Air America

[Joseph Pappalardo]

From: "A. Joseph Ross"

> > But the votes were counted 3 times in the accepted manner we count votes
> > (by machine).  And the 'problems' were dealt with with the legal/lawful
> > methods we have in place to deal with them.
>
> That is not the accepted manner.  The accepted manner is counting every
ballot in which the
> voter's intention can be determined.

The accepted practice is to put them in a machine and let the machine count
them.  That's how we determine the voters intention.

It was done 3 times.

> > Fair, meaning....count them over and over again, and change the criteria
> > for counting, until our guy wins.
>
> Fair meaning counting the ballots once in which all of the ballots in
which the voter's
> intention can be determined are counted.

Yeah, second guessing who they *really* wanted to vote for...Now that's
fair, isn't it?

The manner in which we detremine the voters intention is by machine.  It's
fair becuase the machine doesn't have any political agenda.  It counts ALL
of the ballots with the same criteria.

>>But if the votes were counted the way the Florida Supreme Court ordered,
then it
would depend on the decision of the judge supervising the count as to how
certain disputed
ballots were to be counted.
<<

Thats what people didn't want....an *interpretation* of how certain ballots
were to be counted.

>>The US Supreme Court blocked
that recount on the ground that there were no uniform criteria.<<

Exactly.

>> Stephanie Miller this morning gave a couple of Websites concerning the
issue of the validity
>> of the vote count this time:  http://blackboxvoting.org and
http://stolenelection2000.com .

There has never been a shortage of conspiracy theories.  You can believe
them if you like.

Now, turning this back to broadcasting, do you think the media did it's job?