Absentee and recounts

It could get messy. If the election is close, if there are recounts, there will be howls, protests, and conspiracy theories, to say nothing of sex, lies and video tape and the main stream media pushing for their guy. Here's how a U. of I. professor of political science, Brian Gaines, sees it:

The extremely tight 2000 election, and resulting dispute over the Florida recount, raised some uncomfortable questions about the U.S. voting system. Have we adequately addressed those concerns? Are there other potential issues or controversies waiting in the wings in the event of another close contest?

"Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a fool-proof electoral system. Blunders and fraud can creep into many different stages, from ballot design, to eligibility screening, to tabulation. Recounts often reveal serious problems. New Mexico's handling of the 2000 presidential election was a shambles, but the state was spared scrutiny because all eyes were on Florida. Washington state had an orderly, uncontroversial recount in its U.S. Senate race that year. The secretary of state crowed that his state managed recounts properly, so watching them was "like watching grass grow." Four years later, his successor oversaw a tumultuous triple recount in which new, previously overlooked ballots emerged late in the process, reversing the outcome. I'll hope for a controversy-free election, but if it is as close as I expect, there will probably be serious problems somewhere. Personally, I worry about the huge growth of absentee voting. Hardly anyone ever points out that absentee ballots defy modern practice by not being secret. Secret ballots emerged in the 19th century as the main device to prevent vote buying and intimidation of voters. We've quietly rolled back that reform in the interest of boosting turnout, on the assumption that decentralized, non-secret ballots are secure. I'm not confident that's right, and I expect a blow up over systematic abuse of absentee ballots by some campaign one of these days."

Then add all the motor-voter, convict voting rights (Democrats want these votes) and soldiers stationed abroad (Republicans want these included), the elder vote who wants to vote at home, all the questioned residency of college students voting for the first time, and we may not know for months who the next president is. These folks don't necessarily turn up in the polls we are reading day to day. The fact that these aren't "secret" will probably be an issue to keep lawyers employed for months, if one party or the other makes an issue. Also, we can expect to see dead people voting again in certain large blue cities as well as large turnouts of confused voters who can't read or figure out the ballots and so someone will demand a recount. Not the whole state, but just certain precincts or counties with identifiable blocks of voters. When it rains or gets cold in Ohio in November (that's a lot, folks), or when the lines are long and the polls close, or if certain people feel intimidated because of the neighborhood or the church where they vote, of if the community organizers from ACORN messed up, or the media talking heads guess it wrong too early, it will be the Republicans fault. About that, I have little doubt.