More government revisions

[londubh]

So, months ago, mid november someone (Greta van Susteren?) claimed either that A) with the exception of the 2000 Presidential election, the recounts Always came back in favor of Democrats, or B) recounts consistently resulted in favor of the party of whomever was in charge of the judicial branch of the precincts in question. Either way, that's a

Comments

[ctseawa]

Before you go fonching and foaming about the ruling you might want to read it.

It's interesting reading. They put a lot of work into explaining what happened, what their reasoning was, and why they ruled the way they did.

[londubh]

My problem is more with the recount itself. As i said, i saw a pretty good sample of the ballots, and based on that and all the statically provable stuff about samples, I have virtually no confidence that the recount was done fairly, and That's the problem

[londubh]

Given that this took 5 full months of tax payer dollars to fund something that, judge salaries, canvasing board, and cost the state of Minnesota half their votes in the senate, and the entire matter was functionally settled by a single decision which was made After the votes were available for viewing?

that should have been:
Given that this took 5 full months of tax payer dollars to fund something that, judge salaries, canvasing board, and cost the state of Minnesota half their votes in the senate, and the entire matter was functionally settled by a single decision which was made After the votes were available for viewing, wouldn't it be cheaper, and less controversial to simply request everyone vote again, and stand by that count?