A hand recount is MORE accurate than the machines. That's why they do it everywhere the machines are used when a race is very close. It is standard operating procedure all over the country for very close machine-counted races. That's right - a hand count may not be perfect. But it is more accurate than the machines. That's especially true when the recount is monitored by both parties like was happening before it was cut off in Florida.And, a hand count of all of Florida would have resulted in a victory for ...Bush.For example, if Florida's 67 counties had carried out the hand recount of disputed ballots ordered by the Florida court on Dec. 8, applying the standards that election officials said they would have used, Mr. Bush would have emerged the victor by 493 votes. Florida officials had begun such a recount the next day, but the effort was halted that afternoon when the United States Supreme Court ruled in a 5-to-4 vote that a statewide recount using varying standards threatened "irreparable harm" to Mr. Bush.http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/12/politics/12VOTE.html?ex=1088395200&en=c182e5018e19181d&ei=5070Or, if Gore had gotten a count of the undervotes of his four hand picked counties, the winner would have been ...Bush.In a finding rich with irony, the results show that even if Mr. Gore had succeeded in his effort to force recounts of undervotes in the four Democratic counties, Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Volusia, he still would have lost, although by 225 votes rather than 537. An approach Mr. Gore and his lawyers rejected as impractical — a statewide recount — could have produced enough votes to tilt the election his way, no matter what standard was chosen to judge voter intent. Any logical, sane, fair way of counting the votes in Florida, by hand or machine, would have resulted in a win by ...Bush.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. M