Fla Sec of State tells counties to justify a recount -- You try it

Because if she doesn't let the recounting continue, it will be viewed as a completely partisan decision. Which it would be. This would lead to even more court action, and drag this thing on for weeks. Why is she so afraid of these recounts? Is it because she is afraid of finding out the true results of the election? Since the overseas votes won't come in til Friday, what's the harm of letting this LEGAL process continue?

------------------
2000-2001 Rockets Game Formulas:
End of 1st quarter: "They're playing so well!"
2nd: "What a great game!"
3rd: "Theres no way they can lose now!"
4th: "What the ******* **** happened?!!"
Revote! Revote! Revote!......
Rocket's Championship 2001!!

 

Ok Freak,

I've got a question for you. Why is Harris petitioning to have the hand count discontinued? It sure sounds like she is trying to manipulate the outcome of the vote don't you think?
http://www.nandotimes.com/no_frames/front/story/0,4501,500279886-500439184-50281 5709-0,00.html

Not trying to start a flame war (believe me, I want this whole mess over).


------------------
'Deeds, not words, shall speak me.'



[This message has been edited by mc mark (edited November 15, 2000).]

 

Not trying to get off topic too much but...

1.) If Bush wins, he won under the current rules and regulations of the election process in the United States.

2.) If Gore (somehow) wins, he will have changed the rules and regulations to suit his campaign.

------------------
"I have a DREAM.........his name's Hakeem."
DREAMer's Rocket Page

 

Well, how about this:

(A) Hand recounts are used all over the country in almost every close race when requested. Why not here? They are widely considered (except for the Republican party for the last 7 days) more accurate than any computer count. They are used in many local and county races that often are this close. The only reason computers are used is for speed.

(B) Punch ballots contain more errors by computer than do handwritten scantron-like ballots. Computers are unable to read many legal punches of ballots.

(C) According to election law in Florida, the goal of a count is to most accurately determine the intent of the voters in the count of the ballots. Computers may or may not accurate count a mostly-punched ballot. Hand-counts are widely used for this exact purpose.

(D) The hand-count does not resolve the questionable issue of the double punches. There's no danger of those votes being counted.

(E) The hand count is observed by both parties and independents to ensure no fraud occurs.

(F) There is no time constraint here. The race cannot be called until Saturday anyway. The American people and the people of Florida have both said they'd prefer to wait a few weeks to ensure the correct count is done.

(G) The Republicans have the right to request hand-counts in other counties or across Florida (which I think they should). The fact they don't take advantage of this is no reason that the other party should be denied their rights to exercise this option.

(H) Two separate courts (one state, one federal) have stated that the hand-counts are reasonable. Contrary to her opinion, the courts have said the Secretary of State must consider facts such as the need for it & how long they take, in deciding whether to accept them. I consider the Presidency of the United States fairly important. I also consider the fact that hand counts are always used in close races fair justification in using them in this close race.

(I) (this has not been confirmed yet, but was reported by MSNBC) Apparently, Republicans have already conducted hand recounts in smaller Florida counties. Whether this is true or not, I'm not sure.


------------------
Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

I didnt think so!!!!

 

How about this: we want to get the result right (meaning, accurate). Republicans and Dems alike should work together to see that that happens, and I don't see how imposing a quick deadline, for its own sake, furthers that goal. Meticulous hand-counting is annoying and time-consuming, but it seems a way to reach the common goal.

------------------

 

To expand on this:

(J) A hand-recount is not fundamentally unfair. Presidential elections are considered county-elections. Not state elections, but county-elections, and each county sets their own rules.

All over the country, the rules on how ballots are counted are different in every county. Always has been this way. What is "acceptable" and what is "not acceptable" has always been determined at the local level.

If Florida was not a battleground state, everything that is taking place would be normal and acceptable. Now that it's actually important, why should we treat it differently?

Also, a Florida Judge just confirmed the above by granting Palm Beach County the right to pick their method as has always been done.

There's nothing unique or different about hand-recounts. Bush had no problem with a selective manual recount in New Mexico. There's no reason not to allow it under current law.



------------------
Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

I didnt think so!!!!

 

Freak,
If this were the other way around I'm pretty positive that the same things would be happening. As it should be.

You keep talking about rules and deadlines and all that. I understand what you are saying but I do not agree with it.

Step outside of your party for a minute and look at the big picture. We have an election that is closer than any election in the history of this country. No one wants the Prez to be decided by a technicality. Bush has a 300 vote lead in Florida currently. With all of the uncertainty with the vote counts then they should have as much time as they need to make sure that every vote gets counted. If they want us to believe that every vote counts then they need to count every vote.



------------------
RocketFuel is dead!

 

I don't think the issue is whether or not hand recounts are allowed.

According to the Secretary of State and GW Bush, it is. Both have filed petitions asking them to be stopped.

The issue is whether or not they should be allowed to continue counting past the deadline for submitting results.

That is also an issue.

Hand recounts have taken place, nobody has stopped them. Why should these hand-picked counties get more time than the rest of the state to recount votes?

But both the Republican Party and the Secretary of State have tried to stop the process. Several counties delayed their recounts several days because of statements and legal issues brought up by both of these parties. It should also be noted that the Secretary of State is a personal friend and chairperson of the Bush campaign. ALL counties should get enough time to do it. These laws were also passed well-before counties were this large.

Computers are not perfect, true. But why should the results of these few counties be any more perfect than all of the other counties in the state? Again, why should certain counties get more time to count than others?

They shouldn't -- all counties should get plenty of time. And to resolve this Bush has the right to ask for all the counties to be recounted. Just because he doesn't want it done in Bush strongholds is no reason the Democrats should be denied their rights to request it in other counties.

If state law says the goal of a count is to determine the intent of the voters in the state, how can you determine that intent by counting some parts of the state differently from others? Why should some parts of the state get more time to count than others?

They shouldn't. And Bush can resolve that easily by using his rights. But State Law also says counties control how their votes are counted. This was affirmed by a state judge today.

Without the double punching issue, what other irregularities exist that would warrant exceeding the deadline for a vote count, and can those irregularities be corrected by a handcount? If there are none, why should extended counting be allowed?

YES -- that's the whole point of the recount. It has nothing to do with double-punches. It has to do with punches that left a portion of the chad connected to the ballot (hanging chads, swinging chads, etc). Yes, many of these votes are found by hand counts and they are perfectly legal ballots. The double-punch issue is totally separate.

I must go now... Will finish later.


------------------
Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

I didnt think so!!!!

 

OK, here's the rest of it:

Whether or not fraud may exist in hand-counting has nothing to do with the decision to extend the deadline for a few counties.

No, it doesn't. But it does have to do with the "hand-counts are unfair" argument.

If there is no time constraint, where did yesterday at 5pm come from? Did I just pull that out of my ass (the sec probably wouldn't say that)?

The deadline came from a misinterpretation by the biased Sec of State. The Courts said that deadline is a tool, but not an absolute deadline. Other circumstances need to be considered.

Do you think the American people and the people of Florida would feel a correct count was done if certain hand-picked counties received more time to count than others?

Not at all. However, counties are different sizes, and all are much larger than when the one-week deadline was passed. That's why all counties should have the time they need, as long as its relatively reasonable (a week or two). A majority of American and Floridian people agree with this.

The deadline for Republicans to request hand-counts has passed.

That's not true. Or, at least it wasn't when you posted this (it may be now that the 2pm justification deadline has passed). The 72-hour deadline is completely made up as far as I know. I don't think anyone, especially not the Sec of State, would deny Bush the right to have a re-count.

Why should one deadline be honored and not the other?

The courts have ruled that accuracy is more important than non-pressing deadlines. Do you disagree?

Are you saying a county's right to a fair count should be determined by a political party?

Not at all -- you are, though, by insisting that the Bush campaign chairwoman's rules take precedence over court rulings.

Need is what you have yet to establish.
"Because it's a close race" is not sufficient to exceed the deadline.

Need has been established. In a close race, the most accurate count is needed. The most accurate count, everyone agrees, is a manual hand-count. Pretty straightforward, I think.

Unless the supposed hand-counts were submitted by 5pm yesterday, the results won't count.

Actually, that's not at all true. The Sec of State has the authority to count them if she wishes. Besides, why should we settle for a less accurate count just because one side didn't want to get a more accurate one? (And yes, Bush feels hand counts are the most accurate way) Does that make any sense?

Besides, they didn't request a hand-count within 72 hours, so the point is moot.

I don't think anyone would deny that right if they requested it.

Essentiallyl your argument seems to be that we have these deadlines, and if we can't get the most accurate count within this time frame, oh well -- deadlines are more important than accuracy. The other argument is that accuracy is more important than deadlines.

------------------
Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

I didnt think so!!!!

 

Y'all need to step back and look at the big picture. Our current election fiasco is the result of the convergence of three truths. They are, in no particular order, as follows:

1. This year's Presidential election was the closest one in history.

2. This year's election occurred in the information age/age of the internet. We are all used to getting instant data and instant answers to our problems/questions. There is no instant answer to this one. It's too close.

3. The Repub Party and the Dem Party are at each other's throats like never before. More partisanship and animosity between the two parties than at any other time in history. They are like two dogs fighting over a bone. Barking & snarling at each other...neither wants to quit.

Look at it this way...

---if there wasn't so much partisanship, the two parties would honestly and swiftly find a compromise.

--if this election had happened in the 1970s or earlier, the country would be more patient as a solution was worked out.

--If the election wasn't so close, we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

The results (so far) of this election proves that the country wasn't voting for one candidate in as much as they were voting against the other guy. Bush plus Gore combined amounts to about 23% of a what a President should be, IMHO. Both of these clowns stink. And, because of what's been going on for the past week, the 43rd President, whoever it is, will be struggling to pick his own nose, let alone get anything done that is good for this country. It's a big sh*t sandwich, and each and every American will be taking a bite, no matter who is declared the "winner".

Think about it. And get over the partisanship! None of us win if we let that cloud our thinking!

------------------
I am the b*stard son of LHutz.

Huh?

Right!

 

If deadlines and rules don't matter because the election is close and we want to make sure every vote counts, shouldn't we extend the deadline for the polls to close? I mean, we have a lot of registered voters who didn't vote, isn't their opinion just as important?

Of course, if the law doesn't matter, shouldn't we allow a revote with Bill Clinton added to the ballot? I mean, his approval ratings are still pretty high. There are likely quite a few people who would like a third Clinton term, and if deadlines and rules shouldn't count, shouldn't we offer the people whatever they want?

The rules and deadlines do matter because they are the rules and deadlines that are set by the law. Without the law, we are not a nation. We must respect the rule of law and live by it. If we don't like the law, we need to get together and work to get the laws changed for the next time around.


------------------
Houston Sports Board
The Anti-Bud Adams Page

 

Well-stated, mrpaige. Clear and concise.

------------------

 

Florida supreme court rejects Harris' request to stop hand count.
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/15/president.election.03/index.html

------------------
'Deeds, not words, shall speak me.'

 

To the people who claim that the secretary of state is biased and then say that courts have decided against her policies,
The courts are biased too, they are controlled by democrat judges appointed by democrat politicians. Whoever decides what procedures will be used in the end could easily be accused of partisan politics unless their decision gave the election to the party that they oppose, and it is against human nature for that to happen. IMHO, in such a close race where there is so much at stake, the only safe way to avoid calls of partisanship would be to follow the letter of the law.

------------------
Don't come in Bullard's house!

 

Are there any Justices that led Gore's Florida campaign? Are there any that have been mentioned for ambassadorships under a Gore administration?

Point those out and I'll agree with you.

------------------
Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him?

I didnt think so!!!!

 

Al Gore just proposed a full hand recount throughout Florida. So more selective counting. What do repubs have against that?

------------------
2000-2001 Rockets Game Formulas:
End of 1st quarter: "They're playing so well!"
2nd: "What a great game!"
3rd: "Theres no way they can lose now!"
4th: "What the ******* **** happened?!!"
Revote! Revote! Revote!......
Rocket's Championship 2001!!