American vs Canadian efficiency

[DGPEAKE@AOL.COM]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
In a message dated 12/1/00 12:15:35 AM Pacific Standard Time, 
remoody@midstatesd.net writes:

> >
> > >   In the Fla. recount  Bush's lead is
> > >now down to 500 votes from 1,500.  So with 10,000 votes uncounted, (ones
> the
> > >machines rejected for whatever reasons)
> >
> > Those ballots were counted twice by machine, and votes for other offices
> > recorded.  Many had no vote for president.  I submit that, had there been
> > the choice, "non-of-the-above" would have won by a landslide.
> > Conrad Hoffsommer
> 
> With a only 500 vote difference and 10,000 votes (I think this is only two
> counties) unable to be counted by machine what is the big deal about
> counting them by humans?  But if not counted manually it will ever be on the
> minds of millions, did Bush really win?  Bush could have said, "count those
> votes, if I am to win it must be clear and decisive".  It would take a very
> bold leader to say this but what else can an effective "moral" leader say?
> By opposing recounts he appears to be impeding the democratic process thus
> begging the question; "Is he afraid to face the truth"?
> 
> >I submit that, had there been
> > the choice, "non-of-the-above" would have won by a landslide.
> 
> 
> There is no need for "non of the above" to be on ballots because that is
> exactly the vote of those who do not show up at  the polls.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > The whole election will be a moot point, anyway.  Both houses are pretty
> > evenly divided, and now extremely polarized by this post-election
> campaign.
> > Whoever wins will never be able to lead a gridlocked congress.
> > Conrad,
> 
> 
> IF the perception prevails that the election was finally won fair and square
> then I think the country will be behind the President.  The US Supreme Court
> is supposed to rule tomorrow.  They can say it is up the the States to
> control the elections, or they can say no law,  person or process can impede
> the casting  or the counting of ballots.  ---ric
> 




> The votes have been counted, 2-3 times and Bush is still ahead. Those 10,000 
> undervotes you mention, why count them? How can a manual count determine 
> the voters intent? Maybe the voter did not like either candidate and left 
> it blank. I would not want someone to change my ballot if I left it blank. 
> And the more the ballots are handled, the more problems occur, like 
> accidentally punching out a chad. Plus there is no precident on how to do a 
> manual recount. How can it be fair from county to county, when they make up 
> the rules as they go? And this is democracy?



   Sorry, but if I were Bush, I would object to such tactics as well.

   I will be glad when this is settled and pianos become to main focus.


  Dave Peake, RPT
  Portland Chapter
  Oregon City, OR
  www.davespianoworks.locality.com

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/pianotech.php/attachments/13/15/0d/37/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--