Gore's approval rating back up

[veryape]

to 60%,up from only 40%. I guess these addresses to the nation are working. I got this information from CBS.

CBS

 

[Moonbeam]

Yup, Florida is starting to smell. It don't look good that only the Republican ballot petitions were fixed and the Demo ones were allowed to stack up or were destroyed. In Martin county, the ammenders took the applications home without stating how many they toor or returned. If the precident of two prior elections holds, all absentee ballots in one county, 15000 will be tossed. Gore will win by 5000 votes, which will mean the legal certification will have to be ammended and the legeslature won't be able to appoint new electors because the election was certified. It's looking like Gore got screwed in Florida and the people don't like it.

 

[veryape]

I agree Moonbeam. A lot of funny stuff occured in Florida,and I believe its all starting to surface,just in time.

 

[Fathom5]

Link please.

 

[Digobick]

LOL, I want some of what you two are smoking!

 

[ToBeMe]

I guess none of it really matters anymore......FL Legislature will assign the Electors and then Gore will challenge the Constitution in the USSC. This will never end! Colin Powell may well swing it over to Bush in majority though. He is more respected than either of these two and their "teams"! If he gets on TV like they want him to and makes a speech for Bush.......admitt it or not, that could well make a difference IMHO!

 

[Russ]

He's right, Gore's approval rating is way up in the poll he's siting. It was a random nationwide sampling of homeless drunks. It has an error factor of +/- 100%.

Russ, NCNE

 

[Moonbeam]

Here's a link.

 

[ToBeMe]

Well, it is higher anyway! A lot of nice articles there.......begs the question, do you think Mr. Gore will challenge the Constitution if FL Leg. does the expected and gives it to Bush? It would be his only logical recourse but, a highly risky one......

 

[AndrewR]

<< But Bush attorney Barry Richard subsequently did address the matter, noting that &quot;the challenge doesn't involve ballots -- it involves applications for absentee ballots. Under Florida law, any person can assist a voter in filling out an application for an absentee ballot.&quot; What happened in Goard's office was &quot;perfectly lawful,&quot; Richard said. >>



No one has questioned the validity of the ballots themselves -- the votes are not determined by a judge, for instance. This only involves the APPLICATION, and as I understand is basically a voter number from party lists.

Must....grasp....straws,....election....has....not....returned....appropriate....result....

 

[Russ]

Moonbeam,

Thanks for the link to Salon Magazine. They've always been my favorite source for accurate, unbiased information.

Russ, NCNE

 

[veryape]

Whatever Russ. Can you ever have a normal conversation without trying to anger the opposition into an insult throwing competition? All I said was the truth and automatically,drunks and homeless people are those polled. Just shows where you stand.

 

[Moving Target]

How can his approval rating be up, my god. People actually approve of his crap.

What a HUGE waste of our tax dollars, thanks alot AL GORE!!!

 

This poll needs a recount.

 

[veryape]

Heres you link.

CBS

 

[ManSnake]

For those of you who still claims that machines counts are more accurate than manual counts, think again! It was people who invented machines! How can one's invention be smarter than the inventor?

 

[AgGolfer]

It's not exactly that it is smarter, there is just a greater margin for human error

 

[ride525]

Actually, even the machine's inventor said manual counts were more accurate.

 

[Xede]

&quot;Accurate&quot; in the sense that a human being can interpret a less than ideally punched ballot better than a machine can.

But, any mistakes made by a machine should be evenly distributed--the machine has no political affiliation. When you open up the process to human judgment, you introduce an element of subjectivity that doesn't belong in an election, as well as all the crap that's gone on about what does and does not constitute a valid vote.

Unless a particular voting machine has been shown to have malfunctioned (in which case that machine's results should be manually counted or just processed by a functioning machine), machine counts are ALWAYS going to be &quot;fairer&quot; and more objective than manual counts.

 

[Valnir]

How is a manual recount more accurate when the final word comes to 3 bias people, normally consisting of 2 or 3 from 1 party and 1 or 0 from the other party??

God lord, when a person takes a ballot BENDS it (*after 3 observers and a canvasing board member tell's her not too*) and sees a spec of light come through the preforation, then the board votes 2 to 1 it's a vote for Gore, how exactly is that more accurate??

When the question of whether or not a voter intended to vote for somewhere is left in the hands of 3 bias people, the chances of error is greatly increased.

It's just funny that we have lived with the fact that every election 1-2% of the voter's choose not to vote for the President and 2-3% just screw up (*be it by punching 2 wholes, or not taking a second to make sure they voted correctly*), but it's only this election we decide that some of these 4 million ballots deserve to be looked at closer.

 

[BoberFett]

ride

Statistcally speaking, a machine will make the same number of errors on both sides. A manual count without bias is more accurate. Only a machine is without bias. It will screw up the results and not care.

 

[ride525]

Human bias could be a factor....but the machines miss ballots that are NOT punched all the way through....

(I'm not sure we will ever REALLY KNOW who had the most votes in Florida. The numbers are just so close, and so many votes in question, by both sides.)

 

[zippy]

You think that people at that are counting votes are biased? Well, sure they are, but are they allowed to let it affect their counting? No. Not with a representative of each of the two major parties at their hip checking each vote along with them.

 

[Valnir]

With no such thing as a standard, the final say on whether or not something is a vote is the board. The example I gave came from the tape recording of the Broward recount. (*played on Foxnews, since it's the only station not actively pulling for Gore*)

I am sorry but the these boards will screw up a hell of a lot more than the machines when trying to figure out voter intent.

There is no excuse for the voter not to take the responsiblity to make sure they didn't make a mistake. The only people who have any reason to make mistakes are the people who can't read or speak English. Everyone else has no excuse for not taking the time to double check.