Maybe I missed it on the news, maybe its on this thread I’ve not finished reading yet, but I’ve yet to hear the one REALLY good reason for going through with the hand count and having that final count accepted…
Am I the only person worried there might be riots in Florida? It looks like there are dozens of protests and hundreds of protesters and they’ve been peaceful…so far. If folks get the impression that thier votes aren’t going to count for reasons other than accidental double-voting, there’s going to be a huge hue and cry and it could get violent.
BTW, I know some folks have joked about sending in UN advisors to oversee the electoral process, or what’s left of it in Florida, but because this is such a volitile and partisan issue maybe we SHOULD seriously consider and outside, disinterested group to oversee things. Can we get someone from Canada to come down…?
I’ve responded to this issue about two or three times, in various GD threads. It’s very much apples and oranges. Perhaps you reject the argument. That’s your prerogative.
You have indeed, milo. And others have pointed out that you could squeeze them apples, add vodka, and enjoy a fine screwdriver.
Some Texas counties use punch ballots.
Some Florida counties use punch ballots.
In Texas, the decision to request a hand count is under teh discretion of the petitioner.
In florida, the decision to perform a hand count is under the discretion of the canvassing board.
Bush signed a law allowing for hand recounts of punch ballots in texas.
Bush went to federal court to declare a law allowing for hand recounts of punch ballots in Florida unconstitutional.
mmm, somebody pass the Stoli.
Monster104
The estimate for a full hand count in Palm Beach County is 6-7 days. While it is possible that Miami Dade and Pinellas might take a bit longer, most counties had fewer votes cast than PBC and should take less time to complete. Think parallel.
Zenster
Thanks for the compliment. Actually I have (and do) argue against some positions held by some Democrats. I am firmly behind the idea that every citizen should have his vote counted as accurately and reliably as possible, though.
I also believe that this issue is important enough that Harris should have bent over backward to reassure the public and avoid any semblance of partisanship. Instead, she appears to have embraced it.
Yep. All of what you said is true. It’s sounds even better when, for about the fourth time, you leave out that little part about approximately 90 percent of Texas’ elections are conducted on marked-paper ballots.
Goodness, milo. Why would I leave out something that was entirely irrelevant?
You, for about the fourth time, insist that the idea that only a small percentage of Texas counties use punch card ballots somehow invalidates the fact that Texas law allows those counties to use a manual recount.
Why?
You have been asked this question before, and have yet to respond. The law covers all counties, including those that use punch ballots. What possible difference does it make that not every county in Texas uses punch ballots? Remember, not every county in Florida uses punch ballots, either.
Any chad perforated enought to fall out, or even be TORN out would have to have two corners punched through. (or else it wouldn’t be a rectangular hole) Thus it would count as a valid vote regardless.
Under Texas law, in fact many chad that couldn’t even be torn out of a ballot would be considered valid votes in a hand count. (Texas allows ‘pregnant’ chad)
The rules being used in Broward county are even stricter than Texas law, though I understand Palm Beach is planning to use the Texas standard.
Stuff on the floor can ONLY be valid votes, having it be on the floor rather than still attached has absolutely no significance.
So what you’re saying, Milo, is that somehow the two situations being exactly the same is comparing apples and oranges?
Both states have both punch and marked ballots, depending on which county you live in. Bush supports hand counts in one of those states, but not in the one that could cost him the election. Sorry, not seing where the difference is.
Also, Monster: almost as likely as sending no electors from FL is sending both sets, and having them all cast votes. Then, Congress has the power to vote on whether an individual elector’s vote counts. Kinda scary, but they’d probably do that before sending none.
Milo, imagine if you will that the situation were exactly as it has been except that the Florida election was governed by the Texas elction law. Now, since the parties will still act consistently (only the specific law has changed):
Palm Beach County would still have used a punch card ballot.
Gore would still want a recount.
The law would allow Gore to petition for a recount.
The law would allow Gore to petition specifically for a hand recount.
The canvassing board of Palm Beach County would accept that petition.
Bush would oppose the selective recount.
Bush would have exactly the same grounds to attack the recount: supposed inaccuracy of process, bias created by selective sampling, etc.
Bush would file suit in federal court to have declared unconstitutional a measure that he himself signed into law.
Milo : If, as you contend, the “hand counting of punch card ballots” is inhereantly WRONG, should be avoided at all costs, then why, oh why, did the Texas law not make a specific provision for it? It would have been simple to do. Instead, the Texas state legislature SPELLED out exactly how to do manual recounts of the punch card ballots and to consider the “pregnant” chad a vote.
What part of “unconstitutional” seems to be escapoing your notice?
Do you see no contradiction in passing a law that works for the majority but is unconstitutional for the minority? Do you see no other troubles with such laws?
For that matter, are you aware that the majority of Florida counties do not use punch card ballots?
Just grab hold of the next punch card you get, flex it a bit, and see what happens. I think you’ll find that a chad won’t fall out unless it’s already been partly dislodged. To be partly dislodged, somebody had to poke it. Also, can you make a dent in a chad without tearing at least one corner? I didn’t think so - “dimpled chad” is a red herring.
Under the laws of both Florida and Texas, as I understand, partially dislodged chad is evidence of an intended vote. Yes, further handling can dislodge it more, but won’t change the result. OK? Are we agreed?
It’s been argued in this thread that “The Bush camp believes hand recounts will be less accurate, and less reflective of the will of the people”. Well, maybe - but is that a belief, or just a spin? Do you think they’d still “believe” that if the situation were reversed? Are there any facts or evidence, or logic, to show how they arrived at this genuine belief? Please, let’s not be so transparent, folks.
I’m deeply distressed by the number of people who have argued that we need to get this resolved more quickly than accurately, as if another week or so is unaffordable. Is there anyone who thinks so who is willing to say they think that’s best for the country, or for its place in the world, or for its place in history? Does anyone on this board really believe that the right of the people to be fully heard and to select their own leaders is subordinate to some other consideration? Is THAT what you think we stand for? I’m embarrassed for America that such sentiments can even be taken seriously.
Manhattan, if it was not a rhetorical question: the punchcards were designed to be counted mechanically. Any other method, first of them manual, are bound to introduce more errors. Election officials ain’t mathematicians, they are ordinary politicians who do not know it. Smart Algore knows the fallacy, but he and his paid-by-the-hour lawyers have different agenda.
ALso, let us not forget that the presidential chads are only a small fraction of the total chads on each ballot, and the majority of chads on the floor almost certainly have nothing to do with the presidential race.
What is the basis of your claim that mechanical counts of the punch cards are less prone to error than manual counts?
The machine will NOT count a vote where the chad is NOT completely punched out. However, human beings WILL in fact be able to see, and COUNT those votes.
“Stuff on the floor can ONLY be valid votes, having it be on the floor rather than still attached has absolutely no significance.”
Well, let’s suppose that a “partially detached chad” is a valid vote, even if only one corner is attached.
Let’s also suppose you’re counting a ballot in FLA, and the “chad” for one presidential candidate has one corner detached, and the “chad” for another presidential candidate is fully detached. How should this ballot be counted?
What if the partially detached chad falls off?
I’m not sure what the answer is, but, given (1) the closeness of the election; and (2) the apparent confusion over the ballots, I suspect that there are a significant number of ballots like this.
Given what has gone on there, I’d be tempted to count it for Gore if the other candidate is Buchanan, but in reality, neither vote should count. And I believe that is the policy.
"I’m not sure what the answer is, but, given (1) the closeness of the election; and (2) the apparent confusion over the ballots, I suspect that there are a significant number of ballots like this. "
Also, I have a feeling that the officials in many of the counties that are hand re-counting will decide these questions in ways that favor Gore. (Just as the Florida Secretary of State has apparently been making decisions in ways that favor Bush.)