Ohio "recount": what it is and isn't. Do people here and public understa

[berniew1]

As the Ohio "recount" winds down, whats next??
I assume that people on this list understand that the Ohio "recount" was never a serious attempt to count or recount the votes of eligible voters in Ohio; since it was controled by the Ohio Sec. of state who didn't want to count the votes. I'm not sure why the Greens and others have gone along with the process and paid for it since the process isn't what was requested, unless it was just with the understanding that while they aren't trying to count all votes accurately, the results might be useful in the fraud investigation process- which is the real deal in Ohio.

In the Ohio "recount" they aren't even trying to count the known at least 93,000 undervotes(hanging chad) that are mostly Kerry votes; much less looking at the issues of voters disinfranchised by systematic voter suppression, or deliberately biased provisional ballot process developed to reduce minority votes. They also aren't looking at the already well documented patterns of vote machine fraud and other fraud that has been documented. So I hope everyone is aware of this, and the results of the recount are just looked at as a means to get further info in the fraud investigation- which is occurring to some degree I think. But I don't understand why those directly and indirectly involved in the "recount" process haven't made it clear to the public what is and what is not going on.
And I hope people interested in the outcome of the election have plans for what comes next. Else the recount exercise was just a fradulent exercise.

I think fraud is now well documented. The question now is what is going to be done about it?? The "recount" process clearly "is not" going to deal with it.

[bones_7672]

1. Let's remember the GLIBs used money from people here at DU.

And I see threads that ask for even more money for even more recounts. And people here decry the televangelists that beg for money!

[righteous1]

2. There is nothing in Ohio law ,other then in exceedingly tight races

that would mandate a total hand recount. If one were to convince them to do it , I am sure the cost would be in the millions

[johan helge]

9. In my home country Norway, all ballots are always handcounted

- and a suggestion that ONLY machines should do it, wouldn't stand a chance. (Not to speak of e-voting without a paper trail - someone suggesting this would've had trouble being taken seriously ever again.)

[eomer]

13. A full recount is mandated if the 3% recounts don't match

which they didn't in almost every case. The BOEs ignored the rules and just decided to not do the full hand recounts, in violation of the law.

[sled]

7. Hmmm...

Seems I got a bushel full of mail & emails, from the Kerry campaign, doing exactly the same, & what the hell do we have to show for it???

They walked off with millions...the Kerry bunch got a lot of somethin', & we got shit, even less.

[BeFree]

16. Yeah, more money?

You would think, wouldn't you, that in America, land of the Free, home of the Brave, that our elected officials would be Brave enough to make sure the votes were recounted for Free!

It is as asinine as can be that any single group should have to pay to get our votes recounted.

I am surprised at you bones_ , figured you was on the side of making sure government was accountable and all that. Guess you'se one of them thats in love with *, eh?

[CantGetFooledAgain]

3. One benefit of the Ohio recount, as I see it...

...is that it allows the documentation, on a county-to-county basis, of the refusal to allow access to the poll books. As I understand, this is public information which is illegal to withhold, and that to do so constitutes "prima facie evidence of fraud".

It is by carefully cross-checking these poll books with the ballots and the reported results that the fraud will become apparent. Additional canvassing and polling may be required. In fact, a lot of additional research will be needed and it will cost money. I for one am more than willing to contribute to this, but it is the Democratic party and the Kerry campaign that really need to step up to the plate, at least at a financial level.

[Al-CIAda]

6. Ha

Skull & Bones 322
Wants us to look the other way. No surprise there.

[regularjoe]

42. No need to attack the poster. Just the post. n/t

[roseBudd]

20. In addition the recount triggered coverup activity

Remember Watergate, the coverup is worse than the crime

[procinderella]

22. WELL WORTH THE EFFORT

Have any of you read the petition filed in the Ohio Supreme Court?

It's all in there. During the Ohio recount, there was not access to some poll books which need to match absentees, exit polls, reg. lists, etc.

This is huge!!! And there was obstruction all over the place.

During Watergate, the Clinton affair, Iran/Contra, in every high profile scandal...the perps are caught in the OBSTRUCTION of the act...after the act was committed.

You go in through the back door.

[Old Mouse]

4. at this point

each and every possible avenue of attach should be supported. Time is short.

[senegal1]

40. agree one hundred percent.

[KittyWampus]

5. It Seems The Recount Has Given Us An Opportunity To Catch Them

red-handed... covering their tracks and breaking the law.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ellipsis]

10. yeah! not much longer now.

and will have gotten to the bottom of this Miasma.

and Mr Blackwell and the like will be dethroned.

We are close.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[johan helge]

11. Question

Did they handcount all of the ("valid") ballots in some selected precincts (and compare the results to the election results), or did they count some stacks of ballots twice - by hand and by machine?

[gulogulo]

15. They handcount precincts that constitute 3% of the votes, then

run the same precincts through the machine, then compare the two results. They do not compare either result to the election results.

[johan helge]

24. Do you know how these two results were compared with the election result?

[gulogulo]

25. No, and I don't think this is ever reported

in any reports I saw (check http://www.votecobb.org/press/ for reports from Green observers about the recount). The only thing that they report are the differences between hand- and machine-count on the day of the recount. After the whole county is counted, then the results are compared to election results.

[berniew1]

35. In real life, virtually no handcount would exactly match machine for punch

punchcard counties, which most there are. They are preventing observers from really observing and just saying the 2 match- irregardless of how close the 2 are. Its clear from the huge problems they had in elections and in recounts that the 2 counts would seldom match. Especially given the known hanging chad, which would give very inconsistent results. How do they know if the machine counted a hanging chad? Who decided if the hanging chad was a vote and who it was for? I suspect its a total sham with no attempt at real counts. Any observers disagree??

[regularjoe]

41. That is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. Of course they should compare

recount results with the actual election results from that precinct. We want to know how it matches the first count, not just how it matches the machine. Good Gravy. These recount procedures are a joke.

regularjoe

[gulogulo]

14. "93,000 undervotes(hanging chad) that are mostly Kerry votes"

I have seen several mentions of this and I always wonder - why the assumption that "those are mostly Kerry votes"? What is it based on?

Is it your opinion that Kerry voters are mostly undernourished and do not have the strength to punch out the chad completely? I really do not see any other reason to think that the "undervotes", if recounted, would mostly break to Kerry. Can you provide one?

[Ellipsis]

17. try here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=178275&mesg_id=178275

[gulogulo]

18. that post talks about the Triad guy

fiddling with the equipment before the recount. How does it address the supposition that the huge majority of the 90K+ undervotes would break for Kerry?

Keep in mind, for example, that in the recount that MSM did in Florida 2000 elections, only in a small percentage (5%?) of the undervotes in Florida could the voter's intent be discerned in any way.

[BeFree]

19. Questions gulo?

Good.

For the answer, I am sure you would agree, being that you are so interested in good government and all that, those 93,000 votes should be hand counted?

If not, why not? Why shouldn't your question be answered by the elections officials?

[gulogulo]

21. Sure they should be handcounted

I think every vote should be handcounted - and not recounted, but handcounted in the first place. The whole "machine count" stuff is ridiculous, it does not take that long to hand count votes, and with proper supervision from the interested parties, it would be almost foolproof.

That still does not answer the question of why is there the assumption by the OP that the 93K+ of Ohio undervotes would

(1) be determined to be valid votes (considering that in hand-recount of Florida by MSM in 2000 only a small percentage of undervotes was found to be valid)

(2) overwhelmingly break for Kerry - basically why is it assumed that Kerry voters cannot punch the chads completely through and Bush voters can?

[BeFree]

26. Only one way to answer your question

Count the votes, then we'll all know.

If you had been paying attention you would know that there have been many cases of vote obstructions documented. And, that in almost all those cases the precincts were in heavily democratic areas.

One of the ways to obstruct is to make sure punch-cards in hard core dem precincts were supplied heavier, stronger paper, leaving more hanging and dimpled chads.

If they count the votes by hand, you will have your question answered, eh, gulo?

[gulogulo]

27. if there is a handcount

we will find out how many of the undervotes were valid and how many were for Kerry/Bush. What we would NOT find out is whether the undervotes were due to "obstruction" or due to people not pressing hard enough/not bothering to check whether the chads were punched through or just not wanting to pick a presidential choice.

How exactly do you suppose a hand recount will help with the above?

[BeFree]

28. Easy

There will be no hanging chad, no impression, no hole to be seen if the voter didn't punch it. Elemental.

The rest is conjecture and without eye-balling the ballots, your questions will never be answered. That's cool with you?

You should be working to get those ballots looked at, don't ya think? I'm sure you wouldn't want your vote to be trashed because no one ever looked at it, right?

[gulogulo]

31. I see, so according to you

any kind of impression, no matter how tiny, constitutes a vote?

On edit: according to Ohio election law, the criteria for a vote is if two of the connectors of the chad were detached. "Impressions" do not count. So the hand-recount would look for those.

And once again, yes, I think they should do a hand-recount. You're for some reason constantly asking if I do. You have a problem?

[BeFree]

32. Any impression?

It's not, nor will it ever be up to ME. But, once trained eyes have looked a ballot over, I will trust them to make the correct decision.

Counting the votes, by hand, you agree, is the only way to answer your questions. Don't be afraid to do what's right: ask the officials in control your questions. You still have that right ya know?

[roseBudd]

48. Because Ohio has clear standards for counting hanging chad and

because hanging chad slam shut when they don't detach and are read as no vote. Inexperienced voters and improperly maintained voting machines in poor precincts and candidate postion over a brace (chad buildup) are all variables.

[meganmonkey]

33. Because a disproportionate amount of the undervotes are from

highly democratic precincts, if I am not mistaken (where the machines tended to be in worse condition, thus not 'punching' the chads out properly). I don't have a link for it right now, I have a very slow connection and I don't have the time/energy to dig up a link. But I'm almost positive that this is the case. Maybe someone'll back me up on it...

okay, here's a related link

http://web.northnet.org/minstrel/dayton.htm

[gulogulo]

34. The same thing happened in Florida

- a disproportionate amount of the undervotes was from highly democratic precincts. I went and looked at the MSM recount of Florida: Analysis of Consortium Study, Ford Fessenden & John Broder, NY Times Nov 12 2001

Out of 175K "spoiled ballots" in Florida 2000 elections, 24.5K "undervotes" could be interpreted as legal ballots under the "most liberal (a small indentation, or dimple, that indicated the voter was trying to punch a hole in the card)" interpretation of the rules. (NOTE: this is a lot more than the Ohio law allows). This is 14%. Even if we allow the same percentage in Ohio (and it should be smaller, because of stricter considerations of what is a legal vote) it would make about 13K legal votes out of those undervotes. Let's say that those votes would break 80:20 to Kerry (again, about the best possible outcome). This would give Kerry extra 7.8K votes.

You would agree than 7800 votes out of 93000 could hardly be considered "93,000 ... mostly Kerry votes" wouldn't you? That is why I was asking why the original poster thought that those 93000 spoiled ballots are "mostly Kerry votes".

By the way, even though the undervotes in Florida 2000 came from mostly democratic precincts/counties, those 24.5K legal votes that were gleaned from them, under the most permissive interpretation, gave Gore an extra 300 or so votes. See for yourself:

http://www.issues2000.org/Florida_Recount_Official.htm

[meganmonkey]

37. I would say that based on the intention of the voter they were mostly

Kerry votes. And that is what SHOULD matter. It's not the voters' fault that the machines are sub-par. Should someone's vote not count because the machine they voted on didn't function right? And, as you said, this tends to happen in highly democratic precincts. That doesn't sound much like a good practice for a democracy.
I can't speak for the person who posted the original statement. I was just backing them up based on my interpretation of what they said.
I try to be helpful to folks who haven't been here long, because there are a lot of details that have been discussed here in length, and we tend to assume that people know them. I was just trying to clarify a detail that you thought was an assumption, and in reality, it is based on fact. But if you're just here to argue, you'll have to find another person to do that with. Have a nice night.

[anamandujano]

38. I believe these are the same machines that were used in FL in 2k

I read something about their being sold to another state to be used in minority Dem precincts. I couldn't believe that any state would buy them no matter how great a bargain. (edit to clarify--to be used wherever and it's easy to guess who allocated the various machines to which precincts.)

If anyone knows how to find out if Ohio was the state and who was responsible for the purchace.

I also think that Blackwell was put in place because he is black and the repukes could say "why would he work against the minority vote."

[gulogulo]

39. I believe each county's BOE decides

which machines to use, how many to buy, etc. I don't think the SOS has anything to do with those decisions in Ohio.

[roseBudd]

49. Ohio did not buy FL's machines, we already had them, have had them

for years.

FYI Blackwell used to be a dem. Now he's a repuke.

[BushSpeak]

23. How can you expect to win when the local Democratic Party leaders

are rolling over and waiting for the Republicans to tickle the stomachs?

You think Kerry is a good general, when his lieutenants are raising the white flag?

Look at how the Republicans are fighting for every square inch in Washington. They just want it more.

To hell with 2008, it's back to the drawing boards for 2020. The Republicans started 20 years ago with a plan, beginning with local officials and judges, you know, the ones that decide whose vote counts. You'll have to start on the local level with the Democratic leaders, the election officials and judges. Then work you're way up, just like Bush & Co.

This election was the best and probably last chance to unmask the Republican manipulation. The system of checks and balances is broken, beginning with the most important, the power of the vote. Everyone is now stuck on a bus with no brakes, having to follow the course charted by a lunatic driver and a host of fanatic co-pilots. How strange it must seem that the only solution is to wait patiently for the pilot to run the bus off the road, so we can pick up the pieces.

So when these local leaders think it's a waste of time to hand count the ballots, you can gently remind them that twelve years is a longer time waste in illusion.

Sorry for the rant, but I guess the frustration is taking it's toll on a lot of us.

Hats off to those on the ground in Ohio, and elsewhere, trying to make democracy work.

Here are the links to the Republican road map to victory.

How the GOP congressional faction is executing a plan to intimidate and control the U.S. Federal Courts
http://www.yuricareport.com/Law%20%26%20Legal/AConstitutionalCrisis.htm

How George W. Bush became the head of the new American Dominionist Church/State
http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/TheDespoilingOfAmerica.htm

Meet 'The Family'
http://www.alternet.org/story/16167

[dogindia]

29. kick.

[Straight Shooter]

30. How about getting the ballot owners' names posted online and published too

Perhaps a paper in Ohio should do what the Seattle newspaper did, and print the names of everyone whose ballot was rejected. Do you think if those people came forward to demand their votes be counted, we'd see a lot of faces of color? Do you think we'd hear stories about problems they encountered while voting? I'm willing to bet we would.

If I lived in Ohio and I saw my name posted as my ballot being rejected, I'd join in Cliff Arnebeck's lawsuit. I think one way to bring more attention to this issue is by humanizing it and showing the faces and life stories of people whose ballots were rejected. There might be some big surprises there.

Leave no stone unturned.

Here's the DU thread which speaks to the King County ballot names being printed in the paper:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x179062

edit: I don't know how King County knows which ballot goes with which name, and if the same knowledge can be gleaned in Ohio.

[regularjoe]

43. How would they know whose vote didn't count?

I think the Seattle newspaper thing only works with absentee when the vote is rejected because of registration problems or lack of info on the envelope whereas polling place votes are kept secret so we can't find out who the ballot came from. Am I missing some info? Let me know.

regularjoe

[lonestarnot]

47. I think this is a great idea, but it can also be hacked.

but there is the privacy of the vote issue... Secret ballot...etc

[Blue_In_AK]

36. First step

I think this may be what they call in the legal business "exhausting administrative remedies."

[candice]

44. Conyers wants us to ask for a formal Judiciary Committee hearing

From the Green Party's Update web page:
http://www.votecobb.org/recount/daily_update/

"The latest development is that Rep. Conyers has called for 1 million emails to Members of Congress to ask for a formal Judiciary Committee hearing, complete with the subpoena power that only the GOP majority can provide. Please send your emails today, and tell your friends to email as well. Messages to your own Senators and Representative, as a constituent, are the most effective. Send your message to both your Congressman and two Senators today."

[berniew1]

45. Solid documentation of vote machine fraud in Mahoning County, Ohio

see the thread by Dr. Richard Phillips

[lonestarnot]

46. Nothing short of civil war will do anything... Tax revolt ... Don't know

[malatesta1137]

50. you ask:

"I think fraud is now well documented. The question now is what is going to be done about it??"

Which is the same as WHAT'S JOHN KERRY GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?