It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Because its alot easier to actually catch fraud with hand counts, and you have living breathing people to see the ballots. Instead of a machine which is very falliable.
Originally posted by infinite
Why have they left it so late
wouldnt of it been better to have a recount like afew days after the result?
Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
Intersting link, Seekerof.
Can you now supply complete information about any recount that took place? Unfortunately "Murdoc's smarter brother", the reputable source in your link, is dealing in first count only, because according to that link there has been no recount.
Misinformation Central again.
Originally posted by Seekerof
Wasn't a "recount" already done Skadi?
November 19, 2004: WA Recount Spreadsheet
So let me guess here Skadi, apparanetly after having one recount already, those still not satisfied, like you and others, are asking for a re-recount? O....kie-dokie.....
as posted my MaskedAvatar
Seems like a dog's breakfast, worth a second recount to see how many times they can get it wrong.
We already have confidence that Rossi was elected. If Gregoire thinks that many residents of the state would seriously believe that a third count would somehow be less prone to errors and fraud than the preceding two counts, then she's smoking crack. The readers of this (unscientific) online poll at KING5 agree overwhelmingly.
"It's tough being Republican in this state," Rossi joked with the crowd of 75 - mostly Republicans - who filled the reception hall at Hawthorne Funeral Home and Memorial Park. "You have to win three times."