Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
On another thread one of her staffers said they wanted to see the source code for the machines..
At least you have to give the Dems credit - they keep fighting and never roll over and play dead - even when in the minority.
Republicans on the other hand, can't seem to fight even when they have the majority.
/perplexed off
Jennings wouldn't know the source code from the sports section of the New York times. This whole thing is a joke, 19,000 people choose not to vote in a race and they call it an under vote.
You might be a ned wreck, make that a Red drek!
The Dems'Communist party has been pulling this garbage since 2000! They actually got away with it in the Wash state gov race. Will the Rs grow Bs? or are the Rs in league with the Ds? Tune in next election for the never ending propoganda of the ENEMEDIAs war on America!
Even if he only won by a margin of one vote, he still won and is entitled to take his seat.
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.
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!
I'm sure they'd LOVE to get their hands on THAT!
Just another typical Democrat whiner who lost and wants a recount.
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.