Recalling the subjectivity of manual recounts
Re: "Clearing up the election that won't die" by Lance deHaven-Smith (My View, Sept. 2).
The malicious allegations and errors of fact by Lance deHaven-Smith do a disservice to his academic credentials, reducing him to a political shill. While a recent University of Chicago study purported to show that Al Gore would have won in a statewide recount, the fact is that the Bush team offered a statewide recount. This was rejected by the Gore team in favor of selective recounts in heavily Democrat counties. Of course, both teams were motivated by the same perception - that in a statewide recount, Bush would be a sure winner, which is probably right. Every study since has shown that every recount wanted by the Gore team would have been won by Bush.
After watching Palm Beach County poll workers holding punch ballots up to the light to see if there is light around a chad, how can a rational professor say that the manual recounts are not subjective?
I remember thinking "Wow. Ballot Fraud is being nationally televised and none of the reporters are saying anything about it."