ShareThis Page
Recount adds to Florida’s reputation for bungling elections |

Recount adds to Florida’s reputation for bungling elections

The Associated Press
| Saturday, November 17, 2018 9:24 a.m
Hillsborough County Supervisor of Elections Office staffer Sheryl Jackson counts ballots during a manual recount on Friday, Nov 16, 2018 at the Supervisor of Elections Office in Tampa, Fla. (Monica Herndon/Tampa Bay Times via AP) /Tampa Bay Times via AP)
Hillsborough County Supervisor of Elections Office staff return counted ballots to locked box after a manual recount on Friday, Nov 16, 2018 at the Supervisor of Elections Office in Tampa, Fla. (Monica Herndon/Tampa Bay Times via AP)
Orange County Elections workers go through the hand recount of ballots at the Orange County Supervisor of Elections office in Orlando, Fla., Friday morning, Nov. 16, 2018. (Jacob Langston/Orlando Sentinel via AP)

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. — Mark Toepfer came to this spit of sand on the Tampa Bay shore to soak up the sun, drink a beer and maybe do a little fishing — not to talk about elections.

But talk he did when asked for his thoughts on whether Florida, as a judge recently put it, is “the laughingstock of the world” when it comes to voting.

“We’re the only state that has problems year after year,” the shirtless 58-year-old said, shaking his head. “Why is it like this? Is it the people in charge? Are our machines not like other states’ machines? Fraud? Incompetence? It’s hard to say.”

With races for U.S. Senate and governor still undecided, the state’s latest recount only adds to its reputation for bungling elections. To much of the world, vote-counting confusion is as authentically Florida as jam-packed theme parks, alligators on golf courses and the ubiquity of Pitbull (the Miami rapper, not the dog).

Florida’s history of election woes dates back to 2000, when it took more than five weeks for the state to declare George W. Bush the victor over Vice President Al Gore by 537 votes, thus giving Bush the presidency. Back then, punch-card ballots were punch lines. Photos of election workers using magnifying glasses to search for hanging chads and pregnant chads symbolized the painstaking process.

There are no chads this year, but there are plenty of cracks about flashbacks to the Bush-Gore contest. And, just as in 2000, the Republican candidates in the contested races have declared themselves winners and asked for the recount to stop.

Add to this a litany of other voting problems: Palm Beach County’s machines went on the fritz during the recount due to age and overwork. The electricity went out in Hillsborough County during a machine recount and resulted in an 846-vote deficit. Broward County missed the state deadline to turn in recount results by two minutes.

Those glitches led U.S. District Judge Mark Walker to ask why state officials have repeatedly failed to anticipate problems in elections.

“We have been the laughingstock of the world, election after election, and we chose not to fix this,” he said. Walker is presiding over one of several election-related lawsuits that have been filed since Nov. 6.

On Friday, election workers in all 67 counties began recounting by hand about 93,000 ballots that were not recorded by voting machines.

The entire spectacle drew late-night TV jokes. Ally Hoard, Broward county native and writer on “Late Night With Seth Myers,” was merciless in a video clip.

“How will Florida handle this recount? Not great,” she said. “Florida is a mess. The people are confused and the system is corrupt.”

But some others, like 74-year-old Dunedin resident Mary Sanders, said the “laughingstock” comment, and all the jokes, are unwarranted.

“I don’t think that now that I live here,” the New Jersey transplant said. “I guess I’m becoming more pro-Florida.”

Sanders, a volunteer with the League of Women Voters, spent Thursday in a windowless room at the Pinellas County election supervisor’s office with dozens of other observers, watching officials scrutinize ballots. She said the world doesn’t see the normal side of Florida during times such as this.

“Here in Pinellas County at least, it’s been a very well-run election,” she said. Indeed, the recount there has been run like clockwork, with election officials giving tours of the ballot warehouse and handing reporters detailed agendas of daily activity.

Paul George, a Miami historian, isn’t so certain about Florida’s reputation, or as charitable as Sanders.

“We’re a joke,” he said.

George thinks part of the problem is that, to some degree, people come to Florida to start over. The traditions and habits they had elsewhere aren’t the same in the Sunshine State.

“It’s different here,” he said. “If you’re back home in, say, Ohio, you know the people at the precinct.”

And the state has many new citizens, he said, along with confusing ballot designs. Or perhaps, he mused, election drama is something intrinsic to Florida.

“Are you aware of what happened in 1876?” he asks, with mirth in his voice.

That’s when the U.S. had a hotly contested presidential election. The winner wasn’t certain until March 2, 1877. Democrat Samuel Tilden won the popular vote, and Republican Rutherford B. Hayes won the Electoral College. Allegations of fraud abounded.

Votes from three states were disputed. Which state had problems?

“MORE TROUBLE IN FLORIDA,” read an Associated Press headline from Jan. 6, 1877.

Categories: World
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.