The recount doesn’t just happen. Allen has to request it, and he can’t request it until after the vote is certified on ~Nov 28. That leaves time to get the numbers pretty well sorted out, and should give Allen time to figure out whether it’ll be worth it to call for a recount. Right now, the numbers don’t appear to make a recount worthwile for Allen, but that may change over the next few weeks. For Allen to publicly call for a recount NOW would be both meaningless and disruptive.
Well, the Virginia recount should be interesting.
I really don’t get this one. Every cash register prints up two receipts. One goes to the customer, and one stays on the roll.
Why?
BECAUSE PEOPLE CHEAT WHEN THEY CAN! THEY ALWAYS HAVE! THEY ALWAYS WILL!
Seems like a no-brainer to me … just like in a cash register, two copies printed simultaneously, you’d get your copy of your vote, and a copy would stay on the roll. Put a clear window in so you can verify the machine copy before you leave if you wish. It’s not like we have to invent anything new to make it work.
Doors, what’s the problem with that?
w.
Also, when we compare what appears to be the VA count vs. the FL count, aren’t we talking about an order of magnitude here? If VA were down to a few hundred votes, instead of around 7000, ought that not to make a big difference in ones decision to request a recount? From what I’m reading and hearing, while it’s certainly Allen’s prerogative to request a recount, and I fully support his right to it, it’s looking like a major longshot under the best of circumstances. FL was nowhere near so easy to guage.
No, not around here, or I don’t think so. I haven’t done a scan of the Board to see who was saying what on the recount, although a search on “Schumer” over the last two days, to see if anyone else had posted on this specific topic first, revealed only a single unrelated hit.
I’m not seeing press reports of high-ranking Democrats telling Schumer to shut the fuck up, let the process go forward, let Webb win without a cloud hanging over him, and let the Senate leadership switch without a cloud as well. I can live with Democrats taking over the Senate and House, but it will be God damned irritating if we have two years of bitchfest threads over here on how “unfair” the election was and how the Democrats won the election and the Senate by “fraud”.
I like Webb and his politics. I hate Allen and his politics. I was hoping and hitting “refresh” all night hoping Webb would win. I want him to win fair and square and related to that I want Schumer to shut the fuck up.
And for Schumer to gloatingly tell Allen to give it up is what? Meaningless and disruptive, that’s what.
The only “fraud” is that he got more votes. Allen is perfectly entitled to demand a recount, but the state is advising him that it’s a bad idea, and he seems to be leaning towards agreement. I don’t understand why it would be necessary for high-ranking democrats to demand that we become mired in process, or why that would make them better or you happier.
I like it just fine. What odds it’ll ever happen, though?
So there’s no election fraud if it fails? Don’t necessarily see how that follows. Heck, without some Rovian chicanery, this might have been a really bad election cycle for the Pubbies.
OK, OK. I’m just gloating now, and its unseemly. Be all right in a few days. Or so.
I’m not going to dispute what’s in Allen’s right to do, but what is the cloud of which you speak? Are there some hanging chads out there I haven’t heard of? Is this difference of thousands of votes likely to change all that much with a re-count? I’m all for being thorough, I support Allen if he wishes a recount (it’s the law, after all), but Schumer’s suggestion is far from outrageous at this point, I think. I mean, if Webb was really worried about a cloud, he wouldn’t be claiming victory before his opponent had conceded, now would he? Hey, maybe Webb should shut the fuck up.
Although I said at first that they should “let the recount happen”, I did not say that a recount must or even should happen, just that people should not interfere with it with grandiose posturing, especially not Schumer. The assumption was when I last read the news that a recount would likely be requested. Since no formal announcement has been made refuting that, I’d say it’s still up in the air.
I also said “I’m not seeing press reports of high-ranking Democrats telling Schumer to shut the fuck up, let the process go forward, let Webb win without a cloud hanging over him, and let the Senate leadership switch without a cloud as well.”
None of that is getting “mired”, so let’s just correct that right now.
I think the jury should listen closely to his testimony.
I’ll give you that. 
It’s fine to be annoyed by Schumer, but I think it’s a bit fantastic to be upset that John Kerry or Howard Dean or somebody to call a press conference just to demand that something be allowed to happen which is being allowed to happen.
Democrats really just have much higher standards put on them, don’t they? Republicans aren’t even expected to run a legal campaign, any more, but Democrats can’t concede fast enough when they lose or defer enough to the loser when they win.
It’s a little early and I think we’re a little removed from the process to be judging why something might change. However, I’ve been hearing all day and reading all day how the election is still “too close to call” - people aren’t saying that because it sounds good. It’s because it’s too close to call. There’s the FBI investigating possible voter intimidation in Virginia - that might have some bearing on the results, maybe. Most likely in favor of Webb. But that doesn’t make any difference.
As to claiming victory and shutting up - unlike Webb, Schumer isn’t running in Virginia. Schumer is being an ass, and it’s no stain on the Democratic win to just admit it.
Well, I guess the AP are a bunch of assholes too, because they’re giving Webb the win. What can I say? Too close or not, it’s getting called, and not just by a lone outsider.
But Schumer can do the same to insist that something else happen?
I know some are all full of piss and vinegar because Democrats won, but I’m on the Democrat side in this particular race too. You’re again deliberately mischaracterizing what I say - I never said anything hypocritical about Democrats and standards, I never said anything about Democrats conceding “fast enough”. Maybe you must have some sort of chip on your shoulder from the last 12 years of Republican domination, whatever, but I’m not talking to you any further if you can’t even have a conversation without trying to spin it so I’m saying something I’m most clearly not. Jesus Christ, try to re-read what I’m saying like it’s not some sort of attack on all Democrats, everywhere. I voted all mixed Democrat-Libertarian in this election, so try to keep that in mind when you write your next post.
Same to you, Loopydude, try not to spin what I say for at least one post and recognize that you’re not talking to an enemy but a recent skeptical convert. So the AP gives him the win - that’s great, but it’s also irrelevant, since the last I checked the AP doesn’t certify election results. And the AP wasn’t coming out to tell Allen to concede earlier this day. If they did, and I had seen it, I would have included them in the post.
Seriously, I wonder what the motive is behind the angst over what I said.
I’m not feeling any angst, I’m just confused by the outrage. I guess it’s because it’s looking to me like Allen just plain lost. It was a close race, maybe a few votes will slide one way or another, but the reality seems to be that recounts and FBI investigations won’t change the outcome. I’m all for sitting back and waiting it out, and maybe Schumer is being a bit of a douchebag, but I don’t think the election hangs in the balance here. If we were talking about a few hundred votes, I’d think Schumer was on crack, in addition to being an ass, but we’re talking over 7000, and Allen himself doesn’t appear to harbor under any illusions. There won’t be any clouds, democracy really isn’t being threatened by this particular result, and Allen can do whatever he wants anyway, if he’s in the mood to exercise his full right.
bolding in the nested and outer quotes by me
While I’m not in Virginia, so I can’t speak to whatever happened in a voting booth there, some 2700 miles away in Anaheim, I watched the paper copy of my votes scroll by under glass, before punching the red “cast ballot” button for the last time. So we know that the technology not only exists, it has been implemented in some precincts.
Also, the fact that there is no requirement that the machines in VA have paper trail backups, the cited text does not state that they don’t actually have them anyway.
Anybody got the downlow on that?
It aint just Schumer.
Redstate: Let’s Not Re-Do Florida in 2000
Hotline: Republicans Will Pressure Allen… Soon
Richmond Times Dispatch: Webb wins it - for now
I agree with Allen’s advisor. If it’s pointless, don’t put the state to the expense.
Dems and Reps alike have no sacred duty to stand silent while Allen makes a possibly foolish, and costly, decision. Buying into that sort of pompous idiocy is what got us into Iraq after all.
I don’t think we have as much disagreement as is worth going back and forth on. Just chalk up part of my “outrage” to Schumer, and part as wanting a time when there would for once be an election with no questions at all who won, no arguments, no bickering about polls gone wild or dirty tricks, no funny stuff, no high crimes and misdemeanors, etc. In other words, a good solid foundation to move forward to a better and more honest future. Seriously, that’s all I want. I’m looking for hope and hoping that this change will deliver it, you know?
Some I guess believe that that path is still right on track regardless, I just wanted to voice that I think Schumer is trying to hypocritically meddle and create a problem where none really existed before, all to make himself look big and get some more column space.
I don’t see how you’ll ever get it in an extremely close race, though. The smaller the margin of victory, the more closely people will scrutinize the integrity of the process.
I think having more consistent, reliable, robust polling equipment and procedures will cut down on the bickering somewhat, but there will always be at least a little room to argue about irregularity.
I don’t see why that’s such a bad thing, or why it would be so much better to have an electoral outcome with “no questions” and “no arguments”. Questioning the integrity of elections doesn’t seem to have paralyzed our governments or destroyed the fabric of civil society.
So in some very tight races, it takes a little longer to figure out who really won and people argue about it for a while. So what? I’d far rather have that kind of active scrutiny and skepticism keeping our electoral system reasonably honest than a false complacency that simply ignores or overlooks dishonesty.