Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Well, well, well...

This is topic Well, well, well... in forum The Flameboard at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/11/565.html

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20001110/aponline213957_000.htm

------------------
"Al Gore cost me the election." - Ralph Nader

Posted by Malnurtured Snay (Member # 411) on :

Wow! This is interesting ... I'm glad it kind of sheds light that Gore's team hasn't been acting as a poor loser, and actually were involved *before* everyone knew Florida would be the key ...

------------------
Gore/Lieberman 2000
***
"You still don't understand, do you MacLeod? I am the End of Time!" - Kronos

"You're history!" - MacLeod
***
"I think anybody who doesn't think I'm smart enough to handle the job is underestimating." - George "Dubya" Bush

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

Well, I suppose that's ONE way of looking at it...

Of course, it also shows that the 'recount' controversy is a Democratic-engineered ploy that was activated as soon as they saw the race was going to be very very close...

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master

Posted by Vacuum robot lady from Spaceballs (Member # 239) on :

I betcha the Jews are involved. They run everything.

------------------
Communism. Who wouldn't like their neighbour thrown into a goulag?

Please vote for the Communist Party of Canada This November 27th.

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

Well, it was kinda funny when the guy who was talking about the 'accidental' votes for Buchanan said "the voters in these counties are mostly Jews and Italians... not the type of people who would vote for Buchanan..."

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master

Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :

The article has one thing absolutely right, were the votes reversed the party names would be too. If anyone can explain this to be worng, please do so.

------------------
I see a red door and I want it painted black

Posted by seanr (Member # 277) on :

According to state law, the names are required to be in a certain order, based on the number of votes received by each party in the previous election. According to the law, Bush should have been first, Gore second, Buchanan Third, Nader fourth (IIRC), etc. In reality, they were not in that order. Reading from the tp down, the order was Bush, Buchanan, then Gore, Nader (IIRC), etc. Gore and buchana were clearly swapped.

The other problem with that ballot is the requirement that the holes be to the right of the names. If some names are on the right side of the holes, that law was clearly not followed. Some people argue that that law only applies to paper ballots, but the law also states that for computer ballots, the requirements for paper ballots are to be followed as much as practicable (a Bushism?). Sure, that's a blurry line, but it's not THAT blurry.

As far as the desgner of the ballot being a Democrat, tat's irrelevent. If it vioates the law, it doesn't mater who designed it. The election board is also at fault for approving it. When you read the code, it is clearly illegal and should have been rejected by the elections board without a moment's hesitation.

------------------
Sean Robertson
[email protected]

http://www.webolutionary.com
http://www.mania-online.com
3D Gladiator Premier Forums Member

"Great is the glory for the strife is hard"
- Wordsworth

"Why must I be surrounded by frickin' idiots?"
- Dr Evil

Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :

"The other problem with that ballot is the requirement that the holes be to the right of the names."

Just one problem, Seany: There is no such law. The law states that the mark must be made opposite the name (I've posted a direct quote elsewhere, but I don't have time to look it up at the mo), not to the right of the name. Title IX, Chapter 101, Section 011, Clause 4, IIRC. The ballot WAS legal.

As for the order question, I haven't run into that particlar code. I'll do a little more research and see if I can get you a direct quote.

------------------
Francesca: He was born on the tundra, that's where he belongs. You'll kill him if you take him to Toronto.
Thatcher: That's a bit drastic, don't you think?
Francesca: Look, I've been to Toronto. Trust me, nothing can survive there. - "due South"

Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :

There is no clause requiring the mark be to the RIGHT of the name.

Now Chapter 101.191 DOES say the following:

"TO VOTE for a candidate whose name is printed on the ballot, mark a cross (X) in the blank space at the RIGHT of the name of the candidate for whom you desire to vote."

However, it is in the following context:

"(1) The general election ballot shall be in substantially the following form:"

The demonstration of the instructions on the ballot is obviously not intended to be law, as it is contradicted by Title IX, Chapter 101.011, Clause (2):

"No paper ballot shall be voided or declared invalid in any election within the state by reason of the fact that the ballot is marked other than with an "X," so long as there is a clear indication thereon to the election officials that the person marking such ballot has made a definite choice, and provided further, that the mark placed on the ballot with respect to any candidate by any such voter shall be located in the blank space on the ballot opposite such candidate's name."

One says that it has to be an "X", the other specifically says that there doesn't have to be. One says that the mark must be to the right of the name, the other merely says "opposite". The only way to interpret the laws where there is no conflict is if 101.191 is intended as simply an example of the proper method of giving instructions on using the ballot, but not stating the specific instructions to be used. Therefore, the statement that the mark MUST be to the right is not, in fact, law.

[This message has been edited by Omega (edited November 13, 2000).]

Posted by Shik (Member # 343) on :

See: "Straws, grasping at."

YES, people are fucking MORONS. The ballots should have been designed to account for that by having the names in 100-point type with instructions to circle the one you want.

YES, said morons fucked up BECAUSE they're morons. You don't GET a second shot. You've learned for next time. This is akin to my complaining that I voted for the president of the Interstellar Alliance, but I MEANT to vote for Delenn when in fact I misread & voted for John Sheridan (Actually, I DID vote for Sheridan intentionally, but we won't go there.)

I just want it OVER. FLIP A FUCKING COIN. Gang members: tell your national heads that they have 48 hours to come to an agreement or I'm installing MYSELF as Leader. Ask them if they want that to happen.

------------------
"Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much."

Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :

So, you, Omega, are choosing which sub paragraphs are the law and which ones aren't, from the same book, in the same section?

I think the design of the ballot was screwed, I think the voters there should have paid more attention, I think blind faith in anything man made is ignorant.

------------------
I am going to buy Japanese cars from now on, because the auto workers got the day off to vote and the state went to Gore, so I want to see how many we can get unemployed.
From The Port Huron Times-Herald talk back section.

Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :

Shik:

Who are you saying is grasping at straws?

Ritten:

"So, you, Omega, are choosing which sub paragraphs are the law and which ones aren't, from the same book, in the same section?"

Different sections. And yes, I am, as both are in different contexts. If the law stated, "If anyone says 'Jessie Jackson shall be put to death,' they are guilty of verbal assault," would you argue that "Jessie Jackson shall be put to death" is the law? Context is everything.

Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :

I think it's more correct, not to say that the first law there is an example, but that it's outdated. It probably describes how the ballots used to look. Someone probably just forgot to amend/repeal that law when the current type of ballot was developed.

------------------
"What he did to that walrus gentle-man was inexcusable."
-T. Herman Zweibel on "Mr. Woodrow Wood-pecker", The Onion, 7-Nov-2000

Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :

"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies."

~Groucho Marx

------------------
Oh, yes, sitting. The great leveler. From the mightiest Pharaoh to the lowliest peasant, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?
~C. Montgomery Burns

Posted by Ritten (Member # 417) on :

So, in essence, without the law being amended/repealed it is still an active law, which the new ballots were not designed in accordance with, and the new ballot design takes precedence over the old law?

uhh???

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

Put it this way: There's a state law in Pennsylvania that says that any motor vehicle proceeding down a road in Pennsylvania must stop every 200 feet and fire off a flare rocket, to warn approaching people/horses.

This law has never been officially repealed.

How often do you think it is followed, or enforced?

Now, some opinions to interject into the matter:

FL's Attorney General has stated publicly that the ballots are perfectly legal. This contention is supported by the word "substantially" in the legal code above, since "substantially" does not mean "Exactly," but it means "largely similar to."

(For instance, I am substantially like my father, in many respects -I'm an adult male human over 5'10" and under 6'3" tall, over 150# and under 200#, with a post-Masters graduate education and generally conservative views- but woe be it to anyone who assumes we are exactly alike.)

In fact, I have seen NO legal authority with the credibility or authority to claim that the ballots are otherwise than legal. Talking Heads on CNN and Jesse 'they started a riot but you can't suspend them cause they're black' Jackson do not count.

------------------
"Ed Gruberman, you fail to grasp Ty Kwan Leap. Approach me, that you might see." -- The Master

[This message has been edited by First of Two (edited November 14, 2000).]