Democrats Drop
Plan in Florida
To Vote by Mail
By JUNE KRONHOLZ
March 18, 2008

The Florida Democratic party dropped the idea of a vote-by-mail presidential primary after even its own members said they doubted it could pull off such a complicated ballot.

The decision effectively ends any prospect of a revote in Florida and any voter-driven resolution to the problem of the state's participation in this summer's Democratic national convention.

The Democratic National Committee stripped Michigan and Florida of their delegates after the two states defied party rules by holding primaries in January. Sen. Hillary Clinton won both primaries, although Sen. Barack Obama's name wasn't on the Michigan ballot and neither candidate campaigned in either state.

Florida party members now are floating a variety of plans that would penalize the state for holding an early primary but still allow the state some representation at the convention.

That would resolve an impasse that has muddied the presidential nomination, embarrassed the party and diverted attention from party efforts to win Florida in November. But any vote allocation would benefit one candidate over the other -- and possibly alter the outcome of the nomination -- which makes any resolution dicey.

Michigan Democrats, meanwhile, were considering a state-run, privately financed primary. Michigan Democratic party spokesman Liz Kerr said both campaigns, the Democratic National Committee and the state party would have to agree to any do-over.

In a letter to party members last night, Florida Democratic Chairman Karen Thurman said the party had received "thousands" of responses to a message on its Web site asking for input on a statewide revote. "The consensus is clear: Florida doesn't want to vote again. So we won't," Ms. Thurman said in the letter.

Another idea being floated would award some portion of delegates based on the primary results and would divide the rest evenly between the candidates. That would likely give Sen. Obama a bigger share than he would otherwise receive.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1205790174...=googlenews_wsj

Earthmother, this whole thing is just so ...I don't even have words anymore to describe how us Florida Democrats feel. I don't have words. Imagine! Me, with no words! Alert the media.

No words.

None.

No one seems to care about us being disenfranchised except for us (FL Democrats) and Michigan. Michigan will be re-voting. We cannot do an in-person re-vote at polling places because, IRONICALLY, all the voting machines are GONE. Yep. Why are they gone? Well, because we (FL Dems) pushed through requiring a paper trail, after what happened in 2000. THAT is why we allowed the Repugs to steamroller us into going along with the bill that THEY (the FL Repugs) tacked moving the primary date up into, because it provided a paper trail. How could FL Democrats vote against a paper trail? WE are the ones who wanted the paper trail. But THEY are the ones who wanted to violate the rules of both parties by moving the primary date up by a few DAYS. Anyway, so now, thanks to that bill (which this part--the requirement of a paper trail--is a good thing) requiring a paper trail starting with the November general election, all the touch-screen voting machines have gone bye-bye and we await our new optical scanning machines. We don't have the machines, let alone our poll workers aren't trained on them yet. We CANNOT, therefore, conduct an in-person election at polling places.

We also can't do a mail-in, because no one is supporting it because there are about five billions things that could go wrong and could be legally challenged and meanwhile millions of Florida Democrats are being disenfranchised again and NOBODY cares.

Our only shot is a federal lawsuit that was heard yesterday on Appeal, but basically has no chance, or a very slim chance, OR that the DNC rules committee will come to its senses and either seat our delegates or maybe seat half of them only. Otherwise: we have no vote. Again.

But it's fine. If Obama doesn't want my illegitimate fabrication in the primary season, he sure as HELL isn't getting it in the general. I will sit it out in TOTAL disgust and heartbreak, for the first time in my entire life. Is it because I can't stand Obama? No, even though I can't. I would have lined up behind our nominee anyway. EXCEPT he has pushed the only two hot-button issues for me that are dealbreakers:

1. He keeps on stating, very snearingly and dismissively, I might add, that my vote and that of millions of Florida Democrats should not count. I have a MAJOR problem with that.

2. His spiritual mentor of decades is a man who thinks Farakkan hung the moon (nevermind listing all the other divisive, ignorant, hate-mongering things about Wright, I'll just stick to my dealbreaker thing of him loving Farakkan).

So, I'm totally abandoned by my party. THAT is how this all feels.

:(

And yet all of what I just said above? It doesn't BEGIN to describe how I feel right now. Again, there truly are no words for it.

P.S. Karen Thurman's letter says it best:

"Dear Florida Democrat,

For a year now, the Florida Democratic Party has tried to comply with the Delegate Selection Rules of the Democratic National Committee.

We researched every potential alternative process - from caucuses to county conventions to mail-in elections - but no plan could come anywhere close to being viable in Florida.

We made a detailed case to the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee, but we were denied.

Our Democratic legislators in Tallahassee tried to set the Florida primary on Feb. 5, instead of Jan. 29, but of course, their proposed amendment to House Bill 537 was greeted with laughter and derision from the Republicans who control the state government.

Does '537' ring a bell? It should. It's the number of votes that separated Texas Gov. George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore in Florida in 2000.

It's the number that sent this country and this world in a terrible direction.

We can't let 537 - or the Republicans - determine our future again.

President Bush plans to stop in Florida tomorrow to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Republican National Committee's efforts to elect his successor in November.

The last thing America needs is a third Bush term. Despite the widespread anxiety that working families feel, not to mention the broad agreement among economists that we are in a recession, President Bush and John McCain blindly believe that the economy is strong.

And let me remind you that John McCain endorsed President Bush's decision to deny health care to thousands of Florida children by vetoing an expansion of the successful SCHIP program. McCain also promises to jeopardize the financial security of Florida seniors by privatizing Social Security. He continually threatens to push Florida's military families to the brink by keeping American troops in Iraq for "100 years" or more.

This is why we are Democrats, and this is why we must stick together, no matter where this ongoing delegate debate takes us.

Last week, the Florida Democratic Party laid out the only existing way that we can comply with DNC Rules - a statewide revote run by the Party - and asked for input.

Thousands of people responded. We spent the weekend reviewing your messages, and while your reasons vary widely, the consensus is clear: Florida doesn't want to vote again.

So we won't.

A party-run primary or caucus has been ruled out, and it's simply not possible for the state to hold another election, even if the Party were to pay for it. Republican Speaker of the Florida House Marco Rubio refuses to even consider that option. Florida is finally moving to paper ballots, which is a good thing, but it means that at least 15 counties do not have the capacity to handle a major election before the June 10th DNC primary deadline.

This doesn't mean that Democrats are giving up on Florida voters. It means that a solution will have to come from the DNC Rules & Bylaws Committee, which is scheduled to meet again in April.

When this committee stripped us of 100% of our delegates last year, some members summed up their reasoning by saying, "The rules are the rules." Unfortunately, the rules did not apply to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina when they, too, violated the DNC calendar by moving from their assigned dates.

As the late great Democratic President Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, "We must adjust our ideas to the facts of today... Rules are not necessarily sacred, principles are."

The Florida Democratic Party has stuck to its principles throughout this debate. We've remained open-minded while never wavering from our commitment to an open and fair election that would allow all Florida Democrats to participate, whether serving in Iraq, retiring in Boca, studying abroad or entertaining at a theme park.

Another late great President -Abraham Lincoln, a Republican - said, "A house divided against itself cannot stand."

If Democrats heed this wisdom, we will win in November.

America needs a great president again, but a President McCain will settle for the status quo and carry on the disastrous Bush tradition.

President Clinton or President Obama will make history and lead this nation in a new direction.

Let's remember this as the delegate debate continues. We must stick together as Democrats. The stakes are too high and the opportunities too great.

I will keep you posted on any major developments. Thank you for your concern and your commitment.

Sincerely,
Congresswoman Karen L. Thurman
Chair, Florida Democratic Party"

Actually, there may be a silver lining here, if used properly.

I don't like the idea of Florida losing the delegates. On the one hand, it shouldn't have happened. On the other, there does have to be a firm date otherwise, states will continue leaping over themselves to be first. If other states were not treated the same, and it's the first I've heard about it, that's a serious issue. However, it's different if the dates were changed from what they had traditionally been, but within the allowed time frame- something that I cannot determine from Thurman's letter.

Silver lining-

What I do think is that the nation, and the press, needs to understand the bind the Florida democrats were in, and that they were put there, I'm sure on purpose, by the republican majority. I imagine they were not totally thrilled when the new republican Governor supported paper ballots. Now, how to turn this into a fiasco for the democrats? Bingo- set a date that put them in a bind, a real big one.

Florida democrats did what was right, stand up for recountable elections by mandating paper ballots. If Florida ever comes out from under it's history of election malfeasance, it will be because of stands that the democrats took. The price paid was the loss of delegates because of the situation set up by the republicans.

I would hope there is a way to seat some delegates. But because Clinton has used this to try to gain advantage, when the other candidates played by the rules, it has to be done fairly.

I think Florida democrats should be treated as heroes, even if they don't have delegates at the convention. What they did was for the greater good, now and in the future.

Take credit for standing for elections that can be recounted, :clap: blame the Republicans for putting them in the spot they are in. :spikey:

Just putting the blame on the DNC is, I think, not using an unfortunate situation to the best advantage. I don't like it. But turn the lemon into lemonade, if you can.

I salute Florida. :good: Lets see if the Florida democrats and the DNC can come up with a way to make this a win-win.

I think both Michigan and Florida shouldn't be seated

There were rules
There were laws

They broke it

Otherwise HIllary gets 100percent advantage and well, screw her, why should she catch a break?

Hillary should have quit the race weeks ago so nobody owes her anything

And after the best speech I have heard in years (Gore's NYU speech, King's I had a dream speech, and now Obama's race speech)
once again it looks like a 2nd ballot won't happen.

Your begining to sound like Katherine Harris. Like in 2000 the rule that was broken was an arbitrary deadline. In elections there should be only one rule, that the will of the people be determined regardless of any arbitrary deadlines or rules.

This should have been resolved long before those primaries took place. It is just another example of the incompetence of Howard Dean that this has become the mess that it has.

Now it would be unfair to Obama to seat those delegations. The primaries should be re-done and the DNC should pay for it.

Did you know that it take 2 to 3 times longer to fill out a paper ballot than an electronic ballot or lever machine? Now multiply that by 100 or more voters in an election district. Now who does that give an advantage to? Republicans. Democratic voters are usually working class people that have limited time to vote. They just don't have the time to stand on long lines waiting. So in the end paper ballots favor the Republicans.

No James, paper ballots are faster.

Touchscreens, which are an abomination, take longer. There is no way to recount them and no way to insure your vote was tallied as you cast it. There is a reason it's called "faith based voting."

I talked to an election official in the midwest a couple years ago who was dreading going to touchscreens, exactly because they took more time and she knew people would complain. Workers were used to voting on their lunch hour, filling in a paper ballot, putting it in the ballot box, and be done.

Besides, the DRE's have a nasty habit of breaking down.

In areas where the ballots are fed through the machines at the polls, IF the machine is set up right, you're going to know if there is a problem with the ballot and perhaps get it resolved.

Having elections that can be recounted, if chain of custody is intact, is the best we can do.

Here's some of the latest on Sequoia's attempt to keep their vote counting secret:

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5820#more-5820

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=5814#more-5814

Optical scans are vulnerable too, but at least you have something to recount.

Spend some time at this site: http://www.votersunite.org/

They do a lot of work at Votersunite. You'll find the problem machines here:

http://www.votersunite.org/info/E-VotingIn2006Mid-Term.pdf

DRE's (touchscreens) lead the list.

No the are not.

And many touchscreen systems have paper back ups that can be recounted.

I feel sympathy for the voters of Florida. On the other hand (I hope hangingchad doesn't blow another fuse), honestly I think that the Democratic Party in Florida must be under the control of some major screw-ups. Sure, the Republicans may have baited the trap, but Florida Democrats walked right into it. When Democrats in the State Legislature voted to move the primary to a date that violated DNC primary rules, what were they thinking?? And what was Jennifer Granholm, Democratic Governor of Michigan thinking??

looking for my flak jacket now..

I think Hillary set this up for her own benefit and gamed the system

Just like the Clinton done for 28 years now

Bill only won because Perot was in the race (regardless of James view).

Obama would be disenfranchised, with the crap in the background, there is NO fair way to revote and it is ILLEGAL to have private people pay

And it is meaningless as Hillary can not win anyhow

She needs now about 84 percent of every delegate to come close

She makes bogus claims, she has her racist hit squad (Ferraro)make accusations on Obama then she whines

Yesterday's speech prooves who is presidential and it sure isn't Hillary

NO to any shenanigans by Hillary

Split the delegates and let them go to the convention
But it's not a God given right that they have to

Especially as 100s of thousands of black Floridians are still off the books voting wise

It is not my view. It is reality based on analysis.

Exit polls taken at the time showed that Perot voters spilt almost equally among Bush (38%) and Clinton (37%). And a state by state analysis shows that only Ohio would, where Clinton had a narrow victory, would have swung to Bush if Perot was not in the race.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m251...i_13975246/pg_2

You're just repeating a long discredited GOP talking point. No wonder so many think that you're really a Republican shill sent here to cause trouble.

How many did? I could be wrong but I was under the impression that most Dems voted against it but since the GOP controls the State Legislature down there the Dems had no way to stop it.

The VOTERS broke NOTHING. Why should we be disenfranchised for the repug state legislature (in the case of FL) pushing through this date change that nobody talks about was bundled into a bill that requires a PAPER BALLOT TRAIL, which is what the Democrats have been pushing for in Florida and why the Democratic minority in the legislature went along with it. And it only moved the frickin' date up by SEVEN DAYS, get the flip OVER IT, DNC et al!

SEAT OUR DELEGATES!

Before I respond, I just want to say that I would be (and have been, since before ANY votes were cast) screaming just as loudly to seat the FL & MI delegates no matter WHO had won FL & MI. I was screaming before the vote, I was screaming when all the candidates were still on both ballots, I'll be screaming all the way to the convention. My passion on this issue is about fighting for the VOTERS, not about which candidate I support. That said:

Seating our delegates would NOT be Hillary "catching a break". It would be the votes of the people COUNTING! They happened to go for Hillary, so they should COUNT for Hillary, whether anyone likes that or not, it is called an ELECTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


:angry:

Bless you for your comments, James!!! The only thing I take issue with is when you say it would now be unfair to Obama if the FL & MI delegations were seated. I take issue, especially about Florida, because:

1. In Florida, ALL of the candidates were on the ballot. NONE of the candidates campaigned here (although Barack did apparently run some ads on cable--I didn't see them, as I don't have cable--that accidentally [!] ran nationally, including FL). The voters have C-SPAN, internet, broadcast TV news, newspapers, etc. This is not the third world. We are informed. Therefore, we cast INFORMED ballots, with a choice from among all the candidates, and we had a record turnout. Our delegates should be SEATED if fairness to the candidates is your only concern, as the election was certainly fair.

2. In Michigan, you do have a better argument, as Obama was not on the ballot. Better, but still doesn't move me. Why? Because it was OBAMA'S STOOO-PIT CHOICE TO REMOVE HIS NAME FROM THE BALLOT! There was no "rule" saying he had to do that! So, if YOU choose to remove your name from a ballot in order to cow-tow to the DNC and four states, then have at it, but don't complain later that the election was unfair because your name wasn't on the ding-dang ballot!!! Obama knew the delegate issue was being contested, big time, from the very beginning, so all his supporters crying about how Clinton somehow is trying to change the rules now or whatever is NONSENSE and very unfair. I'm not a huge Hillary fan or anything, so please know that I say this not because I am for her out of the remaining two (which I am, but that is NOT why I say this, believe me). Because as you guys of all people should know, I really don't have ANY dog in this hunt. My dog chose to sit it out this time (boo HOOO!). My 2nd choice dog was Edwards. My third choice was Biden. So, I mean, I am not exactly a rabid Hillary supporter. My position is about FAIRNESS and the sanctity of the process and the VOTERS.

SEAT OUR DELEGATES!

Why does everyone, all over the net, keep saying that Hillary didn't play by the rules? I agree that she is wanting the delegates seated because it would be to her advantage and probably not because she deeply cares about the disenfranchisement of us FL & MI voters. But whatever the reason, she is on the side of truth, justice, and the American way, so I don't question it. And she DID play by the rules, that is the part I don't get about what, Obama supporters in particular, keep saying. What rule did Clinton violate, exactly? She did NOT campaign in MI or FL. That was the ONLY thing she agreed to, or, I should say, NOT, to do. So, are you talking about her leaving her name on the MI ballot? That was perfectly within "the rules", the precious, all-important RULES! Just because all the other candidates were idiotic enough to remove their names as soon as the DNC and/or the four states exerted the tiniest bit (or maybe a huge bit, for all we know) of pressure, doesn't mean she violated any RULE, God forbid. No, she just showed some JUDGEMENT and sanity, unlike ALL the other candidates.

:!:

I'm so upset. I'm sorry I get so worked up over this all, but, see, thing is, I've been all over the net lately discussing this and other issues to do with the primary race and whenever the issue of FL and MI comes up, you wouldn't believe the vitriole that is out there directed at Florida voters and Florida Democrats! Your average American apparently hates us and feels we should be permanently banned from voting, why limit it to just the 2008 primary? Apparently, it is OUR fault that Gore lost in 2000. Nevermind that the REPUGS intentionally obstructed a fair election/recount. No, apparently, it was the idiotic Florida voters (me--a lifelong Democrat and ardent Gore supporter since 1988, for example), who blew the election and caused the resulting seven years of hell. And the rest of America HATES us for this.

So, after dealing with those types of vitriolic comments for the last few months, pardon me if I'm a little OVER SENSITIVE and over the top about this whole thing, even when responding to perfectly reasonable, non-vitriolic posts. I'm just worked up to a fare-thee-well is all.

Example, here is an exchange I had with someone of the FL-voter-hating, vitriolic variety just today:

Me: Your comments show that you are quite ignorant of the history of what has unfolded since the Republican-controlled FL state legislature decided to violate the primary date rule. Since we are only allowed short comments here, I won't bother trying to educate you. Suffice it to say that the millions of innocent, long-suffering Dems of FL & MI have been trying to fight Dean's insane removal of all our delegates ever since it occurred, as millions of voters in FL & MI shouldn't be disenfranchised.

Vitriolic Other Person: Lady, please... "Innocent, long-suffering Dems"? A bit melodramatic aren't we? Aren't the Florida Dems the ones who threw the election by being too stupid to understand a simple ballot?

Me: NO the FL Dems did not "throw the election". I, for one, voted for Al Gore, as did millions of others. What "threw the election" was the REPUBLICAN FOBs (Friends of Bush) who intentionally impeded a fair process/recount and threw the country into chaos. Do NOT blame the voters and NO, my saying we are both innocent & long-suffering is NOT an exageration. Have you lived through the last 7 years of shrub?!!! If so, you'd realize that it is not possible to overstate how tragic 2000 was!
P.S. Typo ALERT: I spelled "exaggeration" incorrectly. See what happens when I start reliving the 2000 election TRAUMA? I lose all ability to spell! Especially when I realize that there are actually people out there who blame the FL Democrats for what happened, when really we (and I am not only a lifelong Dem but I happen to be an ardent supporter of Al Gore since 1988) were the last line of defense against shrub getting into the White House, & a fair process was blocked by the REPUGS!!!

Yet, apparently, not only do us FL Dems deserve to have no vote in the primary because we are a rule-breaking bunch of jerks, but we also cost Gore the election in 2000. See, that is eye-opening to me, because I could have sworn that I VOTED for Gore, as did millions of other FL Dems. I could have sworn it was the REPUGS who impeded the election and the NADER voters who put Bush 537 votes ahead of Gore in FL when all was said and done, when they had 97,000 votes they could have spared for Gore. Yet apparently it is my fault and apparently my vote should not only not count in the 2008 primary because the Repugs violated the date rule, but also because the repugs stole the election in 2000. Clearly, this is all the fault of Florida DEMOCRATS like me!

:!: :!: :!:

Horrifying thought: I just wonder...although I doubt it, as the man is extremely intelligent: you guys don't think that Al Gore himself blames Florida Democrats somehow for costing him the 2000 election ...do you?

Because, I'm telling you, I'm so amazed to learn, via comments from others (NOT you guys, I'm talking comments to other articles and blogs around the net re the delegate sitch) when discussing this current delegate situation, how many people really truly seem to clearly BLAME "Florida" (which I guess means different things to different people) for what happened in 2000. Apparently "Florida" to a significant number of them means, or at least, definitely includes, the DEMOCRATIC voters of Florida.

How effing ironic is that? We/I voted for GORE. But do they blame the stoo-pit repugs in all the states that went clearly red? No. Do they blame the stooo-pit Nader voters? No. Do they blame the repug FOBs who CLEARLY, disgustingly, intentionally obstructed a fair recount and process? No. They blame the Florida VOTERS. They think we did this!!!!!!!* They think WE put shrub in the White House for the past seven years.* If I really stop to think about that for any length of time, I could spontaneously combust, so I'd better not.

* :o

See, this is why I love you guys and this forum and the Gore community in general: voices of REASON!!!

Thank you. Thank you guys (even those who disagree with me about seating the FL & MI delegates) for being so REASONABLE all the time. When you take a little trippipoo around the net, sometimes it is scary. You have to remind yourself that people who post responsive comments to articles and blogs on line are often not representative of the majority of people out there...I hope *lol*. I mean, on the net, anonymously, they feel free to just let LOOSE. But on the other hand, that just maybe shows us the true feelings of a lot of people out there. And it really upsets me, from my point of view as a lifelong, loyal Democrat and Gore supporter since FOREVER, who voted for Gore in 2000 and saw the REPUGS take that away, to learn that so many "out there" in America blame ME somehow for what happened in 2000. When meanwhile, that was one of the worst days of my life and I will never get over it and yet somehow it is my fault?

Thank God I can come to this forum for some SANITY. It helps to know that some people see things as they are. Namely, and let's say this all together and with great feeling:

IT IS ALL THE REPUBLICANS' FAULT! EVERY LAST BIT OF IT.

And that is the truth, pure and simple.

God, I loathe the Republican party with a white-hot burning PASSION!

http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2008/03/by-...mment-107571742

Hangingchad, 2000 was NOT Florida's fault, not the peoples.

Katherine Harris, for one, and certain county election officials are just the beginning.

From the ousting from the voter roles Greg Palast wrote about; to optical scans behaving differently in different counties, also a Greg Palast story; to the butterfly ballot which was duplicated, in parts, in the recent primary election in California in LA County; to punch card machines that were not even properly cleaned, let alone maintained.

Then there is the issue of the one memory card that was caught, reversing votes for Al Gore. (More on that below with the story of the test hack in Florida) Yet, when all was counted later, much too much later, Gore really won.

People became the scapegoat for a theft.

I believe that Al Gore is far too wise to blame the people of Florida. It may be why he's not chosen to run, because the system is still broken. 2006 was better, but how much better should it have been?

I do not believe it is all the Republicans fault. A Republican legislature in your state set up the Democrats for the primary fiasco. Playing games on the state level and it is dirty pool. Would/could the Democrats have done the same thing? No one seems to belive in a fair competition any more.

But on a national level and in many states, it is the Democrats who drag their heels on good voting legislation or write bills that in the end, still enable touchscreen voting (Holt's bill in Congress and many others submitted by Dems) and would make the oversight agency presidentially appointed, the current problem with the EAC, who won't even alert other states and counties of severe problems in voting systems when they are discovered.

And most voting machine vendors happen to be very Republican connected as well as with the military industrial complex.

Some, I said SOME, Republicans have been responsible for making things better. While I don't agree with most of them on other issues, if they do something right and good, it has to be acknowledged. So I can't brand them all same as I can't say the Dems have a stellar track record. Kerry gearing up for a legal battle then calling his lawyers back comes to mind.

The problem is the establishment, both Democrat and Republican, that benefit from the lack of transparency and auditing of our elections.

It is NOT the PEOPLE and it never has been.

By the way, you have a hero in Florida, Ion Sancho. He let a test happen that even amazed him by how easy it was to change the results in an optical scan system (Think that subtracting memory card that happened to be caught):

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?opti...d=798&Itemid=51

Another hero, from Utah, and a Republican. Doing the right thing cost him his job:

http://votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=c...1154&Itemid=113


So, I can't put all the Republicans in one basket and call them all bad. There may not be many good apples, ;) but there are a few.

From the people who gathered the information, did the math, and found touchscreens to CAUSE long lines/voters not voting. Read the report, it's very enlightening. Also information on cost to counties of touchscreens vs. paper, and the hackability of both.

If a touchscreen breaks down, and boy, do they, you are out of luck of have to vote provisionally in many states- and that's a problem. With paper, you can fill out the ballot and deposit in a box. Intuitive.

Yes James, you can put a paper trail on DRE's, but the vendors are not putting quality printers on nor ones that print that can be read, so it causes all sorts of problems. You see, the vendors have fought tooth and nail to get rid of paper and they do everything they can to make adding paper bad.

2006 election report:

http://www.votersunite.org/info/E-VotingIn2006Mid-Term.pdf

Touchscreen (DRE) responsible for longest lines and people leaving without voting, on p. 14 of the above report, in chart form.

From P. 23:

“The incident reports also reveal an additional, cloaked threat to fair voting practices when locales choose direct record electronic voting systems. Repeatedly, case studies indicate that voters were directed to cast their vote on provisional ballots when the e-voting equipment didn't work. However, provisional ballots are intended only for voters whose registration is in question. The improper use of provisional ballots for duly registered voters frustrated by failed DREs is a very disconcerting consequence of poorly functioning equipment and inadequate contingency plans.”


“Notably, while precinct scanners are used in 38 states and central count scanners are used in all states, DREs are used in only 34 states. Nevertheless, as the following chart shows, there were over three and a half times as many reports of problems with DREs; nearly nine times as many usability difficulties with DREs; and over fifteen times as many reports of long lines and/or voters leaving without voting. In fact, scanner or EBM malfunctions only resulted in long lines and/or voters leaving without voting when poll workers failed to allow voters to deposit ballots for later scanning.”


On p. 24, the final chart that shows DRE’s (touchscreens) with the most long lines/people leaving because of lines.

As mentioned in the article, at least a paper ballot can be deposited to be scanned later if problems occur. It is also faster to mark a paper ballot and review it than to scroll through a screen.



Increased costs due to touchscreens:

http://www.votersunite.org/info/costcomparisonextended.asp



You can hack, undetected, an optical scan machine. Why audits are necessary:

http://www.votetrustusa.org/index.php?opti...d=798&Itemid=51

Hacking the touchscreen:

http://votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=c...1154&Itemid=113

The Bush's and Clinton's stole Gore's votes in 2000

They did not want Clinton in, and they stole it

It was not republican or democrat

It was the Bush's and Clinton's (who act as if they are enemies, when they are in on it together

Until people realize that, the party will always be split

Gore's best interests were NOT served by Hillary and Bill
He was screwed by them

We must repudiate the Clinton's to get freedom from the Bush's as you cannot separate one from the other

I know some here don't like to think that, but think of Gore's great speeches he gave in 2003 and 2004 and how they tried to silence him each and every time

Even the NY Times didn't bother running Gore's NYU speech that MLK Jr. day speech he gave. Not one word in Hillary's hometown paper that day

Repudiate the Clinton's and the Bush's will come tumbling down.

NO to any phony vote count, when Obama's voters did not vote.
Florida had a choice, they tried to game the system, but you have to work in the system.

Questions, your last two posts in particular are brilliant, substance-laden and accurate. I so appreciate the sanity on this forum! I was talking to a dear friend yesterday about how upset I am to have the creeping realization, due to all my internet "travels" to every article and blog I can get my eyes on regarding the FL & MI delegate situation, and reading all the comments by Joe and Joette Blow, that many out there in the country and world actually blame the Florida VOTERS for what happened in 2000. They do, they think we are gibbering idiots who can't punch a chad correctly to save our lives (or country). When really it was the REPUBLICANS obstructing the election process (in my strong opinion) that did just that: obstructed a fair election. My friend whom I was talking to about this last night said something interesting: she said there are a lot of PAID people who go around responding to blogs and articles, etc., who purposely repeat something often enough so that in the collective consciousness people start thinking it is true. Now, I knew that sort of thing goes on, but I didn't really think about it in this situation, but suddenly a lightbulb went off, because there are certain untruths that I keep reading over and over and over again and I really think that there are some paid people with various agendas (promoting a certain candidate, or a certain party's agenda, etc.) in the mix. So I don't need to go around feeling like the whole country thinks **I** cost Gore the election, which, if I did think even ONE person thought that, would kill me dead on the ever-lovin' spot. No one in America cast a more enthusiastic, passionate vote for Al Gore on election night, 2000, than I did. And I can assure you that my chad was fully punched through (although, at that point, I didn't know it was called a "chad"; that is something we all learned later!). What happened after that, I had no control over and could only watch in horror. And since then, I have been living what has only truly been captured and expressed beautifully and accurately in Michael Moore's opening dream sequence of "Fahrenheit 9.11". Those opening scenes capture it. I get a lump in my throat and tears in my eyes every time I re-watch them.

I swear, if my party doesn't want to seat our delegates in a representational way (NOT "splitting them 50/50"!), we are going to take this all the way to the convention. I will BE THERE. With about 1.7 million of my closest friends.

At the risk of hijacking this post, but what happened in Florida reverberates to this day and I think Florida did the right thing:

Hangingchad,

If you get to go to the convention, be a hero and everyone else from Florida.

You got maneuvered into a corner by the neocon GOP and had to make a choice- and Florida chose paper ballots for elections that could be audited.

Florida CAN turn this into a positive. Florida looked to the future and paid the price for the benefit of years to come.


For more information on what happened in Florida, try this report from Dan Rather:

http://www.hd.net/transcript.html?air_master_id=A4755


Before anyone goes off about his "disgrace" on Bush's military record, that story was never refuted- just the sources. Rather and CBS were too eager to jump the gun on that one, and it cost Rather. Nor am I a particular fan of Rather.

But the story above, done after Rather left CBS, never made it to the MSM. Wonder why?

The story starts out with touchscreens but the interesting part for Florida are former employees coming forth with information about the punch cards.

The question that Rather apparently didn't ask, was why the ballots in particular counties seemed more problematic.

The next question, and I've voted on punch cards, was why they suddenly failed so dramatically? In Florida- in those counties?

And while everyone was focused, on purpose, on punch cards, what else was happening? Like the memory card from the optical scan that subtracted votes for Al Gore?

And if this was just a ploy to get touchscreens off the ground, how did the company know- and you bet they knew- that the Help America Vote Act was just around the corner, so conveniently written to imply touchscreens were the only way to go? The threads on this one go far deeper than anyone has ever looked.

Botch an election in a "friendly" (Jeb Bush) state, get a federal bill off the ground that will give millions to vendors, and in the process, wipe out any way to insure votes were counted as cast. I'm losing track of if that's a two-for-one, three-for-one, or four-for-one deal. Like the Patriot Act, HAVA was just a little too fast out the door. One of the reasons I have no use for Steny Hoyer and am very skeptical about Chris Dodd, the dem cosponsors of that bill. Steny's partner in the house? Try Bob Ney.

Go to Votersunite.org and find a voting integrity group in your area. Join it, help them, strive to get good legislation passed at the state level. Be polite, follow the rules, but let government know, from the county to state level, that people are watching. More scrutiny at the local level by people in these groups I think helped make the 2006 elections better.

2008, IMHO, will be even more critical.

Don't feel like a loser Hangingchad. Florida should not. Be the heroes you are for trying to insure Florida is never again to be manipulated as it was in 2000. :clap:

FYI, check the audit laws and recount laws in your state. The first step is paper ballots, the next is actually having the ability to audit them.

But if you like Gore, why would you want something to benefit Hillary?
Who did all she could to see Gore didn't get seated, and Kerry in 2004?
Hillary is not a friend to Gore

I haven't been able to find a good source to research the vote totals on this bill. I heard that the vote was nearly unanimous, but I'm a long ways from Florida and I can't verify that. Maybe someone can check the Florida newspapers or public records for the April or May 2007 time period. :?:

Wayne,

I haven't had time to read the entire bill. You can find some of the history here:

Check on this bill number. Got information from a story on the legislation:

http://www.myfloridahouse.com/Sections/Bil...llSearchIndex=0

http://www.myfloridahouse.com/Sections/Bil...llSearchIndex=0

http://www.myfloridahouse.com/Sections/Bil...llSearchIndex=0



This appears to be the bill. You have to go to the one of the Engrossed pages to read about the requirement.

It does appear to have passed pretty unanimously.

However, I would not fault the Democrats on that. They got stuck with an either/or.

I don't know if the primary date was an amendment and what the vote may have been on that if it was. Keep in mind that if it didn't pass, then the requirement for paper ballots would not have passed. There is also mentioned an audit but I don't have time to read the whole bill. If they got a real audit requirement passed, so much the better. Have to read the details before you know if it's just fluff.

Keep in mind that bad things get tacked on to good bills. What do you do? Which is more important, in the long run?

I LOVE Gore. Love the man, I tells ya. But no matter which candidate would benefit from the seating of representational (versus the arbitrary 50/50 split being floated by the Obama camp) delegates from FL & MI, I would be fighting for it. It isn't about the candidates, it is about the VOTERS and the integrity of the democratic process. I realize parties have a right to choose nominees without even HAVING elections, but since the Democratic party DOES choose to have elections and since the rule violated was arbitrary, stoo-pit, arcane and unfair and since some of the privileged early states violated it TOO, yet were not punished, so what Dean did to FL & MI was selective punishment and since the precious rules suggest just cutting the delegates in HALF for such an infraction and since this punishes and DISENFRANCHISES the voters, THAT is why I am fighting this thing all the way to the convention! It is precisely BECAUSE of 2000 and what happened to Gore that I have such a fire in my belly over this, because we FL Dems were disenfranchised then (by the Repugs impeding a proper recount, etc.) and we will NOT let it happen again! Even if all the votes on 1/29 in FL had gone to Obama, whom I am rapidly beginning to actively detest versus just think is all flash and no substance, I would be fighting all the way to the convention for the delegates to be seated and cast their votes for him. For me, this is about the VOTERS being represented, pure and simple. It is also about 2000. I can't exactly explain it, but it feels like it is happening again, and I won't let it, not as long as I can breathe. If you look at the history of this delegate mess, you'll see that it was the REPUGS at it AGAIN and I'm not HAVING it. NO. No mas!

While I can't speak for Al Gore and wouldn't presume to try, I believe that he would not want the voters of two huge states disenfranchised, even it if meant that the delegates, once seated, would cast votes for a candidate he doesn't like.

Personally, I'll take Hillary over Obama any day of the week, yet I can't believe it has come down to these two. This whole thing (and by "whole thing", I mean everything that has happened since election night 2000, culiminating in this asanine delegate sitch in the present day) is like a surreal nightmare that I can't wake up from. That said, I do think Hillary has the makings of a d*mn fine president. Obama, not so much. In fact, the more I study him, the more troubled I am, but I digress. I SWEAR I would be just as passionate about seating the delegates if the votes had all, every last one of 'em, gone for Obama.

As for the idiot taking himself off the Michigan ballot, don't even get me started on how NON-EXISTENT my tears are for him on that one. Boo hoo HOO...not. Oh well. Next time don't cow-tow to the four special states and the DNC, and leave your name on the ballot. No "rule" said you had to remove it. NONE. If you expect any VOTES, leave it on there, Oh He of Great Judgement.

:!:

Guys, yes, the Dem MINORITY in the legislature voted for it, but ONLY because the REPUGS maneuvered it into legislation that provides for--requires, actually--a PAPER BALLOT TRAIL starting with the general election of November 2008 (which, ironically, is why many of our counties in FL at this moment have ZERO voting machines, so we physically could not even do a primary re-vote if we wanted to, as the stoo-pit touchscreen machines are all being replaced with optical scanners, but they ain't here yet!). The Dems couldn't vote against a paper trail!

Again, please, please, please read Karen Thurman's recent statement. Once you read this, you'll see the true sitch:

http://www.fladems.com/content/w/party_sta...imary_situation

Edna, you know I luv ya, but I have to take exception to your harsh judgment of Obama and the other candidates (at the time) who tried to play by the rules. The fact is that Michigan, like Florida, went against the DNC effort to keep all the states from moving their primaries into January. Edwards, Obama, Richardson, etc., all filed papers removing their names from the ballot in Michigan in deference to the system set up by the DNC, which, after all, is the organization that runs their show. If anything, I think people's ire should be directed at Clinton for being the only candidate who was calculating enough to thumb her nose at the DNC rules. But I won't go down that road . . . . My point, however, is that vitriol against Obama (and the others) for trying to play by the rules seems misdirected. I think we can all agree that it's not fair to change the rules of the game once the game has started, and especially when those rules were clearly laid out in the beginning.

Of course, the main person to blame for all this mess in this primary season is Howard Dean. IMO, another person would have foreseen these problems and arranged things differently. But the DNC laid out its rules, and it was incumbent upon the candidates to play by those rules. Calling a candidate an "idiot" because he played by the Party's own rules just doesn't sit well with me.

I understand your frustration at what's happened in Florida and Michigan. We all feel it, although living in Florida you'd feel it more than we do. I don't have a solution, but that's why I'm not head of the DNC. :rolleyes: All I know is that faulting someone for playing by the rules just doesn't seem right.

My humble two cents: Go by the election results in Florida giving Hillary the delegates she won, and split the Michigan delegates with Obama 50/50. Obama still will have the upper hand. Though, of course, you know I want A BROKERED CONVENTION with you know who as the consensus candidate. What would voters think of that though? Would everyone but us be pissed off and not vote, letting McCain take us four more years into hell?

Whatever happens lets remember that we do not want another Republican in the White House no matter what we think of Obama or H. Clinton and all this mess.

Blue = Earthmother

Purple = The crazy person formerly known as hangingchad

"Edna, you know I luv ya, but I have to take exception to your harsh judgment of Obama and the other candidates (at the time) who tried to play by the rules. The fact is that Michigan, like Florida, went against the DNC effort to keep all the states from moving their primaries into January. Edwards, Obama, Richardson, etc., all filed papers removing their names from the ballot in Michigan in deference to the system set up by the DNC, which, after all, is the organization that runs their show. "

Well, then they should have yanked themselves off of NH's ballot, too, as NH moved up ahead of when the DNC said they could...yet NOTHING was done about that. But anyway, you are right that Obama just did what all the candidates (except Hill) did. And I got mad at all of them for it, even and especially Edwards, who I was for and thus particularly disappointed by/in.

"If anything, I think people's ire should be directed at Clinton for being the only candidate who was calculating enough to thumb her nose at the DNC rules."

But, earth, there is NO--zero, none, zilch, it doesn't exist--DNC rule saying that the candidates should take their names off of the ballots!!! The rules suggested that the DNC strip the delegates of the offending states by half, like the repugs did. If they had just done that, I wouldn't be having my ongoing heart attack since that point. That would have punished FL & MI for moving their dates up, lessened their power in the nominating process, yet still left room for the voters themselves (ourselves) to have a voice in the process. But, no, Dean had to go sailing right off his meds and yank away ALL our delegates, AND pressure the candidates to remove their names from the MI ballot (which is disgusting to contemplate, because he must have REALLY leaned on them to get them all except Hillary to do it) AND to get them to sign that stoo-pit pledge not to campaign here. WhatEVER, Dean. But there was no rule, so I have nothing but a higher opinion of Hillary for standing up to the INSANITY and leaving her name on the ballot. If they had all done that, plus not agreeing not to campaign in FL & MI, the situation would at least be better than it is right now, as we wouldn't have to be discussing re-votes or anything, only whether delegates should be seated.

You know I love you, too, but we are going to have to disagree on Obama, I can see. I can't stand the man, personally. Phony, fake, and false. Color me singularly unimpressed.

And no, it isn't that I'm thrilled with Hill, either. The two on the ballot are not the two I'd want on there, that's for sure. But I do think Hillary would make a good president...IF the Kenneth Stars and the Karl Roves of this world will get out of her way and let her. I mean, the right is going to mercilessly dog her as they did to Bill, until they either find or fabricate something, and I'm personally not up for Round Two. Bill was a GREAT president, imho, yet he was mercilessly gone after by the repug smear machine the entire time he was prez. I'm not really up for a repeat of that, but then again, Hillary would be great in some ways and way better, imho, than Obama.

Of course, I'm singularly unenthused because of the absence of my true candidate, plus the absence of my 2nd, 3rd, or even 4th choice, plus Dean Scream 2008 yanking away our delegates, not to mention our passion.

:(

"...vitriol against Obama (and the others) for trying to play by the rules seems misdirected. I think we can all agree that it's not fair to change the rules of the game once the game has started, and especially when those rules were clearly laid out in the beginning."

Nobody is trying to change any rules. It is fair game to try to challenge Dean's ruling about the delegates. And it was fair game for Clinton to leave her name on the ballot in MI.

"Of course, the main person to blame for all this mess in this primary season is Howard Dean. IMO, another person would have foreseen these problems and arranged things differently."

I totally agree with you there, earth! I don't blame Obama for this mess, I only blame him for his response to it. For the mess itself, I mainly blame Howard Dean. I also have room in my crosshairs for the Republican legislature of FL. Those are the culprits, imho.

"But the DNC laid out its rules, and it was incumbent upon the candidates to play by those rules. Calling a candidate an "idiot" because he played by the Party's own rules just doesn't sit well with me."

Again, no rule exists saying that a candidate had to remove his or her name from the Michigan ballot. I'm sure that pressure existed, but no DNC rule existed. If Barack and the others had a pair, they would have STOOD UP to the DNC! Hillary is apparently the only one with a pair in the lot. But then, why didn't she also refuse to sign the "pledge" not to campaign? That seems contradictory. But anyway, she broke no rule.

And, for whatever reason(s)--and I'm willing to concede that it/they could be and probably are purely mercenary--she is fighting for the voters of FL, while all Barack does is to snear and dismiss and to have his official campaign mouthpieces like Kerry do so as well. THAT is why I am mad at Barack Obama, Mr. Inclusiveness (not), Mr. New Politics (not).

We will have to disagree on him. :Y:

"I understand your frustration at what's happened in Florida and Michigan. We all feel it, although living in Florida you'd feel it more than we do. I don't have a solution, but that's why I'm not head of the DNC. :rolleyes: All I know is that faulting someone for playing by the rules just doesn't seem right."

Girl: I wish you were head of the DNC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ...Anyway, both Obama and Hillary played by the rules (except for the national cable ad that Obama apparently aired here, but I don't think he meant it to air in FL), so no one is faulting him for playing by the rules. But the rules did not stipulate that he take his name off the MI ballot. So, too bad, so sad, no votes for you, Obama.

...Don't mind me...I've been reading too many internet comments at the end of various blogs and articles and as a result I now come out SWINGING to beat the band, called for or not. Just a sad reality of the combativeness that currently exists among/between Democrats, just when we should be targetting all our pent-up rage at the oh-so-deserving repugs. Classic Democratic party...

"I don't belong to any organized political party. I'm a Democrat." - Will Rogers -

(and, btw, p.s., that is yet another reason I LOVE Al Gore: he always manages to be diplomatic and stay above the fray, out of the mud, and in the Pure Class Zone. I, on the other hand, while a classy gal on the inside, tend to TOTALLY dive into the mud ring at this point in the going *lol*!!! So, no one will confuse me with Al Gore. If only we could all be like him. But alas...some of us get quite worked up and cannot contain it at this point in the sorry state of affairs that is our party, our nation, the world, et al.)

edited to add: btw, I DO have a solution for the DNC: do what the repugs wisely *choking* did: cut the delegates in half. That way, the state is reprimanded and does have less power, thus providing a disincentive to other states to pull such a leapfrog, yet the voters still have a voice, albiet a diminished one. AND, for future election cycles, create a fair, rotating system of regional primaries. Ba-da-bing, ba-da-boom, problem solved.

WHY does the DNC not consult me on such matters? I'm just sayin'!

:laugh:

Hangingchad for head of the DNC!

A modest suggestion: Appoint Al Gore to sort out this mess :!:

I think there's some fault all around: The candidates, the states, the DNC, the voters

God help us all!

:lol:

NOT the voters. Strike them/us from your statement and I'm with you. All we have done is to vote, so don't hate us because we're beautiful!

:lol:

P.S. LOVE the cartoon!

Here's the latest:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/politi...,0,932559.story

Sounds fair to me at this point. Ausman has been fighting for us since the beginning, which I appreciate.

I love this article!

http://www2.nysun.com/article/73596

What does it mean to you that she's the only name on the ballot? It should have been an indicator to the Democratic Party of things to come. The ambitiousness that kept her from joining her fellow candidates in removing her name, is the very same ambition willing to damage the Party now by knee-capping her Democratic rival and frontrunner.

Hillary Clinton's behavior is becoming increasingly reprehensible and it's becoming painfully obvious the welfare of the Democratic Party is not a priority to campaign.

Well said.