Comments on: Minn. Senate race could hinge on scanning machine mistakes

The state's hand recount starting Wednesday may show that thousands of ballots were mistakenly rejected by optical scanning machines.

[QuercusMax]

Minnesota is going down the same rat-hole as Florida in 2000 and the Washington state governor's race in the last election. Past experience in both of those cases as well as other major races in the past is that if you recount enough, somehow you will always "discover" more votes for the Democrat. Anyone with a knowledge of statistics or in possession of common sense will be very troubled by this. And strangely enough, in all 3 cases the voting problems mainly occurred in counties with heavy Democrat leanings: Dade, King, and Hennepin. Finding 32 uncounted ballots in a car trunk after the election is also interesting. If they need any more ballots to help in any way, I'd be happy to help them "find" some more.

I have much more faith in the impartiality of the optical vote counting machines in Minnesota than any count done by humans after the fact. Hand recounts are an artifact of a bygone era where the votes were counted by hand in the first place and subject to error or bias. I suppose the recounts will be conducted in rooms lit by kerosene lamps and recorded with quill pens, too. Time for the "progressive" state of Minnesota to join the 21st century.

[john55440]

Hand counting of these pen-and-ink ballots produces the most accurate results. A person should not have their vote thrown away, because they circled a name, rather than filling in the blank. Minnesota officials do not engage in voter fraud.

[aaf07c]

If the problems are with Democratic ballots, Democratic counties, and those problems favor _Republican_ candidates, wouldn't that statistically point more towards the Republican side of the situation being underhanded? I'm not about to say that they were, but if you've ever seen a recount process you'd know that it's far less "subject to error or bias" than your technological preferences. A machine can be hacked, after all (as we learned in the Florida elections of '00), and whatever bias you're assuming exists will be kept in check by overseers from each party. Like john said, IF the voter's intention is made clear, a machine shouldn't be able to dictate whether or not their vote counts. If that means we have to wait a few weeks for them to recount the ballots by hand, then so be it.

[chris_d]

the ballot-in-trunk story has already been discredited by REP Gov Pawlenty. This sounds exactly like the kind of thing that comes out of limbaugh's butt on a daily basis; which begs the question: why does anyone enjoy listening to rush break wind?

[jezzur]

THat is a remarkable display of paranoia QuercusMax. It really is sad how much your country is fearful and divided. Unfortunately, the fearful and stupid then puff out their chests and parade around talking tough - at home and internationally. Frankly, the rest of the world is sick of it.

Finally you have a president who has some brains and is not a phoney, and yet you complain and whine. Just sad. Then, in your next breath, you will talk about freedom, love of your country, justice for all. Freedom to be absolute morons? Love for the other fools who agree with you and hatred for everyone else?

[sanenazok]

That's interesting...6K people don't know how to draw a line so that means Franken has an excellent chance of winning because these are his supporters apparently. I can't wait for the recount on electronic voting!

[Travis Ernst]

I was dumbfounded to see the number of votes that Stewart Smaley received in the election. It's sad to see the state official being so biased along with the media. I'll be glad when this is said and done with.

Thankfully MN doesn't have to worry about "hanging chads" when it comes to voting. However accessibility was an issue at a few locations. How can they have voting booths where wheelchairs cannot gain entry! That blew my mind.

[ivorycruncher]

"A person should not have their vote thrown away, because they circled a name, rather than filling in the blank."

No, you've got that backwards. That's EXACTLY why their vote should be thrown away. I've voted at several different places in Minnesota over the past few years, and I have never, ever found the clearly-printed instructions to be confusing. I believe the usual options are either draw a line between two dashes, or fill in a little oval completely, both so simple, 4-year-olds could do it, if they know how to read of course.

There are clearly-defined rules for holding elections and casting ballots, and those that choose to disobey the rules, either intentionally or due to ignorance (if you are ignorant, it's because you choose to be, therefore it's your fault), your vote will not and should not be counted. This is why two states' worth of democratic primary election results were thrown out, because they didn't follow the rules and decided to hold elections early. Too many people in this country think that personal failures should be rewarded, which is one of our biggest problems. If you failed to follow the instructions, it's nobody's fault but your own. If you were confused on how to properly vote, election officials were there to help you if you had just asked. If you did not properly vote, your vote does not count. These rules of voting should not be changed for a mere recount.

And another thing. If there were absentee ballots that were submitted properly, but not counted due to an election official's error, I'm all in favor of counting those. That's because the voter followed the rules properly. However, if once again, voters did not take responsibility by making sure their ballots were in on time, they do not deserve to have their vote counted, because they didn't follow the rules. Any ballots that came in once the polls were closed are invalid and should not be counted. Period.

We need to stop rewarding irresponsibility and laziness, or else we are in for a world of hurt. Oh wait, that's right, we're already there.

[aaf07c]

Those clearly defined rules also include that if the voter's intent is clear, the ballot is to be counted. Are you suggesting we pick and choose which rules Minnesota follows and which they don't? The rules are not being changed to allow for a recount- they're pre-existing rules.

[jezzur]

Seriously, the hypocrisy and dull-mindedness of some commenters is remarkable. The rules say if intent is clear, the vote is valid. The ridiculous thing is using a machine that rejects lawful votes. At the very least it should be standard practise to review the discarded votes if it is a known flaw in the system, especially if it has a significant ratio of errors.

You supposedly love your country and the ideals it was built upon, but then self-serving and mypoic thought, along with a solid baseline of pure idiocy leads to the most whacky and paranoid thinking I have ever seen.

[::G]

I live in MN and voted in the election. There were *examples* of how to fill in the ovals on the ballot itself. If a voter can't follow simple instructions with an example, they DO NOT deserve to have their vote counted. That is regardless of whether they're a Democrat or a Republican!

ivorycruncher, I'm with you.

[stevep66]

This re-count thing is a farce. Another cheating democrat trying to steal an election. the dem's like these paper ballots so they can holler voter fraud and missing vote's. make all ballots computer then the chances of voter fraud is near 1%. If people cant figure out these simple machines then they dont have since enuff to vote anyway therefore they cant have enuff since to know the issues anyway and therefore they shoulnt be able to vote anyway.

[aaf07c]

Right, because Bush so fairly won the election I'm sure you're referring to. If the votes missing were Republican votes, would you want them to be counted? So would we. Do you know why? Because that's Democracy.

[sanenazok]

@aaf07c - correct me if I'm wrong...but of all the endless recounts in Florida...didn't each one show a Bush win? Was there a single recount that gave Gore the state? I don't exactly remember, but I'm pretty sure there was none. Wikipedia confirms that Gore only won the 'unofficial' recounts by the beacons of independent thought (liberal press) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_election_recount

[jcarys]

First off, although the article does eventually describe the situation correctly, I think the headline calling this "scanning machine mistakes" is misleading. The machines worked as they are supposed to - the humans doing the input did not. All machines work within a given specification, and these did as expected. So the recount will simply find the ballots that were rejected because people did not fill in the little dots very well or at all.

For those that consider these people less deserving or stupid, you might consider viewing the situation a bit more charitably. There are always older voters and those that have physical issues with hand motion or eyesight that could have prevented them from filling the form out correctly. Perhaps there were language issues and they didn't understand what was expected. The line of attack is that since these people did not fill out a form perfectly, there vote is worth less than others. I'm sorry, but the Constitution makes no provision for how good you are at filling out a computer form.

Finally, I don't believe we are going down a rat hole like in Florida. Minnesota has well defined laws that govern the recount process and a known set of rules to judge ballots. Florida in 2000 never did a full recount after the Supreme Court decision, leaving voters in perpetual questioning of the results. MN is doing exactly the opposite - counting every single vote to determine the intent of the citizens. It's always possible that candidate lawsuits will cloud this process, but it's going along just fine so far.

[y_p_w]

These machines are not flawless. They require maintenance and have been known to have a host of problems when not maintained properly. Ballots themselves can have problems even though they were filled out according to instructions. For this election, I heard about one vote count that was reduced because it was determined that the ballot had jammed the scanner and two votes were recorded for the same candidate. Sometimes a ballot is misprinted with a certain skew such that the machines can't properly read them.

These machines have to be certified too. I know in California some counties still use (some of the older ES&S) machines that wouldn't be allowed as new because their certification audits failed (error rates were high), but their counties can't afford new machines. Even when there are no permanent physical problems with the machines, they can sometimes fail to record a vote. These machines are like any other piece of equipment. I think we've all had our own problems with copiers, FAX machines, ticket dispensers, etc.

Back when I took the SAT using an optical scanning for, we could request a hand-check of the form if we doubted the accuracy of the score. I forgot what the fee was, but it wasn't ridiculous.

[ps_martin]

The title of the article implies there is a problem with the machines. You even state ballots could have been "mistakenly rejected by the machines". You then state "The optical scanners would have rejected ballots that were not filled out correctly." So...if the ballots weren't filled out correctly, how were they "mistakenly rejected"? Isn't it the job of those machines to tabulate correctly filled out ballots?

Perhaps a better title for the article would be "Minn. Senate race could hinge on voter mistakes."

[Tom Grezek]

When I was waiting in line to vote, I noticed on two occasions the scanner kicked out the ballot and the election judge indicated to the voter that they had either not cast a vote for a candidate or it could not be counted. The voter was then allowed to correct the error and rescan to insure it worked propeerly. I'm wondering how other precints handled the issues.

[PhilosopherJay]

The story is fine, except for the fact that you repeat the fable about the 32 ballots left in the car. Here is the article in the Minnesota Post debunking that story: http://www.minnpost.com/davidbrauer/2008/11/12/4565/minneapolis_election_director_speaks_ballots_in_my_car_story_false

The Republicans seem to whipping up their low I.Q. faithful into a frenzy with bogus stories like this. It belongs with "Iraq had weapons of mass destruction" and "Obama was Palin Around with Terrorists" as examples of events that only exist in the alternative ideological universe that many Republicans inhabit.

I hope that you will print a retraction.

[jwrofwheaton]

If the democrats win in minnesota, and they will, then that partially makes up for the fiasco in florida. All you repubs walking around with a stick up your ass get used to it cause the dems will be in power for the next 30 years.

[pwandmaker]

does anyone else see the hilarity of this?

it seems that a country that continually harps on about being the planets greatest democracy can't quite get the simple act of casting a vote?

ahhh americans, a never ending source of humour for the rest of the world.

[jezzur]

I agree whole-heartedly. Just this "Dems are dumb"... "no, republicans are dumb". I get the impression that the republicans are probably a bit less informed, fearful, more often racist on the whole, but there are also some very intelligent people who just think about the world differently to me. I can't help but notice that people in the US so often talk with pride about a country that is severely flawed, but then pounce on anyone who criticises. The wasted energy of this bickering, constant paranoia, and ridiculous election displays is immeasurable, but it will never change because people are living in pixie-land thinking US is the best place on Earth. It just isn't, and even if it was, you would want to make it even better yeah?

Criticism and self-criticism is essential to move forward. That makes us learn. Moreover, not being selfish is a good idea, and democracy is flawed in itself just for the fundamentally nature of every vote counted. It can easily lead to situations where 51% of a country is laughing while the other 49% live in squalor. If you are happy with that, you arent human.

[jezzur]

oops...i meant the fundamentally flawed nature of votes. That is, that if everyone votes for themselves, you can easily have a situation where if 51% of the population is aligned, then the other 49 percent suffer. THe politicians fight over the median 5 percent of votes... if they can capture them and not be too retarded they can keep power.