Some people screwed up their votes in Palm Beach. People, of course, screw stuff up every day.

Now, the argument is that these people were confused by the ballot and thus did not vote correctly. So we should give them another chance to exercise their sacred right to vote and be counted. This time they will take their right to vote very seriously, mark the ballot very carefully, and get their vote correct.

But I wonder, if their right to vote and be heard is so sacred that we as a nation may be willing to let a small group of people (who could not figure out their ballot) singlehandedly choose the next US President, why then did NOT those very same people take all due care and diligence with their sacred right to vote to begin with? Afterall, were they not at that time voting for the next US President? Were they not in fact exercising their sacred right to vote carelessly, or without the solemnity that the occasion calls for?

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), November 10, 2000

Answers

UD- Years ago (seems like a different lifetime now), I was very much an active liberal Democrat, very idealistic, and went so far as to be involved as a northern in voter registration drives in the south, Selma (ALA) to be specific.

Now when I look at the likes of Jesse Jackson in Florida protesting the "disenfranchisment" (sp?) of voters, I saw myself almost 40 years ago. Now when I see this kind of activity (Jesse Jackson), my stomach churns.

UK, I agree with your thoughts here, and can see that mistakes in the exercise of voting (wrongly or rightly) does not mean a "second chance." No amount of protesting or legal manuevering can convince me that a voter (in Florida) must be given a second chance. And I trust the legal syatem in Florida will agree. If they don't, a pandora box is open, and many voters across the country could demand (I think) a second chance also.

Did you happen to catch the clip from the Jay Leno show? JL was talking about the recount going on in Florida, and how the DNC is sending lawyers to Florida...then he breaks in with a newsreel clip of paratroopers falling from air transports. Lawyers to the rescue!

-- Jay Bab (here@home.com), November 10, 2000.

According to the prevailing doctrine of "fairness", everyone in the entire country should be permitted to vote again. After all, any one of us may have misunderstood our ballot. The losing party should be permitted to take the result back to court for just any unfairness, possible fraud, mistake, or misunderstanding, and we all do it over again. Over the course of time, perfection being impossible, we should probably become efficient enough to have a new vote every week. Of course, Hell will freeze over before we have a PERFECT election where NOBODY made any mistakes at all, but the eternal weekly-vote enterprise should be fun. For as long as the country lasts without a President, of course.

Now back to reality. As they say in the military, any decision should be firm and prompt. If it's correct, so much the better, but whoever hesitates is lost. Hey, people, this election was a TIE, within our ability to measure these things. We need a decision definitely and quickly. Whoever wins doesn't matter. A definite winner RIGHT NOW matters. A contested winner is no winner, and a winner later by default is no winner. The system has spoken.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), November 10, 2000.

Isn't there some identification on the ballots of the person who punched them? If so, the vote would not need to be redone. Just contact the people who punched 2 holes and ask them who they intended to vote for.

Since Gore was listed second on the left hand side, these votes would be mostly in his favor. Most people punched the second hole, then realized it was for Buchanan, so they punched the third, which was for Gore.

Hard to believe the election would come down to a bad ballot design, but just a few thousand of the disqualified ballots make the difference in getting the president we voted for.

I wonder how Shrub would feel if the situation were reversed and his name was second on the list, to be confused with Buchanan.

-- (let.the.truth@be.known), November 10, 2000.

November 10, 2000

Dems Called Fla. Voters About Ballots

by THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Faced with a cliffhanger election, the Democratic Party directed a telemarketing firm on Election Night to begin calling thousands of voters in Palm Beach, Fla., to raise questions about a disputed ballot and urge them to contact local election officials.

The Democratic National Committee paid Texas-based TeleQuest to make the calls Tuesday night -- while polls were still open -- alerting voters in the heavily Democratic enclave in Florida of possible confusion with the ballots they cast.

''Some voters have encountered a problem today with punch card ballots in Palm Beach County,'' the script for the call said. ``These voters have said that they believe that they accidentally punched the wrong hole for the incorrect candidate.''

''If you have already voted and think you may have punched the wrong hole for the incorrect candidate, you should return to the polls and request that the election officials write down your name so that this problem can be fixed,'' the script said.

The firm took the names and numbers of voters who said they may have cast an errant ballot, providing the Democratic Party a list of about 2,400 voters in the county who thought they may have misvoted.

If voters were about to go to the polls, the script called for the caller to instruct them to ``be sure to punch Number 5 for Gore- Lieberman'' and ``do NOT punch any other number as you might end up voting for someone else by mistake.''

Democratic National Committee spokeswoman Jenny Backus said the party had been making traditional get-out-the-vote calls all over the country Tuesday, but shifted gears in Palm Beach after hearing local news reports about possible voter confusion.

''Once we were informed by local news accounts of the magnitude of the problem with confusion about the ballot, we shifted our scripts to make sure that people who were voting were aware of the questions and confusion around the ballot,'' she said.

The maneuver indicates that long before Americans awoke to the reality of the Florida ballot dispute, Democrats were already mobilizing voters there. The concern has focused on Palm Beach, where 19,000 ballots were disqualified and hundreds of voters have said they mistakenly voted for Patrick Buchanan while trying to vote for Gore.

Within hours of the phone campaign, hundreds of Democratic voters had called election officials in Palm Beach to complain they may have been confused by the ballot and voted for the wrong candidate.

Some Palm Beach County voters have filed lawsuits seeking a new vote.

The outcome of the dispute is key because George W. Bush is leading Gore by a mere 327 votes after a statewide recount. The winner of Florida will lay claim to the electoral votes needed to become the nation's 43rd president.

The calls indicate that Democrats were concerned about Palm Beach problems even before they knew Florida's vote would end in a razor- thin margin, said American University political science professor Candice Nelson.

''To the extent there have been accusations that Democrats didn't cry foul until they realized Wednesday that Bush may have won, this cuts the other way,'' she said.

Nelson and other political and legal experts said the calls were perfectly legal but could have contributed to what appeared to most Americans to be a spontaneous explosion of concern in Florida the morning after the election.

''I think those kinds of calls make perfect sense,'' Nelson said. ''In terms of people getting riled up, it would be a tactic that might energize voters who might otherwise not have realized they may have mistakenly voted for the wrong candidate.''

One Florida Democrat said Republicans would take similar action had the tables been turned.

''They'd be fighting this thing tooth and nail for months and months,'' said Wayne Brewer, 45, of Juneau, Fla.

''They knew they ... lost, and now they want to win on an assumption,'' he said, speaking outside the government center in West Palm Beach.

Wade Scott, an account manager with TeleQuest, said Democratic Party officials contacted his company shortly before 6 p.m. EST Tuesday to make the calls.

With only an hour to go before Florida polls closed, his company mobilized all of its telemarketers to make some 5,000 calls in less than 45 minutes, Scott said.

''It was a very short burst of calling for our industry,'' Scott said. He said only about 100 of the voters in Palm Beach it contacted hadn't voted, and about 2,400 felt they may have made a mistake on the ballot.

-- they did try (to@warn.folks), November 10, 2000.

"But I wonder, if ...we as a nation may be willing to let a small group of people (who could not figure out their ballot) singlehandedly choose the next president,"

This bothered me too. This may be unplesant or even unkind but I'm uncomfortable that people this careless would hold the keys to the kingdom. I know we don't and shouldn't have any type of criteria screening otherwise eligible people from the polls but having the voting process itself do the screening doesn't bother me.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), November 10, 2000.

With only an hour to go before Florida polls closed, his company mobilized all of its telemarketers to make some 5,000 calls in less than 45 minutes, Scott said.

''It was a very short burst of calling for our industry,'' Scott said. He said only about 100 of the voters in Palm Beach it contacted hadn't voted, and about 2,400 felt they may have made a mistake on the ballot.

If this sample is representitive of the whole county, then it appears that almost 50% of all voters made an error in their votes, and not just the people who may have voted for Buchanan. This wold indicate that around half of those who did vote for Gore actually intended to vote for someone else (perhaps Bush or Nader), and around half of those who voted for Bush actually intended to vote for either Gore or Buchanan.

Surely the only thing to do is to let the vote stand AS IS and ignore any unintended errors.

-- Malcolm Taylor (taylorm@es.co.nz), November 10, 2000.

A ballot, deampt up. I can see their confusion. It was ordained. Count they, many times, the Winner is Bush, for the Military Power, this nation claims. My Story, and I am Sticking.

-- How close (an@enconter.com), November 10, 2000.

This may be unplesant or even unkind but I'm uncomfortable that people this careless would hold the keys to the kingdom.

I hate to tell you this but - generally speaking - Citizen John/Mary has the brainpower of a potato. Trust me, I've dealt with the General Public for long enough to know that if there's a way for them to screw up, they will, and they'll never think twice about it. Tra-la-la-la-laaaaaa. I often wonder how some people can even make it through the day, they're THAT stooooopid. The Dumbing Down of America is alive and well, and Florida represents a prime example of how insidious it's become.

-- People (Are@Dumb.com), November 11, 2000.

If an accurate accounting is what we're after, then make ALL the States do a recount by hand. That's the only way to stop all the bickering and lawsuits. Now Bush is threatening to force a recount in the States where he narrowly lost. This shit is never gonna' end...it's like that damned Elian story.

-- Enough (Is@Enough.com), November 11, 2000.

"Now Bush is threatening to force a recount in the States where he narrowly lost."

The rule that is in place is a good one... recount if it is within 1/2%?

Bush can threaten all he wants, but states should not be required to recount unless it falls within the required narrow margin.

-- (shrub@is.crybaby), November 11, 2000.