Vote

[MU82]

If my side is corrupt, say it.

Hehe ... "your" side ... you're killing us, cubbiechicos.

      " Looks like Scott should have fired her in 2016"


   you do realize that if scott were to even think about this, he would be a racist of course, have to enter into the federal witness protection plan...and miss the packer-dolphin game

And now here comes Boo-Boo with his "humorous" pointing out of reverse racism ... which as everybody from "a certain side" knows is worse than actual racism.

Good stuff!

[WarriorDad]

You're a poor historian Cheekz. The 5-4 decision is the one that mattered because rather than provide a remedy to do a proper recount, the Court ended the whole thing altogether. It was overtly political and is commonly understood to be one of the worst-reasoned decisions in SCOTUS history (so much so that even SCOTUS itself limited the application of law to only that particular order, i.e. no stare decisis, which is unusual and betrayed an extraordinary lack of confidence in the soundness of its own decision). It was not a high-water mark for my Republican Party. Shameful, really.

7-2 ended the improper remedy by the Florida Supreme Court.  Violated the equal protection clause to have different standards used, thus violating those that voted in other parts of the state.  5-4 stopped it all BECAUSE of the faulty ruling of the Fla Supreme Court.  The 7-2 decision led to the 5-4 remedy.  If the Florida Supreme Court hadn't created new election law (only a state legislature can do this, not the judiciary) then the second decision isn't even necessary.

All post analysis says Bush wins anyway based on what Gore sued on, so why is this even a thing for our side 18 years later? We lost. 

AP: A vote-by-vote review of untallied ballots in the 2000 Florida presidential election indicates George W. Bush would have narrowly prevailed in the partial recounts sought by Al Gore, but Gore might have reversed the outcome – by the barest of margins – had he pursued and gained a complete statewide recount.

Palm Beach Post: Al Gore was doomed. He couldn't have caught George W. Bush even if his two best chances for an official recount had played out.

USA Today: George W. Bush would have won a hand recount of all disputed ballots in Florida's presidential election if the most widely accepted standard for judging votes had been applied.

moveon

[WarriorDad]

      " Looks like Scott should have fired her in 2016"


   you do realize that if scott were to even think about this, he would be a racist of course, have to enter into the federal witness protection plan...and miss the packer-dolphin game

Stop with the racial stuff.  Someone is either competent or not.  She is not competent. 

[Babybluejeans]

7-2 ended the improper remedy by the Florida Supreme Court.  Violated the equal protection clause to have different standards used, thus violating those that voted in other parts of the state.  5-4 stopped it all BECAUSE of the faulty ruling of the Fla Supreme Court.  The 7-2 decision led to the 5-4 remedy.  If the Florida Supreme Court hadn't created new election law (only a state legislature can do this, not the judiciary) then the second decision isn't even necessary.

All post analysis says Bush wins anyway based on what Gore sued on, so why is this even a thing for our side 18 years later? We lost. 

AP: A vote-by-vote review of untallied ballots in the 2000 Florida presidential election indicates George W. Bush would have narrowly prevailed in the partial recounts sought by Al Gore, but Gore might have reversed the outcome – by the barest of margins – had he pursued and gained a complete statewide recount.

Palm Beach Post: Al Gore was doomed. He couldn't have caught George W. Bush even if his two best chances for an official recount had played out.

USA Today: George W. Bush would have won a hand recount of all disputed ballots in Florida's presidential election if the most widely accepted standard for judging votes had been applied.

moveon

Oh no, I wasn't having a debate about this, simply pointing out that you were (and are) wrong about the meaning of the cases. Your side lost, and in a different way, so did my Republican Party.

[rocket surgeon]

Stop with the racial stuff.  Someone is either competent or not.  She is not competent.

you are absolutely correct-the american people and floridians deserve better than this.  not being racial.  being incredibly honest and unfortunately, correct as well.  tried to lighten it up with a little jocularity, but whatever...

[Mutaman]

All post analysis says Bush wins anyway based on what Gore sued on, so why is this even a thing for our side 18 years later? We lost. 

"These tallies conducted by the NORC consortium are caveated with the statement: "But no study of this type can accurately recreate Election Day 2000 or predict what might have emerged from individual battles over more than 6 million votes in Florida's 67 counties."

Wiki

[Herman Cain]

Broward and Palm Beach counties do it the old fashioned Chicago/Cook County way - they wait for the rest of the state to count their ballots, see how many votes they need and try to "produce" them.

In the 1941 Senate  primary election Lydon Johnson paid off the people in charge . However he did not win. After the election he asked what happened and he was told, he only paid for a certain amount of votes. That next time he needed to pay to actually win.

When the 1948 election rolled around he paid the amount necessary to win.

The tradition of "finding votes" is alive and well.

[GGGG]

7-2 ended the improper remedy by the Florida Supreme Court.  Violated the equal protection clause to have different standards used, thus violating those that voted in other parts of the state.  5-4 stopped it all BECAUSE of the faulty ruling of the Fla Supreme Court.  The 7-2 decision led to the 5-4 remedy.  If the Florida Supreme Court hadn't created new election law (only a state legislature can do this, not the judiciary) then the second decision isn't even necessary.

You're wrong because you are misinterpreting it. 

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Your memory sucks Chicos. 5-4.

And Sandra Day O'Connor had told everyone previously that she wanted to retire, but would only do so if there was a Republican President in office to pick a replacement for her seat, so she made cast the deciding vote to halt the recount.

She later regretted it.  For years she defended the decision, but then slowly changed her position.  She didn't like what the party morphed into after 2000 and gradually moved away from the Republican party.  In later years she said the SC should never have taken the case. Shouldn't have been an "activist judge" Sandy!

[vogue65]

And Sandra Day O'Connor had told everyone previously that she wanted to retire, but would only do so if there was a Republican President in office to pick a replacement for her seat, so she made cast the deciding vote to halt the recount.

She later regretted it.  For years she defended the decision, but then slowly changed her position.  She didn't like what the party morphed into after 2000 and gradually moved away from the Republican party.  In later years she said the SC should never have taken the case. Shouldn't have been an "activist judge" Sandy!

Wow, who are you T-34?  Right on and said so beautifully.  Could not have come close to your eloquence.  Not argumentative, political or controversial, just very well presented and factual.  Thank you.

[rocket surgeon]

Wow, who are you T-34?  Right on and said so beautifully.  Could not have come close to your eloquence.  Not argumentative, political or controversial, just very well presented and factual.  Thank you.

   maybe so, except for the "activist" part.  don't you guys prefer the term "maverick"

the bigger question here is should the supreme court have been involved at all?  if so,  the ruling would have the appearance of being politically biased regardless of which decision was made. with the supreme court engaged, the ruling had to be made based on what was right and proper in accordance with our constitution.  so if they would have voted 5-4 to continue the recount or ipso facto hand the victory over to algore, would that be considered "activist"? 

   weren't they ruling on whether or not the florida supreme court(7-2 decision) got it right or not?  in other words, what warrior daddy was saying-florida violated the process-yes or no?  if the supreme court says yes,  is o'conner, because she cast the deciding vote, an activist?   it's funny the other 4 get off scott-free.

yes i realize justice o'cconner has expressed some regrets, but if we would not have known anything of these,  we are left to our own suspicions and biases.  but because she verbalized her thoughts in retrospect, it gives one side the ongoing fodder it needs to keep the debate open.  bottom line, justice o'conner needs to "man-up" and respect the decision she made under the circumstances at the time.  to take an event out of it's time and place, one can always 2nd guess it;  just be mindful of the revisionism that usually follows

[dgies9156]

As a new Floridian, I'm stunned this is still a problem. I just don't get it. This ain't Illinois -- or so I thought until this week!

I voted early in Indian River County. Went to the County Library in Downtown Vero Beach. I showed a driver's license, was verified to vote, told what my precient was and then given a ballot. I went into a private space, marked my ballot (no hanging chads!), put it into a sleeve and carried it over to a scanner, which registered my vote. I then went home.

In our county, we verify eligibility by examining the voting rolls and reviewing a driver's license or other valid picture identification issued by either the State of Florida or the federal government (i.e., a passport). Incidentally, Florida scans a driver's license to get the number and assure that one's identity has been checked. I signed for my ballot but that was electronic and an acknowledgement that I received a ballot.

Given all of this, it seems inconceivable that we could have "provisional" ballots. That's why when we read about the screw-ups in Broward and Palm Beach Counties, we just shook our heads. The Senate and Governor's races were highly emotional and extremely close and while it is easy to say "screw-up," one has to wonder whether the ghosts of Lyndon Johnson and Richard J. Daley went south for eternity.

P.S. -- Apparently, as Ms. Dgies points out, this whole provisional ballot mess was caused by a 2011 law that allowed people who had moved within the state to cast a "provisional" ballot while their eligibility was checked or allowed people who forgot their ID to vote provisionally while their eligibility was further checked. Well, the latter provision could only happen in Florida, also known as God's Waiting Room!

[GGGG]

I expect reasonably intelligent people to read up and educate themselves on why issues occur.  I don't have much use for people, when they witness incompetence, to assume it is conspiracy. 

[Pakuni]

As a new Floridian, I'm stunned this is still a problem. I just don't get it. This ain't Illinois -- or so I thought until this week!

I voted early in Indian River County. Went to the County Library in Downtown Vero Beach. I showed a driver's license, was verified to vote, told what my precient was and then given a ballot. I went into a private space, marked my ballot (no hanging chads!), put it into a sleeve and carried it over to a scanner, which registered my vote. I then went home.

In our county, we verify eligibility by examining the voting rolls and reviewing a driver's license or other valid picture identification issued by either the State of Florida or the federal government (i.e., a passport). Incidentally, Florida scans a driver's license to get the number and assure that one's identity has been checked. I signed for my ballot but that was electronic and an acknowledgement that I received a ballot.

Given all of this, it seems inconceivable that we could have "provisional" ballots. That's why when we read about the screw-ups in Broward and Palm Beach Counties, we just shook our heads. The Senate and Governor's races were highly emotional and extremely close and while it is easy to say "screw-up," one has to wonder whether the ghosts of Lyndon Johnson and Richard J. Daley went south for eternity.

P.S. -- Apparently, as Ms. Dgies points out, this whole provisional ballot mess was caused by a 2011 law that allowed people who had moved within the state to cast a "provisional" ballot while their eligibility was checked or allowed people who forgot their ID to vote provisionally while their eligibility was further checked. Well, the latter provision could only happen in Florida, also known as God's Waiting Room!

Provisional ballots are allowed because there is no remedy for someone being improperly barred from voting. If, say, the election judge screws up, the disenfranchised person can't simply come back a few days later and try again. That right to vote in that election is denied forever. So they cast a ballot that remains in a sort of limbo until his or her eligibility can be determined.
How anyone would find this unusual or unreasonable, much less inconceivable, is beyond me.

[WarriorDad]

And Sandra Day O'Connor had told everyone previously that she wanted to retire, but would only do so if there was a Republican President in office to pick a replacement for her seat, so she made cast the deciding vote to halt the recount.

She later regretted it.  For years she defended the decision, but then slowly changed her position.  She didn't like what the party morphed into after 2000 and gradually moved away from the Republican party.  In later years she said the SC should never have taken the case. Shouldn't have been an "activist judge" Sandy!

Let's not overstate what she said.  She has doubt, she didn't say it was wrong.  Maybes.  Probably. Nothing definitive.




"It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue," O'Connor said during a talk Friday with the Tribune editorial board. "Maybe the court should have said, 'We're not going to take it, goodbye.'"

The case, she said, "stirred up the public" and "gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation."

"Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision," she said. "It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn't done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."

[WarriorDad]

I expect reasonably intelligent people to read up and educate themselves on why issues occur.  I don't have much use for people, when they witness incompetence, to assume it is conspiracy.

One has to ask if the incompetence is intentional.  Partisan. Those are important questions to ask.  One can understand why conspiracies come up when 80% to 90% of votes that are found are benefiting one side as reported today.  My guess is if the shoe was on the other foot and Beto was winning in Texas, we might have a different viewpoint.  Imagine the scenario right now in Georgia where one person lost, 5800 votes were "found" yesterday, over 85% of them for one person.  Those are the things that make people question what is going on.  No differently than my parents living through JFK and Nixon with Illinois voting.  Texas voting back then, also.

You're wrong because you are misinterpreting it.

Maybe I am, but this is a topic like others in the law where people can interpret things differently and still be solid with the law on their side. I may not agree with Scalia on most things, but would anyone say he was not an expert in the law? He said it was the correct decision and 7-2 the key decision.  Others agree and yet others will say differently and disagree.  The law is a funny thing like that, which is why decisions are rarely unanimous.

[WarriorDad]

In our county, we verify eligibility by examining the voting rolls and reviewing a driver's license or other valid picture identification issued by either the State of Florida or the federal government (i.e., a passport). Incidentally, Florida scans a driver's license to get the number and assure that one's identity has been checked. I signed for my ballot but that was electronic and an acknowledgement that I received a ballot.

It is quite peculiar that a bigger county, Miami-Dade can have all their stuff together and comply with the law, as well as the panhandle counties that were rocked only a few weeks ago by the Hurricane, but every time Broward and Palm have problems. 

That is why conspiracy theories start, when it is repetitive.  What's the old saying.  It isn't who is doing the voting, but who is doing the counting. 

The non-citizen votes that she wants counted, that's a bridge too far.  Now 22 votes that people are aware of officially. It's not the number, as it is small, its the fact that people are arguing they should be included at all because of their error. When do non-US citizens have the right to vote in state elections?  That is not right and to watch that argument be made is really something.

Washington Post, Miami Herald, all piling on her incompetence. 

[GGGG]

One has to ask if the incompetence is intentional.  Partisan. Those are important questions to ask.  One can understand why conspiracies come up when 80% to 90% of votes that are found are benefiting one side as reported today.  My guess is if the shoe was on the other foot and Beto was winning in Texas, we might have a different viewpoint.  Imagine the scenario right now in Georgia where one person lost, 5800 votes were "found" yesterday, over 85% of them for one person.  Those are the things that make people question what is going on.  No differently than my parents living through JFK and Nixon with Illinois voting.  Texas voting back then, also.

I expect people of all political persuasions to be smart, do research and seek understanding.  Not to just buy into the latest conspiracy.

As for your typical, wishy-washy "both sides" bullsh*t:

https://journalistsresource.org/studies/politics/polarization/conspiracy-theories-conservatives-liberals-knowledge-trust

[Pakuni]

It is quite peculiar that a bigger county, Miami-Dade can have all their stuff together and comply with the law, as well as the panhandle counties that were rocked only a few weeks ago by the Hurricane, but every time Broward and Palm have problems. 

That is why conspiracy theories start, when it is repetitive.  What's the old saying.  It isn't who is doing the voting, but who is doing the counting. 

The non-citizen votes that she wants counted, that's a bridge too far.  Now 22 votes that people are aware of officially. It's not the number, as it is small, its the fact that people are arguing they should be included at all because of their error. When do non-US citizens have the right to vote in state elections?  That is not right and to watch that argument be made is really something.

Washington Post, Miami Herald, all piling on her incompetence.

So wait ... is she incompetent, or is she the mastermind of a huge conspiracy to  rig elections in favor of Democrats all while under the eye of (largely) Republican state officials?
Can't have it both ways, guys.

Also, you're wrong about the non-citizen vote thing.

[forgetful]

One can understand why conspiracies come up when 80% to 90% of votes that are found are benefiting one side as reported today.  My guess is if the shoe was on the other foot and Beto was winning in Texas, we might have a different viewpoint.  Imagine the scenario right now in Georgia where one person lost, 5800 votes were "found" yesterday, over 85% of them for one person.

You point out something that is 100% fact.  Conspiracy theories come up, because people are unwilling or unable to simply look at data and facts and make a logical conclusion, but rather immediately craft a scenario that benefits their pre-held beliefs.

The votes are coming up 80-90% benefiting one side, because they are coming from districts that vote 80% democratic.  It is exactly what is expected based on the underlying data and facts.

[mu03eng]

So wait ... is she incompetent, or is she the mastermind of a huge conspiracy to  rig elections in favor of Democrats all while under the eye of (largely) Republican state officials?
Can't have it both ways, guys.

Also, you're wrong about the non-citizen vote thing.

Perfect application of Hanlon's Razor: Never ascribe to malfeasance what can be explained by incompetence.

Broward County is terrible at elections....full stop. No conspiracy.

[WarriorDad]

So wait ... is she incompetent, or is she the mastermind of a huge conspiracy to  rig elections in favor of Democrats all while under the eye of (largely) Republican state officials?
Can't have it both ways, guys.

Also, you're wrong about the non-citizen vote thing.

Didn't the judge rule against her only two days ago because there is no watchful eye?  That's the point, things done without canvassing boards or the overwatch you are stating. At least the way I read it.

I don't think I am wrong about the non-citizen thing, this comes from Miami Herald reporter Martin Vassolo says "Brenda Snipes says she recommends the canvassing board ACCEPT the mixed batch of 205 provisional ballots, including at least 20 illegal votes."  Nov. 10th

https://twitter.com/martindvassolo/status/1061290178298425344

[WarriorDad]

You point out something that is 100% fact.  Conspiracy theories come up, because people are unwilling or unable to simply look at data and facts and make a logical conclusion, but rather immediately craft a scenario that benefits their pre-held beliefs.

The votes are coming up 80-90% benefiting one side, because they are coming from districts that vote 80% democratic.  It is exactly what is expected based on the underlying data and facts.

Which is why the question comes up why is it those districts where votes are found?  Can you see why the conspiracy theories come up?  If Beto was winning Texas right now, and Cruz votes were found by the thousands 48 to 72 hours after the election and those votes were 88% for him, how would our side react?  Say those votes all magically happened to be in heavy GOP areas.

[forgetful]

Which is why the question comes up why is it those districts where votes are found?  Can you see why the conspiracy theories come up?  If Beto was winning Texas right now, and Cruz votes were found by the thousands 48 to 72 hours after the election and those votes were 88% for him, how would our side react?  Say those votes all magically happened to be in heavy GOP areas.

First, there is no "our side".  Quit that, it's ridiculous. 

Second, there are simple and obvious reasons for why those districts tend to have more problems.  It has to do with demographics, funding, tendency to have mail in votes, district infrastructure (again funding) and others.  In Broward county they also had more threats to deal with regarding cybersecurity, as they and their voting system has been targeted by Russian hackers.

[Pakuni]

Didn't the judge rule against her only two days ago because there is no watchful eye?  That's the point, things done without canvassing boards or the overwatch you are stating. At least the way I read it.

I don't think I am wrong about the non-citizen thing, this comes from Miami Herald reporter Martin Vassolo says "Brenda Snipes says she recommends the canvassing board ACCEPT the mixed batch of 205 provisional ballots, including at least 20 illegal votes."  Nov. 10th

https://twitter.com/martindvassolo/status/1061290178298425344

You're misinterpreting what's happening with those ballots. Because Snipes (or someone in her charge) is a dope who mixed a small number of illegal ballots with the other provisionals, and because the state refused to give her office time to separate them, she submitted them all in order to meet the deadline. Her thinking being not - as you claim -  "Let's count these non-citizen ballots," but rather, "Let's not throw out almost 185 potentially valid ballots because of 20 invalid ballots." In the unlikely event the count is such that those 20 ballots actually matter, there will be plenty of time after the fact to litigate that.
Make sense? This is a mess of Snipes' creating, to be sure, but it's not as you and the likes of Bretbart claim.