Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

LetMeSleepNoEleven t1_iztq37n wrote

Reply to comment by March_Latter in Recount flips Mass. House election to Democrat by 1 vote by TurretLauncher

I’m not familiar with a hand-count and machine-count that were significantly different from each other. There are often a very small number of ballots that are damaged or not marked well and cannot be read accurately by the machine. Consequently, again, it may affect a very close race, so if the vote gap is very small, it makes sense to do a hand recount to eyeball the ballots that might not have been properly legible.

In this case, it is not that the machine is ‘inaccurate’ but that the ballot was not legible.

If you’re familiar with a case in which hand and machine counts differed beyond a small margin, please let me know.

Otherwise, this is not really a matter of trust but of statistics.

4

March_Latter t1_iztt2t0 wrote

Then the statistics need to be trusted. In the last 3 years how many close elections such as this one have been decided on the last batch of votes? Miracle last group to be counted seems to always be the winner for Democrats including this one. The first few times this happens its not a statistic. When its consistent it is. Overall we cannot fault one group but not the other when there is a possible issue. People on this thread claiming the republican is wrong when a recount decides against him? No way. The right to challenge is obvious and history shows him not to always be wrong on this.

−5

LetMeSleepNoEleven t1_iztupnt wrote

Again, it’s not a matter of trust except in trusting to reason.

The sequence of vote counting does not impact the total.

It’s known that Democrats are more likely to vote by mail, and these are often counted last.

There’s nothing suspicious about that.

3