General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forums“Glitch” wipes out 1,000 early votes in black FL neighborhood
Glitch wipes out 1,000 early votes in black FL neighborhood
http://americablog.com/2012/11/computer-glitch-votes-black-florida-county-election-fraud.html
Always Florida
There was a story over at NBCs The Grio three days ago noting that at one Florida polling location, in a heavily black neighborhood, the number of people who voted early was suddenly revised from 2,945 to 1,942 thats a 34% decrease.
At first, polling officials blamed it on a computer glitch. Uh huh. And what glitch would that be?
The local supervisor of elections (SOE) didnt inspire a lot of hope when speaking about another, smaller, change to the early voting numbers at another polling location:
(more at link)
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)Dr. Brenda Snipes, is an African-American and a Democrat. Why would you believe that she would be destroying votes in the African-American community? If you look at the numbersm, it's easy to see that it could have easily been a math error. Granted, these should be checked by at least one person from each party before being submitted, but that's a process problem, not intentional vote stealing.
Some mistakes are just that - mistakes.
vaberella
(24,634 posts)It's about the bloody machines themselves. Machines that have heavy Republican backer investment in other locations if not that one.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)It's very easy to see how this could have happened, because the first set is added manually.
Not to mention that these aren't votes, these are numbers of voters. This has nothing to do with the counting of the votes.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)That isn't waht the OP said. It said the # of votes cast had changed downward.
Seems to me if the NUMBER of votes is changed downward, then the votes that were associated with the prior votes were lost, as well. Are you saying that the 1,000 votes are still in there, being counted as votes, but the number of votes won't match it?
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)But if you read the article, it clearly talks about this relating to number of voters. Votes haven't even been counted yet.
Number of voters and votes cast are tallied by two different means and could be two different numbers.
robinlynne
(15,481 posts)snacker
(3,619 posts)And why the hell do we allow it to happen?
NotThisTime
(3,657 posts)graywarrior
(59,440 posts)Blue Owl
(50,494 posts)Isn't this about as anti-American as it gets?
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)They are voter counts.
Second, if they were votes, how would you suggest they put them back in?
vaberella
(24,634 posts)And Anderson Cooper. They will get that remedied and put some heat on these ass holes for trying to steal the vote.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)would never try to steal an election.
Or some would have us try to believe it seems.
SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)But these aren't even votes they're talking about.
Hekate
(90,793 posts)SickOfTheOnePct
(7,290 posts)That doesn't mean that every error means that someone is stealing an election. These aren't even votes that we're talking about, it's number of voters.
I don't get why people can't understand that math errors can be made when humans are involved. There is no excuse for not having the manual totals checked by two people, one from each party, but that's just poor process.
Believe it or not, some mistakes are just mistakes. I find it hard to believe that a Democratic SOE would stand by and allow fraud to happen, so I believe her explanation.
YMMV.