After the whole issue with Voting in 2000. Has your faith in our process been shaken? Do you feel more shenanigans are going on than we know about? Do you feel the right Candidate/admendments/etc get elect? I'm concerned more now. . . . esp with Electronic voting which . . . if tampered with . . . how would JOE PUBLIC KNOW? American have a Strong sense of Faith in our government. Moreso I think than almost any country. Are we at the same level we were say . . . .50 . .or 25 years ago? Rocket River I clearly do not think so.
It doesn't shake my faith in upcoming elections so much...but it cast into doubt every election prior. Were people really counting "pregnant chads" as votes in years past??? What standards were in play to make sure that each ballot was interpreted under the same set of rules??
Doesn't affect me much. I do wonder if the courts in general are a lot more activist (see California recall, and other rulings) since they saw the Supreme Court make a pretty activist decision.
I think 2000 was a dangerous precedent in that it marked the first time courts were brought in to interfere in elections. What's to stop the loser from crying for a recount in every single close election and tying up the will of the people for months on end while lawyers duke it out? Nothing now.
The recount had nothing to do with Gore "crying." He wanted a fair count and thats all. I'm sure the majority of Americans wanted the same thing since the majority of Americans voted for Gore.
It shook my faith in the process. Especially when you hear about who got disenfranchised and how little attention they got.
Fair count in Democratic wards where he was assured victory, that's all. The Democrats showed how stupid their voters are because they even said that their voters couldn't tell the difference between a punch for Buchanan and a punch for Gore on some silly butterfly ballot. There was a fair count the first time around and all Gore wanted to do was recount until he was president. The thought of his legal manuver to disenfranchise military absentee votes made me sick.
People who are too stupid to figure out when, where, and/or how to vote having a voice in who runs the country is just one more reason I would support a form of oligarchy for our government.
Actually Gore's team went and proposed a statewide recount and that he wouldn't challenge the findings. The initial recount was in certain counties that were more strongly democratic, but that was by Fla. constitution which demanded it. The Gore team did initially urge the counting in favorable areas, but in reality the offer Gore made after the initial hubub was to count all military votes, all statewide votes and to not contend the results in court at all.
Makes sense. But what about this stuff? Official: Florida disenfranchised minority voters March 9, 2001 Web posted at: 6:09 p.m. EST (2309 GMT) By CNN Producer Brad Wright WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The chairwoman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights issued a rebuke to the State of Florida Friday for alleged voting irregularities on Election Day, though the Commission has not completed its investigation. Widespread complaints of voting irregularities prompted the commission to hold hearings in Florida earlier this year at which more than 100 people have testified. And though the commission appears to be weeks from completing its investigation, Chairwoman Mary Frances Berry issued a statement of preliminary findings. "Voting is the language of our democracy," Berry said. "And, regrettably, when it mattered most on Election Day, real people lost real opportunities to speak truth to power at the ballot box. This must never occur again if we can do anything to stop it." Berry cited problems she said contributed to the disenfranchisement of many minority and elderly voters. Allocation of resources headed her list. "Key officials anticipated on Election Day that there would be an increase in levels of voter turnout based upon new voter registration figures, but did not ensure that the precincts in all counties received the resources to meet their needs," Berry said. Berry's list of problems in Florida on Election Day included: • At least one unauthorized law enforcement checkpoint was set up resulting in an investigation by state authorities. • Non-felons were removed from voter checklists based on unreliable information in connection with state-sponsored felony purge policies. • Old and defective election equipment was found in poor precincts. • Many Haitian-Americans and Puerto Rican voters were not provided language assistance when it was requested. • Many African-Americans did not cast ballots because they were assigned to polling sites that did not have the resources to confirm eligibility status. • Voter registration applications were not processed in a timely manner under the National Voter Registration Act. Two of the commission's eight members said the statement was premature. Abigail Thernstrom said it appeared the commission members had already reached their conclusions, and that the investigation is being conducted to fit that conclusion. In a letter to Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Berry said his statement of priorities in opening the state's legislative session "did not address the most serious problems that occurred in Florida during the 2000 elections." Berry wrote that she expected the commission to endorse new hearings in Florida to address what state and local officials have done to correct the alleged voting irregularities. But the Florida governor interpreted Friday's statement as a vindication of sorts. "Today's statement confirms that, after three days of hearings involving over 100 witnesses, the Civil Rights Commission has yet to be presented with any evidence of intentional discrimination in the conduct of the November 7, 2000 election in Florida," said Gov. Bush in a statement. The brother of President George W. Bush said he takes seriously "the alleged inefficiencies and bureaucratic errors" noted by the commission. "Many of these matters are addressed in the recommendations of the Select Task Force on Election Procedures, Standards and Technology. I am confident that the Legislature will act on the task force's recommendations and that the result will be a world-class election system in Florida." Bush complained that Friday's statement was drafted without prior discussion by the commission, and that Florida officials were given no opportunity to respond to the issues raised in the statement. "Hopefully, the commission will bring greater fairness and objectivity to the preparation of its final report," he said. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One of these days, I need to watch this documentary: http://www.unprecedented.org/
It truly bothered me When Gore was shown in the led . .late in the afternoon Bush got on TV and Said: I'm not going to Concede Florida . .. MY BROTHER ASSURED ME WE WOULD TAKE FLORIDA . . .and then they turn it around . .. If the son of the a Former leader and cheif of the secret police won an election . . .basically by the virtue of a state which his brother JUST HAPPENS to be Governor . . . . I think if it happen anywhere else {SAY . . hhmmm IRAQ] . .. we'd be suspicious. Rocket River
Ya'll need to read The Best Democracy Money Can Buy by Greg Palast. (Michael Moore gets his stuff from Palast.) The author is a journalist so widely hated that you know he gets at the facts. He has to work in England because America's "liberal-biased" media won't print his stories. This is far more than a case of hanging chads. Basically, between 57,000 and 100,000 people were disenfranchised in the Florida elections, mostly illegally or through various shenanigans (now there's an old-fashioned word). Half of them were black. Almost all were lower income (re: Democrats). Other states want to get in on the act, too. They want to go to electronic voting methods; these can be tampered with not to record votes. And they have already been used in Texas for local/state balloting, if I remember correctly. So, yes, my faith in the system is shaken. We might very well have Banana Republic voting very soon.
People have been worrying about electronic voting fraud, but I think the technology could be made safe. That's not to say that it is currently safe, but there is no reason why it has to be less secure than paper balloting. Currently, I understand, there is no paper produced and it is all electronic, which makes double-checking difficult. For starters, they could print a receipt for every voting transaction so they can keep a paper copy of all the data. More generally, protecting the vote is simply a logistical problem; it can be overcome.
