News flashes/comments/thoughs afurther: 17. One voter who filed a complain with the PBC Board of Elections said he didn't realise that casting two votes for President would make his ballot invalid. This is a direct quote. >From Washington Times on Friday: 'Max Drier, a retired Palm Beach County resident, said the confusing ballot led him to vote mistakenly for Mr. Buchanan, which he then tried to correct by punching the ballot again to cast a vote for Mr. Gore. '"My original vote was for Buchanan, but I wanted to make sure I voted for Gore. I didn't realize if I punched in two votes that my ballot would be invalidated," said Mr. Drier, who filed a formal protest with Palm Beach County yesterday.' When I was six, I knew you could only vote for one candidate for President. When I was 12, I realised that such ballots were thrown out. 18. <a href=http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ELECTION&STORYID=APIS786FCQO0 target=new>http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=ELECTION&STORYID=APIS786FCQO 0</a> This is the link to the story of where 15K ballots were thrown out in 1996. As turnout was higher this year, more marginally competent voters could have come out, pushing up the # of thrown out ballots this year. 19. The hand recounts Gore requested just happen to be in four heavily Democratic counties. Of course as we all know hand recounts are less accurate than machine recounts. They may however validate previously invalidated ballots. <<Well, people from other countries *are* laughing at us, but for reasons other than the ones James Baker has in mind.>> 20. Of course. But do Europeans really need an excuse to laugh at Americans? <<They are laughing because the person with the most votes probably will not be President.>> 21. Let's wait until the 2M absentee ballots are counted before saying that. 22. Gore's lead is ~200K depending on who you ask. California alone has 1M left to count as of yesterday (Friday) and the LA Times article said there were potentially more. 23. Why was this not a bad thing when Gore was thought to be the beneficiary of this? I do not recall seeing a flood of posts on this board complaining about the Electoral College BEFORE the election. 24. It (the popular loser winning the Electoral college) is hardly a unique occurrence, happening twice before in our history and nearly occurring a few other times. Both candidates knew the rules. <<They are laughing because the next President will not represent 52% of those who voted.>> 25. You mean like Clinton did not represent 55% and 57% of the people who voted? <<They are laughing because our system is so complicated, from the primaries to the Electoral College.>> 26. Well, it was simpler back in the day when Presidential candidates were selected in the smoke-filled back rooms of yore. A lot simpler. It was simpler when we had fewer voters, because minorities, women, landless, etc., were simply not allowed to vote. <<They were even laughing before November 7, because America's version of "free and fair elections" cost over 3 billion dollars in campaign financing, and because our process takes so damn long.>> 27. What do you propose to replace it? America is THREE TIMES as big population wise as any EU country. It is in fact nearly as big economy-wise and population-wise as the ENITRE EU. Elections are just going to cost more here. <<But they won't be laughing when their leaders have to meet with a President who can't even speak his own language well, let alone converse in foreign affairs.>> 28. You mean as opposed to having the gentleman who flunked out of law and divinity schools? --regards, shawn
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST