If it had not been for faulty machine error, producing an absurdly high undervote, then Christine Jennings would have won this election on November 7th:The group of nearly 18,000 voters that registered no choice in Sarasota's disputed congressional election solidly backed Democratic candidates in all five of Florida's statewide races, an Orlando Sentinel analysis of ballot data shows.

Among these voters, even the weakest Democrat -- agriculture-commissioner candidate Eric Copeland -- outpaced a much-better-known Republican incumbent by 551 votes.

The trend, which continues up the ticket to the race for governor and U.S. Senate, suggests that if votes were truly cast and lost -- as Democrat Christine Jennings maintains -- they were votes that likely cost her the congressional election.

Republican Vern Buchanan's 369-vote victory was certified by state officials Monday. His camp says that, although people may have skipped the race -- intentionally or not -- there is no evidence that votes went missing.

But the results of the Sentinel analysis, two experts said, warrant additional investigation.

"Wow," University of Virginia political analyst Larry Sabato said. "That's very suggestive -- I'd even say strongly suggestive -- that if there had been votes recorded, she [Jennings] would have won that House seat."

David Dill, an electronic-voting expert at Stanford University, put it this way: "It seems to establish with certainty that more Democrats are represented in those undervoted ballots."

The Sentinel reviewed records of 17,846 touch-screen ballots that included no vote in the tightly contested 13th District congressional race to determine whom voters selected in other major races. Now, even a small, cursory examination of the voting machines used in Sarasota County shows regular and serious problems with the vote count. If Vern Buchanan is seated in the House without a new election, than the FL-13, Katherine Harris's old district, will have a representative seated against the will of the voters.

There is, however, a way that Democrats can solve this problem without the need for further lawsuits or recounts. Considering how close the election was, how flawed the voting was because of the machine error, and that the voting problems caused the result of the election to flip sides, the only just solution is for a new election in FL-13. After January 4th, House Democrats will have that power:Election watchers around the country think that the race could end up before a House committee -- the House Administration Committee, which oversees Federal elections. If so, the full House, which in the end is responsible for seating new members, could potentially vote on which of the two candidates to seat, thus deciding the race's outcome itself -- or could call for a new recount, or even declare the seat vacant and mandate a new election. Right now, of course, the House is still GOP-controlled, but by the time of this vote it could be in the hands of Dems -- meaning Jennings could conceivably pull off a win after all. Jonathan is right to point out that simply seating Jennings without a new election would probably be a bad move politically. However, Democrats do have two reasonable options. First, they could refuse to seat either Jennings or Buchanan without a new election. Second, they could seat Jennings for a few minutes, and then have her immediately resign, resulting in a special election for FL-13 in the spring of 2007. Either way, House Democrats would be fulfilling the necessary and just goal of a new election in FL-13.

The best move would probably be to take the first option until either Bush or the new Florida governor refuses the budge. Once that point is reached, it is time for option number two. I have no idea what sort of chance Jennings would have in a new election, but holding that new election is, quite simply, the only just option. There is a danger that this will become an unfortunate sideshow during the first couple months of the new Democratic Congress, but it is the sort of fight that I, and I imagine the entire netroots, and willing to give Democrats full backing to engage.

Please, continue to support the Christine Jennings recount fund. If you are a local, you can also participate in a rally for a revote in Florida 13 this Sunday. We can't let faulty voting machines defy the will of the electorate in Katherine Harris's district.

As much as I would like to start lining up House targets for 2006, I have no intention of doing so until the House is finally settled. That won't happen until December. Needless to say, both sides will be able to draw up fairly deep target lists, considering the very high number of close races in the House this cycle. However, with an expected wave of Republican retirements, and with Democrats coming out on the wrong end of slightly more close races than Republicans, our target list should still be deeper than theirs. With another good cycle, Democrats could pick up as many as 15-20 more seats in the House in 2008. Couple that with better maps after 2010, and then we will have built a truly long-term majority.

The Washington Post has a quick round-up of the ten House races that are still unresolved. In the extended entry, I provide the latest news on CT-02, WA-08, OH-15, and FL-13.

There's more...

Let it be known that the netroots is ready and willing to defend Democrats in any and all recounts. Jennings is not conceding in FL-13. Massa is not conceding in NY-29. Kissell should not concede in NC-08. There are several other marginal seats where we should strongly consider recounts: NY-25, OH-02, OH-15, WY-AL and, if it goes poorly in the final few votes, PA-06.

Republicans will probably be challenging our victories in CT-02, IA-02, NM-01, NY-19, GA-08, GA-12 and PA08 (at least). It can't stand. We will sustain our victories in all of those seats.

I'm not tired anymore. I don't need a vacation anymore. Let's keep fighting. I don't want to concede any seat where Democrats themselves have refused to concede.

In an election with the polls this close, with such great differences between the two candidates, with massive class and cultural differences between the supporters of the two candidates, in a country with a history of rigged elections (though mainly carried about by PRI, the party that finished in third place), something like this was almost bound to happen. From the Guardian: Mexico's hero of the downtrodden, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has ordered nationwide marches to converge on the capital on Sunday in what could be the biggest demonstration in modern Mexican history.

The former leftwing mayor of Mexico City rallied 150,000 followers on Saturday to press for a recount of the presidential election, which his supporters believe was stolen. The official count of the July 2 presidential poll gave the governing party candidate, Felipe Calderón, a victory of about 0.6%, or less than 244,000 votes. The count was based on adding up the vote tally sheets from polling stations on election night. The rallies seem to be getting larger than the figure cited above. Legal challenges loom: Mexico's young democracy entered uncharted territory Sunday as the Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD) put the finishing touches on what officials said would be 152 lawsuits aimed at overturning results of the July 2 presidential election.

Top leaders of Mexico's left-leaning party, known by its Spanish initials PRD, are challenging the count in all 300 of Mexico's electoral districts. Sunday was the opening shot fired in what is sure to be a nasty legal battle to challenge conservative Felipe Calderon's narrow 0.58 percent margin of victory.These challenges could lead to a Constitutional crisis in Mexico López Obrador added a new layer of complexity to the crisis by saying he not only would challenge the results in the country's special elections court but also would attempt to have the election declared illegal by Mexico's Supreme Court. That strategy presages a constitutional confrontation because according to many legal experts the special elections court is the only body that can hear election challenges.: Now, Lopez Obrador has produced some rather stunning evidence: MEXICO'S disputed election took another startling turn when leftist candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador produced telephone recordings he said proved a plot between rival political parties to deny him the presidency.

In a dramatic moment during a massive rally in Mexico's largest public square at the weekend, members of Mr Lopez Obrador's campaign played the recordings over loudspeakers.

"The group that has political and economic power is accustomed to winning at all costs," Mr Lopez Obrador told the crowd, which police estimated at 280,000. "The only thing that matters to them is their privileges."

The two recordings were said to be of conversations between a state governor belonging to the rival Institutional Revolutionary Party (known as the PRI), a union leader in the PRI and a minister in the Government of current Mexican President Vicente Fox, who represents the conservative National Action Party.

The conversations, which allegedly took place on election day before vote counting began, implied that the PRI would try to fraudulently swing votes in favour of conservative candidate Felipe Calderon because it was clear the PRI's candidate would not win.

The phone conversations are the closest thing Mr Lopez Obrador, the leader of the leftist Democratic Revolutionary Party, has had to a smoking gun in his effort to prove fraud in the presidential election held on July 2. Whether or not there was fraud, I don't know (how could I know?) However, there is an interesting precedent in this election: Mr Lopez Obrador has used protests in the Zocalo, the central square in front of the National Palace in Mexico City, to great effect in the past.

Last year, he mobilised more than a million supporters to protest against an attempt to disqualify him from the presidential race over a minor land dispute.

In the wake of the public display, Mr Fox backed off, paving the way for Mr Lopez Obrador's candidacy. The leftist remains wildly popular in Mexico City, where he served as mayor from 2000 to last year. Anyone who thinks this is over is not paying attention. Anyone who thinks that whoever eventually becomes President will have an easy time is crazy. This is going to be a long, hot summer in Mexico:HIS election provoked wails of grief and cries of "fraud!" in Mexico's slums and impoverished countryside. In upmarket neighbourhoods and boardrooms his apparent victory induced deep sighs of relief.

If he withstands legal challenges, president-elect Felipe Calderon will preside over a country that hasn't been this openly divided since the bloody, 10-year Mexican Revolution of 1910.

The closest election in Mexico's history has ripped open long festering differences that separate Mexico into north and south, rich and poor, light-skinned and dark-skinned, employee and employer. The implications of this election are massive. Fasten your seatbelts.