Hold onto your hats, Wisconsin audit/recount: WTF! Greater than 100% voter turnout

[ffr]

Last edited Sat Dec 3, 2016, 03:28 PM - Edit history (2)

Edit 2 (12/03/16): Before coming to any conclusions about Isa-Lee's comments, please read this:

I did some background checking and have come to the conclusion that she may have misspoke when using the word "voters." She may have meant "ballots." While this does not change my first edit links from Richard Hayes Phillips at the bottom of this post, it does leave me skeptical as to where she arrived at her numbers. Based on 'registered voters' on 11/2/16 & 11/16/16 in one Ward 2 & one Ward 18 of Kenosha County, she does not specify which township/municipality. Therefore I am unable to find one that matches the claim of 346 voters and 746 voters respectively.

With respect of several of the Ward 2 & Ward 18 registered voters, those numbers all appear to be higher than votes, as she lists them. Thus, in line. See topic below, here.

I apologize if this thread mislead anyone, if it turns out to be the case, as I was one that was mislead initially too. - ffr

Isa-Lee, Kenosha County

I observed today in Kenosha county. Here is my report regarding the incidents I noted. Most notable: on the Inspector's Statement Ward 2 and Ward 18 in Kenosha, there were more votes than voters: Ward 2: 344 voters; 346 votes; Ward 18: 743 voters; 746 votes.

(PDF link)
OTHER ISSUES:
Around 2:50 pm: Wheatland 1-6

Trump at 25 votes more than official total. Recounted; 24 Clinton votes were found in Trump’s
pile. Trump still at one over official total: 1119 (originally 1118).

Votes from electronic voting; all Trump ballots had initials at the bottom aside from one ballot.
Clinton also ended up one vote above the official total at 557 (orginally 556). I did not observe
that ballot.
<snip>

Time unknown, Afternoon prior to dinner: Bristol, absentee.

Absentee envelopes were scrutinized. Though they appeared to be hand-delivered, they did not
bear the signature of a witness. None had an address or stamp. One envelope was torn too low to
indicated whether it had a stamp, but it had no address, for a total of 12 ballots. The argument
was raised that because they were handed to the poll worker, the poll worker, not the voter, was a
fault for the missing additional signature. That argument was accepted.

A separate absentee ballot that did bear a stamp also did not have the signature of a witness, but
it did have the signature of a poll worker, which indicated that the ID of the voter had been
previously verified. The argument was raised that the reason for the witness signature was
identity; identity was already confirmed as per the poll worker’s initials. - Isa-Lee (Jill Stein Recount)

Our election is screaming for federal action. Hillary polled equally high before and after the election with likely voters and on election day in exit polls, yet only performed poorly on election day at polling places?


None of this adds up to be what you'd expect in a normal election.

Edit: Here is how I am reading Isa Lee's comments

We are joined by long-time election fraud investigator and author Richard Hayes Phillips, to discuss all of that and his detailed report about the unusually large apparent voter turnout numbers in many rural WI municipalities and the difficulty citizens have in verifying and overseeing those numbers. As Phillips explains, there are horrible public reporting requirements for both results and for same-day voter registration provisions in the state.

"At a minimum, the problem is a lack of transparency," Phillips tells me today. "We have no way of knowing how many registered voters there are [in WI]. If you don't know how many registered voters there are, you don't know if too many ballots were cast." His report finds that, based on the latest state-reported voter registration numbers, there were "193 towns with turnout of 90% or better, 25 towns with turnout of 95% or better, and 7 towns with turnout of 100% or better." Those exceedingly high turnout numbers are likely lower in reality, due to same-day registration in WI, but the lack of reporting requirements for those numbers is "unacceptable". - Brad Blog 11/28/16

Source: Veterans Today, footnotes to Richard Hayes Phillips

[MFM008]

1. Stolen

......

[Hoyt]

2. Not much of an error rate, assuming it is even legit. They are going to have to find a lot more

than that, and we don't know what they'll fine when the go back through the supposed "errors." In fact, the "additional votes for Trump" numbers don't sound in our favor.

I'm sorry, I'm not gonna get excited until something significant happens.

[ffr]

8. Except that these are individual ward numbers and there are over 5,000 wards.

At least that's what the Wisconsin recount spreadsheet shows, 3,636 wards and multiple wards grouped within the 3,636 ward rows.

[rzemanfl]

3. That is more votes than voters. Not turnout. n/t

[ffr]

5. I don't understand. Wouldn't turnout be synonymous with votes?

Or do you just not like the word turnout being used interchangeably with the word votes?

[rzemanfl]

6. Precinct X has 100 registered voters. 50 of them vote, the rest don't. Turnout is 50%. If there

are 101 votes in that precinct, then turnout is over 100%.

[ffr]

9. Exactly. What's your point?

Isa - Lee
Ward 2: 344 voters; 346 votes; Ward 18: 743 voters; 746 votes.

I wrote "Greater than 100% voter turnout"

[rzemanfl]

11. So you are saying-

every registered voter in those Wards cast a ballot? That would be quite remarkable.

[ffr]

14. That's what it appears Isa Lee is saying. I'm just relaying what she wrote

I assume when she lists "voters," she means "registered voters," as that is what the SoS will be referring to.

If you have further questions regarding this matter, perhaps you can ask her or call the Wisconsin SoS office for clarification.

[rzemanfl]

17. I think she is saying "voters"number of ballots. In other words, more votes recorded than were

cast.

[ffr]

19. If she meant ballots, why didn't she use that word instead of voters?

[ffr]

22. I see what you're saying now. Let's see if that follows with what she says.

"Most notable: on the Inspector's Statement Ward 2 and Ward 18 in Kenosha, there were more votes than voters

Following your logic, her wording would be awkward and misleading. I agree. That would be more plausible. If so, she should have worded her comment that the vote totals don't correspond to candidate vote breakdown and the discrepancy is a few votes in those two wards.

[Nay]

15. He is saying that every registered voter, plus a few extra, cast a ballot. Election fraud.

[rzemanfl]

24. I agree that would be fraud. It seems to me that when a "registered voter"

or "eligible voter" votes, the qualifier comes off and they are at that point a "voter." I hope I am wrong and you're right because it should be pretty easy to find the people who didn't vote yet are recorded as having voted.

[BlueProgressive]

47. I don't find that credible, either.

I think some voters in some of these rural areas were somehow "helped to vote"--
and needed "help" because they never actually showed up.

[TNNurse]

53. So would 90% and 95%

compared to the rest of the country.

[putitinD]

4. it must be all those dead Trump voters

[Wolf Frankula]

7. Remember Josef Stalin Once got 111% of the vote

in some areas in one election. I think we see Gospodin Putin's hand here.

Wolf

[Fast Walker 52]

10. RIGGED

[Beartracks]

89. Trump said so!

[bucolic_frolic]

12. Why should I not believe

cash persuaded here or there?

Extra voters, double or triple voters, do it any way you can

I still expect to hear of padded tallies at the points of aggregation.

It was either very many voters, and/or tally points

But I'm skeptical by nature and i could be all wet

[ffr]

16. Humans, like you and me, recognize patterns. It is the patterns we're trying to reconcile

with what we're being told about who won.

I'm having as much difficulty as you understanding how HRC lost these states. It's the skeptic in me that needs answers for how we got to where we are. I'm not buying the glossed over conclusions that the M$M is feeding us.

[jodymarie aimee]

13. ain't nothing normal about my state

We live in Hell. Period. What we have lived thru in the last 6 years is about to be done to the entire country. You may speculate, we know.

[Thor_MN]

62. Everyone knows that Hell is in Michigan. But Wiscosin is Hell, adjacent. At least under Walker.

[Ellipsis]

64. You know why Wisconsin doesn't fall into Lake Michigan?

Cuz Minnesota sucks.

*GRIN*

How's it feel?

Knock that shit off.

[Thor_MN]

66. You need to do some remedial Geography work.

Hell is actually in Michigan. And Wisconsin is next to Michigan.

Have your homework on my desk Monday morning, 2 pages, double sided, single spaced.

[Ellipsis]

69. Wisconsin is next to Minnesota and Lake Michigan Except for the "Upers".

Do I need to show the palm of my hand?

[humbled_opinion]

18. So the election in fraudulant

what makes us think the next one will be fair >? Honestly wtf can be done about it now? There is no reason to get false hope. Nothing will change, Dumpf will still be President on 1/21/17. < Maybe if POTUS would come out and make a significant statement and tell us how we can move forward with this that might help.

[lonestarnot]

30. If there is proof beyond reasonable doubt, how can the fucker take office?

And if Mr. President knows, how can he remain silent?

[pink-o]

67. Because post truth and depraved indifference

[cstanleytech]

87. The problem isn't what he knows it's what he can prove and barring

conclusive proof of tampering there is little he can do.
I know, you or someone else will claim he can investigate but again to do that he needs something major to support an investigation otherwise the opposing party could take it to court and accuse him of sour grapes because his parties candidate lost.

[standingtall]

20. If more than 100% of registered voters

voted and not just more votes counted than votes cast than that is a clear evidence of election fraud and really even if it were right at 100% between the 2 wards that combine for more than a thousand people that is also next to impossible.

The other side will argue that Clinton had 1 over vote too,but if I'm reading the context correctly that's a 30 to 1 advantage Trump in over votes including the 24 Clinton votes he was accredited.

[ffr]

23. She may have worded her comments awkwardly. See post above

Far less damning. Would make my title accurate to her comment, but inaccurate to what she meant.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=2639168

[Coyotl]

21. The polling and the results don't add up like never before, that much is certain.

[triron]

25. Looks like hints oof widespread election frud.

[Botany]

26. Ever wonder how Walker made it through his recall election

Time for the democratic party to grow some balls and call the GOP out
for rigging/stealing elctions.

BTW Who thinks this was the only place that a >100% turn out happened?

[drm604]

27. K&R

[strongermessage]

28. I can't believe that people on THIS forum are questionning this...

the poster clearly pointed out that more votes were counted at the polls than the actual voter turnout at the polls. Beyond that, does anyone here believe that the votes in the three most pivotal states could not have been compromised. I know that progressives are generally more tolerant than those on the opposite side of the spectrum, but when it comes to this election, nothing is off the table.

[standingtall]

32. The op was interpreting

something that was written in ambiguous terms and he was right in his interpretation. The 2nd part of it gives context to what was said,but that was edited in later.

I don't find it unreasonable at all that people who openly engage in mass voter suppression efforts would also engage in election fraud. The question is would we catch them?

I could see a hand full of very small towns with close to 100% turnout if we are talking about 50 people,but to run the board like that in 193 of them with an estimated 95% turnout,25 with 90% turnout and 7 with 100% turnout. No way! The article does say that it is impossible to no for sure how many registered voters there are,because of same day registration,but still I don't see anyway same registered voters could make up that type of gap. Clearly looks like fraud.

[lonestarnot]

29. Yep! Yep and Yep! Fucker! Bet he doesn't get confirmed. Keep counting!

[GummyBearz]

72. I'll take that bet

How much you want to wager?

[lonestarnot]

73. Since it appears about as important as gummy bears that a cheat took place, I'll bet you five gummy

bears. All orange.

[GummyBearz]

77. Something about that color just bugs me lately

I'm not sure what it is. Can we do the green ones instead?

[Ellipsis]

31. Cool the seismologist... If it's there, he will find it. Looks like he did.

Dr. Phillips

[AgadorSparticus]

33. Trump was right. It truly WAS RIGGED....for him!!!

[standingtall]

34. Will the msm have the backbone

to call out the fraud? Or will they just parrot republicans talking points. Like claiming there were errors in the recount,because according to their logic errors that could sway the election could only happen during recounts,but couldn't possibly happen on election day.

We have a football game there is instant replay to make sure they got the call right,but when it comes to something as important as the Presidential election the media just wants to get it over with getting it right doesn't matter.

[hueymahl]

35. More tinfoil hat bs

In any large state, you are going to have errors. That is why you do the recount. Nothing above indicates widespread fraud in any way.

Grasping at straws people. Let's keep a little grip on reality.

Or, grab the tinfoil. Whatever helps you cope!

[Botany]

36. Sure because greater then 100% of the recorded vote happens all the time

[hueymahl]

37. clearly there was a mistake

Mistake does not equal fraud.

We need to stop crying wolf every time we see a Childs drawing of a wolf. It destroys credibility.

[Botany]

39. This was not a mistake

And it wasn't just in Wisconsin.

I have worked many elections and it is impossible to have a greater
# of votes then people who voted and at multiple locations too.

Your concern is noted and BTW I love wolves.

[standingtall]

42. So mistakes that disproportionately

favor one candidate over another are just errors?

[Bohunk68]

49. It's math. I have been voting since 1964, and have yet to

see 100% OR BETTER turnout in ANY election, in any jurisdiction. Can you come up with proof that this 100% or better turnout is the norm anyplace in this country? Most of the time, it is less than 60%. To have a 100% turnout would indicate 40% voter fraud. And to have it over 100% turnout, someone needs jailtime. You seem to be wanting to just shoo away fraud and explain it all as a "mistake." I would seem that you have never worked as an Election Inspector. I have. For the last 26 years.

[Thor_MN]

63. 40% Voter fraud would be extraordinary, 40% Election fraud is another story.

A search of reports of confirmed cases of Voter fraud in the 2016 election turned up 4. Not 4%, 4 people. All republicans.

The distinction between Voter fraud and Election fraud is very important. Crucial. The GOP screams about Voter fraud to fuel voter ID measures and reduce access to polls to suppress turnout. When, in fact, Voter fraud is virtually nonexistent. Elections don't turn on voter fraud, they turn on Election fraud. And they GOP really, really does not anyone talking about Election fraud. Wonder why?

[strongermessage]

59. Simple math ..

tells you that if you give each of ten people a marble and tell them to put it in a box, at the end of the exercise there will no more thanten marbles in the box. If you don't understand that, then loosen the straps on your tin foil hat.

[HassleCat]

79. But we need a straw to grasp.

There is a very, very small possibility this represents widespread election fraud. That would be nice for us, since we could overturn the results. But too many people are getting too heavily invested, and they're going to be bitter at the conclusion of all this.

[hueymahl]

91. Yep. Well put. NT

[jfern]

38. Loving County, TX has more than 100% turnout every election

[standingtall]

41. I looked up Loving county Texas

Population 95 people as of 2013. I don't even know how many of those 95 people are registered to vote. We are talking about at least 2 counties one with over 300 voters and another with over 700 so I think don't think it's comparable. Plus Loving counties population at times has been even smaller in recent years. In 2008 the population there was only 40 people.

[HassleCat]

40. As they say on my mom's side of the family

Oof-dah!

[byronius]

43. Good lord this is ridiculously clear.

And I think everybody's going to see this unfold next week on national television.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

46. All I've seen so far is Chuck Todd gloating over Hillary's loss.

[Hekate]

44. KnR

[Spitfire of ATJ]

45. What was it Trump said?

"Millions of illegal votes" or something like that?

[MADem]

48. On twitter they said there was evidence of tampering w/recount machines which led to a link

at Stein's website:

http://www.jill2016.com/wendy_st_croix_county

Five of the nine machines being used in the recount have tampered seals. Photos of two are attached. Photo of seal, followed by photo of serial number.


?1480723833

[DFW]

50. Without seeing the whole roster of wards

I'd say that this sample is reason enough for the Federal Election Commission to get involved to the extent that their charter permits, and the rest is an emergency issue for the Attorney General. When the number of ballots cast exceeds the number of registered voters, something is very wrong. When Trump's people start screaming loudly to stop this kind of examination, there is even more reason for the Justice Department to get involved.

If there was no concrete evidence of gross error/tampering, that would be one thing. But this is just too much to be a series of coincidences, and, like Ohio 2004, how come they ALWAYS favor Republicans? Remember that one precinct in Ohio 2004 that was actually examined. The one electronic voting machine that actually DID get examined gave Bush 3000 votes in a precinct with 600 registered voters. So what did Ohio do? They subtracted 2400 votes from Bush's margin of victory, and then STILL REFUSED to examine ANY of the other voting machines. We rolled over on that one. The stakes are a LOT higher this time. If we lose, then we lose, but let's not roll over and play dead this time just because they want us to.

[Omaha Steve]

51. Glad I kicked into Stein's recount fund

Edit for sp. No coffee yet.

[rzemanfl]

52. Interesting.

So there is no way to determine turnout because of same day registration and lack of data. It seems pretty implausible that EVERY SINGLE REGISTERED VOTER plus a few more who decided to register on election day voted. I wonder if these figures include early voting.

[rzemanfl]

54. 2012 Total votes (Presidential)

Twn. of Tomahawk 257
Twn. of New Lyme 90
Vil. of Stockholm 48
Twn. of McKinley 198
Twn. of Cedar Rapids 24
Vil. of Tony 51
City of WI Dells 63

Source http://elections.wi.gov/sites/default/files/Amended%20Ward%20Report-11.6.12%20President.pdf

[Botany]

55. outside of the township of cedar rapids

every area had more votes then in 2012

[rzemanfl]

56. What I found interesting was that

these rural areas had quite high turnouts in both elections.

[Botany]

57. Beth Clarkson a professor of math and engineering @ Wichta State U. did a study and ...

... found that voting machines were made to dump votes in more urban areas. She
could not understand how Gov. Brownback won re-election even though he had done
an awful job and Ds, Rs, and Is did not like him.

These #s out of Wisconsin can help explain how Scott Walker survived hios recall.

It is time for America and the democratic party to wake up and say out loud that
republicans cheat to win elections.

[Greybnk48]

58. In Wisconsin, we've been screaming foul

since the Walker recall, when everything showed he was going to lose, and suddenly he won contrary to all polling. The Prosser Court election as well. Wisconsin is dirty. This probably has nothing to do with Russians.

[Thor_MN]

60. We have no way of knowing how many registered voters there are? Bullshit.

To print voter rolls, you know precisely how many registered voters there are. A precinct (Wards in Wisconsin) knows how many new registrations were done on election day, they processed them. Update Voter Rolls can (are) delivered to the precinct to cover last minute registrations the in the days before the election. Registered Voters is the sum of the Voter Roll, Update sheets and new registrations done election day.

In the precinct I worked in Minnesota, we knew the number of registered voters the second the polls were closed - BEFORE we printed the results from the tabulation machine. The guy working new registrations was a monster, he did it solo, all day and processed new registrations about 8% of preregistered voters.

Side note, it is damn near impossible to have turnouts in the 90%. Registered voters die - there is no process to automatically remove them from the rolls. If you have 100% turnout, then there were ballots created for dead people and people that moved.

[Ellipsis]

61. They didn't share the up to date info with Phillips

[Thor_MN]

65. Gotcha. I didn't realise that quote was from an outsider, not an election official.

I retract the "bullshit", but everything else is accurate.

[Ellipsis]

70. Richard Hayes Phillips is no Outsider.

http://electiondefensealliance.org/witness_crime_citizens_audit_american_election


But I hear you.

[Thor_MN]

71. Outsider, as in, not an election official defending their results.

I originally thought that the quote was from a Wisconsin election official.

[lonestarnot]

68. Shameful that this election handled by Americans conducted in this manner. Something truly stinks.

Hope they find the body.

[1876em]

74. St. Croix County WI suspicious activity in re-count room

Just discovered this UTube of suspicious activity in St. Croix County WI re-count room. https://mobile.twitter.com/NoMoreWarTY/status/804758817481388032

Woman appears to be taking something from computer, going through papers and dropping something in trash can.

She left with the county clerk earlier, the clerk locked the door on the video replay

http://theuptake.org/live-video-post/wisconsin-recount-day-2-st-croix-county/

during the lunch break after everyone left the room and entered 3 minutes later she's in the room by herself. Under the re-count rules absolutely no one can be in that room alone during the re-count process. Could someone re-post in a new thread to spread this around as soon as possible and also notify Jill Stein's team? St. Croix County is the hub of Republican possible shenanigans - home to Kitty Rhodes (now deceased hand-picked head of Gov. Walker's Health and Human Services Dept.) and Dean Knutson (senator behind trying to re-write open records laws to hide government activity - and other horrible legislation).

Please spread this around so that it can't be ignored.

[ffr]

75. I saw that video. But that same lady is in another video with other people

The twitter feed proclaims possible election fraud. I'm skeptical.

[1876em]

76. Video

The first video is a portion of the entire video shown in the second video. They're filming the room where the re-count is taking place. After everyone left for a lunch break, the clerk and assistant left and locked the door. Approximately three minutes later the assistant is back in alone. The rules state the absolutely no one should be alone in that room. She appears to be taking something out of the computer, goes through a bunch of paperwork, throws something into the trash can and leaves. There should be no reason she should have been in there in the first place.

[ffr]

78. Yeah, but she felt it would save some time and she could take care of it herself.

Rules are for insiders. She's thinking outside the box. Have to admire that.

[1876em]

80. Video

You made me laugh but it's not funny. It's creepy. It's been creepy here in WI since Walker won. Something is going on that's not right.

[ffr]

82. Being a skeptical deductive thinker will do that. When something doesn't seem right

it probably isn't.

Welcome to DU!

[Vinca]

81. Curious. I was reading responses to an article on HuffPo and someone said

they lived in a really red county in Arizona and were certain people known to be voting for Trump were given 2 ballots. Of course, anyone can say anything on the Internet, but it would explain more votes than voters.

[1876em]

83. St. Croix County WI video

I don't have enough posts to start a thread yet. Would someone post the link to the video for me? Maybe someone knows something or can put it out into the Googlesphere so it's picked up far and wide. In addition to the video, 5 of 7 of the voting machines appear to have been tampered with in St. Croix County.

[Jeroen]

84. Former Trump Advisor: Scott Walker Has 'Rigged' 5 Elections

Walker, Priebus, Trump, this is from August 2016:
http://www.wpr.org/former-trump-advisor-scott-walker-has-rigged-5-elections

[1876em]

85. Roger Stone and Scott Walker

Isn't that special? Perhaps there will be so much evidence coming out of these election re-counts that we will finally have justice, clean the whole thing up, let ALL people vote easily and change this country and world around - I say with rose colored glasses on.

[OnlinePoker]

86. I'm curious how military votes are handled?

In Canada, unless you opt out, your vote goes back to the place you lived when you joined up. You aren't actually on the voters list for that place, but your vote is counted there. Is this the same in the States?

[Beartracks]

88. Remember Michelle Obama's speech about just a couple votes...

... in each precinct being able to swing a vote on way or the other? She was, of course, urging people to get out and vote. But that math works, too, for just a couple of errors... or just a couple of hacks... Hundreds or thousands of small "anomalies" are a hell of a lot harder to detect, and thus a lot harder to prove a concerted effort could be behind them.

===================

[turbinetree]

90. Just imagine trying to sit down in a court room with these numbers

and trying to explain to a federal judge how did you come up with this total.

http://blackboxvoting.org/

Reminds me of this