Reply #13: Precedent...... [View All]

[suston96]

http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061109/NEWS/611090440

"A case that lawyers for both camps might look at would be a touch-screen problem in North Carolina in the 2004 race for state agricultural commissioner.

In that case, a single electronic voting machine ran out of memory and didn't record 4,438 votes. Because of a signature log, elections workers had a record of whose votes were lost, but not a record of how they voted.

The winning margin was only 2,300 votes, enough to have been swung by the missing ballots.

What followed was a three-month battle over what to do, ending with a new state law allowing a revote when disenfranchised voters can be identified.

With no way to recount the missing votes, the state board of elections called for a revote in the one county where the machines were broken, but Superior Court judges ruled that would be against the law.

In the end, winning Republican Steve Troxler and his lawyers collected signed affidavits from more than 1,400 of the voters whose ballots were lost, saying they voted for Troxler.

Before Troxler could deliver his argument, incumbent Democrat Britt Cobb conceded."

Democrats may have won, but the victory does not accurately reflect by how large a margin they - we won.

Someday people in this country will learn that the voters cannot be intimidated "in any way" (see Sec. 2 14th Amendment) in making their elections. Touchscreens and the like intimidate to the point where prospective voters will elect to skip the election.

Maybe that was the intent all along.