Friday, December 14, 2007
Unofficial Recount Results Show Bennett The Winner
Unofficial results of the recount of the Terre Haute mayor's race confirms that Republican Duke Bennett defeated Mayor Kevin Burke by 108 votes, one more than the original vote tally showed. Unable to win cleanly, Burke is resorting to every under-handed play in the book to win the race. His recount attorneys want to throw out all the votes in 4 precincts, which would erase most of Bennett's winning margin, while they want to count the precinct results with the most voting discrepancies because Burke carried that precinct. Isn't it funny how much hell Democrats have raised over Indiana's Voter ID law, but they are willing to disenfranchise hundreds of voters who validly cast their ballots because it might tip the balance in favor of their candidate?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Indiana law provides that if a party can prove that a pool of votes [precinct] has been tainted then that entire precinct should be disregarded. The GOP has the same right to challenge precincts where they believe that there is an irregularity. How can you condemn someone for following the avenues used as provided by law....if it is bad law then the legislature needs to change it.
No. the funny part is that it is a Democrat is making accusations of voter fraud, which likely is totally composed of "Democratic" votes.
And, what of Muncie?
No, the terribly sad part of this entire discussion is that far less than a majority of the people of Terre Haute probably voted in the election.
I do not understand why we would do anything other than encourage people to vote. That's exactly what the new voter ID system does.
As I post anonymously, I'll boast that I got a drivers license in the name of a friend who was trading airplane tickets with me. He'd broken up with his partner who was a friend of mine, so he went to Florida with my plane ticket while I vacationed out west with his ex.
If someone wants to cast a fraudulent vote, having a picture ID isn't going to stop them. But conversely, this requirement is ridiculous. I'd guess that at least a dozen people (probably many more) didn't bother to vote in Muncie because of the new requirement. Some probably pulled up to the polling place, remembered they'd left their ID in another pocket, and just turned around and went home. Others were asked for it, didn't have it, and walked out. So who's the real winner gonna be in Muncie? Nobody, because we're ALL losers with the election registration and voter ID system we have.
At the same time (and thanks for the soapbox, Gary), we require photo ID for voting at the polling place with our neighbors as witnesses, but we don't in absentee voting? Um, Muncie HAS had fraudulent absentee voting. Or should I say they DO have it (as does Anderson and Terre Haute and every other major city), each and every election. Do you need an ID to vote that way? Nope. Anyone can fill out your absentee ballot and send it back in for you, no questions asked.
Voter ID is ridiculous and hypocritcal to the extreme, and its impact is magnified in these close elections.
varangianguard, what is the proof of your allegation or is it just another partisan case of mudslinging?
Post a Comment