Swamped!

You may also like...

11 Responses

  1. anonmyous says:

    Something isn’t right in the state of Denmark and it isn’t the Cheese. Too bad their isn’t a paper trial!

  2. Ken says:

    A lack of a paper trail is one of the main reasons that Joel, James (I think), and I all opposed electronic voting back in 2001.

    Sigh.

  3. SGInsider says:

    Accelerated is not allowed to post the results until Senate confirms them as official on Tuesday. There were no irregularities. The final vote total was 10,155, not 10,240. There were only 508 undervotes for President. Perfectly understandable with people like Christian Duque out there who may have felt dissaffected and only voted for Susan for Treasurer, there of course are always the young kids who go out and vote only in the Senate race their friend is running in.

  4. SGInsider says:

    May I also point out there is no paper trail in any real election in the state of Florida that emplys electronic voting machines, Accelerated machines are utilized in several large counties with no errors or complaints over the last four years.

  5. Ken says:

    If you look at the results, the totals for Pres/VP and Treasurer are as close as they usually are, about 50-100 votes off. The problem is both totals are 500 votes off from the supposed overall turnout.

    Now, I doubt there are 500 people voting just for Senator, so I suspect it’s either an over-estimation of turnout, or there were 500 ballots not counted for some reason.

    Your other excuse (votes for Susan) isn’t credible as it would require 500 under-votes for Treasurer from President, in addition to 500 votes for Treasurer and not President. That doesn’t seem plausible.

    So we’ll find out what gives soon enough.

  6. gatorman-uf says:

    I actually noticed that as well… and if you count the number of Senate Seat votes and expect that everyone voted for the maximum number of people in each seat, the numbers still come closer to the 9500 or so…

  7. SGInsider says:

    Many more people than you might expect only vote for one person in the senate races. Obviously if you can choose 5 and you choose only one, that person has a higher chance of being elected. Only 5 percent of the ballots contained under votes for president. Completley plausible as many people were lukeworm as to both parties.

  8. gatorman-uf says:

    oh SG insider, I don’t doubt that some of the logic I did in my numbers is flawed, but it would take alot of the people to be able to do that… I can’t wait to see the results overall on Tuesday, but I don’t think the election results will change, but does make you go hmmmm….

    5% for President, but another 5% for Treasurer, and assuming full votes another 5% for Senate candidates, that’s alot of undervotes… probably note enough to swing the election, but enough in some close races

  9. Mike Bowen says:

    If you look at the graduate student votes, there are at least 100 undervotes there for people who just voted for three candidates rather than voting for their parties.

    That doesn’t bode well for grad student representation next year.

  10. old school says:

    Ok one last post before i go off to trial practice, my instructor is Judge Nikki Clark of Bush v. Gore fame.

    Christian made reference that i said Ken had bad BO. Well that is actually a funny story involving me and ken. back in 2001 ken and i got into a fight over email in which he said i didn’t dress right (my shirts were too big) and i said he had bo. We didn’t speak for a month after that, which people in SG knew of the split of Kerns and Argento.

    I guess i have to stop reading christian’s blog, i can’t take all the negativity. It was a fun read and i actually agreed with him on some things.

  11. Ken says:

    and I think part of our argument was over how the Spring 2002 election was unfolding, or something like that.

%d bloggers like this: