It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Washington State Democrats Want Hand Recount

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:01 PM
link   
seattletimes.nwsource.com...

Democrats want hand recount of Washingtin State Election. Given the closeness of the election, and the fact that Rossi is a shady character, I say hand recount is in order.

Edited: Wrong Link

[edit on 1-12-2004 by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf]




posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:09 PM
link   
I don't know why people think a "hand-recount" is accurate.

The first town to vote in America each election has like 27 voters.

They had to hand count 3 TIMES before the counters agreed on how many votes each candidate got this year.

human error will always exceed machine error.

take a look at Ukraine.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:26 PM
link   
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.

This election was VERY close, so they say, and given the fact that Rossi is a crook, I think its better to keep counting and look for possible inconsistancies.

I really dont think people here in Washington want a shady bastard like Rossi in office,m especially given the president we have.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Is Rossi "shady" or a "crook" because he is Republican?

I just don't understand unfounded slander such as that. Was he tried and convicted somewhere? Seems more like personal bias than actual truth.

There is a new motto for the Politics Forum. Deny Bias.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:48 PM
link   

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.



The people should do everything necessary to ensure the count was right. I, for one, will not waste my time voting ever again, as long as those rigged, paperless machines are used. THEY elected Bush, the people DIDN'T!



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:49 PM
link   
Why have they left it so late

wouldnt of it been better to have a recount like afew days after the result?



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 12:56 PM
link   
ECK...you are delusional.

Even your buddy Michael Moore admits GW won fair and square.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 01:18 PM
link   

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?


They have been counting and recounting the whole time. The did the initial count and then a costly machine count. No vote has ever been changed by a recount, that is a fact. The Democrats want to find flaws somewhere though because the loss is only like 40-some votes (closest ever).

Now the hand recount is the option now but it costs $700, 000. The Democrats are trying to raise the money or they might pay for a partial recount of select areas to see if they can prove errors.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 02:37 PM
link   
The first total tally of ballots had rossi winning by 247 votes, because it was so close, they did a recount that had an outcome favoring rossi by 43 votes. I dont blame gregoire for wanting a hand recount, 204 votes moved into her favor with the last re count. I for one dont want rossi in office, and hope that somehow gregoire will take it.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 02:39 PM
link   
And if they have anothe rrecount it will probably move back into Rossi's favor.

The point is, hand recounts are UNRELIABLE.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Wasn't a "recount" already done Skadi?

From:
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.....




seekerof



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 03:17 PM
link   
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 there has been no recount.

Misinformation Central again.



posted on Dec, 1 2004 @ 06:45 PM
link   
Hmmmm I can't seem to "edit" what has happened to us in the past two hours?



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.




Adds from www.boston.com :

"Thousands of ballots were mistakenly double-counted in Sandusky County, Ohio; Sarpy County, Neb.; and Grays Harbor County, Wash. Democrats in Washington must decide by Friday whether to seek a second recount in the closest governor's race in state history. One recount has been held, reducing Republican Dino Rossi's 261-vote lead to 42 votes over Democrat Christine Gregoire."


Seems like a dog's breakfast, worth a second recount to see how many times they can get it wrong.

There is no trace of democracy left in some quarters. How can you trust a result?




*Oh. The edit button is miraculously restored. More fun than a pre-programmed Diebold machine. Can anyone audit all that? *

[edit on 1-12-2004 by MaskedAvatar]



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Wasn't a "recount" already done Skadi?

From:
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.....




seekerof


because after a few recounts, Seekerof, the results tend to be different each time. And there is the issue of many military and absentee ballots as well.


We want a recount again because of the mixed and suspicous results.



posted on Dec, 2 2004 @ 08:26 PM
link   
I can understand the desire for a recount, or even an accurate recount in light of the circumstances. That's a tight race!

Still, I am reminded of Florida again, where the attempt was made to supersede the established election process with court decisions.

And here we are again. I'm not saying the courts don't have their part to play, but the more courts are involved in selecting leaders, the less the citizens are.

At some point, the repeated absence of a wolf when the alarm is sounded will encourage the townsfolk not to care anymore.

At least, that's my opinion on the matter.



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 04:27 PM
link   

as posted my MaskedAvatar
Seems like a dog's breakfast, worth a second recount to see how many times they can get it wrong.


Despite how you play the word 'wrong,' there were two recounts to be had:
A hand count, which Gregoire lost by 261-156 (variable, depending on source) votes
and
A machine count, which Gregoire lost by 42.

Washington governor's race heading for two recounts



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.

Sound Politics

"Misinformation Central" out, k?


seekerof



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 04:35 PM
link   
You are often critical of the sources used by other members. On a topic to do with George W Bush and his middle fingered salutes, you labelled other members as being "desperate" in their choice of sources.

But that quote from your own current source speaks volumes.

Roll on, recount. Let's use a credible source that just states the facts and the results!



posted on Dec, 4 2004 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Lack of your own sources to counter, are you still insisting/believing that their have not been two different recounts (hand and machine)? As such, two recounts are not good enough? Yes, yes, let the third recount take place, when the 'price' for said recount is paid. BTW, you contributed to the third "recount" fund, or you just countering to be countering, as par?




seekerof

[edit on 4-12-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Dec, 12 2004 @ 09:15 PM
link   
Comment by Rossi:


"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."

Rossi discusses state budget in MV



seekerof



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join