By definition, in any democracy or republic, the minority interest is always seeking to become the (ruling) majority. Short of that, even at 49.9% in a 2 way race, the "first past the post" system of elections such as we have here in the United States, creates what can fairly be called a "Guaranteed Minority Disfranchisement System" of voting, whereby the alleged losers of the election get zero representation from the party of their choice, while the "winners take all." Thus, the apt title "Loser Take All" is a reflection of the human desire to "compete and win in the 21st Century" (to borrow a phrase from Clinton), and many a commentator has noted the culture of cheating that's developed in America from SAT exams to baseball steroids to Enron.
It should be clear from even this short discussion that since elections are purely procedural measures to measure the will of the people, they don't promise us, even when properly run, a *just* result on the *substantive* level (i.e., a "Hitler",for example, could conceivably be legitimately elected, though probably not without some deception of the public as to intentions...). Thus, those individuals or minorities who feel VERY passionate about politics -- whether for ideological reasons, moral reasons, financial reasons, reasons of power-mongering, or any other way of being convinced or sold on a course of action for any ballot measure or race, is usually MORE THAN ENOUGH for a sizable percentage of folks to cheat in an election -- they are, after all, doing the Nation a FAVOR (in their minds) and saving us all from a fate that may be (in their minds) worse than death -- like "saving Western civilization itself" from the alleged "weakness" of a Sen. Kerry. Or, perhaps they are just sealing up control of the world's richest country and sole military superpower -- which are clearly at stake with the US Presidency. These are the HIGHEST STAKES THE WORLD HAS TO OFFER, and the fairness of the counts is utterly inscrutable, secret, and there's not one shred of evidence, nor one human witness in any jurisdiction without hand counting, to testify competently that the counts reported as official are "True and Correct." Secrecy in vote counts or anything else always means UNaccountability, and nobody can possibly favor UNaccountable elections, yet that is precisely what we will get and yet not be able to say the emperor has no clothes at all!
In short, only Pollyanna remains unconcerned about the undeniable fact that computers count, in utter secrecy, and therefore with utter unaccountability, fully 95% of the nation's total votes. Winners will be "Crowned" with such speed that even the best evidence (if secrecy could somehow be overcome) would be highly technical and unlikely to motivate the kind of outrage necessary to change the apparent winner to get the true winner announced instead. And Bush v. Gore stands ready to terminate human recounts because of their alleged possible biases. In reality, humans that don't trust each other counting votes are the most accurate system ever devised (just like tellers and customers at banks) and that's why the hand recount has always been the count of last resort - and most accuracy. But now the Constitution, via Bush v Gore, says, essentially, otherwise.
Only Pollyanna remains unconcerned about media-rush jobs pressing for instant election results -- because speed forces things to happen faster than the human eye or brain can follow -- and is the foundation of all sleight-of-hand tricks, as well as a classic foundation of fraud).
Why indeed is the media interfering to FORCE the creation of news? Shouldn't they sit back and objectively report the news when its ready? Forcing speed in common observation is akin to forcing errors, or at least increased chances of errors. We've waited two years for the campaign to cease, two days at the most for a proper, OBSERVABLE first count (the one that determines the all-important apparent winner and the allege "Sore loser") is more than reasonable and tolerable.
After the first count, don't expect election officials, or any human beings, to watchdog themselves, audit themselves, recount themselves, or otherwise attract the media fishbowl of Florida 2000 to THEIR locality -- to their everlasting shame. No, the 2004 recount on the presidential race was rigged in Ohio 2004, there were criminal convictions, then an admission the case was "no contest". After the all-important first count is "certified" (based on no personal knowledge whatsoever) the officials are in a poor position indeed to be guardians of democracy and attack the very counts they just certified under penalty of perjury, so they rig the recounts, instead.
WE must get it right on election night -- or shortly thereafter, on the FIRST count. Bush v. Gore comes in to terminate human *recounts* or "audits". Problem is, right now the election night counts are rushed, computerized, utterly secret, and there's no rational basis for confidence in the results. (this is a scientific certainty, given that election results are non-reproducible, non-observable, and violate other primary requirements for science).
READ THIS BOOK and find out more about how the liberty of the American people is being thrown out the window in a fit of secrecy, with local officials purporting to contract our most sacred rights away to corporate vendors of voting machines. If you don't have GUARANTEED to you the ability to "kick the bums out" (and with computerized elections you Surely can't kick our crooked politicos against their will) then WE are not FREE. That makes this book IMPORTANT, with all capital letters.
Full Disclosure: my spouse wrote a chapter in the book on Bush v. Gore but receives no royalties or consideration of any kind. And I'm not a US citizen and can't vote, but I can see that even if my favorite wins, the procedure of the American elections is such that it's a void nullity no matter who wins. Perhaps, Americans will be happy with all incumbents staying in power, since this is the natural result when incumbents (who make all election laws, by definition) really foul up the election systems. It seems Americans should take control of their elections back, unless they think the government can watchdog itself as it determines its own power and paycheck in secrecy and unaccountability.
