News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google won't donate to members of Congress who voted agai... by rayiner on Tuesday January 26, 2021 @11:34AM (#25917787)
> Hanging chads, over/under-votes, etc.

These were limitations that existed in the equipment in the time. (The uncountable ballot rate in newer optical scanners is vastly lower.) It only became a “concern” because of Gore’s hand recount strategy. (And burning a ton of time pursing the selective recount, which the Florida Supreme Court put a stop to.)

The fact is that with a 1-2% error rate, you can’t reliably “measure” an election result that’s within a tenth of a percent. The whole attempt to recount spoiled ballots was gamesmanship on Gore’s part. (Permissible under Florida law, which was written by idiots, but gamesmanship nonetheless.)

Re:Google won't donate to members of Congress who voted agai... by acdha on Tuesday January 26, 2021 @11:38AM (#25917837)
Again, I’m not saying the hanging chads weren’t a statistical process which was widely recognized, only that they’re a more plausible argument when the entire election comes down to a hundred votes in one state. A recount shifting less than a couple hundred votes is quite possible and at no point did Gore or his party call for disenfranchising huge numbers of people because of it.
Re:Google won't donate to members of Congress who voted agai... by rayiner on Tuesday January 26, 2021 @11:45AM (#25917957)
Yes, I agree. Given the closeness of the results, Gore only needed to try and manipulate the vote counts in one state.