Link to jump to start of content The Seattle Times Company Jobs Autos Homes Rentals NWsource Classifieds seattletimes.com
The Seattle Times STOP: The Seattle Times Opinion Blog
Traffic | Weather | Your account Movies | Restaurants | Today's events



Welcome to STop, the Seattle Times Opinion blog where our editorial writers and editors share their evolving thoughts on a variety of issues. STop is a place where opinion writers and readers can exchange views and readers can learn more about how editorial positions are formed.

The opinions you read below are those of the individual writers, not necessarily views that will become formal positions of The Seattle Times. Respond to STop
(Please be aware that your name and comments may be published here, unless you specify otherwise).

Currently, STop cannot automatically post readers' comments on the blog. However, the editorial staff will regularly post readers' comments. Your comments are sent directly to the individual editor or writer.

space space space

Jim Vesely
space
Jim Vesely
E-mail | Bio


Lee Moriwaki
space
Lee Moriwaki
E-mail | Bio


Joni Balter
space
Joni Balter
E-mail | Bio


Eric Devericks
space
Eric Devericks
E-mail | Bio


Lance Dickie
space
Lance Dickie
E-mail | Bio


Bruce Ramsey
space
Bruce Ramsey
E-mail | Bio


Kate Riley
space
Kate Riley
E-mail | Bio


Lynne Varner
space
Lynne Varner
E-mail | Bio


Ryan Blethen
space
Ryan Blethen
E-mail | Bio


December 28, 2004

Re: For shame!

A reader responds to another reader's comments:

You have many TYPICAL Democrat responses in the "thoughtful" response from a reader.

The fact of the matter is this election has MAJOR serious problems. The outcome all THREE times begs for better handling of ballots. What the "thoughtful" responder didn't acknowledge is that the original machine count WAS accurate. The reason there were differences between the first and second count were new ballots were added in several counties.

I TRUST a machine recount much more than a hand recount. A machine doesn't have to wrestle with bias or outside influences. A machine doesn't go cross-eyed when its eyes get so red they can hardly stand the pain. A machine doesn't have to think about what to have for lunch while viewing ballots or what the kids are going to do today. A machine doesn't use "fuzzy logic" to conclude if a voter filled out the form correctly. A machine just counts and does it much more accurately than any hand count could by a long shot.

Don't let them fool you into believing that the machine made errors. IT DID NOT. Humans who created the input (the ballots) made errors and thus in my mind invalidated their own vote. It is not the fault of anybody else that they invalidated their OWN vote it is strictly their own responsibility.

Oh wait, that isn't the case in a liberal's mind. The intent makes it valid ... Never mind that the voter didn't read instructions ... Never mind that they didn't take the time to make sure all markings on the ballot are what the voter intends to submit. Never mind that the EASY to FOLLOW instructions are there ... The ballot counts.

Give me a break. Can't someone take responsibility for their vote not being counted?

Respond

 
Posted by Kate Riley at December 28, 2004 10:08 AM



Marketplace

November 2005

S M T W T F S
    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