barbarake
|
posted on November 8, 2000 05:52:14 PM new
In case anyone is interested, here's a url that enables you to easily send an e-mail to Florida's Division of Election Director, Clay Roberts urging a new vote.
http://www.workingforchange.com/activism/action.cfm?ItemId=9237
(Let's see if I did this right...)
|
Meya
|
posted on November 8, 2000 06:11:05 PM new
It'll never happen. The ballots were not in error, the people who punched the wrong hole were simply not paying attention. There is no way you could do a new vote and have it be fair either. Just because a vote is close doesn't mean you get a "do-over".
|
uaru
|
posted on November 8, 2000 06:17:52 PM new
Out of curiosity I looked at that site... (yawn)
Reports from Palm Beach County indicate that a confusing ballot set-up in that county led to thousands of votes mistakenly going to Pat Buchanan instead of Al Gore.
The ballots were approved by both parties before the election, shouldn't that validate the ballots now?
There are reports of other voting irregularities as well
That's a bit vague isn't it? If there were other reports they could validate I'm sure it would have been in there best interest to reference them. If they can only make a reference to 'reports of other voting irregularities' I seems like a hollow accusation. The only other irregularity I can think of was the stunt pulled by the news services when they announced Florida in Gore's win column before the polls had closed in Florida's pan handle (part of Florida is in another time zone).
|
Shoshanah
|
posted on November 8, 2000 06:20:42 PM new
The news just mentioned that Al Gore's Lawyers are on their way to Florida, to possibly ask...for a REVOTE....(Channel 5 CBS, California)
********************
Shosh
http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/rifkah/
|
uaru
|
posted on November 8, 2000 06:28:14 PM new
"The news just mentioned that Al Gore's Lawyers are on their way to Florida, to possibly ask...for a REVOTE"
I believe he'll get another chance at the voters, unfortunately for him it won't be till November, 2004.
|
Meya
|
posted on November 8, 2000 06:29:35 PM new
"The Democrats will have to make a compelling and precise case of voting irregularities; they will have to identify specific individuals willing to swear that they either weren't permitted to vote or didn't vote their intentions because of voting problems.
If after the recount Governor Bush's lead is smaller than the number of specific incidents of voter irregularities the Gore folks can point to, then I think it becomes more likely that there will be a legal challenge.
But if Bush's lead is greater than the sum of that second number, we either won't see a challenge or we will see an unsuccessful one." — CBSNews.com Legal Analyst Andrew Cohen
Edited to add, the ballots in question were approved by both parties prior to the election.
[ edited by Meya on Nov 8, 2000 06:30 PM ]
|
Zazzie
|
posted on November 8, 2000 06:33:07 PM new
Wasn't the correct looking ballot approved??? and the one at Palm Beach were glitches
|
amalgamated2000
|
posted on November 8, 2000 06:33:16 PM new
There is no way you could do a new vote and have it be fair either.
True. But it's pretty clear at this point that no solution is going to be fair to everyone.
There are many issues on the Palm Beach thing. One is that the ballot itself was not legal. Florida state law specifies the order in which the candidates must be listed, and these ballots did not follow that order. So that in itself may be sufficient to negate the vote.
Then there's the issue that some voters were specifically instructed on the problems with the ballots while others were not. This is legally significant because it indicates that some voters did not have the same opportunities as others, and that would negate those ballots.
Then there's the fact that the machines themselves may have added to the errors, and that alone would negate the ballots.
The fact that some people were confused is also a significant issue, but it's probably not the most important, and that alone would likely not be enough to overturn it.
But it's becoming clear that a majority of voters in Florida intended to vote for Gore, but the balloting mechanism prevented that.
And if they do have to conduct the balloting again it would not be fair. To paraphrase Churchill, it's the worst possible solution, except for all the others.
|
barbarake
|
posted on November 8, 2000 06:50:03 PM new
amalgamated (hope you don't mind the nickname <grin>
I think the illegal ballot will be the clincher and will force a new vote. Yes, evidently it was approved by representatives of both parties but the law is the law - the ballot was illegal according to Florida law.
Anyway, I find this whole thing very exciting.
|
kiheicat
|
posted on November 8, 2000 06:52:15 PM new
uaru I'm not certain what all of the other irregularities alleged are but one is missing ballot boxes (plural).
From what I understand there were voters who asked the Palm Beach staff for another ballot because they had mistakenly voted for Buchanan instead of Gore and they were told they couldn't have one... so they just let it go. It would be interesting, though, to uncover exactly how many people we're talking about.
No matter who wins at this point, 1/2 of this country will be p.o.'d. 
|
uaru
|
posted on November 8, 2000 07:04:56 PM new
"I'm not certain what all of the other irregularities alleged are but one is missing ballot boxes"
The only story I'm aware of on missing ballot boxes was the story where a woman found one in a school. The news stories were quick to jump on that story, but the last story I heard on it was the box wasn't a ballot box but a box full of school supplies. I've not seen any news stories currently mentioning 'missing ballot boxes' (singular or plural).
|
hopefulli
|
posted on November 8, 2000 07:12:04 PM new
A re-vote would be extremely unfair since there is no way to guarantee that voters would vote the way they had "intended", without the benefit of hindsight. What about those who initially voted for Nadar? Now that they know their vote is pivotal, I bet they would change it. And how about those that didn't bother to vote in the first place? Sorry, they lost their privilege.
|
barbarake
|
posted on November 8, 2000 07:18:40 PM new
No matter what happens, someone will say it's not 'fair'.
What about those people that meant to vote for Gore but voted for Buchanan instead? (Did you see the spike of 'Buchanan' votes in Palm Beach?? Hmmm)
Actually - is it 'fair' that the winner of the popular vote doesn't get to be president? Doesn't seem 'fair' to me - legal maybe, but not 'fair'.
(I'm not trying to poke fun by putting quotes around the word 'fair' - I'm just trying to emphasize the word. Hopefulli has a point - but I think a re-vote is the least 'unfair' option we have.)
|
Zazzie
|
posted on November 8, 2000 07:19:46 PM new
Thw whole world watched this election and is still watching.....and believe me...if Bush goes into office without Florida doing something about the weird ballots and other issues---this Bush presidency will be looked on by the nations of the world as tainted and untrustworthy. If Bush comes out the winner after investigation or re-vote--then the office is his but until then--he will always be suspect.
Please excuse me poking my nose into others affairs---I forgot the Star Trek Prime Directive for a moment there
|
fountainhouse
|
posted on November 8, 2000 07:50:06 PM new
I thought I was the only one still awake at 4 a.m. when ABC showed Florida's own web page with a final count of less than 500 votes separating the two candidates. By 7 a.m. the gap had widened a couple of thousand.
I didn't think too much of that until I saw one of the Florida DNC reps on CNN today saying that this is yet another question that needs an answer -- where did these votes come from when Florida itself had labeled the results final.
BTW, CNN's current reports show Gore has so far gained a net of 600+ votes in the recount.
|
hopefulli
|
posted on November 8, 2000 07:54:34 PM new
I realize that using the word "fair" can sound like kids on a playground. I guess I just can't muster up much sympathy for anyone who didn't take the time to read the directions before voting. There were plenty of people who didn't have a problem using the ballot (or did they? maybe they meant to vote for Bush and voted for Gore instead).
And I don't have much faith in personal affidavits from people swearing they didn't get to vote-not when the democrats have set up a hotline to "find" everyone. People have a tendency to want to become part of something larger and more exciting than their regular life. I wonder how much of all this is a "me too, lets jump on the bandwagon".
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on November 8, 2000 07:58:11 PM new
What may be crystal clear to you may be utterly confusing to an 85 year old.
|
kiheicat
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:03:14 PM new
I've not seen any news stories currently mentioning 'missing ballot boxes' (singular or plural)
I have. On CNN. Today. This morning, actually, and our morning here in Hawaii is 5 hours behind East Coast time, so it was this afternoon there.
And I agree with what james said ^ .
[ edited by kiheicat on Nov 8, 2000 08:04 PM ]
|
Zazzie
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:04:43 PM new
If the ballots were identical all over the state then it was fair---if the ballots in question in Palm Beach were somehow different--then it was not fair. Whoever they intended to vote for (Bush or Gore)--it is unlikely Buchanan was the candidate of choice for that area.
Good luck folks---I'm off to watch Star Trek Voyager and then West Wing (still a Democrat in that White House--1st term/2nd year)
Live Long and Prosper
|
uaru
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:05:11 PM new
"What may be crystal clear to you may be utterly confusing to an 85 year old."
My father is up there in years. He didn't vote yesterday, but if he had I'm sure he'd have wanted to cast his vote for Eisenhower... Buchanan could have got his vote for all I know.
|
kiheicat
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:07:29 PM new
Zazzie, I'd look at a Bush administration as untrustworthy anyway... voting gliches or no. I really love the warmth of the tropics but Canada would be looking REALLY good if he's truly elected.
|
kiheicat
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:08:32 PM new
uaru LOL @ Eisenhower 
|
hopefulli
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:14:53 PM new
Well, this will sound harsh and I'll get slammed, but anyone who is not in control of their mental faculties probably shouldn't be voting.
This is the problem I had with the democrats rousting the elderly from their nursing home beds and escorting them to the polls. This is just one of things we were treated to in California, but because it was such a landslide for Gore in this state, no one cares.
|
uaru
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:16:29 PM new
I've not seen any news stories currently mentioning 'missing ballot boxes' (singular or plural)
I have. On CNN. Today. This morning, actually, and our morning here in Hawaii is 5 hours behind East Coast time, so it was this afternoon there.
Yes, there were stories earlier about 'missing ballot boxes' or to be more precise one that a woman had found in a school. It was on the cnn.com site infact. Since then the alleged ballot box turned out to be a box full of school supplies. I can no longer find the original story about it on cnn.com, much less any later mention of the box being filled with school supplies and not ballots. The key word in my original statement was 'currently'.
|
CleverGirl
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:20:58 PM new
Oh, man. My local news just announced that Florida has THROWN OUT more than 19,000 ballots because they had more than one candidate for President punched.
Yup, Palm Beach County.
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:22:06 PM new
Hopefulli: The voting privilege begins at 18 and ends at death (or felony conviction). Your position may be harsh or not, but it's not the law.
Actually, I wasn't referring to senile 85 year olds necessarily. Many older people have eye problems, for example, that would make interpreting that particular ballot a chore. Maybe those folks shouldn't drive, but why shouldn't they vote?
In fact, how do you know you would have got it right? All we know is that we understand how that ballot worked because we have seen diagrams of it after it has been discussed, all marked up with helpful pointers explaining the confusion. Perhaps at the polls yesterday it would have caught even you or I off guard.
[ edited by jamesoblivion on Nov 8, 2000 08:24 PM ]
|
jamesoblivion
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:23:07 PM new
BTW, please don't take that as a 'slam'.
|
hopefulli
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:30:00 PM new
Your right, I have no idea whether I would have been confused by the ballot. I just think I wouldn't have marked it anyway and then complained.
And I am not implying that a person's voting privileges should be revoked once they reach a certain age. My own parents are in their 70's.
No slam taken.
[ edited by hopefulli on Nov 8, 2000 08:35 PM ]
|
KatyD
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:40:25 PM new
This is the problem I had with the democrats rousting the elderly from their nursing home beds and escorting them to the polls. This is just one of things we were treated to in California, but because it was such a landslide for Gore in this state, no one cares.
I don't have a clue about what you're talking about. As a "Californian" I've yet to hear about any "elderly being rousted from their nursing home beds." If you're referring to seniors living in retirement centers being driven to polling places by volunteers, that's hardly being "rousted from a nursing home bed". These same seniors are driven to the grocery store, shopping centers, drs appointments, etc. Just because they can't drive does not mean they don't have the mental faculties to vote.
KatyD
|
uaru
|
posted on November 8, 2000 08:41:41 PM new
Missing Ballot boxes
Here's a story on missing ballot boxes, go to this URL and search for Clouser
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/11/08/election.president/
|
