>From what I heard, there is a definite problem. I caught the tail end of it, and don't know the exact numbers, but it was something like this: in an area known for Buchanan supporters, there was "300" votes for him. In the area in question, which is supposed to be a big democrat area there was "5000" votes for Buchannan. I honestly don't know what they can do about it at this point, but they'd better get to work making sure it never happens again.

Yes, that's what I've heard, but I have not seen the numbers to back it up yet.

>Although, it does work out nice for those of us who want Bush to win. :)

I frankly don't care which one wins, I never liked or disliked either candidate strongly enough to matter, IMO either one is capable of handling the presidency well enough. But I do care about the future of the nation, and would like to be quite certain that virtually all votes were correctly punched and tabulated. I think it will have a lasting ill-effect of there's a feeling by about 50% of the voters that the election is seriously tainted by one county in Florida. So, I think something like this should be straightened out thoroughly now, no matter who wins, even if a "runoff" is required.

That said, I would certainly grant the Bush supporters every right to demand re-counts in closely-lost states, and any oddities (like the St Louis thing) investigated too. Fair's fair.