Some Fear Ohio Will Be Florida of 2004

[troutman]

Registration required:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...-2004Oct25.html

Could it be days/weeks before we know who the next President will be? With most polls suggesting a dead heat, this election could be decided again in the courts.

Democrats and Republicans here traded accusations of voter fraud, obstruction and intimidation Monday as officials grappled with what is becoming a confused -- and potentially chaotic -- presidential election in this critical battleground state.

"A storm is brewing in Ohio," Columbus Mayor Michael Coleman (D) said Monday. "The day after Election Day, we've got to make sure the sun is shining. By that, I mean each and every vote has to be counted."

[troutman]

And maybe Florida will be the Florida of 2004:

Gov. Bush defends state voting system after criticism
Charges of partisanship against state elections officials, fraud allegations and a flurry of lawsuits have put Gov. Jeb Bush on the defensive.

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/10014833.htm

Last week, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement established a statewide task force to investigate voter registration fraud and voter harassment at early-voting sites.

The conflict and criticism has forced the governor to morph from head cheerleader, greeter and strategist for President Bush's campaign in Florida to chief defender of the elections system -- with an opposition ready to pounce on every misstep.

[troutman]

AP Poll: Voters Skeptical About Election

http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/news/spec...04/10016562.htm

Memories of Florida's contested 2000 presidential election and a growing number of pre-election lawsuits are making Americans skeptical about a voting process they once took for granted.

Six in 10 of those surveyed in an Associated Press poll say it's likely there will not be a clear winner in the presidential race by Nov. 3 - the day after the election. About half say they fear the results will be challenged in court, according to the poll conducted for the AP by Ipsos Public Affairs.

Courts could decide the race
Close presidential vote is likely to bring some legal challenges

http://www.freep.com/news/politics/e...e_20041023.htm

"It's almost a perfect storm kind of situation," said Richard Hasen, an election-law specialist at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. "You have an incredibly polarized electorate, unprepared states and a litigation-oriented system. People didn't learn the lesson of Florida, which was to make sure that election laws are carefully crafted. You can't prevent all of these problems, but you can be ready for them, and we aren't."

Hasen warns that potential challenges to the election depend on an extremely close vote. Current polls suggest the 2004 vote could be as close as the 2000 contest, and that as many as six battleground states could well end up as close as Florida was last time.

"If it's that close, litigation is almost certain," Hasen said.

[Cowperson]

Some Fear Ohio Will Be Florida of 2004, Washington Post

I hope so.

We need some drama in this election.

Cowperson

[Lanny_MacDonald]

I hate to say this, but I think that this is going to end up in the courts and its going to get really ugly. Bush will likely win another court battle and remain President. Kerry will carry the popular vote though, just like Gore.

[troutman]

Litigation in Colorado:

Judge dismisses challenge to Electoral College ballot measure

http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,3...2493157,00.html

A federal judge in Denver today left it up to Colorado voters to decide on Election Day whether to change the way the state distributes its electoral votes for president.

The measure, Amendment 36, would scrap Colorado's winner-take-all system for distributing its nine Electoral College votes. Instead, presidential candidates a would be awarded a share of the electoral votes based on the popular vote. The change would begin with this year's elections

The measure has drawn national attention because the race between President Bush and Democratic challenger John Kerry is so close. The difference between getting all Colorado's Electoral College votes and getting eight or fewer could be enough to determine which man wins.

[troutman]

Problems in Missouri:

Group criticizes Missouri's preparedness for election

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stor...ss+for+election

A group of election experts from around the world says voting in Missouri could be hamstrung by conflicts of interest and low-tech ballots.

Global Exchange launched the election monitoring project after the 2000 election debacle in Florida. Missouri was chosen as a destination both because of its status as a swing state and the voting problems in St. Louis in the last presidential election. The observers will return to St. Louis and other parts of Missouri, as well as Florida and Ohio, to watch the Nov. 2 election.

Global Exchange's report found that most of Missouri is still using punch card ballots, although the federal government has provided $60 million to Missouri to improve voting methods. Punch card ballots and the hanging chad they sometimes leave became the focus of the Florida recount controversy in 2000.

More about Global Exchange:

http://www.fairelection.us/

The disputed 2000 presidential election gave new urgency to questions about how Americans vote, who participates, and how campaigns are financed. Four years later, unease about the basic mechanics of U.S. democracy is undermining civic trust, distracting from the debate over ideas that that should be at the core of a vital democracy.

That is why Fair Election is inviting international civil society to come to the United States this fall to monitor our electoral systems.

Democracy Quiz:

http://www.fairelection.us/Quiz/quiz.htm

[troutman]

And Minnesota:

http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/n...cs/10014210.htm

The latest total of registered voters for the state is 2,975,125.

That's up 6 percent from the 2,801,169 voters registered at a comparable point in the 2000 election campaign, up 4.6 percent from the 2002 election and up 3.4 percent from Jan. 1 of this year.

"It seems low compared to how many cards have been picked up from my office," said Kiffmeyer, who early this month said she had to order new cards printed after the first 1.5 million had been exhausted.

Kiffmeyer said she could not explain what became of all the unused cards.

[troutman]

The more I read, the more I'm sure this election will be decided in court.

In Pennsylvania:

Road to the White House: Expect a horde of monitors at the polls

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04298/400858.stm

Thousands of volunteers -- some Democrats, some Republicans, and some from non-partisan groups -- who will head here on election day in unprecedented numbers, monitoring polling precincts across the state in an effort to avoid the chaos and legal challenges that followed President Bush's minuscule margin of victory in Florida during the 2000 election.

The volunteers' stated goal is to block suspicious activities at the polls, while offering help to legitimate voters who encounter problems. If necessary, they will have access to mobile teams of lawyers who will be ready to go to court. Both Democrats and Republicans will be watching each other closely.

Berger said he expects as many as 1,000 New York lawyers to trek to Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Florida as the election nears.

[troutman]

Oregon too:

Watchers watch the watchers as ballot counters try to count
Both parties put in regular appearances at the Washington County Elections Division


http://www.oregonlive.com/campaigncentral/...92262326020.xml

As a voluntary observer at Washington County's Elections Division office, Cornish is allowed to watch, but not object, touch or, for the most part, speak. She and a group of fellow Republicans, mostly retirees, organized through a series of shifts, have taken the tradition of poll watching to another level.

Instead of showing up at the election office on Election Day, as usual, poll watchers such as Cornish have been streaming in and out of the office since Oct. 18, the first business day after ballots for the Nov. 2 general election were mailed.

A few days later, volunteers from a nonpartisan group, Count Every Vote, showed up. And then a few Democrats started to appear.

[arsenal]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Oct 26 2004, 03:49 PM
Some Fear Ohio Will Be Florida of 2004, Washington Post

I hope so.

We need some drama in this election.

Cowperson

I hear that. It has been a rather un-eventfull. Need some good 'ol fashioned mud slinging or something.

[troutman]

And in Wisconsin, another battle-ground state:

Major parties gird their lawyers for vote count

http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/oct04/268355.asp

Teresa Vilmain, chief strategist for the Democratic Party effort on behalf of Sen. John Kerry in Wisconsin, said about 400 attorneys are ready to get involved on Kerry's behalf in the state.

[Cowperson]

"The first thing we do," said the character in Shakespeare's Henry VI, is "kill all the lawyers."

This is nothing new.

Cowperson

[RougeUnderoos]

Maybe one of the Americans can fill us in on why it's so complicated.

How many things/people will you be voting for on Tuesday. Obviously the President and Senators, but what else? Do you have a bunch of stuff like voting for a Sherriff and a DA and Proposition 9B and that kind of thing? If there are 2 dozen things on the ballot I can understand the confusion, but we've never been through it.

I actually worked an election/enumeration for Elections Canada and it was very simple. 1) Name on the list (I went door-to-door for names) 2 ) show up, get ballots, drop in box 3) I counted by hand, 2 other people did, then me again 4) repeat all across Canada.

It seems crazy-complicated down there with the registering and the different methods.

Oh yeah, what do they mean by "voter intimidation" at advanced-polling sites?

[arsenal]

I am not american, but this is what I found here.

Each State is allocated a number of Electors equal to the number of its U.S. Senators (always 2) plus the number of its U.S. Representatives (which may change each decade according to the size of each State's population as determined in the Census).
The political parties (or independent candidates) in each State submit to the State's chief election official a list of individuals pledged to their candidate for president and equal in number to the State's electoral vote. Usually, the major political parties select these individuals either in their State party conventions or through appointment by their State party leaders while third parties and independent candidates merely designate theirs.
Members of Congress and employees of the federal government are prohibited from serving as an Elector in order to maintain the balance between the legislative and executive branches of the federal government.
After their caucuses and primaries, the major parties nominate their candidates for president and vice president in their national conventions
traditionally held in the summer preceding the election. (Third parties and independent candidates follow different procedures according to the individual State laws). The names of the duly nominated candidates are then officially submitted to each State's chief election official so that they might appear on the general election ballot.
On the Tuesday following the first Monday of November in years divisible by four, the people in each State cast their ballots for the party slate of Electors representing their choice for president and vice president (although as a matter of practice, general election ballots normally say "Electors for" each set of candidates rather than list the individual Electors on each slate).
Whichever party slate wins the most popular votes in the State becomes that State's Electors-so that, in effect, whichever presidential ticket gets the most popular votes in a State wins all the Electors of that State. [The two exceptions to this are Maine and Nebraska where two Electors are chosen by statewide popular vote and the remainder by the popular vote within each Congressional district].
On the Monday following the second Wednesday of December (as established in federal law) each State's Electors meet in their respective State capitals and cast their electoral votes-one for president and one for vice president.
In order to prevent Electors from voting only for "favorite sons" of their home State, at least one of their votes must be for a person from outside their State (though this is seldom a problem since the parties have consistently nominated presidential and vice presidential candidates from different States).
The electoral votes are then sealed and transmitted from each State to the President of the Senate who, on the following January 6, opens and reads them before both houses of the Congress.
The candidate for president with the most electoral votes, provided that it is an absolute majority (one over half of the total), is declared president. Similarly, the vice presidential candidate with the absolute majority of electoral votes is declared vice president.
In the event no one obtains an absolute majority of electoral votes for president, the U.S. House of Representatives (as the chamber closest to the people) selects the president from among the top three contenders with each State casting only one vote and an absolute majority of the States being required to elect. Similarly, if no one obtains an absolute majority for vice president, then the U.S. Senate makes the selection from among the top two contenders for that office.
At noon on January 20, the duly elected president and vice president are sworn into office.

So this is how I interprit it:
Electors are the people you vote for in each state. The public then vote for who they want for President/VP through the electors. These people are aligned with a political partry. On your ballot it will say "Electors for: " and the party name. So you are voting for the party.
So which ever elector gets the most votes, gets all the electoral college votes for that state (except I believe 3 where they can split it).

Where I think some of the confusion comes in is the popular vote. I will use Gore/Bush as an example. Say for instance 1 state has 3 electoral votes, and another state has 10. Gore can win the state with 3 electoral votes by a land slide, but he still only gets those 3 electoral votes. Bush wins the state with 10 electoral votes by say 500 votes or so, and wins all 10. More people would of voted for Gore, so he wins the popular vote. But when it comes to electoral college, he is 7 votes behind.


If someone can clarify why there are representatives, that would be great. Also, fill in any gaps I have missed.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by arsenal@Oct 26 2004, 06:37 PM
I am not american, but this is what I found here.

Each State is allocated a number of Electors equal to the number of its U.S. Senators (always 2) plus the number of its U.S. Representatives (which may change each decade according to the size of each State's population as determined in the Census).
The political parties (or independent candidates) in each State submit to the State's chief election official a list of individuals pledged to their candidate for president and equal in number to the State's electoral vote. Usually, the major political parties select these individuals either in their State party conventions or through appointment by their State party leaders while third parties and independent candidates merely designate theirs.
Members of Congress and employees of the federal government are prohibited from serving as an Elector in order to maintain the balance between the legislative and executive branches of the federal government.
After their caucuses and primaries, the major parties nominate their candidates for president and vice president in their national conventions
traditionally held in the summer preceding the election. (Third parties and independent candidates follow different procedures according to the individual State laws). The names of the duly nominated candidates are then officially submitted to each State's chief election official so that they might appear on the general election ballot.
On the Tuesday following the first Monday of November in years divisible by four, the people in each State cast their ballots for the party slate of Electors representing their choice for president and vice president (although as a matter of practice, general election ballots normally say "Electors for" each set of candidates rather than list the individual Electors on each slate).
Whichever party slate wins the most popular votes in the State becomes that State's Electors-so that, in effect, whichever presidential ticket gets the most popular votes in a State wins all the Electors of that State. [The two exceptions to this are Maine and Nebraska where two Electors are chosen by statewide popular vote and the remainder by the popular vote within each Congressional district].
On the Monday following the second Wednesday of December (as established in federal law) each State's Electors meet in their respective State capitals and cast their electoral votes-one for president and one for vice president.
In order to prevent Electors from voting only for "favorite sons" of their home State, at least one of their votes must be for a person from outside their State (though this is seldom a problem since the parties have consistently nominated presidential and vice presidential candidates from different States).
The electoral votes are then sealed and transmitted from each State to the President of the Senate who, on the following January 6, opens and reads them before both houses of the Congress.
The candidate for president with the most electoral votes, provided that it is an absolute majority (one over half of the total), is declared president. Similarly, the vice presidential candidate with the absolute majority of electoral votes is declared vice president.
In the event no one obtains an absolute majority of electoral votes for president, the U.S. House of Representatives (as the chamber closest to the people) selects the president from among the top three contenders with each State casting only one vote and an absolute majority of the States being required to elect. Similarly, if no one obtains an absolute majority for vice president, then the U.S. Senate makes the selection from among the top two contenders for that office.
At noon on January 20, the duly elected president and vice president are sworn into office.

So this is how I interprit it:
Electors are the people you vote for in each state. The public then vote for who they want for President/VP through the electors. These people are aligned with a political partry. On your ballot it will say "Electors for: " and the party name. So you are voting for the party.
So which ever elector gets the most votes, gets all the electoral college votes for that state (except I believe 3 where they can split it).

Where I think some of the confusion comes in is the popular vote. I will use Gore/Bush as an example. Say for instance 1 state has 3 electoral votes, and another state has 10. Gore can win the state with 3 electoral votes by a land slide, but he still only gets those 3 electoral votes. Bush wins the state with 10 electoral votes by say 500 votes or so, and wins all 10. More people would of voted for Gore, so he wins the popular vote. But when it comes to electoral college, he is 7 votes behind.


If someone can clarify why there are representatives, that would be great. Also, fill in any gaps I have missed.

Honestly, thanks for that because it was helpful, but I was really wondering how many things are on the ballot and why it's so complicated for them to get everything right re: counting votes and that kind of stuff. The "logistics" of a single person actually voting seem to be really complicated, and that's long before they get to the equally confusing electoral college.

It's easy for us Canadians to get on the list and vote, but down there it isn't so easy. Why doesn't everyone vote the same way physically? I mean why the computers in one place, the punch cards in another, that kind of thing?

[arsenal]

Yah.. I realized that after I posted... sorry bout that

I found this at the latimes (you might have to register).
http://capwiz.com/latimes/e4/

Every state is different, but you vote for a number of things:
President/Vice President
There may be congressional Races as well.
Also, you vote on state issues.
ie: in New Mexico Constitutional Amendment:
Consitutional Amendment 3
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 7 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF NEW MEXICO TO ALLOW RUNOFF ELECTIONS FOR MUNICIPALITIES HAVING A POPULATION OVER TWENTY THOUSAND AND FOR CERTAIN OTHER ELECTIONS AS PROVIDED BY LAW

As far as why every state is different in how people vote?
I am guessing that is state run legislation on weither they vote with computer or punch cards.
Thats the limit to my knowledge, so hopefully someone like Lanny or Dis will explain it a little better.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally posted by arsenal@Oct 26 2004, 07:11 PM
Yah.. I realized that after I posted... sorry bout that

I found this at the latimes (you might have to register).
http://capwiz.com/latimes/e4/

Every state is different, but you vote for a number of things:
President/Vice President
There may be congressional Races as well.
Also, you vote on state issues.
ie: in New Mexico Constitutional Amendment:
Consitutional Amendment 3
PROPOSING AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 7 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF NEW MEXICO TO ALLOW RUNOFF ELECTIONS FOR MUNICIPALITIES HAVING A POPULATION OVER TWENTY THOUSAND AND FOR CERTAIN OTHER ELECTIONS AS PROVIDED BY LAW

As far as why every state is different in how people vote?
I am guessing that is state run legislation on weither they vote with computer or punch cards.
Thats the limit to my knowledge, so hopefully someone like Lanny or Dis will explain it a little better.

Yeah, that's the kind of thing I was looking for. Thanks.

I guess though I was just assuming that all Canadians vote the same way. Piece of paper, mark an X -- that's about it here in Alberta. It could be different in Newfoundland or BC. I've never voted anywhere else but I assume since it's "Elections Canada" its the same thing coast to coast. But maybe not. Before I accuse the Yanks of making it too complicated I should find out if it's the same way here.

[arsenal]

I think people in canada all vote the same way. Becuase AFAIK it is federally regulated.

The difference with the states is that you can kind of think of every "state" as its own country. Which is the political definition of "state". Which is how you get United States of America. Which is why you get such disparity from state to state, becuase i *beleieve* every state has its own constitution, laws etc. It definately makes things alot more confusing.

Didn't know if you knew that, but I am going to assume you did. So am I going to finish my ramble now.

[troutman]

Originally posted by Cowperson@Oct 26 2004, 10:58 PM
"The first thing we do," said the character in Shakespeare's Henry VI, is "kill all the lawyers."

This is nothing new.

Cowperson

Right. This is nothing new. Lawyer Bashers always drag out the same old Shakespeare quote.

Come on Cow, you can do better than that. Be funny.