Recounts don’t mean a more accurate total.
Oh, so the first count was half assed?
If you actually want to get it right, you do more than two counts, unless both counts show the same basic rersult. If you count the same ballots twice and get two different results, choosing the second result is as arbitrary as choosing the first. Count a third time, or declare a tie.
Oh, and BTW, I DARE Democrats in Congress to go on record voting against voter ID. That would be awesome.
If you count the votes the second time in exactly the same way as the first, I’d agree. My understanding is that in the second count in Florida, the second time the votes are scrutinized more.
But I’m most interested in your answer to my question regarding a single system of voting at the federal level, if you want the votes to be counted as accurately as possible.
What the hell makes you think so?
No, incomplete.
No, vote totals are not random events, and neither are counts of them.
You show the same corrosive attitude toward democracy that the Supreme Court showed in 2000 - the fact, or risk, of your preferred candidate losing does not mean the process was flawed. It can simply indicate that good faith was not present on all sides.
Now, please tell us in your own words, why do you have a problem with democracy? And if you still claim you don’t, what do you propose to make its basic process better? Is simple sniping and delegitimization attempts all you and your party really have?
The machine recount is the same, the hand recounts do scrutinize undervotes and overvotes, but unless the hand recount SOLELY accounts for the difference between the two counts, you need to count a third time. If the second machine recount shows a different result, the second count could have been less accurate than the first. Which is exactly what happened in Broward.
Is the federal government going to manufacture all the machines, install them, and operate them? What’s plan B if the machines have problems?
No, the first count is not incomplete. All ballots are counted in the first count, and all ballots are counted again in the recount.
This is only true if you believe there is no margin of error in a process involving hundreds of people and dozens of machines counting possibly millions of ballots. If you think that 10 counts wouldn’t produce 10 different results, you’ve never counted a jar of marbles before.
Recounts have nothing to do with democracy, anymore than Congressional resolutions do. If Congress could only pass laws and not meaningless resolutions, we would be not one iota less democratic than we are now, and the same would be true if the first count was the only one that counted.
It’d only be fair - Republicans have gone on record about deliberate voter suppression.
Except for the ones that haven’t come in yet, or got misplaced somehow. You really haven’t been paying attention, have you?
There is only one right number. It *can *be determined if you want to, it just takes good faith. Is that present in your party?
Accurate counting of the ballots does. Having the winner be the choice of the people *is *democracy. Why does that need explanation?
Republicans have introduced and voted on exactly zero bills that didn’t have wide popular support. You may not like “voter suppression”, but the bills Republicans introduce are some of the most popular bills Republicans ever introduce on any subject. Democrats, on the other hand, have consistently refused to repeal even existing ID laws in states they control, because they know it would be toxic. Better to have activists they can keep at arms length going to court for them.
Ballots that haven’t come in have nothing to do with a recount. The first count is not finished until all ballots are in. That’s why some races remain undecided.
Misplaced ballots in most states are not counted. All ballots have to be secured with a clear, documented, chain of custody. Once that chain of custody is broken, ballots are no longer valid, as it cannot be verified that they were not altered.
There is objectively a correct number. Which can only be ascertained if machines are perfect and no human makes an error. Since that cannot happen in any race with more than a few hundred ballots, there will always be a margin of error.
If the goal of an election is to determine the people’s choice, the voting ITSELF breaks down if an election is close enough. Witness the 20K voters who failed to vote in the Senate race in Broward. When an election is this close there is no way to definiitively know what the will of the voters is. Better to just declare a tie and have agreed upon ways to settle a tie. Just running the ballots, which we already know are off by 20K due to voter error, tells us nothing more about the will of the voters than a coin flip would.
That’s not really an answer.
And adaher, while I’m asking, if you don’t mind, forget I said “federal”. Make that voting in general. One method for all.
That’s not a repudiation of voter suppression by Republicans, I note, although I see you’ve added some “scare quotes” and some additional sneering.
Gosh, Addy, nobody told you? In all relevant threads, we of the SaneSide have stated clearly that “voter ID” ain’t it, its using “voter ID” as a tool to give an advantage to one party over the other. Yes, it is very popular, mostly because it appears as a simple, common sense thing. Which it can be if applied correctly. But it isn’t. The very fact that it is supported by bogus fear tactics about “voter fraud” ought to have tipped you off.
You didn’t hear about this? However did you manage that? Are the Republicans innocent lambs who simply have no idea about this? None of them are using this for such a political theft? None?
Standards are fine, with funding help to make sure there are enough locations and machines. You know, one thing I wonder about with Democrats is why they don’t advocate to pay big money to run elections right. we use volunteer poll workers, but like the census, we should have well trained employees who know the system inside and out. And minimum standards, which we have through the Help America Vote Act of 2001, but there are other things we can do.
I have no problem with minimum standards and better funded elections, I just don’t want the federal government to dictate everything, like ballot design, what kind of machines to use, etc. And you don’t really want that either, because if I was in charge party names would not be on the ballots. You’d have to figure that out for yourself.
Voter suppression is active measures to deny certain groups the right to vote, not popular measures to insure the integrity of the system. Now I’ll grant that in the debate over voter ID, Democrats have it right: in person voting fraud on behalf of someone else is a non existent problem. But there are other areas that do experience fraud, like registration, absentee balloting, same day registration, and possible double voting or non citzen voting. Democrats want to basically break down all the walls that prevent fraud, without having to actually pass bills to do so. Instead, they do things like challenge rejection of non-citizen ballots when they think no one will notice.
Define the terms any way you like that gets you the answer you want. Shrug. You’re still trying to undermine the legitimacy of democracy itself.
Of course there is. By counting. That’s a skill you learn in kindergarten. It isn’t that complicated in reality, but there are indeed multiple ways one can make it seem complicated, or random, or somehow illegitimate. If, that is, one puts party before country.
Or just declare the Republican the winner. There’s a Supreme Court precedent for it. But you don’t know if it’s a tie until you fucking count the votes, as accurately and fairly as good faith on all sides permits, do you?
What if you count twice with the same ballots by the same method and get two different results? What would be the logical thing to do in that case, and what actually happens? I’m not seeking to undermine democracy. I’m seeking to AVOID such hard feelings because close elections always end with the losing side convinced they were robbed. Or perhaps you missed what’s happening in the state north of Florida, where lies are being told about Brian Kemp?
I’m all for spending money to make sure elections run right. I’m not sure why you single out only Democrats for not advocating for this.
I want more than minimum standards. Maximum standards, as it were. Why just minimum standards? And as I suggested, yes, I do want someone/some group to scientifically research and determine a fair, accurate, well-tested system of voting to be used everywhere. If it meets those criteria in Alaska, it meets them in Florida. Move to a new state? Terrific. The one thing to be sure of is that you don’t have to learn a new way of voting. As for what you or anyone else wants, that goes back to my bolded requirements I just mentioned.
Or, what if you just fucking count all the votes? :dubious: And, since you bring up Georgia, quit trying to suppress voting? Is it really so fucking hard to understand what a commitment to democracy means?
Because he knows his Republicans sure as shit aren’t, and we all know why, too.