, we’ve linked news sources, investigations by the Civil Rights Bureau and the task force brought on by Jeb & Katherine. On your side, you’ve got a poster here making allegations about improper counts, another poster saying that improprieties **could** happen during the hand counts and therefore hand counts shouldn’t be done, but have offered exactly zilch to support that allegation. Not only that, but you’ve rejected the sources of information because **one** contained a header to a Socialist Party (was offered as a listing of the places where a felon could vote, not for anything more esoteric), and the others show an investigation in progress and ‘gee that isn’t proof anything criminal went on’, even tho’ our allegation was that there were irregularities, not necessarily that there was a formed and informed conspiracy. **kiffa** AFAIR, there **were** double voted ballots that were counted. I know that I referenced that and provided a news site to back it up in one of the many election threads in November/early December. I’d look it up, but I’ve done so much delving into those threads lately - the level of venom that went on I can’t take doing it again. But if you link my name to a search of Great Debates with the key word “election” or “votes” and then search what I’ve posted, I’m sure you’ll run across it. Like I said, I’d do it for you, but I can’t take the level of nastiness all at once. ---
**Author:** ![Milossarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Milossarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Milossarian)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 2:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/195 "2001-03-05T14:48:44Z")
milroy and ExTank: Another reason wring won’t be posting the evidence of voters being prevented from reaching the polls in Florida, other than the news links no longer being there, is that **there is no evidence** that voters were prevented from reaching the polls in Florida, by a police blockade or anything else. When she had links they were all a random allegation here, a random allegation there. The U.S. Civil Rights Commission’s hearings on voter irregularities in Florida? Same thing. As has been noted, every person who testified about irregularities in Florida _also cast their vote_. If there was a police blockade for any reason on election day (which still has not been **confirmed** ), it was a bad idea. Was it a nefarious attempt to disenfranchise the black (and presumably Democratic) vote? Puh-leeze. I’ll buy that the minute you show me **one person** who was held back from voting from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Election Day. The most I’ve heard so far is a stop and request for ID. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/196 "2001-03-05T15:07:21Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Milossarian \* > \*\*milroy and ExTank: Another reason wring won’t be posting the evidence of voters being prevented from reaching the polls in Florida, other than the news links no longer being there, is that **there is no evidence** that voters were prevented from reaching the polls in Florida, by a police blockade or anything else. > > When she had links they were all a random allegation here, a random allegation there. The U.S. Civil Rights Commission’s hearings on voter irregularities in Florida? Same thing. As has been noted, every person who testified about irregularities in Florida _also cast their vote_. > > If there was a police blockade for any reason on election day (which still has not been **confirmed** ), it was a bad idea. Was it a nefarious attempt to disenfranchise the black (and presumably Democratic) vote? Puh-leeze. > > I’ll buy that the minute you show me **one person** who was held back from voting from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Election Day. The most I’ve heard so far is a stop and request for ID. > > \*\* \*\*Milo. \*\* Read again please. The **police admitted there was a road block**. The allegation was that there were roadblocks. there has been an admission there were roadblocks. Please show me where I said “voters were turned away”. I haven’t. Odd that there only were roadblocks in minority neighborhoods. The allegation was made **by the voters themselves** in sworn testimony that things \*\*such as the roadblocks \*\*(which have been admitted) **intimidated them**. Random allegations ? you must be confusing your postion with mine. You’ve made “random allegations” that counters were partisan (oh, I’m sorry there was **one** counter that you had allegations was partisan). No proof. No link to where some one made the allegations. My statements were that **voters** made allegations that there were irregularities, that there was a police presence that intimidated them. The links show that there was a police presence, that 300 voters made **sworn statements** (ie different than a 10 second newsbite, which you have yet to provide), that \*\*even the GOvernor Secretary of State of Florida \*\* seem to believe that there were enough irregularites to warrent reform. Try again. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/197 "2001-03-05T16:20:56Z")
[here republican overvotes were counted](http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/florida_election_recount_001116.html) note that it’s a news based site, please. > [@](#): > > Canvassers discovered some voters (wring adds in Polk County) had improperly voted twice on some of their ballots by both voting for their candidate, Gore or Bush, and writing-in that candidate’s name, says Polk elections spokeswoman Vi Thornburg. > The vote reading machines had rejected those votes altogether, spitting the ballots out into a special container. Since those voters clearly wanted to vote for just one candidate, canvassers added the votes to the candidates’ tallies, one per voter, with more ultimately going to Bush, she says. So, apparently, overvotes \*\* were\*\* counted, at least in Polk County, with the plurality going to Bush. Now, and for your perusal, **Milo** (who always says I never say anything pro Republican or anti Democrat, here I am chiding **both** sides) in [here](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=47082) you’ll note on November 18, 2000, my comments: > [@](#): > > in this heated rhetoric, it would be helpful if BOTH sides looked at the matter objectively instead of selective quotes and repeating the appropriate mantra. (snip) > This is a debate, not a playground. If you want simply to sit around and talk about how bad the other guys are and how supremely fair and reasonable your guys are, I’m sure there’s a party headquarters that would be happy to serve the purpose. > > I suspect when all the chads have settled, that Bush will be declared the winner. And frankly, I would think his job would be MUCH tougher had he been declared the winner without the recounts. > > So, please remember, at the end of all of this, we are still a nation together, and need the cooperation and hard work of ALL of our citizens in order to continue to thrive. You’ll also note, that in the same article I cited, there’s a mention of 'sworn affidavits" regarding 153 votes in Gadsden County. There you are **Milo**. I found your site for you, sort of. Of course, I also found this [Bush prepared to fight electoral college](http://www.nydailynews.com/2000-11-01/News_and_Views/Beyond_the_City/a-86769.asp) ---
**Author:** ![Milossarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Milossarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Milossarian)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/198 "2001-03-05T18:49:21Z")
Thanks for the links, wring. As I said earlier, I personally disagree with counting overvotes of any ilk, but can see how, under standardless intent-of-the-voter, they could be counted in those cases we discussed earlier. The story you link also mentions another, predominantly Republican county where canvassars decided not to evaluate more than 21,000 overvotes. This bolsters my premise that in an election whose result is determined on vote counts in multiple counties, the standards should be the same in all of those counties. Have a standard for punch-cards, have a standard for optical scan, and for any other ballot that may be in use in your state, and stick to it. Judging from your statements two or three posts up, wring, you seem to be in agreement. > [@](#): > > The police admitted there was a road block. And I don’t dispute that. But the presence of a temporary roadblock, while unfortunate for an election day, doesn’t seem to have been nefarious in any way, and would not seem to have prevented anyone from casting their vote. So … what? As I said (and you apparently skipped): > [@](#): > > (S)how me **one person** who was held back from voting from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Election Day (by a police roadblock). The most I’ve heard so far is a stop and request for ID. > [@](#): > > Odd that there only were roadblocks in minority neighborhoods. Is it? You certainly offer no proof. You are making an allegation here that isn’t supported by any facts that have been brought to the fore. > [@](#): > > The allegation was made by the voters themselves in sworn testimony that things such as the roadblocks (which have been admitted) intimidated them. Voters (i.e., “people who casted votes in the election”) felt intimidated? That’s too bad. Work should definitely be done to make sure that doesn’t occur in the future. We can all take some solace, however, in the fact that everyone who was intimidated by a police roadblock on election day could still cast their vote if they so chose. > [@](#): > > Random allegations ? you must be confusing your postion with mine. You’ve made “random allegations” that counters were partisan (oh, I’m sorry there was one counter that you had allegations was partisan). No proof. No link to where some one made the allegations. Really? Read better. The allegation was made by both _your Governor_, John Engler, who sat as an observer on one of the crucial Saturdays in the hand-counts before they were stopped, and noted by columnist Robert Novak. The link was made in an election thread at the time, and _you_ personally responded to it. Convenient memory. The allegation is also supported by your’s truly, who watched the process as it occurred in Palm Beach County on MSNBC on the Saturday morning in question. For the entire time they were broadcasting, Beth Gunzviller named every questionable ballot for Gore. Every. Single. One. If that’s not good enough proof for you, I don’t particularly care. What I saw with my own eyes was good enough for me, though. And it was confirmed by at least two other people, as was already pointed out to you a couple of months ago. I’d love to see a breakdown of the political party split on particular hand-count evaluations of ballots in those Gore-supporting counties. I betcha it’s a party-line split on the vast majority of votes. That would tend to mean to me that, whichever party was viewing the ballots through partisan shading, partisanship was a problem. Pointing out exactly why such a system (particularly when what’s needed to overturn the election result is known by the party that gets the final, majority say on the ballot evaluations) is a crappy way to try to divine “the truth.” > [@](#): > > (E)ven the GOvernor Secretary of State of Florida seem to believe that there were enough irregularites to warrent reform. Agreed. No one seems to be working harder on election reform in the state of Florida than Secretary of State Harris, given all of the problems that were brought to the surface in the presidental election controversy. This is a bad thing, how, exactly? Because it’s too late to help Gore? It was too late to help Gore after the election took place. And if you don’t get _that_ yet, maybe we can keep going round and round and round on this for a few more years. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/199 "2001-03-05T19:52:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Milossarian \* > \*\*This bolsters my premise that in an election whose result is determined on vote counts in multiple counties, the standards should be the same in all of those counties. Have a standard for punch-cards, have a standard for optical scan, and for any other ballot that may be in use in your state, and stick to it. \*\* and proves my statement (where you and others said "yea, well prove it) that it **did** happen. You believe that it should have been uniform standards. Fine, SCOTUS said so to (not the 'firm, hard, rigid you kept saying but uniform). Or have you gone to simply “uniform” now? if so, fine. And, I was in agreement that votes such as these should be counted. > [@](#): > > wring The police admitted there was a road block. Milo replied: > [@](#): > > And I don’t dispute that. > [@](#): > > Milo says :(S)how me **one person** who was held back from voting from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. on Election Day (by a police roadblock). The most I’ve heard so far is a stop and request for ID. Try to follow along. The allegation was made that there were roadblocks. one or more of the Republicans here said “prove it”. I did. Now, as for what does this mean? Do I believe there was a conspiracy from Bush et al? I have seen no evidence to suggest this. However, the **idea** of a police check point in front of minority polling place for ‘routine’ matters on election day should make all of us queasy. And, it is being investigated. with sworn testimony. I never attempted to prove that x number of voters didn’t vote because of it (which, by the way, as I recall was the position of the Rep side re: the election call coming 15 mintues before the polls closed in Western Florida “thousands of votes” were claimed to have been lost. No verifying data, of course, just the claim.). I \*\* am\*\* claiming that minority voters felt intimidated by this and other factors - that claim is supported by their \*\* sworn testimony\*\* before the Civil Rights investigation. The ‘proof’ of the police blocks ‘only’ in minority areas comes from: A. the lack of news reports that suggested that police roadblocks were anywhere else, and B. the testimony in front of the civil rights folks that the police block existed (implication was that it was in the area where the voters were complaining). > [@](#): > > We can all take some solace, however, in the fact that everyone who was intimidated by a police roadblock on election day could still cast their vote if they so chose. Really? and just how would you support that contention? I’m not saying there were masses of folks who could not or did not vote because of it, but, by the same token, you cannot claim that no one was disuaded, either. > [@](#): > > \*\*Really? Read better. The allegation was made by both _your Governor_, John Engler, who sat as an observer on one of the crucial Saturdays in the hand-counts before they were stopped, and noted by columnist Robert Novak. The link was made in an election thread at the time, and _you_ personally responded to it. Convenient memory. \*\* Selective? nope, I remember well, of course, if you remember it too, you’ll have no difficulty providing the link to the article now (as I have done). Actually, what I recall is that you made the claim, and I suggested (with a cite) that Mr. Engler (who was quoted at the governor’s conferance that Gore was “stealing the election in front of everybody’s eyes”) that he was less than objective, to say the least. And as for the columnist? let’s see the site **Milo** , I don’t recall that you provided it then, either. Let you wade through the venom this time. Nice that you have personal memories of news stories. I do too, but I know better than to attempt to suggest that my personal memory of events I saw on TV is proof of anything. > [@](#): > > If that’s not good enough proof for you, I don’t particularly care. and if news stories from objective places, investigations by the Civil Rights folks, admissions from the people involved that ‘stuff needs to get fixed’ isn’t proof enough that things went terribly wrong, well, I officially give up. > [@](#): > > I’d love to see a breakdown of the political party split on particular hand-count evaluations of ballots in those Gore-supporting counties. I betcha it’s a party-line split on the vast majority of votes. That would tend to mean to me that, whichever party was viewing the ballots through partisan shading, partisanship was a problem. Nonsense. If that were true, then, for example, Palm Beach County would have had zero for Bush and 1000 for Gore. You know, if there was such a grand conspiracy by the Dems to see ‘only Gore votes’ and disregard any Bush votes, since they **all knew** how many votes they needed, how do you explain away that they came up short? > [@](#): > > wring says(E)ven the GOvernor Secretary of State of Florida seem to believe that there were enough irregularites to warrent reform. Milo answers: > [@](#): > > Agreed. No one seems to be working harder on election reform in the state of Florida than Secretary of State Harris, given all of the problems that were brought to the surface in the presidental election controversy. , well, I would say that the Civil Rights people are working pretty hard on it as well. > [@](#): > > This is a bad thing, how, exactly? Because it’s too late to help Gore? It was too late to help Gore after the election took place. back to the party bickering stance again I see. Just exactly **where** did I say that it was a bad thing? I really wish you’d stop this sort of thing, it does nothing to enhance: the debate or your stance as a debater. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [March 5, 2001, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906/200 "2001-03-05T21:20:43Z")
\*\*originally posted by _Milo_ in this thread page 3 at 2:33 pm on 3/1 > [@](#): > > We don’t count overvotes. Never have. No court, even the pretty clearly liberal Florida Supreme Court, suggested or suggests such a thing originally posted by _Milo_ in this thread page 3 at 8:54 pm on 3/1 > [@](#): > > The post I saw by Gadarene on this topic alluded to evidence, but offered none. I don’t recall this at all. If you or someone else has evidence that overvotes were counted for Bush anywhere, I would definitely like to see it. \*\* \*\*Originally posted by _milroyj_ page 3 of this thread 3/3 at 12:06 pm > [@](#): > > Because a ballot with two votes is invalid. Period. 3/3 at 12:43 pm > [@](#): > > The ballot, containing two votes, is spoiled and not counted. \*\* What’s missing from this picture? **Milo** and **milroyj** ’s admission that they were wrong. That at least in the one county specified in my link, overvotes (double punching) where the voter intent was clear **were** counted in November 2000, and there were more of these Bush votes than Gore votes in that county. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-wins-again/55906.md?page=11)