I find it odd that there's such strong objection to what is a clear way to assure that our elections are reliable and we can do a recount if there are any questions.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
The fact of the matter is that they are entitled to request a recount. We're entitled to give them a recount.
Do you ever get the feeling that the only reason we have elections is to find out if the polls were right?
Once they ask for a recount, we will provide them with a recount.
I am convinced that we as a body must conduct a formal and legitimate debate about election irregularities.
You know, having been an election monitor in countries across the world, I can tell you that we would never certify another country's election if it had as many flaws in place as we had in Florida.
I think we can spend too much time worrying about polls.
We need to ask our policy makers and those we elect to office who are supposed to make decisions to give us the evidence of the facts that are behind the decisions that we make. We should be skeptical.
The problem is that when polls are wrong, they tend to be wrong in the same direction. If they miss in New Hampshire, for instance, they all miss on the same mistake.
It's the details and the human element that makes 'Recount' entertaining. Even though we know how the election ends, it plays like a thriller. It's also funny.
We certainly should support both parties having observers at the polling stations to make sure that neither side does anything that allowed a fraudulent vote. That's a very healthy check on the process.
No opposing quotes found.