Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on November 10, 2000, 12:40:00 PM
-
So, this county has a habit of voters screwing up on their ballots, with pre-approved voters ballots by both parties, should they be allowed to re-vote even though historically this county is known for screw ups and the fact that the ballot was 'bought off' by the DNC prior to the voting? (Incidently, the actual designer of the ballot was a Democrat, I don't see the media focusing on that aspect too much, interesting to say the least)
-
Hmmm, according to my liberal media radio station(that's the only kind, right Wrench?), the ballot in question does not meet Florida State Law requirements, regardless of who approved it's use.
Let me elaborate....According to my left-wing liberal source(NPR), an "expert" on Floridian law stated that the names of the candidates must be on the left side of the ballot, with the corresponding punch hole to the right of the names. Furthermore, it requires that the two major candidates be the first two names on the ballot.
Guess that ballot fails on both accounts, doesn't it.
[This message has been edited by banana (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
I just heard the 19,000 ballot story is bogus. It was originally reported that these ballots did not count, story I just heard was that these 19k ballots were the ballots redone by voters who made a mistake on their 1st ballot, went and got another from the polling officials and submitted the corrected one before they left the polling centers. The news story stated that there isn't 19k gore votes in the trash somewhere. Has anyone else heard this?
Can anyone confirm this story?
Eagler
-
Eagler, I heard Rush report the research done by Mary Matlin!!! So why hasn't CNN reported that as she works for CNN. This would have been an exclusive!!!
Why? Because it doesn't fit what CNN is trying to do, create chaos!!! You will hear race baiting from the Rev Jackson long before you will hear anything researched by anyone!!!
The truth be damned!! CNN motto!!!
[This message has been edited by 1776 (edited 11-10-2000).]
[This message has been edited by 1776 (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
Lol - "research" by Mary Matlin? You have *got* to be kidding me (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
She actually called a person who worked the polls to get the scoop on what the ballots were really about!! How novel, actually going to where the news really is!!! Isn't that what an "objective reporter" should have done???
So why did it take someone who we know as a partisan to ferret out the truth???!!!!!????
I refer you to my thread titled "mainstream media"!!
[This message has been edited by 1776 (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
That's cute, 1776 (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
OK banana - If the ballot is illegal then why didnt somebody point that out before the election?
Did some obscure Florida law go into effect in between the time the ballot was approved and election time?
How else do you explain the lack of comment by anybody, regardless of party affiliation, about the ballot being illegal before the election?
I just find it a little fishy that now that it seems that VP Gore didnt win, that all of the sudden there is a problem with the ballot....that was designed "illegally" by a Democrat in the first place.
[This message has been edited by sling322 (edited 11-10-2000).]
-
Good question, Sling. I'm sure we'd all like to know.
-
Ripsnort,
Who cares that 14,000 were thrown out in 1996.
They COULDN'T make any difference in the outcome of the 1996 Elections. Regardless of which way they were intended to go, Clinton was still going back to the White House. If George Bush was leading Al Gore by 25,000 votes right now, the 19,000 wouldn't matter. But he's not. He's leading by less than 1,000.
As to anything you get off of Rush, you've got to be kidding if you think I'm even going to begin to take it seriously. CNN probably didn't report that because Mary Maitlin probably didn't do any such thing. Rush almost certainly made it up, just as he makes most things up.
Sisu
-Karnak
-
I think the point is that a similar number were tossed out in '96, not whether or not they made a difference. I think I saw that something like 490,000 ballots were cast in this county, with 3.8% or ~ 19,000 disallowed.
In effect, he's saying that in this county one could expect about 4% of the ballots to be tossed in any election simply because of voter ineptitude.
Now whether this can be documented or not, I have no idea. I think a listing of the % if tossed ballots from this county in the last 5 National Elections would be interesting and illuminating, though.
Further, 19,000 were tossed out for unspecified various reasons. One cannot conclude that ALL were tossed for "double punch" or any other singular reason, since that information had not been released.
Additionally, there is a rumor (and I emphasize rumor) that some or all of these 19,000 may have been incorrect ballots that were picked up from voters when the particular voter ASKED for a new ballot. In this event the ballot should have been destroyed.
Basically, there's a whole lot more to this story. You can be sure we haven't heard it all yet.
-
Originally posted by Karnak:
As to anything you get off of Rush, you've got to be kidding if you think I'm even going to begin to take it seriously. CNN probably didn't report that because Mary Maitlin probably didn't do any such thing. Rush almost certainly made it up, just as he makes most things up.
Sisu
-Karnak
Yep and Gore tells the truth always.
I see now, thanks for that clarification.
Eagler
-
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
According to some Florida Democrats, the particular
layout of ballots in Palm Beach was confusing to
voters, and resulted in mistaken votes for Buchanan
which were actually intended for Gore. The Florida
judiciary has already addressed the issue of
post-election claims about ballot confusion, and the
precedent is unfavorable to those who want the
election overturned.
In the September 10, 1974, Republican primary in
Pinellas County, several losing candidates brought a
post-election suit against county election officials.
(Pinellas sits on the Gulf Coast, and includes St.
Petersburg.)
At issue was the longest ballot in Pinellas County
history. To save space so that every candidate and
issue could fit on the voting machine, the election
officials had created a ballot on which the list of
candidates for some offices appeared on two lines. In a
particular race, for example, the first three candidates,
listed alphabetically, appeared on one line, and the last
two candidates, alphabetically, appeared on the next
line.
A lawsuit demanding a new election was filed by
candidates who appeared on the lower line and lost.
The Florida trial court agreed. But on October 15,
1974, the Second District Court of Appeal unanimously
overturned the trial judge, and let the original election
stand. (Nelson v. Robinson, 301 So.2d 508, Fla. Ct.
App. 2d Dist., 1974.)
The Court of Appeal explained:
Keeping in mind that we are talking about a claim
made after an election, and not one which may have
been enforceable before, if a candidate appears on the
ballot in such a position that he can be found by the
voters upon a responsible study of the ballot, then such
voters have been afforded a full, free and open
opportunity to make their choice for or against that
particular candidate; and the candidate himself has no
constitutional right to a particular spot on the ballot
which might make the voters' choice easier. His
constitutional rights in the matter end when his name is
placed on the ballot. Thereafter, the right is in the
voters to have a fair and reasonable opportunity to find
it; and as to this, it has been observed that the
constitution intended that a voter search for the name of
the candidate of his choice and to express his of the
candidate of his choice without regard to others on the
ballot. Furthermore, it assumes his ability to read and
his intelligence to indicate his choice with the degree
of care commensurate with the solemnity of the
occasion.
The Court of Appeal also cited a U.S. Supreme Court
case in which the high Court explicitly and
unanimously affirmed a Pennsylvania federal court
which had ruled that an unfavorable location on the
ballot was not a form of unconstitutional discrimination
against a candidate. (Gilhool v. Chairman & Com'rs.,
Philadelphia Co. Bd. of Elec., 306 F.Supp. 1202
(E.D.Pa.1969), affluffied 397 U.S. 147 (1970).)
In Palm Beach this year, the ballot form was approved
beforehand by Democratic Supervisor of Elections
Theresa LePore. This fact relates directly to the
Florida Court of Appeal's point that "it has often been
held that one who does not avail himself of the
opportunity to object to irregularities in the ballot prior
to the election may not object to them after."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Karnak,I take it you missed my challenge in another thread. I woulld like you to listen to Rush for 6 weeks then tell me what you think. I would also like to discuss the WWII generation and how I differ with Rush on his assessment!!
-
New Mexico to close to call !!
Seems voting corruption is surfacing everywhere today.
Eagler
-
Nate I think that sums up this whole mess pretty succinctly.
Nash the bold part is the precedent rip was talking about when he started the thread with this. That part is the reasoning as to why the appeals court overturned the trial court's decision, and denied the revote.
-
banana, seems we listen to the same radio station, you failed to mention how they led the story. Seems the State of Florida says the ballot was 100% legal. I won't bother to search for and post the statement they aired today on Talk of the Nation...lawyers will decide for us, good luck to you. I listen to many news sources, I am intelligent enough to know liberal garbage when I hear it though (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
The point has been made that the ballots are anonymous, there is no way to decide this without holding another election and we are not going to do that.
Once again it is about personal responsiblity. I was responsible for my vote and so were residents of Palm Beach. Once again we need to bend the rules or allow an unknown number of recounts because someone else just isn't responsible for what they did...how many recounts in the state do we need? I know, just until Al Gore wins.
Didn't they do this in Yugoslavia recently? Lose and then start calling for a RE VOTE!!!
DO OVER! DO OVER!! We weren't ready!!! Man this aint fair!! WE LOST? BULL YOU CHEATED. YOUR PARTY MADE THAT BALLOT HARD TO READ!! My pary made it? OK, I made a mistake, can't I get a do over? Who reads the instructions anyway. I didn't know it would matter...I could go on all night (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Wrench
-
Heard tonite that Duval County (Jacksonville) threw out 22,000 ballots and no recount there. These are damaged/errored ballots which were recast before the voter left the poll so they are counted. The media/democrats have spun the 19k votes in Palm Beach to sound as if they were never counted. This is not true.
Eagler
-
The '96 14,000 figure Rip alludes to has no real relationship to the 19,000 figue this year. Compared on the same basis, it is actually closer to 7,000.
[This message has been edited by Nash (edited 11-12-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Nash:
The '96 14,000 figure Rip alludes to has no real relationship to the 19,000 figue this year. Compared on the same basis, it is actually closer to 7,000.
[This message has been edited by Nash (edited 11-12-2000).]
I'm just wondering where this particular tidbit came from....
This year ~4% were tossed out, '96 ~4% were tossed out.
-
Well, I should fess up and say that 7,000 is only an estimate. No one has an exact overvotes-vs.-undervotes breakdown from '96. The way one can extrapolate that number though,is as follows.
Well, the short answer is that the 14,000 number contains both over votes AND under votes votes. In this election, 19,000 ballots were due to over voting while an additional 10,000 ballots were discarded due to undervoting.
So looked at in the same light with the same standard, you get either 30,000 this year vs 14,000 in '96, or you get 19,000 this year vs approx 7,000 in '96. Either way, this years' discards were *double* what went on in the last election. NOT as close as 14,000 vs 19,000.
The long answer is this:
Punch-card ballots are most often discarded for two reasons: when voters select too many candidates per contest ("overvote") or no candidate at all ("undervote").
Overvoting counts for roughly one ballot per thousand, or .10 percent.
Undervoting occurs on a lengthy ballot when voters simply don't bother to fill in every category. Overvoting occurs when, for example, people think they have to mark their selection for both President *and* Vice President. Not very bright, I know, but there you have it. When ballots are "discarded" for either reason, they are done so only for that particular race. If someone overvotes for president, or doesn't vote at all, his or her legitimate vote for senator still counts.
Due to this, it is *very* unusual for discarded ballots to contain more overvotes than undervotes.
In this election, the much-talked about 19,000 disputed ballots in Palm Beach included overvotes only. An additional 10,000 ballots were put aside by county officials for undervoting, bringing the total to nearly 30,000 discarded ballots in all.
In the '96 election, the 14,000 Palm Beach County ballots that were voided in included *both overvoting and undervoting.* In other words, there were twice as many ballots voided this year in Palm Beach County.
Again, no one has an exact overvotes-vs.-undervotes breakdown from '96. But understanding that undervotes almost always outnumber overvotes, at most, half of those 14,000 ballots in '96 were undervotes.