Spiritus–
Are we allowed to have a rational discussion in the Pit? What is the world coming to?
I was not aware that Bush was challenging this on constitutional grounds, even though you have said so clearly. Do you have any details on why he/they are claiming something unconstitutional is going on? It can’t simply be hand counting, because before there were any other method, hand counting is all there was.
There it is!
Just heard on the news what the constitutional challenge is all about–the fairness of votes NOT being so carefully counted in the rest of the country. Interesting point.
This is a stament from Dan Bartlett, Bush’s spokesman:
‘Hand counts, Bartlett said, are “a fundamentally flawed process” that “undermines confidence” in the election’
(from the CNN website)
This isn’t hypocracy? As has been stated here, Bush signed a bill supporting hand counts. So what is his position?
Happy to help.
According to “Meet The Press” this morning, the difference is that 230-some of Texas’ 240-some voting districts use paper, not punch ballots.
A reasonable person should be able to surmise that in a situation such as that, a manual inspection would make more sense, than in a situation of punches that are intended to be read by a machine.
As I posted in a GD thread, also on “Meet the Press,” it was pointed out that these heavily Democratic counties very carefully picked out by Gore for manual count, the boards of canvassars who will make the determinations on Gore votes are 2-to-1 Democrats. Numerous instances where they are out-voting the Republican representatives on deciding for individual votes have already been reported. And the fact that the criteria on which to approve or disapprove a ballot are complete subjective and vary from county to county makes this all the more egregious.
Now, why would anybody not think that fair, or want to oppose it?
In general, I agree with the gist of the argument here, and have no useful comments to add.
But I wanted to take issue with the post title.
Don’t you feel that Republicans or hypocrites are entitled to fulfilling sex lives too? :eek:
Not true, and PROVEN not true. The punch-ballot machines gave Gore 800+ more votes in the second recount in Palm Beach, and Bush a hundred or so more.
Not true. They have a very clear and simple standard: If any corner of the chad is disattached, it counts. If all four corners are attached, it does not count. What’s so subjective about that? Simple, clear, and a standard writtten into Florida law in 1990. It is therefore false to claim that the manual recount is subjective, unless you consider it subjective to determine whether all four courners are attached or not? After all, they either are or are not.
They followed instructions. We’ve all punched out chads from cards in our time. They don’t always disattach completely.
No, there would not, because they are not punch-ballot counties, and did not demonstrate the same rate of error. That is the POINT that so many people keep IGNORING…Gore “hand picked” :rolleyes: counties that had ballots which demonstrated high rates of error due to punch ballot problems. That they happened to be Democratic counties was a fortunate fact on Gore’s side.
Why would we do that, when other counties didn’t show so many errors? just to make Republicans happy?
Like it or not, the FACTS OF THE SYSTEM created this situation, and did so in Gore’s favor. He didn’t do anything to skew it that way.
Deal with it on THAT level, if you dare.
stoid
getting annoid with deliberate ignorance of the FACTS.
sheesh
The motion papers in the case are available here (Warning: large pdf file.)
In this case, Governor Bush, Mr. Chaney and a number of Florida voters are seeking to stop state and county election officials from doing their jobs on the grounds that the state laws that authorize the hand recounts dilute the constitutional voting rights of those whose votes were counted by the machines. The Republicans make a rather complex argument that I will attempt to explain.
Key to the GOP argument is that voters have a right to not have the power of their vote diluted by allowing unauthorized ballots to be counted. That is to say, if an improperly cast vote is counted, a voter is harmed because the importance of his vote is decreased relative because it becomes a smaller proportion of the electorate.
The prime deficiency identified by the GOP is that under Florida law, county election officials have broad discretion to allow or prevent a recount. The relevant law does not provide any gudiance or rules as to when a recount should be authorized.
The GOP says that this unbridled discretition makes the law unconstitional on its face because it allows the officials to choose whether or not to dilute the votes of those who cast “machine-readable” ballots with those who cast “hand-readable-only” ballots. They assert that allow the county officials to “change” the “normal” procedure for counting votes is an unconstitutional deprivation of voting rights.
For a wide variety of reasons, I believe their arguments are far-fetched and borderline frivolous, but I won’t include my analysis of the motion’s deficiencies in this generally factual post.
Bill
(P.S. Polycarp, of course Republicans should have fulfilling sex lives, but there is that provision in the GOP platform that sex lives should be fulfilled only in the missionary position. I have it on good athority that there was one occasion in 1997 when the Bushes were having sex and they rolled over and completed the act with Laura on top. That is why I identifed them as ‘fucking hypocrited.’ 
Since 1983, when I began voting in Texas elections, I have voted in three different counties - Dallas, Lubbock, and most recently Tarrant. Until I voted in Tarrant County, I always encountered a punch card ballot. In fact, when I first voted in Tarrant County, I was confused by the “scantron” type ballot. I kept looking for the slot where I could slide my ballot in so that I could punch it.
I haven’t voted in Lubbock County since 1986, or Dallas County since 1994, so I can’t state unequivocally that a punch card ballot is used there. But I do know that at one time, both counties did use that type of ballot.
Well, first of all there are 254 counties in Texas. So if 230-some of these counties use paper ballots, then that leaves potentially 24 that use punch ballots. At least one of these 24 is Dallas County (unless they have changed their method since 1994), one of the largest counties in the state. So I guess that what you’re saying is that the voters in Dallas County and these 23 other counties aren’t entitled to a manual recount of votes, but that the voters in the other 230 are?
No; I’m saying the clearly-grasping-at-straws Democrats who are saying “See! See! Bush himself says hand-counts are the best way!” are comparing apples to oranges. Because the vast majority of voting districts in Texas use hand-marked, paper ballots and not punch cards, it makes far more sense that hand re-counting would be a tabulating method you would want at your disposal.
I don’t understand this “apples to oranges” argument. Help me out here.
Texas law specifically states that a manual recount is the preferred method of a vote recount. Texas law allows counties to use either paper or punch card ballots. Therefore, it is assumed that, since Texas law doesn’t specify that a manual recount is preferred for paper ballots only, it is the preferred method for both types of ballots. Just because a manual recount may make more sense for paper ballots doesn’t mean that it is not a valid or preferred method for punch card ballots. George W. Bush signed this into law, implying that he had no issue with this.
I’m assuming that Florida law allows for a manual recount. I’m also assuming that Florida law allows the use of punch card ballots. It would follow that at some point in the past, elected Florida officials had no issue with a manual recount of punch card ballots, and therefore, as in Texas, it can be considered a valid method of recounting votes in Florida.
Again, how is this comparing apples to oranges?
it is a really weak argument, from what I can tell. And here’s what I wrote in the “memo to Bush supporters” thread:
I have not seen the paper ballots in Texas, but it seems to me that they are being described as pen-to-paper, and therefore ridiculously more clear and easy to “determine intent” than punch ballots. (Therefore Bush is not a hypocrite.)
Well, I dunno 'bout that.
Assuming, as I must since I haven’t seen them, that the ballots are something similar to a lottery slip, it seems to be just as subjective, if not MORE subjective, to decide if a slight pen mark on a spot counts as an intent to vote, than to decide if a punched out chad means an intent to vote. After all, with the chads it’s pretty straightforward: the chad is connected by four corners. If one, two, or three of those corners are detached, it’s a vote. No corners detached? It’s not a vote. How much simpler, straightforward, and unmistakable can it possibly get?
Pen to paper, on the other hand…setting aside the people who might actually write: “I meant to vote for Bush!” on the paper, all other markings would be pretty subjective. Of course, if someone draws arrows, crosses things out, then that might be easy to discern, but I’ve had lottery slips rejected because my pen touched an extra spot. I’ve seen people’s lotto slips where they barely marked the spots, others where they scribbled all over. People do it all kinds of ways. If the Texas ballots are anything like this, what is the objective standard used, comparable to the attached/detached corners of chads, that makes the Texas statute so much more logical/fairer/more reasonable than the standard used in Palm Beach?
We all know I’m biased in terms of who I want to win, but really…it seems really obvious to me that manual determination of whether a chad is punched is much more objective than trying to decide if a light pen mark is deliberate or accidental. After all, in order to punch, you have to stick it in a metal hole and press down. In order to make a mark with a pen, the pen merely has to brush the paper. I’ve made thousands of accidental pen marks in my life…I haven’t punched many accidental holes.
Anybody got any answers for this? (silly question)
And Texas does BOTH, as someone said, yes?
So there are the republicans. faced with the blatant hypocrisy of their guy, coming up with some really creative (and ridiculous) justifications… and THIS is why I don’t trust conservatives! They sacrifice logic on the alter of their desires…
Hey, Bush actually signed this law. If he doesn’t support hand-counts, how can he support a Patients’ Bill of Rights which he merely allowed to pass without signing or vetoing?
Hypocrite.