blzrul Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Hypocrites Just note for the record who, once again, has run to court demanding that ballots NOT be examined...at least ballots from traditionally Democratic strongholds. And by the way the recount was triggered by state law when the margin was only 260 votes - law calls for a recount if the difference is less than 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 gawd, the election was over 3 weeks ago and you guys are still grumpy. well, at least you realized the futility of contesting the presidential election and moved onto something else. but keep focusing on this kind of stuff and not on why you guys lost, that'll help your chances in 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 I hate when they try to use a standard to determine something. Heaven forbid people follow simple rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBTG81 Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 Hypocrites Just note for the record who, once again, has run to court demanding that ballots NOT be examined...at least ballots from traditionally Democratic strongholds. And by the way the recount was triggered by state law when the margin was only 260 votes - law calls for a recount if the difference is less than 2000. 131355[/snapback] Get over it. You LOST. I'm still waiting for my damn sandwich, woman! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted November 23, 2004 Share Posted November 23, 2004 gawd, the election was over 3 weeks ago and you guys are still grumpy. well, at least you realized the futility of contesting the presidential election and moved onto something else. but keep focusing on this kind of stuff and not on why you guys lost, that'll help your chances in 2008 131366[/snapback] This isn't about being a sore loser. The people who wrote the constitutions put the delay b/w voting day and inaguration day in there for a reason, as well as the mandatory recount measure. And there isn't any one "standard" b/c it's different voting machine types. Count them again, properly, per instructions of the elections director, who's saying the GOP lawyers' arguments to stop the recount are wrong. Fulfill the constitutional requirement. Whoever gets the most wins. If the loser makes a stink after the recount, then it's sour grapes and being "grumpy." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted November 24, 2004 Share Posted November 24, 2004 gawd, the election was over 3 weeks ago and you guys are still grumpy. well, at least you realized the futility of contesting the presidential election and moved onto something else. but keep focusing on this kind of stuff and not on why you guys lost, that'll help your chances in 2008 131366[/snapback] If it does nothing more than leading to a more accurate system- forgetting the past 2 results, it is worth it.....always have to find a better, more efficient way Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 This isn't about being a sore loser. The people who wrote the constitutions put the delay b/w voting day and inaguration day in there for a reason, as well as the mandatory recount measure. And there isn't any one "standard" b/c it's different voting machine types. Count them again, properly, per instructions of the elections director, who's saying the GOP lawyers' arguments to stop the recount are wrong. Fulfill the constitutional requirement. Whoever gets the most wins. If the loser makes a stink after the recount, then it's sour grapes and being "grumpy." 131397[/snapback] You don't happen to know how many recounts the law dictates, do you? As it stands now, one candidate won the initial count and first recount (by a margin of 49 votes)...and they're progressing to a second recount now. Although I have no problem with a law that says "A margin of victory in the election of less than X automatically triggers a recount", I'd have serious issues with a law that said, in effect, "You must keep recounting the votes until the margin of victory is greater than X". So does anyone actually know what the law is in this case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 You don't happen to know how many recounts the law dictates, do you? As it stands now, one candidate won the initial count and first recount (by a margin of 49 votes)...and they're progressing to a second recount now. Although I have no problem with a law that says "A margin of victory in the election of less than X automatically triggers a recount", I'd have serious issues with a law that said, in effect, "You must keep recounting the votes until the margin of victory is greater than X". So does anyone actually know what the law is in this case? 132914[/snapback] Obviously the system is broken. Given the times, technololgy you wonder why nobody has proposed sweeping reform for the cornerstone of our society. Make no small plans! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBorn1960 Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Hypocrites Just note for the record who, once again, has run to court demanding that ballots NOT be examined...at least ballots from traditionally Democratic strongholds. And by the way the recount was triggered by state law when the margin was only 260 votes - law calls for a recount if the difference is less than 2000. 131355[/snapback] He won the Ist count.... he won the recount ... "The just-finished statewide machine recount left Rossi clinging to a record-narrow victory. Rossi had also won the regular count completed last week, his 261-vote margin just a tiny fraction of 1 percentage point, triggering an automatic recount." Now the challenger..."Gregoire wasn't formally asking for a manual recount, saying she has until next week - after the election is certified - to decide whether to seek a full statewide recount or just selected counties or precincts Selected recount.... hmm and what happens when the "selected" (presumably democratic) precincts result in a reversal of the election.... Do we give the victory tio the democrat or the republican who won the 1stt two counts? This is your problem Democrats.... You can't except the results you manipulate the rules in an effort to change the results until the outcome is one you like.... get over iT!!! They had an election and a RECOUNT!!!! and your candidate lost!!!! why not focus on why you lost and fixed those problems so when and if you do win... it won't be close.... you are just alienating more and more people with these friviolus(sp) actions... OMG!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Here on Long Island... Fifty year old voting machines used. No lines, no waiting. And we are the biggest Township in the Country. No problems with "confusion". No instances of "fraud"...that Im aware of, anyways. Fifty year old voting machines used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted November 25, 2004 Author Share Posted November 25, 2004 The law is that a machine recount is mandatory when the margin is less than 2000 as I said originally. Interestingly, the current winner after the machine recount is by 42 votes but originally was by 261. More interestingly, the ballots that were LEAST accurate are those that are electronically scanned. Given that that in one area alone there were 2,262 votes that swung the other way, that's somewhat telling. By law any candidate can request a hand recount in one county or the entire state. That request cannot be made until after the recount is certified - I believe the date is December 6. At that time I hope that the recount will be made of the entire state. There are anamolies in several counties that would give them time to sort out, including the fact that in Snohomish county the number of votes exceeded the number of registered voters. King County is a big Dem stronghold, I think Snohomish is more evently split but I may be wrong. The GOP files lawsuits BEFORE the state-mandated machine count to toss out the provisional ballots in King County (only) and to stop the machine count. Both were tossed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 The law is that a machine recount is mandatory when the margin is less than 2000 as I said originally. 133337[/snapback] Technically, that's not the law, it's an interpretation of the law. And I'd wager it's only half of it...that dictates when the recounts start, but not stop. It's entirely possible (likely, I'd guess) that the abuse of the system is a non-partisan issue: one party wants to stop all recounts including the legally mandated ones, the other wants to keep doing recounts well beyond any reasonable point. But we can't really tell without knowing the law, can we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted November 25, 2004 Author Share Posted November 25, 2004 Technically, that's not the law, it's an interpretation of the law. And I'd wager it's only half of it...that dictates when the recounts start, but not stop. It's entirely possible (likely, I'd guess) that the abuse of the system is a non-partisan issue: one party wants to stop all recounts including the legally mandated ones, the other wants to keep doing recounts well beyond any reasonable point. But we can't really tell without knowing the law, can we? 133357[/snapback] Ah here's our resident Cliff Claven who knows Washington State law better than anyone eh? According to everything I have read and heard here, a machine count is automatic when the difference is <2000. You should immediately perform the public service of advising all media outlets plus both parties. Or if you are too busy to do so please send the relevant link to the statute that I may forward it to them and advise them that they have wasted time and taxpayer money. It really doesn't matter to me personally - the Democrat is a jerk and the Republican an idiot. What irritates me is the hypocrisy. The state GOP chairman, when asked about a manual recount, stated regarding the Dem's asking for a recount that if "Dino Rossi is ahead at the end of the day, he is the governor-elect, this is over, she she (the challenger) needs to do the right thing, the gracious thing and the honorable thing and concede". When asked what if Christine Gregoire was ahead after the recount, the same guy said "That's fundamentally different." His name is Chis Vance and you can Google it and find your own source. Hypocrites. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 Ah here's our resident Cliff Claven who knows Washington State law better than anyone eh? According to everything I have read and heard here, a machine count is automatic when the difference is <2000. You should immediately perform the public service of advising all media outlets plus both parties. Or if you are too busy to do so please send the relevant link to the statute that I may forward it to them and advise them that they have wasted time and taxpayer money. It really doesn't matter to me personally - the Democrat is a jerk and the Republican an idiot. What irritates me is the hypocrisy. The state GOP chairman, when asked about a manual recount, stated regarding the Dem's asking for a recount that if "Dino Rossi is ahead at the end of the day, he is the governor-elect, this is over, she she (the challenger) needs to do the right thing, the gracious thing and the honorable thing and concede". When asked what if Christine Gregoire was ahead after the recount, the same guy said "That's fundamentally different." His name is Chis Vance and you can Google it and find your own source. Hypocrites. 133444[/snapback] Please point to where I claimed any knowledge of the applicable law. I simply state the possibility that you're as KzooMike as I am on the matter. A possibility I consider more and more likely, considering that you haven't managed to explain the entire state electoral process. Your knowledge, by all appearances, doesn't extend beyond "One legally mandated recount". As for the hypocracy...they're politicians. Point to one that isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted November 25, 2004 Share Posted November 25, 2004 >>>hypocracy<<< Correct spelling? Happy Thanksgiving! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBorn1960 Posted November 26, 2004 Share Posted November 26, 2004 The law is that a machine recount is mandatory when the margin is less than 2000 as I said originally. Interestingly, the current winner after the machine recount is by 42 votes but originally was by 261. More interestingly, the ballots that were LEAST accurate are those that are electronically scanned. Given that that in one area alone there were 2,262 votes that swung the other way, that's somewhat telling. By law any candidate can request a hand recount in one county or the entire state. That request cannot be made until after the recount is certified - I believe the date is December 6. At that time I hope that the recount will be made of the entire state. There are anamolies in several counties that would give them time to sort out, including the fact that in Snohomish county the number of votes exceeded the number of registered voters. King County is a big Dem stronghold, I think Snohomish is more evently split but I may be wrong. The GOP files lawsuits BEFORE the state-mandated machine count to toss out the provisional ballots in King County (only) and to stop the machine count. Both were tossed. 133337[/snapback] Waaaaaa WAAAAA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts