http://www.freep.com/news/nw/glitches13e_20041113.htm
Trouble plagues N. Carolina vote count November 13, 2004 BY STEVE HARTSOE ASSOCIATED PRESS RALEIGH, N.C. -- A Florida-style nightmare has unfolded in North Carolina in the 10 days since Election Day, with thousands of votes missing and the outcome of two statewide races still up in the air. </SARCASM> Oh well, these things are so messy. Who can understand such complicated processes? Why worry? Is it really that important anyway? Afterall these are just the people that make the laws, tax us, and spend our money. Messy, messy, messy, BUT, that's democracy for ya. On Mon, 15 Nov 2004 02:46:17 -0400, Robert Munn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I am not making an assumption, I am basing my argument on a report prepared > by the polling company itself after the election. From the New York Times: > ----------- > THE 2004 ELECTION: THE POLLING; Report Says Problems Led To Skewed Surveying > Data > > By JIM RUTENBERG (NYT) 1185 words > Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 23 , Column 5 > ----------- > > I would link to the article but it is in the nytimes.com archives. The bottom > line is that the polling company said its own results were skewed. There is > no conspiracy. There is no broader issue at play. > > Do we have an antiquated election system? Sure, but to paraphrase Winston > Churchill, democracy is the worst form of government possible, except for all > the others. Nothing is perfect. > > We all agree that we still live in a democracy, right? > > > > > >>Gruss wrote: > >Isn't it a "flawed assumption" to assume they weren't? In fact, all > >the report is saying is that the odds of all of the exit polls in all > >3 states being consistently conducted wrong is extremely low, almost > >impossibly so. > > > >The first rule of science is to assume nothing and let the facts speak > >rather than your pre-conceived notions. In this case, the facts say > >that your assumption, that there was widespread consistent pollster > >error , is very low. > > > >Further, I'm more concerned about fair and accurate elections than > >your partisan accusations. Truth be told, Mr. Bush's election has > >already given me a huge financial boost. Throwing the election into > >doubt would not be good for the markets, and reversing it would be > >worse, not only within the markets, but for my taxes. > > > >We've had 2 elections that have left room for doubt and that's not a > >good thing. Rise above your partisanship for a minute - there's a > >broader and more important issue here. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:135908 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
