2 ms·
It would just be recognizing the jitter that exists inherently in the system. You will always get a different number when counting the votes, so you can end up
by SoftwareMaven 15y ago
It would just be recognizing the jitter that exists inherently in the system. You will always get a different number when counting the votes, so you can end up with a "50% voted for both" situation.
Why is flipping a coin worse than pretending the next count will be more correct? You kind of contradict your own point by implying the supreme court didn't supply legitimacy to the election. Nobody can blame a quarter for being stiffed with neocons on the heads side.
- mikeash 15y agoThe trouble is that getting people to recognize that is really hard, and just changing how the system works probably won't do it. If you want to politically antagonize nearly any American with a strong political affiliation, regardless of what that affiliation is, just tell them that the margin of error in the 2000 presidential elections was far larger than the difference in votes, and therefore both candidates were about equally legitimate winners.