> "S.J. Van Sickle" wrote:
> BTW, where do you suppose all those extra votes actually came from?
Some local reports are saying that crumpled, smeared and torn ballots were
not run through the computers the first time. It was only during the
recount that they are being manually entered if the machines wouldn't read
them.
Another reported source of votes is write-in votes. Apparently, no one
counted write-in votes because 95% of ballots had punched a pre-printed
candidate (meaning that no write-ins could win anyway). During the recount,
they are actually counting write-ins for Bush and Gore which add more votes
that were not counted the first time.
I am concerned at how inaccurate the vote was until we started the recount.
It is disturbing that a careful recount should take so much longer than the
first count, and should come up with different numbers. We need a margin of
error on elections. Who will believe Bush really won by exactly 229 votes
when there are so many more errors than that. We really don't have any idea
who won this election!
-- Harvey Newstrom, Security Testing Manager, Fiderus Phone:321-676-4894 Tollfree:866-FIDERUS Mobile:321-258-4809 FAX:321-676-5707 Pager:866-786-1001 or mailto:pager@HarveyNewstrom.com Web: http://HarveyNewstrom.com or http://Fiderus.com Emergency 24 hour response: 1-877-595-8491
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:20 MDT