Ohio Counties React Differently To New Recount Requests

[lovuian]

http://www.wcpo.com/news/2004/local/12/13/ohio_recount.html

Ohio Counties React Differently To New Recount Requests

Reported by: A.P.
Web produced by: Neil Relyea
Photographed by: 9News
12/14/2004 1:02:23 AM
Ohio elections boards are reacting differently to new recount requests by Democrat John Kerry's presidential campaign.

The eleven requests range from visually inspecting ballots that don't have a vote for a presidential candidate to having a neutral group involved.

When contacted today by The Associated Press, many boards officials said they hadn't heard about the weekend request by a lawyer handling the recount for the Kerry campaign.

snip...

A few elections officials say they would cooperate with the request, while some officials say there is just no way they can comply.

HMMM!!! Who are these officials who say they can no way comply. Its the law!!! If they can't do it put somebody in there that can!!!

[Verve]

1. We have to find out what counties aren't in compliance and keep our eyes

on them!:crazy:

[lovuian]

2. Yep I bet Warren County can't comply

How much do ya want to bet!!!

[Straight Shooter]

4. I'll bet you a Blackwell and raise you a LoParo

Deal?

[merwin]

3. Take it to the supreme court, equal protection :-)

From Wikipedia,

Bush V. Gore:

Bush, represented by Theodore Olson, charged that the recounts in Florida violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Because the votes were being counted unevenly, with standards varying from county to county and recounts in counties where he could have been likely to have gained votes not even being conducted, Bush argued, the decision went against the language in the Constitution stating "nor shall any State . . . deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

In a 7-2 opinion, the court ordered that a ballot recount then being conducted in certain counties in Florida was to be stopped due to lacking a consistent standard.


Woot, isn't this the same thing?

[lovuian]

5. Great Point Merwin RIGHT ON!!!

:bounce:

[nascarblue]

6. yes, but didnt the Supreme court say it was a one time ruling? NT

[rodeodance]

7. Is it Blackwell's responsibility to inform these workers ???

[Merlin]

10. Hey! How dare you be so lucid + rational while using (almost) my name! :-)

How will I ever live down the damage to my reputation?
:bounce:

[DeepModem Mom]

8. kick

[DeepModem Mom]

9. kick