Posted on 11/11/2001 3:00:48 PM PST by Sonar5
Gore edged ahead of Bush under all the scenarios for counting all undervotes and overvotes statewide... WORLD EXCLUSIVE: BIG MEDIA RECOUNT RESULTS REVEALED
You can Freep, er I mean vote HERE. Vote early and often, just like the democRATS do!
Published Friday, May 11, 2001
`OVERVOTES' LEANED TO GORE
But to win, he needed help of dimpled ballots
BY MARTIN MERZER
mmerzer@herald.com
Democrat Al Gore might be president today if Florida's ``overvotes'' had been examined and counted -- but only if dimples on ``undervote'' ballots were accepted as valid votes, the first statewide review of overvotes shows.
Republican George W. Bush still would have prevailed -- even with the overvotes tabulated -- if undervotes had been counted under more restrictive standards, the review indicates.
The review, conducted by The Herald, its parent company, Knight Ridder, USA Today and several other newspapers, also shows that Gore's name was marked on overvotes far more often than Bush's name -- fodder for Democrats who insist that most Floridians intended to vote for Gore. Overvotes are ballots rejected by counting machines because they show more than one vote for president. Undervotes are ballots without presidential votes detected by counting machines.
The findings produce an ambiguous conclusion to an unprecedented effort to examine more than 176,000 untabulated ballots in Florida's disputed presidential election.
......... Continued at the link below.......
http://www.miami.com/herald/special/news/flacount/docs/068716.htm
ROFL! You really can vote over and over and over! Just hit the back button!
I think the media needed something exciting to sell since the War On Terrorism is going too slow for their taste.
The delusional RATS are notorious for not believing in absolutes and the rule of law. IMO, it's hypocritical of them to even attempt to identify what's 'right'.
cuz they can't beat anything else....
or can they... Audio
When we are talking about Votes (=a legal fiction, created by society through its laws), then yes I am a "social-constructivist", I suppose.
The Secretary of State has the final say so. It doesn't follow that she can't get it wrong.
As long as she does it legally, it does.
Now if she were to say "I decided a seven-day deadline was too long - get those vote tallies in within 37.37 hours", she would get it wrong. Or if she said, "Do not include the votes of any black people in your final tallies". Or if she said "Add the number 538 to your final tally for Mr. Gore." Or if she said "crack a raw egg onto each ballot and if the yoke slides to the left, count it for Mr. Gore; if the yoke slides to the right, count it for Mr. Bush."
So you see there are plenty of ways in which she could have "gotten it wrong". But as long as she follows the law as it was written before Election Day, there is no "getting it wrong". The term "wrong" doesn't even make sense; it does not apply to this situation.
Once again, we are talking about Votes here, which are legal fictions created by the actions of society through laws in the first place. The only question of importance is, Who got more Votes (not "ballots")? To discover the answer to this we have no choice but to appeal to the Laws which create those things known as Votes. Just looking at ballots isn't enough. One must look at those ballots in accordance with Election Laws. This was already done and cannot be repeated (you know, because of that little thing known as a "deadline").
Pray for President Bush and the Truth!
They have another poll you should vote in too. "Should We Just 'Get Over It'?" You can vote HERE.
Yeah, they get a lot of practice voting 2-3 times per election. Even after death.
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.