To: anniegetyourgun
Of the 8,359,168 votes cast statewide, some 384,427 (nearly 4.6%) were not recorded for the recall question. Almost half of these missing votes (over 175,000) were in Los Angeles, nearly 9% for that county. Yet the Datavote punchcards used in 14 other counties fared somewhat better, on average, than all of the optically scanned and touchscreen systems, with the exception of only the ES&S Optech Eagle (used in San Francisco and San Mateo counties) and the Diebold Accu-Vote-TS (used in Alameda, though with some reports of equipment malfunctions). So, this beggars the question, was the 4.6% error rate in LA due to the problems with the machines or problems with the voters?
2 posted on
10/10/2003 9:42:17 AM PDT by
dirtboy
(Cure Arnold of groping - throw him into a dark closet with Janet Reno and shut the door.)
To: anniegetyourgun
The Sequoia Edge touchscreens, currently under litigation in Riverside County, performed slightly worse than the Datavote punchcards. The ES&S iVotronic touchscreens were ranked lowest of the three touchscreen types in the state, and were outperformed by all other systems with the exception of the Sequoia Optech optically scanned systems and the Pollstar and Votomatic punchcards. How can a touchscreen system not work? If a vote was not registered for the recall, maybe it was because they did not want to cast a vote....
To: All
|
God Bless Those who Protect our Liberty
---
Past, Present and Future.
|
Please visit the FR Fundraiser
|
6 posted on
10/10/2003 9:44:48 AM PDT by
Support Free Republic
(Your support keeps Free Republic going strong!)
To: anniegetyourgun
Before Florida I never hear anything about problems with figuring out how to vote.
Following your bingo card is more difficult.
To: anniegetyourgun; dirtboy; Torie
The analysis revealed some shocking details. Of the 8,359,168 votes cast statewide, some 384,427 (nearly 4.6%) were not recorded for the recall question.
This sounds like the "undervote" canard that was thrown dishonestly into the ACLU's error rate argument before the 9th Circuit. I'm therefore skeptical of the entire article. It should be noted that the residual vote tally is incapable of differentiating between a voter who deliberately or accidentally did not make a selection on the recall question, and an equipment failure (such as hanging chad) that could result in a cast vote not being counted.
Yes, it should be noted, but regularly isn't, by the Left.
|
9 posted on
10/10/2003 9:48:36 AM PDT by
Sabertooth
(No Drivers' Licences for Illegal Aliens. Petition SB60. http://www.saveourlicense.com/n_home.htm)
To: anniegetyourgun
Many of us on FR noted that the recall vote question itself was at the top of the candidate card (in our area you just used a black marking type pen and marked your ballot...old fashioned but duh, it works!) Some Freepers remarked they questioned themselves about whether they had voted on the recall question itself because it was at the top of the ballot.
My family members began calling one another first thing in the mornig - remember to vote on the recall itself. I think some people actually thought all you had to do was vote a replacement and not the recall question which would lead to this discrepency.
To: anniegetyourgun
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson