Posted on 12/23/2006 5:04:28 PM PST by Patriot28
As I read this, if the "undervote" rate in surrounding counties was 10%, then the "undervote" in Sarasota County would have been 11%.
Statistically insignificant on its face.
It's going to be a long two years. Especially with a confused and docile 'Pubbie minority a President who's even acting like a lame duck.
That math is wrong. 13% of the ballots in Sarasota county were blank for Representative, the percentage in other counties was 3% or less. It is 10% of the total, not 10% more undervotes, and that is statistically extremely anomalous.
It seems pretty obvious that there was a major voting machine snafu, and that the "real winner" is probably unknowable.
Nonetheless, it is up to Florida to certify the winner or order a new election. If Nancy P. wants to decline to seat the Republican, she can make a case for it, but it would be very unwise politically. (Which is why I hope she does it.)
If she actually seats the Democrat, rather than leaving the seat vacant, all hell will break loose.
The Republicans couls have acted like Democrats and refused to seat Sanchez or Landrieu, but again it is really up to the judges or voters of the state to rectify these matters.
In general the Republicans need to be MUCH MUCH tougher on the Democrats regarding the stealing of elections. However, this is NOT a good case to start doing that, there was clearly a major screwup somewhere with the voting machines.
Good point, and I didn't know that Kuchel hired Panetta first. Kuchel made Nixon SEEM conservative.
Let Pelosi refuse to seat Buchanan, and then let the Republicans in the Senate filibuster the organizing vote until they get a promise from Harry Reid that they can reorganize if the balance in the Senate changes within the next two years.
-PJ
Exactly right. And don't forget how they permitted Sanchez to steal Dornan's seat with illegal votes because Newt thought Dornan was an embarrassment with his "special orders" on C-Span.
Yes, again, we pay for the legacy of Newt.
We the people.....
If she doesn't care for elections, we have other ways of expressing our views. Some are less polite.
my my aint we off to a fien 'bipartisan' post election year-- http://sacredscoop.com
Since when do the RATs care about the law and the Constitution? We saw how much they care about other peoples' rights during the 2004 election.
It's ironic; the dems whine and throw a fit whenever Republicans look at them the wrong way and accuse them of fascism, yet the minute they gain power, they turn around and and act like fascists for real. And their pea-brained supporters don't say a word.
Sounds like she is gonna darn well try.
Keep it up Nancy...just keep doing this stuff...we are taking notes.
I tell ya, she is Joan Crawford .....don't let her near wire hangers!!
You have that right not to mention that same group of people now are saying if Republicans don't put up a social conservative they are staying home. As far as I am concerned, we need to start looking elsewhere for votes because this group cannot be counted on in close elections. I have had it with the 'my way or no way' or 'we are going to teach Republicans a lesson because we don't agree with them 100%' crowd!
Sounds like communism to me. Time to trade in the donkey for the hammer and sickle.
It's in the constitution. Each house of Congress is the final arbiter of who sits.
But she won't be the speaker until after the new Congressmen are all seated in the new house. Until then, Hastert is still the speaker. Therefore it's the old house that decides who will be seated in the new house, right?
I do believe that if she insists on treating republicans this way the sizable minority can and will make her next two years somewhat unpleasant. I forsee daily quorum calls and 10 minutes work completed for every 12 hours in session. Confusing abuse of the opposition with House disipline will not yield her intended results.
LOL. A happy Christmas Eve day to you and yours, sleuthie.
This is news? The RATS will no longer recognize the will of the voters unless said will validates the RAT agenda. They only protect the "disenfranchised" in cases where voters are too stupid to distinguish between Algore and Pat Buchanan. Nothing new here, move along.
In the 1984 election, Rep. McCloskey faced conservative state senator Rick McIntyre. Buoyed by President Reagan's strong coattails, McIntyre trailed McCloskey by only 72 votes after the initial vote count. A tabulation error, however, resulted in an overcounting of McCloskey votes and the Republican Indiana Secretary of State certified McIntyre as the winner by 34 votes, ignoring other recounted tallies that actually showed McCloskey was in the lead. The Democratic-controlled House refused to seat either McIntyre or McCloskey and conducted their own recount. In the end, the House seated McCloskey after declaring him the winner by just four votes (116,645 to 116,641). The vote was largely along partisan lines and in response every Republican House member marched out of the chamber in protest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.