According to this link here, http://www.gopbi.com/partners/pbpost/epaper/editions/today/news_2.html
GW gained 6 votes over algore in the recount, in MIAMI-DADE! A democrat stronghold, and all. Hmmm, stolen election, my ass.
If he gained votes, why did he complain so much about not recounting them all? Shouldn’t he want everything to be counted, to silence his critics? Isn’t it just a little too convenient that all the problems occurring in GW Bush’s brother’s state, where the election was run by someone who was almost guaranteed a job if Bush won? That’s like hiring a contestant’s mother to judge a beauty pagent.
Sort of like how it was a little too convenient to only recount votes in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties?
Yes, the election was one big mess.
There should have been a statewide recount instead of just in certain counties.
Why that did not happen is beyond me.
Sorry to hijack the thread, but can anyone explain why this didn’t happen?
These were the counties the Democrats pursued for recounts. They felt that these counties would indicate that a state wide recount may have been needed. They also wanted to recount the entire state, but their request was turned down several times.
Here’s my idea on how to decide the winner. Throw out the election results, and let them beat the crap out of each other, in a hand to hand fight to the death. Then we would at least get rid of a politician, maybe two. If we could just get lawyers to try all court cases like this, the world would be a much better place.
Well, 6 votes is a lot less than 900.
And if you fairly count counties BESIDES Miami, then who knows . . . .
a knife fight with a slow acting poison!!!
milroyj, I notice you neglected to mention the rest of the article, where they said things like:
Gosh, 302 is a lot more than 6.
Also, they noted:
**
It appears that the Florida legislature messed up. There was no mechanism in place for a statewide recount prior to the election, which would seem to be a necessary thing for election disputes involving federal or state offices.
They seemed to only anticipate a problem with a close vote within a particular county, like for a county clerk or commissioner.
And they, like about 33 other states, will likely be re-thinking their statute’s vague and not particularly helpful “intent of the voter” standard for discerning what is a vote, and going to some specified criteria.
Keeping it vague starts to move things into the realm of the ridiculous if a particular side needs a particular amount of help.
Such as counting the votes of people who didn’t even come close to voting correctly or following any instructions whatsover.
You’ve gotta have standards. And now is the time to get them right, not while any changes will affect a vote that has already occurred.
Florida, and any other state with a similar provision, will also need to address that messed-up little item where each candidate gets to pick three counties for hand-counts.
As that was smacked down for Constitutional, equal protection reasons by the Supreme Court of the United States.
You can’t treat some counties’ ballots differently than other counties’, when all of those counties together determine a particular election outcome.
Common-sense should tell that to any thinking person. It didn’t seem to work that way in this election, however (or in this message board forum, for that matter).
In this forum we don’t base facts on common sense, since its very existence is questionable. You don’t get to vote on the facts, remember?
Unless all of the ballots in a state are the same ( which is not the case in Florida ) they can’t be treated the same.
Why? Because they are different.
So, states couldn’t enact statutes that said, “If using a punch ballot, this is the criteria; if using an opticial scan ballot, this is the criteria,” etc.?
Sorry; that’s common sense.
I think there should have been a hand recount of all counties that used punchcards, and of any counties that used similar methods where there is an actual, physical card or piece of papter to examine. But I don’t see how you can have a hand recount in a county that used modern voting methods. If it’s done electronically, what is there TO hand count?
I don’t understand why Gore didn’t (a) call for a hand recount of all counties that used punchcards, and (b) explain the above points to the public.
As I understand it, punchcards have a high error rate. A hand recount always finds votes that the machines could not read. And as I understand it, in Florida, the counties using punchcards were the poorer, blacker counties, all of which tended to vote Democrat. A hand recount of all punchcard counties should have benefited Gore.
I also don’t understand why Gore didn’t speak out about, and demand an investigation of, the various irregulatities that have been reported.
As a Gore supporter I’d have to vote for nowalls’ fistfight solution to the election for three reasons:
I) Gore has several inches and a few dozen pounds on Bush.
II)Gore was captain of his high school’s football team.
III)Bush was captain of his high schools cheerleader squad.
Of course the election is over. Gore conceeded, the electoral college voted, the Senate (Gore presiding) accepted the results. I’m gonna go back to crying in my beer now…
Milossarian:
Certainly they could. In fact, I think they should.
But then I think they should do a lot of things that will never happen.
Let’s see how it turns out.
Umm…have you ever seen how buff cheerleaders are? 
David B, if they didn’t follow instructions, why should their vote even be looked at as possibly valid? If I mess up on a test because I didn’t read the directions, I don’t get my points back.
As for the other quote, isn’t that exactly what the GOP was complaining about when Gore wanted hand recounts?
I don’t think either of the quotes you pointed out discredits milroyj
I wasn’t trying to discredit him, just to point out that he only provided the information in the article that best supported his apparent position.
Do I think those 302 should have been counted? Probably not. But they have that law about “voter intent,” so it’s a possibility.
As far as the second quote, yes, there will be different counts by different newspapers using different standards. However, if there had been one standard applied statewide – which the courts could have orderd – that wouldn’t have happened.
Harken to the sound of “A. Horse” (recently deceased) being flogged on non-consecutive occasions!! Way to go!!
If a significant number of voters fail to follow the procedure correctly then it is the procedure that is faulty, not the voters.
and what job would that be? She’s still Secretary of State. She already has a job and lots of money.
I don’t find anything curious in a close election in which the Republicans are in charge. They were put there by the voters to run the state and election laws.