What A Shame.......Franken/Coleman Recount...

rsmith6621

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:14 AM
Original message

What A Shame.......Franken/Coleman Recount...

What a shame.....it took less than 24 hours to count the initial vote and two months to do a recount....something is wrong with this picture YA THINK!!!

I think that there needs to be a more efficient way to do recounts....what a disservice to the people of MN and to the USA in general to currently have 98 Senators eligible to vote. I think a way needs to be figured out that would have the recount complete and court challenges complete before the first day of congress.

This is a pathetic chapter in the American voting process.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

The Velveteen Ocelot

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:18 AM
Response to Original message

1. It takes awhile to hand-count 3 million ballots.

And isn't some method of hand-counting vs. unreliable, hackable machine counting what we wanted in the first place?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Bandit

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #1

12. Canada seems able to do it in a 24 hour period, more than just three million too.

:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ThomWV

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:20 AM
Response to Original message

2. The problem isn't with the recounts, its with the initial count. Make it paper and give them time

I do not need to see instant returns on MSNBC, I could wait a day or two to let them get it right the first time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemzRock

(824 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #2

3. When it's close you need accuracy over speed! n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DemzRock

(824 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #2

4. When it's close you need accuracy over speed! n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mugu

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #4

5. You can say that again. n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ThomWV

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #4

7. I'd say that you need accuracy over speed even if its not close, just ask Al Gore.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Clovis Sangrail

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:26 AM
Response to Original message

6. our entire voting process is pathetic and devoid of common sense

1) we should be using condorcet or IRV or something better

2) The contracts to provide voting machines (electronic or otherwise) are competitive bid
rather than being based on the most important aspect - integrity of the count.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Cornus

(720 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:40 AM
Response to Original message

8. Perfect example of why we need IRV. n/t

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TheCowsCameHome

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 08:55 AM
Response to Original message

9. I want every vote counted, even if it takes three months.

As painful as this was, think if Coleman had been declared the winner when he appeared to be the leader.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

randr

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 09:00 AM
Response to Original message

10. Some tell me how in the hell do they count all the money,

with all the different forms of transfer in millions upon million of places and machines, and get it right each and every day?
Same people make these machines and systems and they can not get less than a hundred million votes counted once every two years.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

global1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #10

13. That's An Excellent Point.....

same thing with Medicaid fraud - if we can monitor credit cards and get things right and find out when somebody is miss using a card - why can't we stop Medicaid fraud as well.

The technology is there for both voting and medicaid fraud - for some reasons - they just don't want to use it. Hmmmm - maybe because they want to scam the system?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Donald Ian Rankin

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Jan-07-09 09:02 AM
Response to Original message

11. Actually, I think that's a good approach.

Remember, all that matters is who wins, not by how much.

So doing a quick count first, and then doing a slower more accurate one if and only if the first one is within a (large) margin of error of a tie strikes me as a good way to get most of the results out fast but make sure that all of them are accurate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Tue May 07th 2024, 08:53 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.