Judge orders hand recount of ballots in crucial (PA State) House race

[brooklynite]

HARRISBURG, Pa. (AP) — A judge Friday granted a request by Republicans for a hand recount of 23,000 ballots in a close legislative election that will determine whether Democrats will reclaim the majority in the state House of Representatives after 12 years.

Chester County Judge Howard F. Riley Jr. said the recount of the 156th District election, in which Democrat Barbara McIlvaine Smith edged out Republican Shannon Royer by 23 votes, would begin on Tuesday and continue "each day thereafter."

...snip...

The Democrats had sought a machine recount and wanted the ballots to be run through a different model of optical scanning machine than the type that was used in the Nov. 7 general election — a process they said could be completed in just three days.

But the Republicans have said they are concerned about evidence that some ballots may not have been properly scanned, and proposed a hand count that they estimate will take about two weeks.

http://www.pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-44/1166229600119980.xml&storylist=penn

If you ever pay a visit to FR, you'll see endless lamentations about how Republicans graciously concede when they lose, and only Democrats drag recounts out endlessly...

[Toots]

1. I think they should have a hand count

It is what I/we have been yelling about for six years now. Having the ability to hand count paper ballots. It is wonderful that there is a place left in America that that can happen. Election judges from both parties will do a very good job with plenty of oversight. I feel for those state where there are no paper ballots but then again we all know machines never make errors:sarcasm:

[rmgarrette64]

12. People make errors too

I like a paper trail, so we can have a double check, but I don't understand this fetishization of "hand counts." The idea that something counted by people is going to be more accurate than something counted by machine goes against pretty much all experience - and the whole point of making the machines in the first place.

Now, fraud is a different matter, and that's why the paper trail is important. You can then check a subset of the paper count against the machine's tally. When counting small amounts, people are quite accurate. But when counting thousands, I'll generally trust a machine tally.

Sorry, but what the Republicans want here is a greater margin of error, so the count has at least a shot of coming in their favor. (And as a side note, I generally suspect the same of our side when we demand hand counts.)

R. Garrett

[buddysmellgood]

2. We should point that out, and encourage the recount. Count the votes. Count them all. Count them

twice.

[Kip Humphrey]

5. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10, 11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20, 21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30, 31,32,33,34,3...

[tblue37]

3. I am an American.

I don't want the person who got fewer votes to win any election.

Count every damned vote, whether it is for a Democrat or a Republican. This should NOT be a partisan issue!

[bigbrother05]

4. Voter's intent?

Will the ruling/law allow the hand count to determine the 'intent' of the voter? Let us all praise the judge in doing the right thing. Will all the ballots be counted or only a portion in the district?

We should all support the counting of all votes.

[MidwestTransplant]

6. I am sure the Freepers are opposed to this and think the Dem.

should just be seated. They aren't much for recounting votes.

[Sherman A1]

7. Superb!!!

No matter which way the results turn out - every vote should be counted.

[Joanne98]

8. I agree. Count them by hand.

[tabasco]

9. A recount?!? OH THE HORROR !!

I thought repugnicans HATED recounts because it was SO IMPORTANT to MOVE ON and GET OVER IT !?!

[grahamhgreen]

10. All votes should be hand counted....

[jarab]

11. That's the message. nt

...O...

[stillcool]

13. Oh, the irony...

the double-standard, and the hypocrisy.. AGAIN. What's good for the goose is definitely not good for the gander. It's the 'right' thing to do when a republican's seat is at stake. When it's the presidential election, or any number of House seats where a democrat may be the winner it is decidedly 'wrong', and the magnification provided by the 'media' is deafening. What a difference a party makes.