Friday, November 07, 2008

Franken Coleman Update

See if you can read the bias. Oh, I highlighted the most OBVIOUS part. Sorry.

The Minneapolis-St. Paul Star-Tribune - "Just as Secretary of State Mark Ritchie was explaining to reporters the recount process in one of the narrowest elections in Minnesota history, an aide rushed in with news: Pine County's Partridge Township had revised its vote total upward -- another 100 votes for Democratic candidate Al Franken, putting him within .011 percentage points of Republican U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman.

The reason for the change? Exhausted county officials had accidentally entered 24 for Franken instead of 124 when the county's final votes were tallied at 5:25 Wednesday morning."

Oh, those poor things. Exhausted are they? Is the question being asked why someone is not exhausting themselves looking for Norm Coleman votes?

"(Al) Franken called reporters to talk about the prospects for a continued narrowing of the count.

'Coleman said there was no reason for a recount, that there would be no movement,' Franken said Thursday, a day after unofficial results initially showed Coleman with a 725-vote advantage. 'But you see that it's more than halved and the recount hasn't even started. This election will be decided by the voters, not by the candidates.' "

Again, numbers dispassionately counted don't continue to migrate in one direction. Why is it that errors only cluster around miscounted Franken Votes? Minnesota is hardly a conservative Republican state. It's apparatus is populated by "exhausted" election workers urgently scouring vote totals to find Extra Franken Votes. THIS IS NOT A FAIR RECOUNT, this is a BIASED recount. This is the origin of machine voting and counting.

It has always been known that when the human factor entered the counting process, the process would be polluted as political goals spilled over into the counting, the process itself becoming a way to elect a candidate. Machine voting never was offered as error free, but as MORE accurate and spreading the errors around randomly. The much vilified punch card ballot would never produce the same result twice, but the number would float one way or the other around a center value that would roughly be assumed to be the true number. The reason? Ballots contain imperfections and would count one time, and not the other, or be destroyed dispassionately and randomly during the recount. They remained however, the physical representation of the voting event.

Even Florida's law in 2000 that was questioned was designed to call the vote count representative of the actual count and that the ideal real vote count could never really be attained, only a representation of it. This is true for anyone who thinks about it. The process of "counting every vote" has become a code word for "stuffing" the vote. Florida even set it's recount limits at a place where recounts were triggered by margins far too high to change in a recount, just to make sure there would be no appearance of defrauding the voters. No one watching the election count in 2000 in Florida thought a 5000 some odd vote margin for Bush would dwindle to about 200 some odd votes, unless of course someone was stuffing the ballot box between counts.

Let us also remember, Al Franken is actually correct, it is not the CANDIDATE that is defrauded by a bad count, it is the VOTERS. The voters as a WHOLE always deserve the most accurate and dispassionate fraud free count possible. It is their will we seek to discern, the candidate that loses is not the wronged party. The wronged party is always the voting public, if there is fraud.

Sphere: Related Content

No comments: