huh? International oversight of our election?

RickM · RickM's Garage

Is it just me or does this sound Effed Up........

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=655&ncid=655&e=3&u=/oneworld/20040811/wl_oneworld/4536916221092230054

ubiquity0 · 08-12-2004, 07:46 AM

Its pretty common for such oversight to be given for elections in third world countries, or fledgling democracies. The last presedential election here was a fiasco and an embarassment. How long did it take again to determine the winner?

RickM · RickM's Garage

And we can't trust ourselves to straighten things out? Apparently some think not. Pretty pathetic.

lendaddy · 08-12-2004, 07:56 AM

It is pathetic.

cowtown · 08-12-2004, 07:58 AM

Yeah, that's what we need - more languages, cultures, and interpretations of the law on Election Day.

That will let us cut right through the problems and straighten everything out.

PS - name an international body that can observe a US election without bias.

techweenie · techweenie's Garage

"Trust ourselves"?

Just the fake 'felon' list in Florida is enough to create distrust in the system. Tens of thousands of registered voters were misidentified as felons and it created huge confusion in the 2000 election. Many polling places found the 'felon list' so wildly inaccurate that they ignored it. In other places, legitimate voters were turned away. Nobody knows the total number of people who tried to vote & couldn't (probably not more than a few thousand, though).

Katherine Harris has consistently defended the system that disenfranchised voters.

When people protested the confusing ballot in West Palm Beach, nothing happened, and Pat Buchanan ended up with an estimated 2K votes apparently intended for Gore. Bush's eventual margin of victory in Florida was 155.

So yeah, if Florida is going to continue to be like a third world voting environment, I guess international oversight is a good idea.

rcecale · rcecale's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by ubiquity0
How long did it take again to determine the winner?

Actually, the winner was determined the following day, after the votes were counted. The loser (that would be Al Gore) just wouldn't concede.

Randy

cowtown · 08-12-2004, 08:10 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by techweenie
"Trust ourselves"?
...
So yeah, if Florida is going to continue to be like a third world voting environment, I guess international oversight is a good idea.

So,

--Which international body do you propose for oversight?

--What authority should they have?

Let's get specific.

Rot 911 · 08-12-2004, 08:11 AM

Can we change these numbers here?
Can we change them, calm my fears?
What do you mean, George Dubya won?
This is not fair this is not fun.
Let's count them upside down this time.
Let's count until the state is mine
I will not let this VOTE count stand!
I do not like it, GORE I am!

RickM · RickM's Garage

I didn't want to bring up the sad state of voting integrity in FLA...but since you did....

I still think it's pathetic and opens us up for unneeded and additional BS. We need the oversight of a 55 nation comittee like a hole in the head. Interested to see how many bankrupt, corrupt and otherwise troubled nations are giving us advice.

gaijinda · 08-12-2004, 08:22 AM

I say we invite the Canadians in. They use the high tech system of paper ballots and black markers. Pretty much idiot proof. Who needs touch screens and computers anyway?

Oh yeah, that and a 24 hours news blackout of all election coverage starting at midnight..

ubiquity0 · 08-12-2004, 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by rcecale
Actually, the winner was determined the following day, after the votes were counted. The loser (that would be Al Gore) just wouldn't concede.

Randy

That doesn't mean the system is any less broken though. Either:
a/ Gore had grounds for appeal (which should certainly not be the case)
or b/ there was no grounds for appeal, but the appeal was accepted anyway (which should not happen either)

ubiquity0 · 08-12-2004, 08:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by gaijinda
I say we invite the Canadians in. They use the high tech system of paper ballots and black markers. Pretty much idiot proof. Who needs touch screens and computers anyway?

Oh yeah, that and a 24 hours news blackout of all election coverage starting at midnight..

Maybe election day should be on a Saturday. That might improve the pathetic (amongst first-world democracies) ~50% voter turnout stat

gaijinda · 08-12-2004, 08:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ubiquity0
Maybe election day should be on a Saturday. That might improve the pathetic (amongst first-world democracies) ~50% voter turnout stat

I prefer it that the apathetic and pathetic amongst us do not vote. These are the folks that snake oil salesman Edwards was making his pitch to at the convention. Let them stay home on the couch..

jm951 · 08-12-2004, 08:47 AM

Hey, while we're at it, let's ignore military votes again, after all, aren't they just stooges of W's? I'm sure gore wishes they had ignored more of them.

For you guys who think it was whacked, in 3 out of 4 methods used by independent orgs, W won. Get over it. IF you libs want your guy elected, make sure your voters can READ next time. But that might work against the libs since an informed populace might read the Bill of Rights.

ubiquity0 · 08-12-2004, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by gaijinda
I prefer it that the apathetic and pathetic amongst us do not vote. These are the folks that snake oil salesman Edwards was making his pitch to at the convention. Let them stay home on the couch..

I would prefer that half the country were not apathetic or pathetic in the first place

ubiquity0 · 08-12-2004, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jm951
Hey, while we're at it, let's ignore military votes again, after all, aren't they just stooges of W's? I'm sure gore wishes they had ignored more of them.

For you guys who think it was whacked, in 3 out of 4 methods used by independent orgs, W won.

So you're sayiing that Military votes were not correctly counted last election, yet arguing that there is nothing wrong with the system & no additional observation is required at the same time?

jm951 · 08-12-2004, 09:38 AM

Actually, they weren't because of postmark issues for overseas personnel. Even though they voted on time, the votes weren't delivered by the PO, nor post marked so that they could be considered official and legal while we agonized over hanging chads, many of our soldiers, sailors and airmen overseas, through no fault of theirs weren't counted. Here's a couple of articles that highlight the problem. Bet you won't hear the DNC or Jesse Jackson saying boo about this-

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/03/military.voting.ap/
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39805
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-289521.php
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-07-13-troopvote_x.htm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/elections/numbers18.htm

Note especially in the last article that military ballots were targeted by the DNC operatives to be tossed out. Since I have family members and friends in the services, this is a real sore point with me when the DNC alledges voter fraud when it suits then and tries to shut out the very people sworn to defend the country with their lives.

But hey, don't trust me on this, I'm a rascally Republican. Do a google search and read it for yourself. You won't find it in the normal media.

ubiquity0 · 08-12-2004, 09:42 AM

Agreed- when the election is more about how many republican votes the D's can get dismissed & how many democrat votes the R's can throw out something isn't right!

jm951 · 08-12-2004, 09:51 AM

As I see it, the DNC on the last election were reaching for anything that could be remotely construed as votes for their guy. Hanging chads, dimpled chads, "misplaced" votes for Robertson, and so on. That falls far short of ignoring military personnel who, in good faith, clearly marked their ballots and mailed them through the proper channels at the correct times, only to have them not counted, again through no fault or deed of theirs. Can you see the difference here? But back to another assertion of mine, teach folks to read and follow the directions and lots of this chicanery will go away. Wouldn't it be a hoot if an international comission caught the DNC throwing out military ballots?

This is why I have major problems of going far past one recount, assuming there is no overt eggregious fraud or criminal deceit. Mistakes will be made, but they will be made by both sides. When I worked the polls, we (rep from all parties) counted the ballots, cross checked each other's work and all signed to certify the results. Granted, we had mechanical voting machines that didn't make for much room in interpretation, but still we all worked together to insure a fair process, win or lose for our guy.