NOW She Cares About Counting ALL The Votes

[Nbadan]

...Where the fuck was she in 2000? Fucken pillar of democracy....


JofnY6xue8s

Pathetic!

:hat

[Heath Ledger]

those votes in mich and florida should be counted period, the voters should not be punished for the errors of their idiot leaders. period, if you disagree you are one of the idiots. period.

[possessed]

Hillary-"There are people who don't want this to be over". Yeah, they're called Republicans.

That woman makes my stomach queezy.

Come to think of it, so does Greta.

[O-Factor]

She is one sneaky bitch. She acts very unpresidential

[Sportcamper]

I beg to differ…People in Florida have no right to vote what so ever…People on the short bus have a constitutional right to be cared for…But NOT to have their votes counted…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1105000/images/_1106732_recountbap300.jpg

[Jamtas#2]

those votes in mich and florida should be counted period, the voters should not be punished for the errors of their idiot leaders. period, if you disagree you are one of the idiots. period.

People who elected their leaders, have to live with the decisions of their leaders, period. And can vote them out of office for their actions.
Leaders who agree to rules and then break them, have to live with the consequences, period.

Those who think the results of an election (known by both candidates to not be valid) with only one candidate on the ballot should be valid and honored are the ones who have the problem. (Or are just Clinton supporters and want them to count as is because she desperately needs the votes)

[Nbadan]

http://images.salon.com/comics/tomo/2008/03/31/tomo/story.jpg

[BonnerDynasty]

It's only wrong when it gets Bush in office.

If it will help Billary...fuck yea! Count them mothafockas :clap :clap :clap :clap




American Politics at its finest lmfao.

[greenroom]

She is one sneaky bitch. She acts very unpresidential

When was the last time a president acted presidential???

I cannot think of one?

[xrayzebra]

...Where the fuck was she in 2000? Fucken pillar of democracy....


JofnY6xue8s

Pathetic!

:hat

Dan, get over it. All votes were counted in 2000, many
time over. By everyone and their brother.

[Nbadan]

Only a small sampling of Florida's ballots were recounted...the complete recount was stopped by the Supreme Court - remember old man?

Meanwhile, the Hillary campaign is out of money....

The Dead-beat campaign...

Cash-strapped Clinton fails to pay bills
By KENNETH P. VOGEL | 3/30/08 7:00 AM EST



Hillary Rodham Clinton’s cash-strapped presidential campaign has been putting off paying hundreds of bills for months — freeing up cash for critical media buys but also earning the campaign a reputation as something of a deadbeat in some small-business circles.

A pair of Ohio companies owed more than $25,000 by Clinton for staging events for her campaign are warning others in the tight-knit event production community — and anyone else who will listen — to get their cash upfront when doing business with her. Her campaign, say representatives of the two companies, has stopped returning phone calls and e-mails seeking payment of outstanding invoices. One even got no response from a certified letter.

Their cautionary tales, combined with published reports about similar difficulties faced by a New Hampshire landlord, an Iowa office cleaner and a New York caterer, highlight a less-obvious impact of Clinton’s inability to keep up with the staggering fundraising pace set by her opponent for the Democratic presidential nomination, Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

Clinton's campaign did not respond to recent, specific questions about its transactions with vendors. But Clinton spokesman Jay Carson pointed on Saturday to an earlier statement the campaign issued to Politico, asserting: "The campaign pays its bills regularly and in the normal course of business, and pays all of its bills."

Just like with other businesses, it’s common for campaigns to carry unpaid bills from month to month, but in Clinton’s case, it also could serve a strategic purpose.

The New York senator’s presidential campaign ended February with $38 million in the bank, according to a report filed last week with the Federal Election Commission, but only $16 million of that can be spent on her battle with Obama.

The rest can be spent only in the general election, if she makes it that far, and must be returned if she doesn’t. If she had paid off the $8.7 million in unpaid bills she reported as debt and had not loaned her campaign $5 million, the cash she would have had available at the end of last month to spend on television ads and other upfront expenses would have been less than $2 million.


By contrast, if you subtract Obama’s $625,000 in debts and his general-election-only money from his total cash on hand at the end of last month, he’d still be left with $31 million.

The presidential campaign of presumptive Republican nominee Arizona Sen. John McCain reported $4.3 million in debt at the end of February, but only $1.3 million of that was in the form of unpaid bills to a dozen vendors. The rest was a bank loan, which the campaign says it paid off last week.

It’s not just the size of Clinton’s debts that’s noteworthy. It’s also that her unpaid bills extend beyond the realm of high-priced consultants who typically let bills slide as part of the cost of doing business with powerful clientele whose success is linked to their own.

Some of Clinton’s biggest debts are to pollster and chief strategist Mark Penn, who’s owed $2.5 million; direct mail company MSHC Partners, which is owed $807,000; phone-banking firm Spoken Hub, which is waiting for $771,000; and ad maker Mandy Grunwald, who’s owed $467,000.

Clinton also reported debts more than one month old to a slew of apolitical businesses and organizations, large and small, in the states through which this historically expensive Democratic primary campaign has raged.

Politico (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9259.html)

Day Late and more than a vote short....

[Wild Cobra]

Only a small sampling of Florida's ballots were recounted...the complete recount was stopped by the Supreme Court - remember old man?

The supreme court stopped the counting because Florida was violating it's own election laws with the prior ruling. Read the ruling!

It was only a small sample because the dems were only asking for democrat areas to be recounted that they thought they could get more votes out of, and not areas that might show a better result for republicans.

I'm not going to go into other factors proven. Just get over it. President Bush legally won Florida.

[xrayzebra]

Only a small sampling of Florida's ballots were recounted...the complete recount was stopped by the Supreme Court - remember old man?

Meanwhile, the Hillary campaign is out of money....

The Dead-beat campaign...

Cash-strapped Clinton fails to pay bills
By KENNETH P. VOGEL | 3/30/08 7:00 AM EST




Politico (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9259.html)

Day Late and more than a vote short....

No the dimm-o-craps didn't want all the votes counted.
but the MSM went in and counted after all the BS and
they said Bush won.

Here read the story.



Florida recount study: Bush still wins

Study reveals flaws in ballots, voter errors may have cost Gore victory
norc.group.story.jpg
A county employee shows a ballot to a National Opinion Research Center coding team. The coders marked their observations on specially designed, triplicate coding forms. They were not allowed to confer.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A comprehensive study of the 2000 presidential election in Florida suggests that if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a statewide vote recount to proceed, Republican candidate George W. Bush would still have been elected president.

The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago conducted the six-month study for a consortium of eight news media companies, including CNN.

NORC dispatched an army of trained investigators to examine closely every rejected ballot in all 67 Florida counties, including handwritten and punch-card ballots. The NORC team of coders were able to examine about 99 percent of them, but county officials were unable to deliver as many as 2,200 problem ballots to NORC investigators. In addition, the uncertainties of human judgment, combined with some counties' inability to produce the same undervotes and overvotes that they saw last year, create a margin of error that makes the study instructive but not definitive in its findings.

As well as attempting to discern voter intent in ballots that might have been re-examined had the recount gone forward, the study also looked at the possible effect of poor ballot design, voter error and malfunctioning machines. That secondary analysis suggests that more Florida voters may have gone to the polls intending to vote for Democrat Al Gore but failed to cast a valid vote.

In releasing the report, the consortium said it is in no way trying to rewrite history or challenge the official result -- that Bush won Florida by 537 votes. Rather it is simply trying to bring some additional clarity to one of the most confusing chapters in U.S. politics.

Florida Supreme Court recount ruling

On December 12, 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a Florida Supreme Court ruling ordering a full statewide hand recount of all undervotes not yet tallied. The U.S. Supreme Court action effectively ratified Florida election officials' determination that Bush won by a few hundred votes out of more than 6 million cast.

Using the NORC data, the media consortium examined what might have happened if the U.S. Supreme Court had not intervened. The Florida high court had ordered a recount of all undervotes that had not been counted by hand to that point. If that recount had proceeded under the standard that most local election officials said they would have used, the study found that Bush would have emerged with 493 more votes than Gore.

Gore's four-county strategy

Suppose that Gore got what he originally wanted -- a hand recount in heavily Democratic Broward, Palm Beach, Miami-Dade and Volusia counties. The study indicates that Gore would have picked up some additional support but still would have lost the election -- by a 225-vote margin statewide.

The news media consortium then tested a number of other hypothetical scenarios.

Use of Palm Beach County standard

Out of Palm Beach County emerged one of the least restrictive standards for determining a valid punch-card ballot. The county elections board determined that a chad hanging by up to two corners was valid and that a dimple or a chad detached in only one corner could also count if there were similar marks in other races on the same ballot. If that standard had been adopted statewide, the study shows a slim, 42-vote margin for Gore.

Inclusion of overvotes

In addition to undervotes, thousands of ballots in the Florida presidential election were invalidated because they had too many marks. This happened, for example, when a voter correctly marked a candidate and also wrote in that candidate's name. The consortium looked at what might have happened if a statewide recount had included these overvotes as well and found that Gore would have had a margin of fewer than 200 votes.
norc.window.story.jpg
A county worker displays an optical scan ballot through a viewing window.

The butterfly and caterpillar ballots

One of the most controversial aspects of the Florida election was the so-called butterfly ballot used in heavily Democratic Palm Beach County. Many voters came out of the polls saying they were confused by the ballot design.

According to the study, 5,277 voters made a clean punch for Gore and a clean punch for Reform Party nominee Pat Buchanan, candidates whose political philosophies are poles apart. An additional 1,650 voters made clean punches for Bush and Buchanan. If many of the Buchanan votes were in error brought on by a badly designed ballot, a CNN analysis found that Gore could have netted thousands of additional votes as compared with Bush.

Eighteen other counties used another confusing ballot design known as the "caterpillar" or "broken" ballot, where six or seven presidential candidates are listed in one column and the names of the remaining minor party candidates appeared at the top of a second one. According to the study, more than 15,000 people who voted for either Gore or Bush also selected one candidate in the second column, apparently thinking the second column represented a new race.

Had many of these voters not marked a minor candidate in the second column, Gore would have netted thousands of additional votes as compared with Bush.

However, the double votes on both butterfly and caterpillar ballots were clearly invalid under any interpretation of the law.

Limits of the study

The National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago study was commissioned by eight media companies -- The Associated Press, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, the St. Petersburg Times, The Palm Beach Post, The Washington Post and the Tribune Co., which includes the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, the Orlando Sentinel and Baltimore Sun, as well as other papers.
norc.table.story.jpg
A county worker displays a punch-card ballot to a NORC coder.

NORC used experienced staff researchers to supervise and train a larger pool of investigators, who then fanned out across Florida and personally examined 175,010 ballots provided by local election officials. The investigators recorded exactly what they saw on each ballot but made no attempt to determine whether the vote should have been counted.

From there, the media consortium took over, analyzing the raw data produced by NORC and drawing conclusions for various hypothetical scenarios.

As with any large-scale study, the NORC data is subject to some important limitations.

NORC reported serious problems with record keeping at many local election offices. NORC relied on these offices to produce the rejected ballots, but county officials were unable to deliver as many as 2,200 problem ballots to NORC investigators.

Although trained to produce accurate, impartial reports, the NORC investigators are human and prone to human judgment and error. In particular, NORC discovered that male investigators were more likely to record marks on ballots than women. NORC also found a slight but statistically significant relationship between candidate marks and the investigators' party affiliation.

Most importantly, there is no guarantee that the judgments of the NORC investigators would have matched those of local election boards had the recount been permitted to proceed under any scenario.

© 2001 Cable News Network. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines.


Link to story (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html)

[Nbadan]

Ummm.......................no.......


Florida


At approximately 7:50 pm EST on election day, 10 minutes before the polls closed in the largely Republican Florida panhandle, some television news networks declared that Gore had carried Florida's 25 electoral votes. They based this prediction substantially on exit polls. However, in the actual vote tally Bush began to take a wide lead early in Florida, and by 10 pm EST the networks had retracted their prediction of a Gore victory and placed Florida back into the "undecided" column. At approximately 2:30 am, with some 85% of the votes counted in Florida and Bush leading Gore by more than 100,000 votes, the networks declared that Bush had carried Florida and had, therefore, been elected President. However, most of the remaining votes to be counted in Florida were located in three heavily Democratic counties - Broward, Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach - and as their votes were reported Gore began to gain on Bush. By 4:30 am, after all votes were counted, Gore had narrowed Bush's margin to just over 2,000 votes, and the networks retracted their predictions that Bush had won Florida and the Presidency. Gore, who had privately conceded the election to Bush, now withdrew his concession and announced that he would wait for a recount in Florida before any further action. After the first recount by the morning of Wednesday, November 8 Bush's margin in Florida had dwindled to about 500 votes, narrow enough to trigger a mandatory recount in that state. In addition, Gore asked for hand recounts in four counties (Broward, Miami Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia), as provided under Florida state law. This set into motion a series of recounts (portions by machine, and portions by hand), questions about portions of the Florida vote, and finally lawsuits.

These ultimately resulted in a December 12 7-2 United States Supreme Court decision that the Florida Supreme Court's scheme for recounting ballots was unconstitutional, as well as a 5-4 United States Supreme Court decision that ended the Florida recounts and allowed Florida to certify its vote. The vote was certified by Katherine Harris, the Republican Secretary of State who had been the Florida co-chair of Bush's campaign[30]. Because Bush's younger brother, Jeb Bush, was the governor of Florida, there were allegations that Harris and Bush had somehow manipulated the election to favor the governor's brother.[31][32] Bush's margin of victory in Florida was officially placed at 537 votes (out of more than 5.8 million cast), making it the closest presidential election in the history of the state. The nine members of the Supreme Court voted along ideological lines in the split decision with the two usually conservative swing voters[33] (Justices O'Connor and Kennedy) siding with the three conservatives (Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia, and Thomas) outvoting the Court's four liberals (Justices Ginsburg, Souter, Stevens, and Breyer). Due to all of these factors, the 2000 presidential campaign has become one of the most controversial, and disputed, elections in American history.

[edit] Post recount

After Florida was decided, Texas Governor George W. Bush became President-elect and began forming his transition committee. In a speech on December 13, Bush claimed he was reaching across party lines to bridge a divided America, stating that "the President of the United States is the President of every single American, of every race, and every background."[34]

On January 6, 2001, a joint-session of Congress met to certify the electoral vote. Twenty members of the House of Representatives, most of them Democratic members of the Congressional Black Caucus, rose one-by-one to file objections to the electoral votes of Florida. However, according to an 1877 law, any such objection had to be sponsored by both a representative and a senator. No senator would co-sponsor these objections, deferring to the Supreme Court's ruling. Therefore, Gore, who was presiding in his capacity as President of the Senate, ruled each of these objections out of order.

Bush subsequently became the President-elect after the electoral votes from all 50 states and the District of Columbia were certified by the joint session of Congress. Bush took the oath of office on January 20, 2001.

In the aftermath of the election, independent recounts were conducted by The Miami Herald and USA Today, concluding that Bush would have won in all legally requested recount scenarios, but that a statewide recount under the most generous standards would have given Gore a narrow victory. This count considered only "undervotes" where no vote is detected by machine, and did not consider "overvotes", such as when a voter marks a ballot for the same candidate using both the labeled space or punch-out and via the write-in space. [35]

Additionally, The Media Consortium hired the National Opinion Research Center to examine 175,010 ballots that were never counted in Florida. [5] The investigation took 8 months and cost $900,000.[citation needed] Their results showed that the winning candidate varied based on the method used to include or interpret ballots.[36] For cases where all of their examiners agreed, the nine different recount scenarios resulted in Bush prevailing four times, and Gore prevailing in the other five. Ironically enough, under the recount rules initially requested by Gore, Bush would have won, and under the rules requested by Bush, Gore would have won.

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2000)

[Nbadan]

On the National Opinion Research Center study...


RinR: One of the most interesting points you make in the book is that the focus on undervotes (ballots containing no vote for president)—the hanging, dimpled and otherwise pregnant chads—was misplaced. Instead, you explain that a study by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago, which looked at all the ballots that were initially rejected on election night 2000, revealed a surprise: most of these uncounted votes were in fact discarded because they were over-votes, instances of two votes for president on one ballot. What do you think the NORC study tells us about the election?

LdHS: It’s an embarrassing outcome for George Bush because it showed that Gore had gotten more votes. Everybody had thought that the chads were where all the bad ballots were, but it turned out that the ones that were the most decisive were write-in ballots where people would check Gore and write Gore in, and the machine kicked those out. There were 175,000 votes overall that were so-called “spoiled ballots.” About two-thirds of the spoiled ballots were over-votes; many or most of them would have been write-in over-votes, where people had punched and written in a candidate’s name. And nobody looked at this, not even the Florida Supreme Court in the last decision it made requiring a statewide recount. Nobody had thought about it except Judge Terry Lewis, who was overseeing the statewide recount when it was halted by the U.S. Supreme Court. The write-in over-votes have really not gotten much attention. Those votes are not ambiguous. When you see Gore picked and then Gore written in, there’s not a question in your mind who this person was voting for. When you go through those, they’re unambiguous: Bush got some of those votes, but they were overwhelmingly for Gore. For example, in an analysis of the 2.7 million votes that had been cast in Florida’s eight largest counties, The Washington Post found that Gore’s name was punched on 46,000 of the over-vote ballots it, while Bush’s name was marked on only 17,000.

FSU, Research in Review (http://www.rinr.fsu.edu/winter2005/features/battlefield.html)

[Nbadan]

HBO is planning to stoke the 2000 Presidential election embers again...

HBO Preps Drama on 2000 Presidential Election


NEW YORK, April 1: On May 25, HBO will premiere Recount, a film directed by Meet the Parents’ Jay Roach with an ensemble cast led by Kevin Spacey, which looks back at the controversial 2000 U.S. presidential election.

HBO Films’ Recount is a Spring Creek/Mirage production in association with Trigger Street Productions and Everyman Pictures. Debuting Sunday, May 25 at 9 p.m., the film was shot on location in Jacksonville and Tallahassee and portrays the turmoil of the 2000 presidential election in Florida. It follows the Florida recount from Election Day in November 2000 through the Supreme Court’s ruling in favor of George W. Bush over Al Gore five weeks later. The script by Danny Strong is based on numerous written accounts, as well as first-person interviews with more than 30 real-life participants from across the political spectrum.

Spacey portrays Ron Klain, Vice President Al Gore’s former chief of staff. In addition to Spacey, the film stars Bob Balaban, Ed Begley, Jr., Laura Dern, John Hurt, Denis Leary, Bruce McGill and Tom Wilkinson.

Paula Weinstein (HBO’s Truman), HBO Films’ senior VP Len Amato (Blood Diamond), Oscar winner Sydney Pollack and Jay Roach executive produced the film.

—By Mansha Daswani

[Nbadan]

bush would have won anyway had the us supreme court followed constitutional guidelines *gasp*


Not if the recount had been completed in the whole state...but they only recounted select counties....

Meanwhile...

On Sept. 1 2007, Hillary accepted and signed the DNC rules barring any other states having a primary earlier than the specified date. She did agree upon it before the election and now because she is losing, she wants them counted?
What about your signed pleadge? -


KmUVr_Qt2Wg