1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Nader for Prez

Discussion in 'The OT' started by lee635, Feb 23, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MarkA

    MarkA God Bless America! DBSTalk Gold Club

    2,538
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    " The "recount" was to simply run the ballots through the machine counters again, and some counties didn't even bother with that!"

    What would you propose? That IS the election system

    "the most accurate method of counting ballots, agreed upon by almost all election experts, is a manual hand analysis of each ballot, at least the disputed ones"

    That would be a nightmare!

    "If "Florida was recounted", why was it necessary to stop the recounts?"

    Al Gore got his one recount. A labour-intensive hand recount is, as you said, what was stopped. And as for it being more accurate - I'd trust it an unbiased machine over a biased human anyday... Even a punch card machine. Let's face it though, people in Florida are crazy. A lot voted Libertarian. Al Gore then said all the people who voted Libertarian should have voted Democrat and therefore he should be given the Libertarian votes (and no, I don't buy the punched the wrong hole thing. We use punch cards here and you'd have to be incredibly stupid to mess it up. You'd either have to be unable to read or unable to properly align the notches on the card. In either case that should disqualify you from voting for someone like the President...)! It was crazy...
     
  2. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    You don't wear bi or tri-focals, do you. :lol: :D Since when does poor eyesight and thick glasses disqualify you from voting? Do you REALLY think all those people intended to vote for Buchanan? Then you're the crazy one. :lol: :D
     
  3. MarkA

    MarkA God Bless America! DBSTalk Gold Club

    2,538
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    " Do you REALLY think all those people intended to vote for Buchanan?"

    I highly doubt it, though you never know. However, that doesn't matter. The FACT is 99% of people were able to GET IT RIGHT, if these people were unable to do so, they should have asked for help. They should have double-checked their ballot against the numbers in the voting book. If they accidentally voted for the wrong person, the blame gets placed on noone but THEM.
     
  4. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    I hope you realize that one of these days you are going to be old too. Nice to see the respect you have for those whose eyesight isn't the greatest anymore, or who might get confused by a complicated ballot, yet might still have enough pride to find it difficult to ask for help. I hope someday someone has more compassion for you than you do. Good luck to your parents or anyone else who might be aging and not up to your standards anymore.
     
  5. MarkA

    MarkA God Bless America! DBSTalk Gold Club

    2,538
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    Bogy, like you said it's a pride issue. If these people have problems with pride that's their problem. I've found when voting that the people in the polling place are extremely enthusiastic about asking if you need help lining up the punch card with the book in the punch machine, about making sure you understand where to punch, etc...

    Also, regardless, changing the system represents a dangerous precedent. The next logical progression of touch screen voting is a sheet of large colour pictures where you circle the one you think looks best with a broken crayon :)

    PS. Part of it is I'm just a little angry that the county I'm in is being forced to get rid of punch card ballots because of new laws... they're replacing them with scantrons (which, except for the lack of having to be lined up right, I fail to see any advantage whatsoever to) and using MY MONEY to do so.
     
  6. Frank Z

    Frank Z Godfather

    301
    0
    Nov 15, 2002
    Nader is a crackpot, no if's, and's, or but's! He'll pull in a few crackpot votes and that's it. He's like a political Corvair.
     
  7. jonstad

    jonstad Hall Of Fame

    6,002
    1
    Jun 27, 2002
    Democracy can be a messy business and 2000 was definately a nightmare. Just running the ballots throught the machines a second time is like getting a wrong number and then hitting "redial" expecting to get the correct number on the second try. You need to go back and punch in each number MANUALLY, examining every one to make sure it's correct. Only then will you be connected to the correct Presidential candidate.;)

    Well, that's not quite true either. Initially, seventeen counties did NOT even bother to run the ballots through the machines a second time.

    Have you really thought about what you say here? Humans instruct the machines on how to count votes. When the ballot does not meet the criteria programmed in for whatever reason, the ballot is not counted, the infamous "overvotes" and "undervotes". Normally, no one bothers with these because the results would not be changed. But Florida 2000 was hardly a "normal" election. With many millions voting, the margin after the second machine count was less then 1000 votes. The US Supreme Court, in more enlightened times, has ruled on several occasions that the "intent" of the voter is what is primary, NOT his or her proficiency with a particular voting apparatus or ballot. In other words, a simple mistake on a ballot doesn't disqualify it IF upon examination the intent of the voter is clear. For instance, some ballots you were instructed to "fill in the circle completely", as we've all seen on tests or questionaires. If the voter placed an X or a check mark instead, the machine would disqualify it. At the top of some ballots was "Write in candidate___________". Some people misread this as an instruction and wrote in their choice(whether Bush, Gore or Nader) as well as punching the ballot with the same choice, in effect voting for the same candidate twice. These ballots too were disqualified by machine. The "intent" in both cases is crystal clear, and this is why a hand count of the under- and overvotes is necessary in a race this close.

    Anyway, I tire of this. It is now history. Hopefully we will learn from it. George Bush should know though if he is "elected" by a similar fiasco this go around, NO ONE is going to let it slide or chalk it up to dumb bad luck.

    Huh?:confused: I don't remember this one. Are you referring to the Buchanan votes? I believe that was the "Freedom Party" or something like that. Perhaps along the way, Gore or his campaign noted that there was confusion among some voters because of the "butterfly" ballot where many people saw Gore/Leiberman listed second and so punched the second hole. Unfortunately, or fortunately depending on your point of view, Gore/Lieberman was the THIRD hole. Buchanan was the second.:grin: It is not an outrageous statement to say Gore "should" have gotten those votes(even Buchanan admitted as much) in the sense that without the confusion, Gore would have gotten some votes that went to Buchanan. I doubt highly that Gore or anyone in his campaign seriously, or even jokingly maintained they "should" be awarded the Buchanan votes. That's just silly, and takes out of context to a new level.
     
  8. MarkA

    MarkA God Bless America! DBSTalk Gold Club

    2,538
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    " I believe that was the "Freedom Party" or something like that."

    Oh, yeah. Sorry... it's been 4 years :)

    As for it being the wrong hole - if their punch cards are the same as the ones here, you punch out the hole NUMBER that's beside the choice. If you can't figure that out...

    Of course the answer to this is to randomly insert "for ballot verification, punch hole #xxx" in the book. If a verification hole isn't correctly punched, disqualify the ballot since the accuracy of the rest of it is called into question. That way there's no accusation people are getting votes that people didn't mean to give them.
     
  9. HappyGoLucky

    HappyGoLucky Banned User

    5,124
    0
    Jan 11, 2004
    The punch cards used in any state or even in different counties, are designed by that state or county, so they would not be the same as yours. The ones in question in the Florida 2000 election were so poorly designed it was a nightmare. The names did not align with the holes to be punched, which resulted in a large number of people thinking they were voting for Gore but instead voted for Buchanan. The hole that lined up with Gore's name was actually the hole to vote for Buchanan, you had to actually look at the numbers in order to make the correct vote.
     
  10. MarkA

    MarkA God Bless America! DBSTalk Gold Club

    2,538
    0
    Mar 23, 2002
    That's what I was saying - the holes do NOT line up with who you're voting for. There's a number beside the candidate's name, and there's numbers in the middle that do line up with the holes (if you've inserted the card correctly and have it lined up). You punch the number that corresponds.
     
  11. HappyGoLucky

    HappyGoLucky Banned User

    5,124
    0
    Jan 11, 2004
    However, like the way the punch cards here in GA were designed, the holes and the candidates name almost always was aligned, so you punched the hole beside the candidates name to cast your vote. That is how the punch cards in Florida were always designed UNTIL the 2000 election. People were used to them being a certain way. The hole to vote for Bush lined up with his name, the hole for Gore and Buchanan did not, thus the confusion. Technically, the cards were correct. Functionally and ethically? A matter of controversy.
     
  12. Richard King

    Richard King Hall Of Fame

    21,331
    0
    Mar 25, 2002
    The polling methods used in Florida have always been under local juristiction, not state or national. The punch card was not a universal method in Florida. As everyone knows, the biggest problem in Florida was in Palm Beach County. The cards and alignment used in that county were designed by the supervisor of elections of that county, a Democrat. If you feel the design was unethical in some way, please explain how. Did she design it to give the opposition party some kind of advantage? Yogi was right, it is deja vu all over again. :rolleyes:
     
  13. HappyGoLucky

    HappyGoLucky Banned User

    5,124
    0
    Jan 11, 2004
    I did not state that the cards were designed to give an advantage. But because of the design flaw, the results of the vote were very questionable. How the debacle was handled afterwards was, in my opinion, unethical.
     
  14. jonstad

    jonstad Hall Of Fame

    6,002
    1
    Jun 27, 2002
    As were the methods for recounts, all part of the GOP mantra of "local control". It's only when the GOP precieved this "local control" might work to ther disadvantage did they cry foul. Typical right-wing hypocrisy.
     
  15. Richard King

    Richard King Hall Of Fame

    21,331
    0
    Mar 25, 2002
    Where's Yogi? :rolleyes:
     
  16. Nick

    Nick Retired, part-time PITA DBSTalk Club

    21,838
    186
    Apr 23, 2002
    The...
    ...and typical left-wing whining. Get over it. Our guy is going to be prez for 5 more years. Deal.
     
  17. jonstad

    jonstad Hall Of Fame

    6,002
    1
    Jun 27, 2002
    Gee, that rings a bell. Seems I heard the same thing about another George Bush about twelve years ago. A draft-dodger named Bubba was all it took.:lol: He's goin' down! :box:
     
  18. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    I have doubts about that. Democrats are pretty united at this point, and I'm hearing from a lot of moderate Republicans who are going to be voting Democrat.
     
  19. Stosh

    Stosh Godfather

    301
    0
    Dec 16, 2003
    I never heard Gore say that. Can you show me evidence he did?

    Many disgruntled voters did make that claim, and while I feel while they may be right, we desperately need more than two parties running candidates in elections. The Dems are Reps are both part of the same problem, and are not nearly as different as people like to think (for example, Bush is in no way a true "conservative", nor does he promote supposed traditional Republican views).
     
  20. Bogy

    Bogy Hall Of Fame

    13,242
    1
    Mar 23, 2002
    It may be true that there isn't that much difference between the Republicans and the Democrats, but there is enough difference and antagonism between them that what this country can't take very much more of, and which it has never tolerated for long, is to have one party in control of both houses and the administration.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page