[jholmes]

This is the way we elect the President of the United States?

The TV networks project based on exit polls before the polls close - soemtimes even in the state they are calling.
Gore wins the total vote but may not win the election.
He concedes the election and then withdraws the concession.
The votes may not actually be totaled for days yet and the whole mess isn't even final until the end of December when the Electorial College meets and votes.

Ridiculous.

I've seen three different headlines in the Dallas Morning News this morning - "Too Close to Call", "Bush Wins", "Recount".

We need to change this process. The polls should be open from noon Eastern Time on the first Monday in Novmember and close at noon Tuesday. With available technology we should be able to do this electronically and directly. One citizen. One vote.

[jaguarandi]

Agreed. Actually, I've always believed that there should be no media coverage at all until all polls are closed, including Hawaii. Too many voters can be influenced by who's 'winning' at any given time, especially those in the west.

This morning I heard a report on the radio that would-be voters in Florida were leaving the polls when a radio broadcast (outside the polling place) declared that Bush had won, at least in Florida. In California, it's illegal to have any kind of campaign propaganda or media, be it flyers, television, whatever, within 100 feet of a polling place. Does anyone know if this is also a federal law?

/e

[jholmes]

I don't know if it's a federal law but we have the same law in Texas

[Misha]

What about the latest issue that as many as 3000 voters in Palm Beach chose Buchanan instead of Gore because of a mistake on their ballots? That 3000 is enough to put Gore ahead of Bush and win Florida, and the election... who knows what will come of that situation.

[VRL]

A media black-out on election day - I totally agree. Also, why not make election day a national holiday to encourage greater participation?

I also believe we need to take another look at the electoral vote method of deciding an election. It seems flawed to me. Perhaps, we could split numbers according to the numbers of votes earned in a state? (e.g., in Florida, each get half.) Or simply use the popular vote! Why not? (And I don't even like Gore!)

As far as the "oops, I voted wrong one" claims ... I don't buy it. If you have a question about the ballot, ask someone! (Where I have voted, there have always been individuals available to answer questions. Have I just lucked out?) Anyway, if you open that can of worms, it would become even more of a confused mess.

I felt before the election that the states that split the electoral vote are doing it right. The all-or-nothing business seemed to violate the spirit of the popular vote. Now that the election mess has happened, I feel the same way.

For instance, if Florida did what Maine does and split the electoral vote based on the popular vote, Gore would win for he has a lead in the electoral vote already. Only by throwing the entire 25 Florida electoral votes to Bush, despite half the state voting against him, can Bush win despite losing the overall popular vote.

The people spoke, and the other guy may win anyway. Therefore, the system should be adjusted for the next time.

As for the recount in Florida, no fear, Bush will win no matter what. His brother is governer, after all, as America has a long tradition of throwing elections one way or another depending on who the local big boss is. One need only remember Chicago in the 60s for an example. Jeb Bush will find a way (although it appears now that he won't need to do anything).

So those 3,000 Palm Beach votes? Forget about it, they will be counted, for it helps Bush.

[jaguarandi]

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/2000...each_dc_1.html

for more on the Palm Beach Buchanan/Gore ballot problem.

Ironic that Bush is poised to win the electoral college while losing the popular vote, while it had been predicted earlier yesterday that the same thing would happen to Al Gore....

/e

[3gg3]

Originally posted by PrivateCitizen:
I felt before the election that the states that split the electoral vote are doing it right. The all-or-nothing business seemed to violate the spirit of the popular vote. Now that the election mess has happened, I feel the same way.

For instance, if Florida did what Maine does and split the electoral vote based on the popular vote, Gore would win for he has a lead in the electoral vote already. Only by throwing the entire 25 Florida electoral votes to Bush, despite half the state voting against him, can Bush win despite losing the overall popular vote.

The people spoke, and the other guy may win anyway. Therefore, the system should be adjusted for the next time.

[3gg3]

3gg3

Originally posted by PrivateCitizen:
...For instance, if Florida did what Maine does and split the electoral vote based on the popular vote, Gore would win for he has a lead in the electoral vote already.... [/B]

But how much of that lead is based on other states' all-or-nothing electoral college allocations.
I'd say you can't have it both ways, but I guess you do, given the Maine situ - maybe it is a screwed-up mess in that sense.



[This message has been edited by 3gg3 (edited 11-08-2000).]

[druber]

http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/p...rt4001107.html

for more on the Buchanan Florida thing. Looks awfully clear from the pictures they provided. If people looked at it and thought that Gore had two holes to choose from, seems that Bush had two holes as well. Buchanan's looks to be directly in the middle.
Very shady.

3gg3,

Yep, it's a bit of a mess right now. Doing away with the electoral college system would require a constitutional ammendment -- not the easiest thing to do. But it would be nice if all states did what Maine does and assigns electoral votes in proportion to the popular vote. It would be more intuitive, in any case, avoiding the inevitable every-4th-year question of 'Huh? What do you mean the popular vote doesn't elect the president?'

Here's a topic question; what do the rest of you think: I doubt they will do this, but if they actually re-did the voting process in Florida, how do you think the vote would go now? Would Nader drop off the radar? Would the polls be packed with panicked voters? Would Florida die of boredom from 30-days of extra campaign ads run ad naseum?

[themotor]

After looking at the images of the ballot at the ABC News site, I can see that it might be confusing at first glance (the direction of the "arrows" seem to be pointing in the wrong direction since you can't really see the holes to punch in this poor photo), but upon a closer look, it's *obvious* to see that there is only one hole punch per "presidential ticket". Ridiculous.

Should people who don't have the smarts figure out something like this really be voting? Or perhaps the person(s?) claiming that there were two punches next to Gore were either cross-eyed, weren't wearing their prescription glasses, or had been spending a little too much time in the sun...

[This message has been edited by themotor (edited 11-08-2000).]

[Gregg]

PC, wow(!) that was a nasty slap at Gov. Jeb Bush. Has he done something to make you believe he is a crook? He was in Austin, for crying out loud. There will be so many attorneys from both campaigns watching this recount, that no one will change the votes that have been cast. If there was corruption "on the ground" it was done by low level gaffers (such as the woman from N.Y. here in Milwaukee) and not because of some sort of masterminded conspiracy.

As for your "split the electoral vote" idea, I haven't done the math, but intuitively, I assume that you could still have a similar outcome. There are 51 units (Puerto Rico doesn't vote, right?) which would have to round off their electoral votes based on percentages of the popular vote. States that only have 3 could only split 1-2 or 2-1 and wherever that round off occured, it could give proprotionally higher electoral votes to the candidate with fewer popular votes nationwide. This election could wind up at 271-267, (meaning 270-268 is possible) and in such a close race, the rounding could still throw the electoral votes to the candidate with fewer overall popular votes.

And doing the election over? Not only impractical, but unfair! Some people who were eligible to vote didn't. Should they be allowed to now. No. Some just got to the polling place late. Ditto. Some couldn't vote because they ran out of ballots. Bad. But, it happens every time. Ditto. Some people who could not vote will turn 18 before "Make-up Day". Ditto. Some people who did vote will die. Ok, they're dead. We know that now, but on Election Day, we did not know they would be. We couldn't disallow their votes then, so what gives us the right to do so now? Doesn't work.

Gregg

[Gregg]

Ya, motor, I think that's laughable too.

[slboett]

Agreed. I saw this pix this morning of the ballots in question - what a damn joke! Anyone who had trouble with that shouldn't be voting.

Scott

"PC, wow(!) that was a nasty slap at Gov. Jeb Bush. Has he done something to make you believe he is a crook?"

Not at all. Everything I've heard of the man has been positive. I was just talking about the long tradition of American politics of getting your man in office, no matter what you have to do. Drive drunks to the polls? Go for it. Sign up dead people to vote? Been done. Vote early and often? A Chicago tradition from the past.

So I was making a general commentary about local politics. The tempatations to make sure your man wins no matter what has tempted many a politician in the day.

I mean, why do you think the Dems sent Warren Christoper to oversee the recount? To make sure the Republicans don't pull a fast one, and to help skew the results to the Dems, if possible. There is no honor in politics, or at least traditionally there isn't. Maybe people have suddenly changed, and everyone is shocked, SHOCKED to discover corruption in office.

In any case, this will be the most scrutinized FL vote ever, so I imagine nothing funny will really happen.

Just to give equal time, and not just to pick on politicians, here's an excerpt from a Yahoo news story showing part of the reason Gore lost Florida. Note the shallow thinking of some voters:

"DeHaven-Smith said the emotional saga of Cuban castaway Elian Gonzalez appeared to have played a critical role in the race in Miami-Dade, home to Cuban Americans who wanted the child to stay in the United States and were furious at the Clinton administration for sending him home.

Miami-Dade, which favored the Clinton-Gore ticket by 100,000 votes in 1996, appeared to have given Gore the nod by fewer than 40,000 votes this time, he said.

``Forty percent of Cubans went to Clinton in '96. I'd be surprised if it was 20 percent this year and it was all Elian,'' he said.

At the bustling Versailles restaurant in the heart of Miami's Little Havana district, Cuban exiles gathered for morning coffee and generally hoped Bush would pull it off.

``Most Cubans voted for Bush,'' said Jose Perez, 67. ``All Cubans know that Clinton and Gore are friends of communists.''

For me, it's not only about the figure heads.

Voting statistics prove that the liberal mentality scores the MOST!

I am happy for the most part.
read

*it was indeed sad when the glimpse of Bush made oil, tobacco, and drug stocks rise while new technologies tanked*

Keep your fingers crossed.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/p...rt4001107.html
http://www.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/...llotbox.found/

[Gregg]

QUOTE: Voting statistics prove that the liberal mentality scores the MOST!

If by "scores" you mean "votes", you are correct. It's an interesting phenomenon. Any ideas on why the left gets the vote out better than the right? I guess the traditional thought on that is that for generations, the right considered politics to be a dirty business, and eligible voters and potential candidates of a conservative bent disdained participation. Is that still true?

Ok, I'll answer the my original question again. Another theory has been that more fat cats on the right stay in business to make money rather than sacrifice wealth for power. More lefties go into politics to get rich, because they're farther down on the economic totem pole. I remember one guy (can't recall from where) who owned a bar, got elected to Congress, and thought he'd struck gold. When he was defeated, he took a huge pay cut. So, any takers on theory #2?

[This message has been edited by Gregg (edited 11-08-2000).]

[themotor]

Here's a better depiction of the Palm Beach Ballot:
http://cnews.tribune.com/news/image/...-82373,00.html

Originally posted by Gregg:
Any ideas on why the left gets the vote out better than tht right?

I'll keep it simple and stick to the words themselves:

Conservative (by definition: against innovation, freedom and enamored of existing evils - look it up)

Liberal (Free by birth; hence, befitting a freeman or gentleman; refined; noble; independent; free; not servile or mean; as, a liberal ancestry; a liberal spirit; Not bound by orthodox tenets or established forms in political or religious philosophy; independent in opinion; not conservative; friendly to great freedom in the constitution or administration of government; having tendency toward democratic or republican, as distinguished from monarchical or aristocratic, forms; as, liberal thinkers; liberal Christians; the Liberal party. - look it up)

My view: This election has been about character assasination in order to skirt around the real issues. (ie: the Supreme Court)

It would be better if all americans would cast their vote towards the better plan, not the (supposed) better figure head.

[This message has been edited by my name is (edited 11-08-2000).]

[Gregg]

whatever your name is, I'm not going to get into flaming here, so if it starts to go down that path in your replies, I will bow out without further comment. But, I couldn't let your manufactured definition of conservative go without comment. So, here is the definition from *your* link:

1.Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
2.Traditional or restrained in style: a conservative dark suit.
3.Moderate; cautious: a conservative estimate.

Now, to elaborate a little. Labels are useful as a means of distinguishing types, and are particularly useful to those who coin them. For example, to cite a couple from the liberal wing...

Does "Affirmative Action" really describe the practices favored by those who coined that term? How about "Pro-Choice"? Both of those terms were brilliant PR inventions, but neither describe the remedies favored by proponents. Both terms could be used to describe a-n-y-t-h-i-n-g !

As to the "character asassination" charge, as Mr. Gore would say, "Uh, yeah!" Every national election evolves into that, from both sides, as did this presidential election. It's a shame, isn't it?

Gregg

[suprz]

i have theory why florida screwed up the votes, it's because of all those damn snowbirds that "fly' down there for the winter. i deal with the elderly, and i dont have anything against them. but , i swear if breathing was not an automatic funtion of the human body, and they actually had to think about doing it, some of them would die of suffocation.....

------------------
" I think,
therefore....IMAC

Let's be realistic. There were probably voting 'irregularities' all over this country last night, but none of the races were close enough to notice them except in Florida. Where do these irregularities come from?

1. Precint workers who are generally incompenent.
2. Precint workers who just don't care enough to do a careful job.
3. Corruption.

Please note, I'm sure the vast, vast majority of volunteers do a terrific job and care very deeply about their civic duty. But with 100,000,000 votes being handled in 50 states and D.C., from large cities to little burgs, those three factors come into play every election.

People always remember the corruption of the past, for example the "missing" ballot boxes in Cook county in Illinois during the 1960 election that, when they finally showed up too late to count, showed Nixon actually carried Illinois, not Kennedy. Or the cases where black or hispanic voters are grilled at the voting locations about non-existant requirments until they leave discouraged from voting. I'm not naive enough to think that corruption is only in the past. On both sides, I might add.

As for incompetence, well, the early returns from Florida's recount show that the numbers are changing. So far not significantly, but an extra 500+ votes have been counted from 19 counties. Doesn't make a difference between Gore and Bush, but it does raise the question Why weren't those votes counted the first time? How many other votes were overlooked in all 50 states?

I doubt anything will change; Bush will carry Florida, and quite probably in a perfectly legitimate manner. But it's also entirely possible that problems occurred throughout the nation in ways we'll never hear. Problems that could have benefitted either Gore or Bush, since incompetence and corruption occurs in both camps.

And you know what? I can't think of a way around this. Go high tech and vote by Web? Then someone will crack into the system and change the database of votes. Power encourages corruption, whether it be in politics, business, religion, whatever. At least we can be glad that the system generally works fairly well, depsite the occasional "glitch", and that no tanks are brought in when we have something like this happen in this country.

[Scott_H]

I think they should go high tech. There' s got to be better ways to make sure that people vote only once and that their vote is counted.


Maybe Bush could make that the first thing to under take when he gets into office. Get up some money for better voting machines and training for officials.

[This message has been edited by Scott_H (edited 11-08-2000).]

[jholmes]

Couple of points from my afternoon of media grazing -

1. Jeb Bush has recused himself from the recount so as to eliminate the appearence of impropriety. Sort of. If Daly could deliver Illinois for JFK in '60 I'm sure Brother Jeb can do it for W.

2. Samples of the Palm Beach country ballots were sent to every resident in the county prior to the election. Nobody mentioned a problem and apparently nobody said anything at the polls - won't the Election officials give you another ballot and destroy the original if you screw it up?

3. Apparently it's illegal for Florida to vote again. But a run off between Bush and Gore would be perfect for Florida - isn't that Ringling Bros winter home for the circus?

4. As stereotypical as it is, I.m surprised I haven't heard anybody credit Leiberman with boosting the ticket in Florida among the snowbirds.

[This message has been edited by jholmes (edited 11-08-2000).]

[Scott_H]

2. Samples of the Palm Beach country ballots were sent to every resident in the county prior to the election. Nobody mentioned a problem and apparently nobody said anything at the polls - won't the Election officials give you another ballot and destroy the original if you screw it up?

Another thing. Democrats looked at and aproved that ballot long before election day. AND (not trying to be mean) The elderly have voted many times before. They should know how to do it.

[VRL]

Agreed. A quote from the AP news ... "the ballot was approved by Democrat Theresa LePore, the county supervisor of elections".

By the way, I'm sure plenty of people "screwed up", especially now that they know how close it is!!

This is getting worse by the minute.

[Arty50]

Exactly VRL. The waiting period generated by the recount has given Gore supporters time to baselessly challenge the election. It's only natural in out litigious society. Anyone who truly screwed up their ballot and complained about it should be taken out and shot. Were these people voting for a border line on the page? I don't understand how anyone with 1/100th of a brain could screw this up. I also have no pity for those that punched two holes. Did they assume that the magic voting fairy was going to assume which candidate they meant to pick? The ballot was laid out in said fasion so that the candidates wouldn't have to be listed on separate pages, which would be a real travesty. I'm so sick of the media for reporting junk like this.

[Gregg]

If I saw the photo of the ballot correctly, the hole to punch for Buchanan was *between* the one for Gore and the one for Bush. If that's the case, wouldn't it have been just as easy to mistakenly vote for Buchanan instead of Bush as it was for Gore? And, if I saw that correctly, why hasn't that been reported?

The media are incompetent in election reporting. After ABC broke in with the announcement by the Florida official on the status of the recount, the local news talking head contradicted her. She (the Florida offical) reported that the margin remains 1784, that is, the same as Wednesday morning, because they weren't done. Then the local news reported (twice! in 15 minutes) that the margin was 362! The second time was after I had called the station to express my alarm over this incompetence, and was told others had called, and they would correct it. They did not in that half hour, and I have yet to watch their next broadcast.

My goodness! How much brain power does it take to figure out that the only number that counts is the one reported by the Florida officials? Forget the AP rumours, or the already proven incompetent Voter News Service! Sheesh! They had the number loaded onto their *@!*% teleprompter *before* the announcement! Duh! These people went to college?????

Gregg

[Gregg]

Well, I watched the next broadcast on that station. They said, and displayed on the screen for a few seconds, what the official margin is from the State of Florida. They then mentioned the unofficial count from AP, and displayed that at the bottom of the screen for the entire news broadcast. Amazing! Now, which numbers matter; the official ones, or the unofficial ones? Let's see, we had some unofficial numbers on Tuesday night.....

Bill Daley's comments today were unconscionable. His father stole the election for John Kennedy, now he's trying to steal it for Gore. Just shut up until they count 'em and release the official numbers, Bill! The thirst to be first made a mess on Tuesday, and now it's spreading the confusion, and throwing fuel on a fire. They're nearly rioting in West Palm Beach!

The restrained response from the Bush camp is commendable, but probably a losing tactic. They have pointed out that there were over 17,000 discarded ballots in WPB four years ago, when there was a much lighter turnout. The problem is, there are too many stupid people voting there!

A mess? I'll say!

Gregg

[This message has been edited by Gregg (edited 11-09-2000).]

[Scott_H]

I agree Gregg. Daley and by proxy Gore is looking very bad.

I saw a great sign someone was holding down in Florida. It said, "Daley go back to Cook County"