PROOF THAT NEOCONS ARE STUPID

Steve -

I will make one last comment that I disagree with you position on counting
votes and the role of the Federal Electron Commission's role in the
gathering and publishing of voting statistics to analyze the effectiveness
of voter registration and voter guarantees in federal elections. I will not
post any further points on this issue as you are the self-appointed expert
and will continue used statistics in the classic tradition to support
forgone conclusions.

Jack G.


"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Steve:

The point is perhaps clarified below in three embedded responses.
Please
note that rudeness is being ignored for the purpose of enhancing
comprehension:

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"Leslie Swartz" wrote in message
...
Steve:

Read the reports.

For what purpose?

**** SNIP ****



The popular vote in each state determines how that state's electoral
votes
are cast.


Kind of.

1) "A" popular vote is "counted" in order to determine how the electoral
votes should be cast by the electors.
2) Exactly how these votes are counted- and whether or not an attempt is
made to count all of the votes, and if so how this attempt is made- varies
somewhat state by state.
3) Once the individual state has counted enough ballots to determine how
to
proceed electorally, the unused/unecessary votes are generally not
counted.
4) The electors from that state are then charged to vote a certain way
(generally).
5) The electors vote; according to the laws of their state.
6) When it's all over, various media types sum the ballots counted in
each
state (with, on the average, a 5% undercount deemed "Acceptable") to
arrive
at what is then reported as the "nationwide popular vote."

Note that in none of this process is there actually an attempt made to
determine, with any type of accuracy, what the "nationwide popular vote"
(let alone the "statewide popular vote") actually is.

O.K.- subtlety aside- note that in none of this process is there actually
an
attempt made to determine, with any type of accuracy, what the "nationwide
popular vote" (let alone the "statewide popular vote") actually is.




We have a casual effort by amateurs inte h press of course- but nothing
approaching any type of recognized official count.

Surprised?


No. Should I be?



Check it out.


Check what out?



Heah, I'm putting it out there and standing behind it. I have provided
the cites. if you think I am making it up, get the reports, read them,
and then let's go at it chapter and verse.


What the hell are you talking about? Is there some part of the
presidential election process you'd like me to explain to you?


Apparently that is not the problem at this time.






The last time I did this nobody took me up on it. it got real quiet
all
of a sudden . . .


Took you up on what?

The true statement that "We can't claim that 'Gore won the popular vote'
or
'Gore got more votes'" appears to be wa-a-a-a-a-ay beyond the
comprehension
of many in this group, who continue to post various numbers as
representing
the "nationwide popular vote" when indeed such a thing does not exist in
reality.

Steve Swartz