interesting how whenever there's a recount, the democrat does better.

[unblock]

maybe it's just me or the close elections that i happen to pay attention to, but it seems like any time there's close scrutiny over ballots, the democrat does better.

things that make ya go, "hmmmmmm"....

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

1. It's just a coincidence, I'm sure.

[Blue_In_AK]

2. Mark Begich is a prime example.

It didn't involve a recount, but there certainly were a lot more ballots to count after election night which overwhelmingly went in Mark's favor.

[Diane R]

3. Same in Washington State. Gregoire didn't win until a handcount.

[dflprincess]

4. I think it's because the people most apt to make an error so the scanner can't read the ballot

tend to be young, first time voters or elderly people. Both groups a bit more apt to be voting Democratic.

The other thing I notice about every recount is that it's always the Republican that wants to limit which ballots get recounted.

[unblock]

5. republicans think it's all a game and any way they can win is fine by them.

if you ask them, our ancestors fought and died for your cherished right to jeopardize your job or go without a day's pay and face a set of arbitrary and surprise clerical and procedural tests for which there's no way to prepare and no time to recover from the slightest error in the vague hope that the people handling your ballot will dain to permit it to count and furthermore, that they will actually count it as a vote toward the person you actually meant to chose as your leader.



seriously, imagine george washington coming back and observing some of this crap, and saying, "my men faced british bayonettes so that you could completely pencil in a bubble with a number two pencil! we did not march and starve and die so you could use a ball point pen! and stray lines are treason! that's how we identified tories! they never could stay in their lines!"

[Mike 03]

6. LOL, excellent observation! NT