-
Website
http://washingtonindependent.com/ -
Original page
http://washingtonindependent.com/?p=15817 -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
nbc1
409 comments · 2 points
-
naturalizedcitizen
1490 comments · 36 points
-
jjfitz
349 comments · 18 points
-
24AheadDotCom
363 comments · 28 points
-
Anteni
600 comments · 35 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
Why I Don’t Write About Sarah Palin’s Facebook Posts
6 hours ago · 70 comments
-
Covering Palin the Right Way
5 hours ago · 11 comments
-
Tea Partiers on Griffith: ‘We Do Not Trust Him’
2 hours ago · 7 comments
-
Sean Hannity Winks at the Birthers
2 weeks ago · 934 comments
-
Pawlenty: Palin’s More Qualified Than Obama
2 days ago · 97 comments
-
Why I Don’t Write About Sarah Palin’s Facebook Posts
That's one way to put it.
My question: lets say the (hacked) totals from a single polling place come to a negative number for Obama. Say negative 10,000 votes for Obama in polling place X. Let's say Obama receives 1,000,000 votes from the rest of the polling places in that state. Does he suddenly have 990,000 votes because of the negative ten thousand from the one location? Or is the negative number ignored? In 2004 in Ohio, I recall that there were negative totals from some locations and I'm not sure how the negative numbers were handled. There will have to be a court ruling on this someday. Otherwise, one polling location could reverse any election.