This principle (that every eligible citizen has a right to have their
opinion heard and choice recorded) is missing something. First of all, it is
the obligation of each eligible citizen to acquaint himself with the
positions of each office-seeker, then exercise that right by voting on the
prescribed day in the prescribed manner.
Some of those that exercised that right are now screaming after the election
is over that they MAY have voted for the wrong candidate, because NOW they
claim that the ballot was confusing.
This MAY have happened.
My point is that the election is over. If the ballot was confusing, the time
to fix the confusion was at the time of voting.
Statistically, there may well be anomalies in the Palm Beach County data.
But so what?
reg
----- Original Message -----
From: "Eric Scharin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Reg Jordan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
"dennis roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 1:34 PM
Subject: RE: Stats on Palm Beach votes
> This is starting to seem relevant to the thread of a few weeks back
> regarding the difference between statistical & practical significance. It
> may be that the 96 Palm Beach bad ballot numbers were statistically
> significant, but not practically so (wouldn't have had an impact on the
> outcome either way). The 00 results are definitely practically
significant
> (otherwise there wouldn't be this debate), and could well be the
difference
> between electing Bush or Gore.
>
> Again, I heard that the real difference in disqualified votes between 96 &
> 00 is around 15,000 vs. 30,000, when you compare apples to apples.
>
> And I'd also like to enter a contrarian opinion on the incompetence of the
> voters. Incompetence or ignorance (even if that is the root cause of the
> misvotes) is currently not a disqualifier for involvement in the
democratic
> process. If that were the case, they wouldn't provide assistance for
> illiterate voters (which they do) and (IMHO) they wouldn't allow 90% of
the
> candidates to run for office.
>
> The discussions I've heard during the media coverage of this all have a
> disconcertingly political tinge to them. There seems to be a lack of
debate
> based on principle. The principle I'm referring to the right of every
> eligible citizen to have their opinion heard and choice recorded. If the
> voting system in place in Palm Beach hampered this fair process, then it
> needs to be investigated in an even-handed way, considering all of the
data
> available.
>
> - Eric
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Reg Jordan
> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 12:25 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; dennis roberts
> Subject: Re: Stats on Palm Beach votes
>
>
> These 19,000 "spoiled" ballots account for about 0.3% of the vote count.
> Doesn't seem too high to me.
>
> reg
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "dennis roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, November 10, 2000 10:02 AM
> Subject: Re: Stats on Palm Beach votes
>
>
> > the people claim that since it had been publicized in the newspaper
trial
> > printing of the ballot ... that it was assumed that al gore, who IS
listed
> > second on the left ... that his vote would be the second hole ... so, it
> > seems like many just like automatons ... punched the second hole ...
which
> > was for buchannan ... but, the ballot is clear enough ... the arrow next
> to
> > gore is clearly >>>>>> this way to the right hole ...
> >
> > but, i want to know why there has not be as much fervor over the 19,000
> > invalidated ballots (primarily for double voting for TWO PRESIDENTIAL
> > CANDIDATES) and WHY that is the case? sure, they say that it was 15,000
> > last time (and then no one presses further on this issue) but ... this
> > seems real high to me ...
> >
> > i would like to see some county listings ... with total votes and %
> > invalidated for double voting and see if what palm beach is within the
> > typical range or, really an outlier ... IF it is an outlier ... then how
> > come? is it because the voters there are SO stupid as to vote for two
> > presidential candidates??? i seriously doubt it ... however, if that is
> not
> > a plausible alternative, then .. what about the layout of the ballot
> > compared to what was publicized in the local media??
> >
> > no one has really pressed this issue ... which seems crucial to me
> >
> > now, i am totally against REVOTES ... since, folks now know the results
> and
> > could alter their votes accordingly ... so that is not fair ... but,
there
> > has to be some ways to attempt to recreate from the invalidated ballots
> ...
> > what happened and to try to recount those in relation to what appears to
> be
> > a read ballot design fiasco ...
> >
> >
> >
> > =================================================================
> > Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
> > the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
> > http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
> > =================================================================
> >
>
>
>
>
> =================================================================
> Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
> the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
> http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
> =================================================================
>
>
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
