Explain this:

[Cobra]

F4UDOA,
Your last tagline about Chamberlain and Hitler did not keep it civil....so much for that I guess.

And in Clinton's case, his acts were in violation of Sexual Harrassment Laws, not to mention Purjury laws.  You know it and I know it.

I am not a Dove or Isolationist, and if you wish to keep it civil as you claimed, you would refrain from labels.

You sir, are not sincere in that, and you know it as well.

And nice attempt at revisionist history.  I will add this, extremist's on either side are equally dispicable.  You qualify!

 

Good Day and Good Bye,
Cobra

 

[This message has been edited by Cobra (edited 11-16-2000).]

[treadhead1]

I have got to say my quick piece on the whole "confusing ballot thing"

A) If you cant read or see where the hell those ARROWS -----> are pointing, see your eye doctor before you vote.

and B) SAMPLE BALLOTS WERE SENT OUT PRIOR TO THE ELECTION. As far as I know, everyone recieves a sample ballot in the mail that is A DUPLICATE OF THE ONE TO BE USED IN THE ACTUAL VOTE. Soooooo, all those people who are complaining about the ballot being unclear or (God help us) too complicated, had AT LEAST a couple weeks to LOOK at the ballot.

Now all of a sudden, "By golly that ballot was unclear!" If you cant figure out the ballot after a couple weeks of looking at one, I say they have an armed gaurd to keep you out of the voting booth!

Tread


[This message has been edited by treadhead1 (edited 11-16-2000).]

[Toad]

Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Quote
"In Palm Beach County there were problems with only 6 percent of the ballots - but that's 30,000 votes more than enough to throw this election, where the margin between the candidates in Florida is only a few hundred."

That statement, as it stands, is correct. There apparently were problems with 30,000 ballots.

What it fails to mention is that 19,100 of these 30,000 ballots were DOUBLE-PUNCHED for the Presidential race.  This, as I am SURE you will agree, is an Illegal, Unacceptable ballot.

Yet you persist in trying to incorrectly make that case that the evil "THEY" are "trying to discount 30,000 people".

Say it F4...it will set you free..."In PBC, 19,100 people disenfranchised themselves by double-punching their ballots."   (Image removed from quote.)

Now, of the remaining 10,900 that are not "counting", I have been unable to find a definitive sight that categorically delineates why they aren't counting.

Some aren't punched at all. That number has been mentioned as "some" and "several thousand" on the sites I've looked at. The other unknown amount apparently have some other problem that keeps them from counting.

If you have better information, I'd like to see it.

With respect to New Mexico. There is still no substantiation of a RECOUNT of ballots. They have found ballots that were initially missed and they have corrected hand written errors in addition.

They have NOT RECOUNTED. Once again, you seek to legitimize Florida's recount process of ballots that have been machine counted THREE times through a New Mexico example that does not exist.

In the vernacular, you're blowing smoke.   (Image removed from quote.)

 

[Fury]

Orginally posted by F4 (cut and paste quote)

"And while this has been going on the Republicans had a Hand recount of votes in New Mexico which nearly led to Bush winning the state. But notice that Gore never opposed that recount. "

Which recount was that?
 http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/16/recounts.elsewhere/

Don't take my word for it, take a few minutes to read for yourself.  As of this posting, it appears that Republicans have not asked for a recount anywhere in the country.  That is, if you can trust cnn.

<<edit: cnn now reports that Mr. Bush will not ask for a recount in Iowa, even though Mr. Gore won by a slim margin>>

Now maybe they will or maybe they won't.  But right now, it's just not happening.

Also, look at New Mexico's spin on democracy in action:  it's legal for a coin toss or a card game is to choose the winner     (in case of a tie).  Believe it or not, it was last done with one hand of 5 card poker in December 1999.

Fury

[This message has been edited by Fury (edited 11-16-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Fury (edited 11-16-2000).]

[Fury]

Collier County: one example of why human counting is dangerous.
 http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/15/collier.letter.ap/

Quote from this page:

"An additional ballot was received October 18, 2000, and accepted. Upon opening, it was ascertained to be a ballot card for the first primary election. Upon further investigation of this ballot, it was determined that the voter had voted for the general election using a first primary ballot card."

IMHO this is a shining example of why hand counting cannot always be trusted.  They actually accepted a primary ballot as a general election ballot because they "determined" that the voter used the wrong card.

Now, it does not say if this was a Republican or Democratic vote.  I don't think it matters.  Recounters deducing what you really voted for are what scares me.

Fury

[mietla]

There is only one reason for a hand count.

Cheating.

[Karnak]

My last political comment for the year 2000:

Funny how George W Bush has no problem with recounts being done by hand in New Mexico where it will switch the state from Al Gore to him.

Funny how George W Bush signed a bill into law in Texas that mandated manually recounts in exceedingly tight elections.

Seems that George W Bush has no problem with hand recounts unless they could alter the outcome of an election agaist him.

Its also funny how Al Gore didn't object to the hand recount in New Mexico.


Another funny thing about George W Bush is how he said, before the election, that if he won the popular vote and lost the electoral college he would mount a massive campaign to get members of the electoral college, and the public to push the electoral college, to vote for him instead of the technical winner, AL Gore.

Now that Al Gore has, unexpectedly, won the popular vote and the electoral college is disputed, Bush thinks that Al Gore should just give up.

Seems that "the good of the nation" only matters if it is Al Gore doing the conceeding.

Funny that.

Sisu
-Karnak

[F4UDOA]

Cobra,

You went from zero to Spaz so fast I'm not even sure what your objecting too? Next...

Toad,

30,000 is the total number of votes discounted. You make it seem as if 30,000 people walked into the polling booths with the idea in mind that they didn't want their votes to count? Even if you discounted the 19,200 people that double punched the ballot it still leaves you with 10,000 ballots that the machine could not read. Under Florida law there are two reasons that warrant a hand count.

1. Voter Fraud
2. Mechanical failure to count votes


Sounds like 10,000 reasons to have a hand count to me. I may be blowing smoke Toad but I think you are inhaling it. You don't want them to break the law do you?

If I am wrong about New Mexico I will admit it. But if I am wrong explain how the vote count has changed so may times without re-examining the ballots?

BTW, you have chosen to attack but not to answer any of my questions.

1. Why is Bush using the Federal courts. I thought Bush believed in states rights?

2. Who were the top three Republican presidents from the last 70years?

3. You made a statement about your knowledge of Soviet and Cuban activities during the 60's. Why don't you explain George Bush's decision in 1991 to sell Iraq weapons until three months before we declared war on them. And why we fought a war to protect a Kuwait dictatorship that paid us 3 billion dollars to assist. Where did that money go? Did it go into the deficit, the budget or Government defense contractors?

BTW, all governments do mock invasions and play war games. In the 60's our Government used US civilian targets to do Nuke strike scoring. This is not an indication of intent.

1.This past week on 60 minutes a Russian Colonel was interviewed and said that he was instructed to fire ballistic missiles at the USA in 1983. He refused the order because he suspected a mechanical failure and he was right.

2. In 1972 during the Yom Kipper war Israel captured the Suez canal. The Soviets threatened a full scale invasion of Israel and war against the US if the Suez was not turned over to the Egyptians. Reportedly Nixon was drunk and would not come out of his bedroom so Henry Kissinger was forced to negotiate with the Soviets and Israel.

3. Kennedy made the decision to blockade the Russian ships based on intelligence he had from a Soviet Spy assuring the US that the Soviets did not have the Nuclear capability to fight a war with the US. The concession made by the US was the removal of short range nuclear weapons from Turkey.

4. Who was the last Democrat you voted for?

Later
F4UDOA  

[Kats]

As an unbiased Canadian observer I have the following thoughts.

Because the machine counts reflect neither Democratic or Republican interest, I think you'll find that a complete Florida recount would yeild the same result. I'm sure Bush must have lost alot of votes in the same manner in Republican stongholds.

The charge that Democrats only want the peoples vote to be counted and implying that the Republicans are against this is very dirty politics considering that there has been 3 counts and in some cases 4 counts already. I believe that the Republican position that the hand recounts on already over handled ballots is more prone to a wrong count than the original counts is very reasonable.

I find the democrats trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator of Americans. The line the other day saying that hand counts served our fathers for 140 years just fine quite disgusting. I'm sure they would have accepted mechanical counts as a better way had technology allowed it, just as technology has allowed us absentee voting today where in most cases it was nearly impossible in other eras.

Lastly, the question of a Presidential mandate is getting on my nerves too. I believe that either Gore or Bush will have as much of a mandate as any other President of the US. It doesn't matter how slim the vote is - they are all slim if you consider the  big picture.

Lets say one of the candidates wins by 1,000,000 votes out of 70,000,000 cast. Do you call that a mandate because the victor has a 1% margin? Yet you'd call it a significant margin! The bottom line (IMO) the people of the US have voted their two best choices for President and both represent the will of the people to a large degree inspite of some differences.

[Toad]

F4,

"You make it seem as if 30,000 people walked into the polling booths with the idea in mind that they didn't want their votes to count?

Not at all. 96% of the PBC voters knew how to vote. I'm pointing out that 19,100 of those people invalidated their own ballots.

No one was trying to "cheat" them. They just weren't up to the task and it's their own fault.  Their intent may have been to vote. They failed to do so correctly.

Sounds like 10,000 reasons

So at last we agree? 30,000 is just inflammatory rhetoric? Good! That's all I was asking you to do...stick to the facts.

Doesn't mean I agree with you, but at least your numbers are more realistic.  

Two biggest changes in NM were in correcting addition and finding additional valid ballots.

One of the tally sheets showed what was first interpreted to be a "1" in the hundreds column and later interpreted to be a "6". This is pretty widely spread over the news sites. It's not a re-examination of ballots, it's a re-examination of addition.

Additionally, there have been some "found" ballots that were "missed" in the first count. That isn't a recount, either. It's a "first count" that's added to the original total.

I didn't answer your questions because you just asked them.    

I did answer the one about Presidents. You just don't understand the answer, I guess.
Presidents, IMHO, rarely shape the opportunities that occur. They react to situations that occur.

For example, Roosevelt. Not discussing the man, here, just the situation. How would he be viewed had their been no WW2 to lift the US out of the Depression? No WW2 that allowed him to demonstrate his leadership?

In short, some Presidents live in interesting times. Some don't. Those that don't never have their true capabilities tested, do they?

If I had to pick one Republican in the recent past it would be Reagan. For all his faults (and he had them), he was able to provide "that vision thing" that has since totally eluded all of his successors. He made us proud to be us again. For that alone, I salute him.

As for the rest, it would be pretty hard to answer all of those; you seem to be throwing cr*p into the air to confuse the present issue. If you'd like to take them one at a time in detail, start separate threads. Otherwise.....

First of all, some are based on speculation or incorrect information, not fact. Secondly, you seem to assume one can devine the true intent of any leader's action. Sorry, I don't have a crystal ball either.

On the nuke capability, about all I can say is that folks right up to the top were pretty concerned when we found the Russians practicing. While you disregard it, many in power viewed it as proof of capability. Intent was not the question; the question was "Could they?" and the answer was clearly "yes". Previously, the "standard view" was that they did not have the capability or equipment, intent not withstanding.

Then the cover up began with the attendent shifting of blame. That's probably where I knew I wasn't staying in the AF and when I finally believed that the US political system was rotten on both sides of the aisle.

I do so hate to disappoint you but I voted for Democrats in this election. Just not for President!

You can't pigeon-hole me as a Republican because I simply don't fit any mold.  

[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 11-16-2000).]

[F4UDOA]

Toad,

Sorry if I confused you with too much information.

I will consolidate my questions.

1. Why is Bush using the Federal courts when it is clearly a states issue? The republican party is built on the idea of states rights. Why change now?

2. What do you propose to do with the 10,000 out of 30,000 votes that have been discarded but can still be considered valid votes by even your standards? Don't these people deserve a chance to be heard?

3. Who was the last Democratic Presidential candidate you voted for?

Later
F4UDOA

[Fury]

The propaganda machine must be running full-tilt about New Mexico.

Nobody asked me, but since I became legal age in 1980 I voted Democratic in every election until 1992, when I voted Independent.  There was no way I would vote Clinton in '96, and I chose Bush this election.  In case anyone cares.

Fury

[Toad]

 

Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Toad,

Sorry if I confused you with too much information.

You didn't confuse me at all. But you certainly were sidetracking the thread. Those questions can't be answered in a paragraph if at all. As I said, if you'd like to discuss them, start another thread.

As a side note, a statement like this one can easily be construed as a "slam". I try to avoid ah hominem attacks, so I won't engage.

I will consolidate my questions.

1. Why is Bush using the Federal courts when it is clearly a states issue? The republican party is built on the idea of states rights. Why change now?

My _guess_ is because it would end up in Federal Court anyway and they are trying to get this settled. Suppose Bush challenged in Florida's Supreme Court and Gore lost. Where would Gore take it next? Federal Court, right? He's not going to give up and neither is Bush. I'm not in the inner circle though...so it's just a guess.

2. What do you propose to do with the 10,000 out of 30,000 votes that have been discarded but can still be considered valid votes by even your standards? Don't these people deserve a chance to be heard?

Neither you nor I can tell if any or all of those 10,000 ballots are valid. Some may not have been punched for President. I stumbled across a site that says about 6600 of the PBC ballots showed NO punches for President when run by the machines. Given the total slate of lightweights the Nation was offered, I'm not sure I'd blame them.   (Image removed from quote.)Still, no one can determine the intentions of a voter that did not make a punch mark.

Further, they've been machine run 3 times. Ballot fatigue aside (and this is an issue that induces errors in the machine count and later hand counts) machines were/are considered less susceptible to ballot tampering than human count.

That's one of the two primary reasons that machine count was instituted in the first place. There are already affadavits that say "Roberts, one of the ballot handlers, has "been observed bending, twisting, poking, and purposely manipulating ballots in a manner that purposely compromised their integrity." (www.cnsnews.com)

You have already said you'd be concerned if all the Canvassing Officials were Republican. Why are you suprised Bush supporters are concerned when the Canvassers are all Democrats?   (Image removed from quote.)

I also think assuming that people doing repetitive examinations on ballots for 10 hours a day for 5 days will make fewer errors than a machine may be optimistic as well. Face it, boredom sets in with people. Machines don't get bored.

3. Who was the last Democratic Presidential candidate you voted for?

Why do you want to know? What do you seek to prove? What difference does it make?

I started voting in the '72 election and haven't missed one since. I've voted Republican, Democratic, Libertarian and Reform, not necessarily in any order. None of those votes seem to have changed the essential nature of American Politics.   (Image removed from quote.)

Maybe I'll go Green next time.   (Image removed from quote.)



[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 11-16-2000).]

[Fury]

The complaint filed with the 11th cites the First and Fourteenth amendments...and also, I heard last night that on CNN that it is a Constitutional argument and not a state argument.  Therefore, the Bush case is in Federal court.  I don't pretend to be a lawyer BTW  
 http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/election2000/siegelleprcmplt.pdf

[F4UDOA]

CC Toad,

I guess all there is to do now is sit and wait.

Good info Fury.

Thanks
F4UDOA