Posted on 12/29/2006 11:09:01 PM PST by jdm
TALLAHASSEE — Congressional hopeful Christine Jennings' drive for a new election in Southwest Florida suffered two blows Friday when Congress announced it would seat her opponent and a state judge denied her request to inspect vote-counting software in Sarasota County.
But Jennings, a Democrat who has fought relentlessly since official results showed her losing by just 369 votes to Republican Vern Buchanan in last month's election, was unfazed.
She pledged to appeal the judge's ruling and said she supported the seating of Buchanan "temporarily," in part because congressional leaders promised to remove him if she prevails in her call for a new election. "It is important to protect the voters, and this step will ensure they are not left without a voice in Congress," Jennings said.
At issue is the extraordinary number of voters in Sarasota County, 18,400, who did not record a vote in the highly contested race to replace U.S. Rep. Katherine Harris, though they did vote for other races.
Jennings and her allies, including a group of voters who have joined her lawsuit, have argued that the undervotes, as they are called, represent a malfunction by the electronic voting machines used by Sarasota County, the iVotronic machine by Election Systems & Software.
In a motion seeking evidence for their case, they sought access to the so-called source code of the machines.
But ES&S, along with state elections officials, challenged that request, contending the source code amounted to a proprietary trade secret protected under state law. They have argued that the undervote was attributable to a poorly designed ballot that put two races on a single screen of the voting machines.
This is actually a very understandable move by the Florida rat. He learned that using the "Kreskin" method of counting votes algore won in 2000 so why not keep trying it. The "Kreskin" method holds that voter who made a choice on all other lines should be viewed as "overlooking" the empty line and that the BoE should count that vote for the party the voter pulled other levers for. Since this "mistake" happens with rat rank and file voters more than it does with American voters, the rat mind theorizes that the missing vote is his. Of course this is complicated but to the rat it's a winner and he will stick with it.
I left quite a few blanks on my ballot last time.
This is pure BS.
The reason there were a higher portion of undervotes than in neighboring districts is simple: There was no incumbent. A good number of voters go simply on name recognition and won't vote for someone whose name doesn't register with them. In this case, Catherine Harris gave up her seat, leaving it to 2 first-time congressional candidates.
They'll have a voice, honey, it just won't be YOURS!
That's why it's so important for conservative repubs to understand we are going
to have to get in the fight big time in the primaries! We can not allow this Major
League Prick to head an already delapidate conservative movement.
We are going to have to fight, and unfortunately that is going to mean within our
own party first to oust rino's! We've got just under 1.5 years to make headway...
It's ok people to have to war within our ranks, it needs to happen NOW
while the door is open!!
DBM/dems will have 10 times the battle we will ever have!
I'm sure they'd LOVE to get their hands on THAT!
Just another typical Democrat whiner who lost and wants a recount.
You shouldn't call him "Major League Prick".
He never shows up at the meetings, he's 2 years behind in his dues, so we kicked him out.
This is the same thing Gore used: "undervotes" - or NON-VOTES.
Contrary to what these people believe, NO ONE CAN DEVINE WHY PEOPLE DIDN'T VOTE FOR CERTAIN ITEMS ON THEIR BALLOT.
I have at times NOT VOTED - which is my priviledge as a citizen. This dem wants to claim the NON-VOTES as if they were her special privilege. So .. just as Gore did in 2000, she claims the machines were either malfunctioning or tampered with. Just more Sorelosermen in the dem party.
So let me get this straight: Ms. Jennings is not at all miffed about losing a cliffhanger. No, she altruistically wants to protect her constituents form losing their "voice in Congress." Got it.
I had been under the impression that the Democrats disliked the low-tech version of balloting in Florida. (Can anyone say, "hanging chads"?) But now it appears that they are disenchanted with its high-tech replacement. A cynic could be forgiven for concluding that the Democrats reflexively oppose any method of voting that does not result in a Democrat victory.
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.