Election Protection – Fraud Busters Ongoing Monitoring of Tight Races

[autorank]

62 Republican House incumbents were challenged by Democrats in races that would determine the make up of the House of Representatives.

10 Senate races involved Democrats fighting Republicans.

TruthIsAll suggested that absent fraud, 42 House seats would turn Democratic and six Senate seats.
To stay on top of this rather than react, a group of DUers got together and agreed to monitor races that fit the criteria for fraud. The criteria is a close race within the margin of error; a race that could be pilfered but where the pilferer cold say, “Oh, those cry babies, this was just a close race.”

Below are the races listed and the DUers who are manning the walls of civilization against the tyrannical horde;)

Tonight and throughout the week, they will update these races with

a) Results – election night; and check ins following election night to show ballots uncounted and how that impacts the races.

b) Incidents – news stories related to voter suppression, equipment problems, lack of transparency related to the election for the candidate monitored.

c) Anything else that they think is pertinent.

The hypothesis was that if fraud took place, tight races represented the best opportunity for a theft. As a result, they were the races to study. The hypothesis was NOT that any race that met the fraud criteria would have fraud. (please wait to respond until I post the races under this OP)

So check in and see how it turns out.

THANK YOU TO ALL THOSE WHO ARE PARTICIPATING. IF I LEFT YOUR NAME OFF A RACE, JUST POST THERE AND I’LL COME APOLOGIZE, IN FACT I’LL DO IT IN ADVANCE. Long day……..

You are all :patriot:’s Thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

These Senate races are critical to examine; Missouri, Montana, Tennessee,
and Virginia need special attention. Virginia is already looking very suspicious.

[autorank]

1. Updates and findings - Autoranks subthread

[mom cat]

3. RI pretty straightforward ... we won!

[autorank]

6. Hey, you wait for your state!!

Isn't it great. I'll be at RI soon. Purrrrr.....

[autorank]

69. NYT - Interactive Map - Undecided Races - 13 total Free access to NYT

Thanks to SpaceBuddy0008!!!

Map link:
http://tinyurl.com/y8b4pv

CT 2
FL 13
GA 8
NC 08
NM 01
0H 2
0H 15
PA 06
PA 08
TX 23
WA 8

[autorank]

2. Arizona 8th Congressional District

8th Congressional District: Dem Giffords versus Graf
Info Giffords http://tinyurl.com/yasr95
Information online http://www.congress.org/congressorg/e4/rlist/?state=az

BushDespiser12

pirhana

[autorank]

48. Poll Watchers Latino Voters Harassed - from our AZ TEAM GREAT WORK

AZ Dist. 8 @ 6:56 MST

Poll Watcher: Latino Voters Harrassed in AZ
By Justin Rood - November 7, 2006, 2:15 PM
I just spoke with a Latino election monitor in Arizona who said that a trio of men, one with a handgun visible, is harrassing Latino voters as they go to the polls in Tucson, Ariz.

Nina Perales, a lawyer for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund (MALDEF), said that three men are approaching Latino voters and videotaping them on their way to vote at a polling place in Tucson's Iglesia Bautista precinct.

"As voters are coming out of their cars and walking up towards their polls, one person is videotaping the voter as he walks towards the polling place," she said. Then another person, wearing an American flag bandana and a shirt with the image of a badge ironed or embroidered on it, approaches with a clipboard to talk to the voter. "While the clipboard person is. . .talking to , the cameraperson comes up and starts videotaping their face," Perales said.

As this happens, the third man -- with a gun visible in a sideholster -- stands next to the voter. According to Perales, he is wearing a shirt with an American flag on it, and camouflage shorts.

The men only approach Latino voters, she said, and noted they have been doing so since early this morning.

Perales' group has contacted the Department of Justice and the FBI. The Feds have asked her group to keep an eye on the situation.

Perales said her group has been monitoring other polling places in the city and throughout Arizona, and this was the only instance of voter intimidation she was aware of.

Update: An earlier version of this story said Ms. Perales was in Tucson at the time of our conversation. She was actually in Yuma.



http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001958.php

[autorank]

4. California 11th Congressional District

'
11th Congressional District DEM McNerney versus Pombo
Web site http://www.jerrymcnerney.org /

sfexpat2000

[EFerrari]

13. 10:12 McNerney 50.7 Pombo 49.3

8:10 57.6 2424 42.4 1788
8:35 53.1 12654 46.9 11217
9:12 48.5 28086 51.5 29792
9:41 48.5 28090 51.5 29794
10:12 50.7 34898 49.3 34017


from SOS McPherson's site

but CNN reports

9:47 51 34898 49 34017 26% reporting

[EFerrari]

34. 11:37 McNerney 51.6 Pombo 48.4

10:42 51.1 36601 48.9 35107
11:11 51.3 37353 48.7 35516
11:37 51.6 45065 48.4 42314

:)

[EFerrari]

41. 12:57 McNerney 53. Pombo 47.

12:09 52.0 57572 48.0 53293
12:37 53.0 65957 47.0 50397
12:57 53.0 80121 47.0 72236

[EFerrari]

42. MSNBC calls it for MCNERNEY

(Jerry won in every county

Alameda
Candidate Votes % of votes
Jerry McNerney (DEM) 12,910 62%
Richard Pombo (REP)* 7,875 38%
86% of precincts reporting

Contra Costa
Candidate Votes % of votes
Jerry McNerney (DEM) 22,853 54%
Richard Pombo (REP)* 19,459 46%
100% of precincts reporting

San Joaquin
Candidate Votes % of votes
Richard Pombo (REP)* 44,965 51%
Jerry McNerney (DEM) 43,721 49%
100% of precincts reporting

Santa Clara
Candidate Votes % of votes
Jerry McNerney (DEM) 6,067 61%
Richard Pombo (REP)* 3,897 39%

ttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14469815

[EFerrari]

45. oops. He didn't win in San Joaquin Co. We need to mark

this county because there seemed to be a lot of strange stuff going on there yesterday.

[EFerrari]

51. SF Chronicle: Challenger defeats Pombo in a stunner

Challenger defeats Pombo in a stunner

Rachel Gordon, Chronicle Staff Writer

(11-08) 10:19 PST -- Democratic challenger Jerry McNerney, a relative newcomer to politics, unseated seven-term GOP Congressman Richard Pombo of Tracy Tuesday in a stunning demonstration of voter disenchantment with the Republican Party nationally.

McNerney, a wind energy consultant from Pleasanton, took Northern California's 11th Congressional District with 53 percent of the vote. Pombo, who held a leadership position in the Republican-held House, received 47 percent. More than 9,000 votes divided the two candidates this morning.

Incumbent GOP Rep. John Doolittle of Rocklin (Placer County), meanwhile, beat his Democratic challenger, Charlie Brown, 49 percent to 46 percent. Libertarian candidate Dan Warren had 5 percent.

"Everyone knew that this election was going to be bad for the Republicans -- the question was just how bad. (Pombo losing) really is the exclamation point," said Brian Klunk, chairman of the political science department at the University of the Pacific in Stockton.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/11/08/MNG9LM8JDV4.DTL&feed=rss.news

[mom cat]

5. K&R ... long day old chap?

[autorank]

7. Colorado 7th Congressional District

7th Cong District DEM Permutter versus O’Donnell
Web site http://www.perlmutter2006.com /

eleny

[eleny]

30. PERLMUTTER winning Precincts Reporting - 17%

This will probably hold. More tomorow morning when the finals are up. If I can stay awake, I'll post again. But this looks good.

U.S. House District 7
Candidate Votes Percent Winner
RICK O'DONNELL (GOP) 58,362 42%
ED PERLMUTTER (DEM) 77,343 55%
ROGER MCCARVILLE (AMC) 1,933 1%
DAVE CHANDLER (GRN) 2,177 2%

Edit to add url http://www.thedenverchannel.com/politics/10247807/detail.html

[eleny]

33. Perlmutter results according to my county elections office

REPRESENTATIVE 110th U.S. CONGRESS DIST DISTRICT 7
(Vote for ) 1
(WITH 162 OF 205 PRECINCTS COUNTED 79.02%)
Rick O'Donnell (REP). . . . . . . 41,921 42.63 14,862 27,059 0
Ed Perlmutter (DEM) . . . . . . . 53,389 54.29 18,707 34,682 0
Roger McCarville (ACN) . . . . . . 1,396 1.42 545 851 0
Dave Chandler (GRE) . . . . . . . 1,542 1.57 693 849 0
WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 94 .10 28 66 0
Total . . . . . . . . . 98,342 34,835 63,507 0
Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 8 0 8 0
Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 1,582 653 929 0

http://ww12.jeffco.us/esrv/2006General.htm

[autorank]

46. Perlmutter Screen shot by eleny

[autorank]

8. Connecticut 2nd and 4th Congressional Districts

2nd Congressional District: DEM Courtney versus Simmons
Web site http://www.joecourtney.com/about.php

4th Congressional District: DEM Farrell versus Shays
Web site http://www.farrellforcongress.com /

[autorank]

9. Florida 13th, 16th, & 24th Congressional Districts

13th Congressional District: DEM Jennings versus Buchanan
Web site http://www.christinejenningsforcongress.com /
]Artiechoke ]

16th Congressional District: DEM Mahoney versus Negron
Web site http://www.timmahoneyforflorida.com/showpage.asp?page=d...
Ginny

24th Congressional District: Dem Curtis versus Feeney
http://www.clintcurtis.com /
Nashville_Brook

[nashville_brook]

32. 24th Congressional District: Dem Curtis versus Feeney

U.S. House - District 24 -
194 of 251 Precincts Reporting

Feeney, Tom (i) GOP 106,681 57.43%
Curtis, Clint Dem 79,068 42.57%

[EFerrari]

59. GD thread re undervotes in FL 13:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2647434

[autorank]

68. FL 13 Via Herman Munster - "Massive Fraud" 2 articles

http://heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage

Christine Jennings spent most of Wednesday out of sight from the public, meeting about the vote in the 13 district Congressional race, but she emerged for a brief appearance around 3 p.m. with a message: “We will not rest until every vote is counted.”

Jenning said the potential “undervote” of more than 18,000 votes is a “staggering number” and expressed perhaps her sharpest concern yet on the results.

“Sarasota voters have been victimized by not having their vote count,” she said.

Jennings said her campaign has been filing reports of voting irregularities since the early voting process. The calls and e-mails continued on Wednesday, she said.

“The phones have been ringing off the hook,” said Jennings, who did not take questions and did not elaborate on the kinds of reports callers were making.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/8/16821/7943

I was a pollworker for this race. What happened was that every so often the ballot would drop Jennings'name from at the review pages. Which means that people pressed her name on their ballot but by the time the reiview page came up (15 pages later) her name had been dropped and it would show no vote for that race. I helped a lot of people revote for Jennings but in my precinct alone we had 33 undervotes. Why was this happening? I would love to know.

[autorank]

10. Illinois 10th Congressional District

10th Congressional District: DEM Seals versus Kirk
Web site http://www.dansealsforcongress.com/about.php

[autorank]

11. Indiana 2nd and 8th Congressional Districts

2nd Congressional District 2 DEM Donnelly versus Chocola
Web site: http://www.donnellyforuscongress.com /

8th Congressional District 8 DEM Ellsworth versus Hostettler
Web site: http://www.ellsworthforcongress.com /

IAmJacksSmirkingRevenge

[autorank]

12. Iowa 2nd Cnggressional District

Congressional District 2 Dem Loebsack versus Leach
Web site http://www.loebsackforcongress.org

[autorank]

14. Minnesota 1st Congressional District

1st Congressional District DEM Walz versus Gil Gutknecht
Web site http://www.timwalz.org /

[autorank]

15. Misouri US Senate Dem. McCaskill versus Talent

Senate Dem. McCaskill versus Talent
http://www.timwalz.org /

galloglass

[galloglas]

64. The novel, "Show Me, Missouri !! "

Chapter 1)Disaster in St. Charles, Missouri 11/7 5:32 PM

Preliminary (more info coming in)

ATTENTION:---- In the entire County of St. Charles, where the Election Director is Rich Chrismer (as in the father of Talent's Campaign Manager, Rich Chrismer), the head of the County Democratic Committee was told, in August, to name all poll judges (the judge part is still uncertain), challengers and watchers! Otherwise, he (Chrismer) did not have to consider any of them!!!

The St. Louis County legal team (headed by, I hear, Shonna Clemmings) knew about this at least two weeks before the cutoff date to submit these names (cutoff was 5:00 PM on Tuesday, 10/31) and managed to get seven people qualified in two weeks!

NOW, in St. Charles County, there are 240,000 ballots to be cast and there will not be one single pair of Democratic eyes to watch the process!

And even with a 60-40 (max) shift to red, that gave the Democrats a span of two weeks to find SEVEN poll challengers or verifiers in two weeks? And they had the 100,000 plus names and address!!

Holy Jumping Jesus!! Why even run the friggin' race? That's like fighting the Battle of Bull Run with Battle Axes!!!



Chapter 2) I think (?!) McCaskill has won!! Nov-08-06 01:00 AM

All the precincts are not yet in but, from what I see (and I parsed the counties), McCaskill will win (if there is no late night burglary!).

This is what shows now: ( Election results as of 12:35:37 on 11/08/2006)

Precincts Reporting 3183 of 3746

Talent, Jim REP 842,170 47.7% %
McCaskill, Claire DEM 867,295 49.1% %
Gilmour, Frank LIB 41,710 2.4% %
Lewis, Lydia PRG 15,722 .9% %

There are only four counties who show no returns yet, and none have the numbers or ooomph! to move these totals.

We also had our three folks in the central tabulating room of St. Charles county "menaced" by the local sheriff (really!!), but they stood their ground, called me, and we got them credentialed to stay!

We have still camera shots of the first 117 precincts, and
filming of the rest.

The vote for the first 117 seemed to stay around 51% to 48% in favor of Talent. But, sometime around the 169th to 170th (the absentees and provisionals) the margin spread. Our lady has *that* on film (but it may require enhancement).

I'm having the films duped tomorrow. Chrismer stopped bringing out the precinct postings after 117 and said they would be available for inspection tomorrow (and I'll have one of our folks pick up copies).

I imagine Chrismer is having some long hard thoughts about
whether to try to play with the figures or not. It will be a tough call. He really has no idea what we know or saw, so he will have to be careful.

They also sent out a Democratic attorney to oversee things.
Not take charge, but watch. From the phone call I just
received from my people, he seemed to be most interested in
how they attacked the problem of keeping Chrismer on the up
and up.

But he introduced himself, and made himself available to the St. Charles folks, and was a well-mannered suit, as I
understand it. They said the other expensive suit was filled with a man who had a rather sour expression through most of the night. Wonder why?

galloglas

PS. My hackers decided to block anymore emails (i believe)
after they discovered I was sending screen shots. At the
least, my email was down this evening.

Ahhh, well, I'll just reformat and reinstall in a day or so. At least after I've laughed and cackled a wee bit, and caught up on some sleep.

PPS. We have the KC ED on film also. But we kicked their tails in KC, so it may not matter.



Chapter 3) Talent is conceding on ABC at this moment !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Nov-08-06 01:06 AM


galloglas




Chapter 4) Disaster averted in St. Charles!! Nov-08-06 02:14 AM

How about the catastrophe in St. Charles??

Three heroic ShowMe citizens fought off the sheriff, GOP lawyers, and Rich Chrismer. Then stuck it out at the 170th precinct in St. Charles County, cameras and all!!

St. Charles went to Talent by 52 to 44% (probably 51% to 48% when we see the films, and recount).

Give a big HIP! HIP! HOORAY!!! to those brave souls from ShowMeTheVote!!!!



Chapter 5) The final (of) Tally(nt) !!! Nov-08-06 09:51 PM


U.S. Senator Precincts Reporting 3680 of 3746


Talent, Jim REP 987,383 47.4%
McCaskill, Claire DEM 1,028,920 49.4%
Gilmour, Frank LIB 47,007 2.3%
Lewis, Lydia PRG 18,016 .9%

Total Votes 2,081,326


Tomorrow's Headlines (?)


Incumbent Loses Due to Complete Lack of Talent!!


"Nah! Nah! Nah! Nah!

Nah! Nah! Nah! Nah!

Hey! Hey! Hey!

Good-Bye!"

[autorank]

65. "Incumbent loss due to no Talent" - Great Narrative - terrific

And you were so right about St. Charles...damn!!!!

[understandinglife]

16. 'They' forgot "the People..." - WE DIDN'T

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2621758

Solid for Cantwell; watching Darcy closely.


BE AMERICA. ---

[autorank]

17. New Jersey US Senate Seat

Senate DEM Menendez versus Keane

[New Earth]

28. Menendez projected winner

Democratic Menendez (Incumbent) 1,139,546 53%

Republican Kean, Jr. 956,511 45%


97% of precincts reporting as of 12:22am

the only problems i heard were that earlier, somewhere in central/northern NJ some machines were supposedly stuck on Menendez while voters tried to vote for Kean. Attorney Generals were sent to monitor these areas but saw nothing wrong.

[FogerRox]

35. Voting machine problems in Camden Cnty, Essex Cnty... South Orange

Montclair, BLoomfield, Randolph, South Brunswick.

[autorank]

66. "Glitches" in the Machines in Jersey - from Faye

Glitches reported in electronic voting

More than a dozen voters who wanted to cast a ballot for Republican Tom Kean
Jr. in the U.S. Senate race were unable to do so today because the
electronic voting machines were already selected for Democratic U.S. Sen.
Robert Menendez, according to the Republican State Committee.

The glitches, which began occurring about 7 a.m., have turned up in Camden,
Hudson, Middlesex, Passaic and Union -- all counties where Democrats hold an
edge in registered voters, committee counsel Mark Sheridan said during a
conference call with reporters. The problems have been reported to the state
Attorney General's Office, which oversees elections in New Jersey, and the
U.S. Attorney's Office.

"The machines appear to be locked or appear to be pre-voted for Bob
Menendez," said Sheridan. ''We're having a difficult time determining
whether it is computer errror or malfeasance by poll workers."

He later said, however, "I don't have any evidence that any campaign people
tampered with the machines."

Four voters from Passaic have provided the GOP affadavits attesting to the
problems, and some other voters told the Republicans their ballots wrongly
went to Menendez because they could not change the vote to Kean, Sheridan
said.

State Attorney General's Office spokesman Jeff Lamm said they had not seen
similar problems so far at those polls in question, although not every
location had been checked as of mid-afternoon.

"We have deputy attorneys general at four polling locations in Paterson --
places where the GOP alleges there is a problem with the machines -- but our
people have not seen this problem since they've been there," Lamm said.

Overall, Lamm said the voting appeared to be going well with only scattered
reports of electronic machines working improperly. Thirty machines in Camden
and others in Salem County were reported to be malfunctioning, Lamm said.

In Essex County, 14 new electronic voting machines had to be replaced, but
Superintendent of Elections Carmine Casciano said voters were able to cast
their votes with emergency ballots.

“Wherever there was a problem with the machine, we used emergency ballots
until we could get it fixed,” he said.

Casciano said machines were replaced in Newark, East Orange, West Orange and
Bloomfield. Other problems were reported in South Orange, Montclair, West
Essex, Fairfield and Verona.

He said most of the problems were solved before noon. He said his office
sent a technician to a polling site or corrected the problem over the phone
with a poll worker.

Contributed by Rick Hepp and Barry Carter

http://www.nj.com/newslogs/starledger/index.ssf?/mtlogs/njo_ledgerupdate/archives/2006_11.html#201952

- Faye

[autorank]

18. New York 19th and 24th Congressional Districts

19th Congressional District DEM Hall versus Kelly
Web Site http://www.johnhallforcongress.com /

24th Congressional District DEM Arcuri versus Meier

Deb

[Deb]

31. NY-24 unofficial BoE returns, Arcuri (D) 54% :-)

Meier has conceded.

Seneca County-
Raymond A. Meier 4147
Michael A. Arcuri 5002
Michael J. Sylvia, III 140


Cayuga County-
(67%)
Michael A. Arcuri 8,261
Raymond A. Meier 7,212
J. Sylvia, III 146

Tompkins County-
Grand Totals
Raymond A. Meier (R)5052
Michael A. Arcuri (D)7284
Michael A. Arcuri (I)361
Raymond A Meier (Con)377
Michael A. Arcuri (WF) 883


Ontario County-
MICHAEL A ARCURI 2,741
RAYMOND A MEIER 1,275
MICHAEL J SYLVIA III 30


Cortland County-
not yet available
100% CNN-
Arcuri 7418
Meier 6032
Sylvia 155

Tioga County-
RAYMOND A MEIER 3,082
MICHAEL A ARCURI 2,514
MICHAEL J SYLVIA III 85


Broome County-
Michael A Arcuri 7,085
Raymond A Meier 6,353
Michael J Sylvia III 205


Chenango County-
Raymond A Meier (R) 3209
Michael A Arcuri (D) 2902
Michael A Arcuri (I) 204
Raymond A Meier (Con) 250
Michael A Arcuri (WF) 200
Michael J Sylvia III (Lib) 123


Otsego County-
not yet available online
100% CNN-
Arcuri 7357
Meier 5613
Sylvia 175

Oneida County
not yet available online
92% CNN-
Arcuri 28891
Meier 25997
Sylvia 329


Herkimer County
no results expected to be posted online
100% CNN-
Arcuri 9760
Meier 8821
Sylvia 148

Thank you old lever machines, you'll be missed.

[autorank]

47. Results with web sites from DU er deb

Just posting your email. It's exelent reporting given the number of data sources. GREAT WORK

Seneca County-
Representative in Congress 24th District
Raymond A. Meier 4147
Michael A. Arcuri 5002
Michael J. Sylvia, III 140
http://www.co.seneca.ny.us/boe-results/election.html

Cayuga County-
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 024 RACES 46 of 69 (67%) machines reporting (56 total
districts)Member of Congress 24th District Vote for 1
Michael A. Arcuri 8,261
Raymond A. Meier 7,212
J. Sylvia, III 146
http://www.co.cayuga.ny.us/election/2006general.htm

Tompkins County-
Grand Totals
Raymond A. Meier (R)5052
Michael A. Arcuri (D)7284
Michael A. Arcuri (I)361
Raymond A Meier (Con)377
Michael A. Arcuri (WF) 883
http://www.co.tompkins.ny.us/boe/2006/General/Congress%2024th%20District.pdf

Ontario County-
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 024 RACES 15 of 15 (100%) machines reporting (15
total districts)REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS 24TH Vote for 1
MICHAEL A ARCURI 2,741
RAYMOND A MEIER 1,275
MICHAEL J SYLVIA III 30
http://www.co.ontario.ny.us/elections/ACCUMRES.HTML

Cortland County-
not yet available
http://www.cortland-co.org/election/ccboe.html

Tioga County-
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 024 RACES 17 of 17 (100%) machines reporting (17
total districts)REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS DIST 24 Vote for 1
RAYMOND A MEIER 3,082
MICHAEL A ARCURI 2,514
MICHAEL J SYLVIA III 85
http://www.tiogacountyny.com/departments/legislature/boe/election_results.php

Broome County-
CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 024 RACES 37 of 37 (100%) machines reporting (37
total districts)Rep in Congress 24th Vote for 1
Michael A Arcuri 7,085
Raymond A Meier 6,353
Michael J Sylvia III 205
http://www.gobroomecounty.com/elections/ElectionsRaceResults.html

Chenango County-
REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS - 24th District
Raymond A Meier (R) 3209 Democratic Independence Conservative Working
Families Libertarian
Michael A Arcuri (D) 2902
Michael A Arcuri (I) 204
Raymond A Meier (Con) 250
Michael A Arcuri (WF) 200
Michael J Sylvia III (Lib) 123
http://www.co.chenango.ny.us/elections/electionResults.mht

Otsego County-
not yet available online
http://www.otsegocounty.com/boe/

Oneida County
not yet available online
http://www.ocgov.net/election/electionresultsindex.htm

Herkimer County
not available online, no results expected to be posted
http://herkimercounty.org/content/Departments/View/7

[starmaker]

19. NC 11 Schuler(D) wins big

120,898 to 103,764 with 91%

[autorank]

20. Ohio Senate plus1st and 18th Congressional District

All three OPEN, Sign up by posting to this message.

Senate DEM Brown versus DeWine

1ST Congressional District DEM Cranley versus Chabot
Web site http://www.johncranley.com /

18TH Congressional District DEM Space versus Padgett
Wesite http://www.zackspace.org /

[stillcool]

29. yikes...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=172&topic_id=20777&mesg_id=20777

[stillcool]

61. Zack Space won District 18 (Bob Ney)

John Cranley lost District 1

RESULTS FOR DISTRICT 18
42 OF 631 PRECINCTS REPORTING
7% IN
66% 8,877 VOTES
Zack Space
34% 4,625 VOTES
Joy Padgett

Edited on Tue Nov-07-06 10:48 PM by stillcool47
Nov 07 2006 10:31PM

According to the Associated Press, Democrat Zack Space has won the Republican-held House district of disgraced former Rep. Bob Ney.Stay tuned to OhioNewsNow.com for more information.
http://www.ohionewsnow.com/?story=sites/ONN/content/poo...
have election results from Hamilton County pdf@10:34pm cumulative unofficial results
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional District 1
Last updated: 11-07-2006 10:36PM
2% of precincts reporting Votes Percent
Steve Chabot (R) - Incumbent 13,989 58%
John Cranley (D) 10,098 42%
http://www.ohionewsnow.com/?story=feeds/elections/webre...




------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congressional District 1
Last updated: 11-08-2006 12:14AM

67% of precincts reporting Votes Percent
Steve Chabot (R) - Incumbent 70,657 52%
John Cranley (D) 65,516 48%
Precincts: 99%
619/622
OH 1ST CONGRESSIONAL DIST.
Updated: 11:51 PM
Projected Winner Steve Chabot 53%
John Cranley 47%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issues on Election Day-

UPDATED: 4:20 pm EST November 7, 2006
Scattered Problems Reported At Voting Precincts
An apparent computer error prevented voters from casting ballots in 75 precincts in Delaware County this morning. County Clerk Karen Wenger said start cards that activate the push-button machines for voters were programmed incorrectly by the company that installed the software.

All of the machines are working now, although the polls will stay open late because of the delay.

In Marion County, paper ballots had to be used in more than 100 of the 914 precincts where touch-screen machines were not working.

Meanwhile, the secretary of state's office hasn't received reports of voter turnout around the state. And spokeswoman Jen Fenger said the office hasn't received any complaints about the voter ID law.
http://www.wlwt.com/politics/10262293/detail.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
http://cincinow.com/news/2006/local/11/07/vote_morn.htm...
HEADING TO THE POLLS
Reported by: 9News
Web produced by: Liz Foreman,
Candice Terrell
Photographed by: 9News
First posted: 11/7/2006 9:18:52 AM
Last updated: 11/7/2006 11:32:47 AM

Here's a rundown of the local voting experience so far:
Red Bank Road and Woodford @ 10 a.m.
Lines are very long at this Cincinnati neighborhood precinct - The Church of Christ. One caller told 9News they had been waiting for an hour.

Lakeside Park, Kentucky @ 10 a.m.
WCPO production manager Mike Pretot relayed his experience voting this morning at Lakeside Emanuel Church. He heard that if someone enters a write-in vote and doesn't do it correctly, it will jam up the machine. His precinct had already called the voting machine repair person before his arrival for write-in voting incident.

Dater High School @ 10 a.m.This is in the second district in Ohio. One of the machines is broken and votes are being put in envelopes to be hand counted later.

Oriental Wok in Ft. Mitchell @ 10 a.m.
The restaurant was double-booked for election day, said one caller to 9News. Apparently, the restaurant is hosting a card party this morning and consequently, all of the voting machines are in the hallway. There's no wheelchair access and things are very cramped, said the caller.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symmes Township "B" Precinct @ 8:15 a.m.
9News' Deb Haas voted this morning at the Lake Isabella boathouse on Loveland-Maderia Road. She said one of the machines was not scanning the ballots, so poll workers were helping voters put their ballots into envelopes that will be brought downtown and counted by hand. Deb said turnout was high, and when she voted at 8:15 a.m., she was the 91st voter at that precinct.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Universalist Church on Newtown Road in Anderson Township
Leslie Hoekzema works for the Kenton County Public Library. Here's her experience: "Voting was very slow. I arrived right after the polls opened and the parking lot was already filled. Putting five precincts in one location may have been the problem. Lines were at each of the precincts, and one of the scanners stopped working after the sixth voter."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not notified of change
Updated 11:26 AM
By DaveH | Enquirer staff writer
Butler County moved my polling place without notifying me. I have received a total of 2 polling place notification cards in the 11 years I have been at my residence. One of these was last year telling me to vote at the location I went to first this morning. This is the second time they have changed polling places without notification. The first time it was changed several years ago, it took me several hours to find the proper polling location. This time, it was moved back to the original location, and voting went smoothly from there.

I was in line with another person from my street who had the same problem and, like myself, did not receive a post card telling her where to vote.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Long wait at Mason Precinct 131-01
Updated 11:13 AM
By DaveH | Enquirer staff writer
Mason voter Bill Weidus writes:

I waited for 1 hour and 10 minutes to vote this morning at Precinct
131-01 in Mason, ZIP 45040. They only had four booths available to vote
in. The line was VERY long. This is at Mason Methodist Church, 773 S.
Mason-Montgomery Rd. I arrived at 7:00 am. There are two precincts
there. One had no line at all, but we were not allowed to use the open
voting machines for the other Precinct. We "Had" to wait for our four
booths to be open. It was crazy. When I left the church the line was
twice as long as when I arrived.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Broken scanner, growing lines at Drake
Updated 10:29 AM
By Gregory Korte | Enquirer staff writer
From voter Neil Goeppinger:

I voted at Drake Hospital (Springfield Township Ward CC)

I had ballot #17 – the e scan indicated that there were only 14 votes counted to that point – and then the machine broke requiring a call to technical support

The staff was distributing emergency ballot envelopes to the growing line as I was leaving
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reporter threatened with arrest
Updated 10:28 AM
By DaveH | Enquirer staff writer
Enquirer reporter Janice Morse and photographer Tony Jones were threatened with arrest this morning at a Butler County polling place, while attempting to photograph and interview Congressman John Boehner as he voted.

Boehner had told the media he would available for interviews this morning, but Jones and Morse were told by poll workers that they could not come into the polling place, which is at the Church of the Nazarene on Tylersville Road.

West Chester Township police had arrived at the church and were talking with poll workers. More details as we get them.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scanners down in Milford G
Updated 10:20 AM
By Gregory Korte | Enquirer staff writer
Voter Sam McKee reports:
The scanner for the G district in Milford was down at the Five Points Building. It was up a half hour later. The ballots were put into another slot on the machine and the workers said that they would be counted at the board of elections. Seemed kind of odd to me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scanners not working
Updated 9:30 AM
By DaveH | Enquirer staff writer
I voted this morning at approximately 6:50 a.m. at Golden Leaf Baptist Church. I am in the Cincinnati 23-H precinct. The optical scanning machines were not working, so I had to place my ballot in the side slot without seeing it scanned. I am worried that my vote will not be scanned and counted.

In addition, the poll workers stated that there were not enough booths, as some of the ones they had been given had broken legs and could not stand upright.

Thanks,
Jane Hamilton
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scanners not working in Clifton
Updated 9:29 AM
By DaveH | Enquirer staff writer
I voted at 6:30 this morning at 15F in Clifton. It took me 1/2 hour and I was only the 6th person to vote. The front door was stuck so we couldn't get in, the scanners weren't working so we had to fill in all those little boxes and we didn't want our votes not to count so we were diligent about filling them in solidly, and the polling place was already running out of pens at 6:45 a.m.!!!

Most people there were fairly upset and I can imagine what it will be like later in the day.

Jo Taylor
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Problem with Newport voting machine
Updated 9:20 AM
By DaveH | Enquirer staff writer
Luann Gibbs, Administrative Assistant/Business-News, reports:

I arrived at Newport High School's voting facility this morning at 6:15 a.m., to find there are already problems arising with the touch-screen voting booth.

There are only two booths at this facility: They are both Direct Response Electronic systems, one being similar to a lever machine but with buttons instead of levers, and the other is a touch-screen machine designed for those with disabilities. The first person to use the touch screen machine at 6 a.m. voted, and the machine immediately began to smoke, emit a foul electrical smell, and the touch screen went blank. Poll workers were already on the phone trying to get it fixed when I arrived, and the gentleman who used the touch screen machine was still there, trying to verify that his votes will be counted. He asked for a provisional ballot in case they could not get the machine repaired but the four poll workers were flustered and no one could agree on whether or not he should have one.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.cincinnatidatadesk.com/pages/voter.html
Conflicting information
Updated 6:03 PM

Fred Ragland of Delhi Township said the scanner broke down at Precinct M at the Delhi fire station on Greenwell.

Ragland said poll workers told him his ballot would be counted later with provisional ballots.

He called the board of elections, which said the uncounted ballots would be scanned tonight at the board of elections, Ragland said. He was unhappy with the confusing answers.

"We'd be better off with hanging chads than this stuff," Ragland said
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forced to vote provisionally in Hamilton
Updated 5:07 PM

Voter Kevin R. Maxfield writes:
When I arrived at the polls this morning in Hamilton, OH I was told that myvoter registration card was reported as "undeliverable" even though I had received the card at home. They told me that I had to vote by provisional ballot. After filling out the ballot and sealing it in the envelope, they provided, I gave it back to the poll worker. When my wife finished voting and we were discussing our votes I realized that they had only given me the first page of the provisional ballot meaning that I did not get to vote on several of the State issues.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Scanners not working at Lake Isabella
Updated 4:41 PM

David Johansenn reported that the scanners were not working at Lake Isabella polling center. Poll workers were taking the paper ballots and putting them into envelopes to be taken downtown to the Board of Elections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
University of Cincinnati researcher gets ID hassle
Updated 3:56 PM

The following complaint is remarkable in that the author, as the director of the University of Cincinnati's polling and research institute, has more than a passing familiarity with election procedures:

I vote in the "Columbia G" precinct in Columbia Township at the Mariemont Florist Showroom on Wooster Pike.

I went to my polling place this morning at around 8:00. I showed my Ohio driver's license with the card BMV 2523 issued to me by the Ohio Department of Public Safety, Bureau of Motor Vehicles. The card reads, in part, "The name and address on the front of this card shows the changes that have been made to your Drivers Record at the Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Please carry this card with your Drivers License....Thank you, Franklin R. Caltrider, Registrar."

A poll worker then attempted to give me a provisional ballot and told me that I had to use it because the address on the original license was different from their voter rolls. I explained to her that, in Ohio, this is how the state changes the address on one's drivers license; they don't issue a new license, but, instead, issue you this card and you use it with the original license to show your current address.
She told me (repeatedly) that the law had changed and they would not accept my documentation. I explained that I knew that the law had changed, but that these two documents together are the state-issued positive identification with my correct home address and that they should be accepted so that I could "vote like they are" (I said this while pointing to the people using regular ballots in the booths.). A man who seemed to be supervising the poll workers backed her up, but I stood my ground and said that I had a right to vote and that I was not going to vote with a provisional ballot because I was entitled to vote the regular way.

After a few minutes they asked me to step out of line and she and he continued to tell me that I must vote with the provisional ballot they kept trying to give me. I asked them repeatedly what kind of documentation they would accept and told them that I would go home and get it and come back and vote. They never answered that question; they showed me the law and I kept telling them that I understood the law and that my documentation met the law's requirements and that I wanted a regular ballot. I also asked them several times how they dealt with people who had no drivers license at all, but they did not answer that question either.

After about thirty minutes of disagreement, they tried to give me the provisional ballot again and pointed out the phone number I should call later to 'see if my vote was counted'. I refused the provisional ballot again and told them that they should call the number because it was not just my vote that was being affected; undoubtedly there would be more people throughout the day -- including my husband who had not been in to vote yet -- who would be affected by their misunderstanding of the law. At that point, the man in charge placed the call, explained the documentation I had provided, and in just a moment (apparently acting on what the person at the other end of the line had told him) hung up and turned to the worker who had been denying me my ballot and said, "Give her the ballot." I was then given my regular ballot and I voted. As I was leaving the polling place, the woman who had initially refused to give me the proper ballot thanked me for helping them.

Later my husband went in to vote and a poll worker tried the same thing with him until another poll worker told her that "this is the same as the other one" and let him vote with a regular ballot.

Beth Walter Honadle, Ph.D.
Director and Professor
Institute for Policy Research
University of Cincinnati
47 Corry Boulevard
Edwards Center 1, Suite 3110
PO Box 210132
Cincinnati, OH 45221-0132
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Lyn Loughlin, 55, of Clifton, writes about her problems voting:

I am a 55 year old white female who has been a registered Democrat for as long as I've been voting (some 30 years now). For the past nine-plus years I've been the resident of a predominantly Democratic neighborhood (Clifton's Gaslight District).

In that time I've voted at the same location (The Unitarian Church 320 Resor Ave.) with no difficulty. This morning, as I attempted to vote, I was informed of the following:

1. My polling location had changed (Clifton United Methodist Church -3416 Clifton). There was no prior notice of this by mail or any other means.
2. That I was not on the voter list at this new location.
3. After going on-line, I discovered that I WAS NOT REGISTERED, PERIOD. I find the timing of this interesting and maddening for the following reasons:
1. Those going through this same difficulty, at BOTH polling locations, appeared to be my age or above.
2. For many, the weather, change of location, and the new voting method, were voiced as extremely problematic.
3. I'm concerned as to whether these instances were experienced across party lines and counties or restricted to Democratic/Independent demographics.
4. Am I to assume that these same "difficulties" are to be expected when attempting to vote during the upcoming Presidential election?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
11:14 a.m.
More than 40 polling places in Cuyahoga County reported problems when the polls opened this morning, a spokesman from the Board of Elections said.

Forty-three of the county’s 573 voting places either failed to open on time or couldn’t get some or all of their electronic voting machines to work, Alan Melamed said.

At Boulevard School in Shaker Heights voters who showed up first-thing were turned away temporarily because electronic voting machines were not working. The poll workers later reverted to paper ballots and began welcoming voters, Melamed said.
By Susan Vinella, [e-mail] Enquirer.com will continue to update this story.http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/200...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------Associated Press
Nov 7, 10:43 AM EST
Long lines, problems with voting machines reported across Ohio
By CONNIE MABIN
Associated Press Writer
In Cincinnati, Columbus, Cleveland and elsewhere, lines more than 30 people deep formed at polling places. In Athens County in southeast Ohio, the prosecutor warned voters to be leery of fraudulent calls claiming their voting precinct had been changed.
James W. Marquart of Cleveland said he left an elementary school polling place without voting because his name wasn't on the rolls even though he had a postcard from the elections board showing that's where he was to vote.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OH_ELN_PROBLEMS_...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ohio Democrats Filing Lawsuit To Keep Polls Open Late
The Ohio Democratic party is filing a lawsuit to keep polling locations in Cuyahoga County open late, ONN affiliate WEWS reported.
Four poling locations did not open until about 7 a.m. The Democrats are not happy that they did not open on time.
They are asking a judge to keep them open. The same thing happened in the May primary.
The Democrats want to give voters extra time to cast their ballots.
They are also concerned about the security of the paper ballots that had been cast when electronic machines weren't working Tuesday morning.
The Board of Elections is preparted to argue the case in front of judge.
----------------------
Forty-three polling locations had some serious problems -- that's 6 percent of all polls in Cuyahoga County.
The problems are similar to what happened in the May primary. Electronic voting machines didn't work, there were long lines and poll workers and technicians didn't show up.
Copyright 2006 by NewsNet5.http://www.ohionewsnow.com/?sec=&story=sites/10tv/conte...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cleveland Polling Locations To Stay Open
Nov 07 2006 6:59PM
A federal judge has ordered an Ohio county to keep 16 Cleveland area polling locations open until 9 p.m. because of long lines and earlier problems with voting machines.
Stay tuned to Ohio News Now and OhioNewsNow.com for more information.
Copyright 2006 by NewsNet5.http://www.ohionewsnow.com/?sec=&story=sites/10tv/conte...

[autorank]

67. Hamilton County Totals

Cumulative Report — Unofficial

-----------------------------------------------------------
HAMILTON COUNTY,OHIO — GENERAL ELECTION — November 07,,2006
----------------------------------------------------------

Page 1 of 32
Total Number of Voters :67,279 of 566,930 =11.87%

11/07/2006 10:34 PM
Precincts Reporting 273 of 880 =31.02%

Party Absentee Candidate Total Precinct

-----------------------------------------
For Governor and Lieutenant Governor,Vote For 1
12,661 33,086 20,425 49.01%51.74%50.66%DEM TED STRICKLAND -LEE
FISHER
12,580 30,766 18,186 48.69%46.07%47.11%REP J.KENNETH BLACKWELL
-THOMAS A.
RAGA
368 924 556 1.42%1.41%1.41%BILL PEIRCE -MARK M.NOBLE
226 534 308 0.87%0.78%0.82%ROBERT FITRAKIS -ANITA RIOS
0 0 0 0.00%0.00%0.00%LARRY BAYS -DEBRA K.FRIES (W)
0 0 0 0.00%0.00%0.00%JAMES LUNDEEN -KEVIN J.BECKER (W)
25,835 Cast Votes:96.44%39,475 65,310 97.49%97.07%
Over Votes:252
Under Votes:702
0.94%
2.62%
156
859 1,561
408 0.39%
2.12%
0.61%
2.32%

-----------------------------------------
For Attorney General,Vote For 1

14,406 33,324 18,918 56.03%49.00%51.81%REP BETTY MONTGOMERY

11,305 30,993 19,688 43.97%51.00%48.19%DEM MARC DANN

25,711 Cast Votes:95.98%38,606 64,317 95.35%95.60%
Over Votes:37
Under Votes:1,041
0.14%
3.89%
10
1,874 2,915
47 0.02%
4.63%
0.07%
4.33%

-----------------------------------------
For Auditor of State,Vote For 1

13,903 34,315 20,412 55.25%53.88%54.42%REP MARY TAYLOR

11,263 28,737 17,474 44.75%46.12%45.58%DEM BARBARA SYKES

25,166 Cast Votes:93.94%37,886 63,052 93.57%93.72%
Over Votes:35
Under Votes:1,588
0.13%
5.93%
13
2,591 4,179
48 0.03%
6.40%
0.07%
6.21%
-----------------------------------------
For Secretary of State,Vote For 1

11,283 31,185 19,902 44.52%52.33%49.20%DEM JENNIFER L.BRUNNER

12,988 29,870 16,882 51.25%44.39%47.13%REP GREG HARTMANN

572 1,216 644 2.26%1.69%1.92%TIMOTHY J.KETTLER
500 1,107 607 1.97%1.60%1.75%JOHN A.EASTMAN
25,343 Cast Votes:94.60%38,035 63,378 93.94%94.20%
Over Votes:95
Under Votes:1,351
0.35%
5.04%
40
2,415 3,766
135 0.10%
5.96%
0.20%
5.60%

[autorank]

21. Pennsylvaniai 6, 7, 8, 10th Cngressional Districts

6th Congressional District 6 DEM Lois Murphy versus Gerlach
Web site: http://www.loismurphy.org /

7th Congressional District 7 DEM Sestak versus Weldon
Web site: http://www.sestakforcongress.com /

8th Congressional District DEM Murphy versus Fitzpatrick
Web site: http://www.murphy06.net/index.php

10th Congressional District DEM Carney versus Sherwood
Web site: http://www.carneyforcongress.com /

Marnieworld

[autorank]

22. Rhode Island Senate Seat

Senate DEM Whitehouse versus Chafee
Web site http://www.whitehouseforsenate.com /

mom cat

[autorank]

23. Tennessee Senate

Senate DEM Ford versus Coker
Web site http://www.fordfortennessee.com /

[kimpossible]

38. I'll jump on this one

11/8/2006 12:52:03 AM
http://www.state.tn.us/sos/election/results/2006-11/en4uss.pdf

Ford         Corker
721286       794444
47.0%         51.7%


A local news snippet:

Decision 2006: TN Election Officials say Problems are Minor

Rain didn't stop Tennessee voters from going to the polls, but long lines and malfunctioning voting machines created a busy morning for election officials. Tennessee Election Coordinator Brook Thompson said there have been allegations of precincts closing, but he said that's not true.

In Madison County, voters had to use paper ballots for 30 minutes until machines were fixed. Most of the voting machines in Hawkins County were down until about noon. The problem resulted after officials ran a program before opening to clear the vote totals to zero.

High turnout created long lines in Blount County, Nashville and Memphis. Spotty showers fell in Middle and East Tennessee this morning.

(Copyright 2006 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)

And an anecdotal problem report, via TPM:

Went to my precinct to vote and all 3 machines were not working. This precinct has a lot of lower-income families and public housing. They finally got one of the machines going, but the lines were out the door - I waited close to an hour and had to get to work. I wasn't the only one - most of those leaving were young(er) working people more likely to vote Democratic. I'll be coming back later to vote, but how many of those that left will be able to do that? You would think the machines would have at least been tested and working before the actual election day.

[kimpossible]

39. Hamilton County counting video

I downloaded and saved this video in case it becomes interesting, from http://www.wrcbtv.com/news/index.cfm?sid=4429.

Decision 2006: How They Count Votes In Hamilton County

Reported by Will Carr

You're about to see a process very few people have seen. Hamilton County Election Administrators let Channel-3 shoot video of the entire counting process.

It can be a huge job, but with new election technology and seasoned election officials in command, you can be rest-assured that your vote has been counted.

[kimpossible]

40. Many voters stuck in line for polls after closing time

"(AP) Many voters stuck in line for polls after closing time"

By KRISTIN M. HALL
Associated Press Writer
NASHVILLE, Tenn.

Election results in some counties were delayed by lines of people still waiting to vote when polls closed at 7 p.m CST, 8 p.m. EST.

In Montgomery County, people were still in line to vote about two-and-a-half hours after closing time.

The county's administrator of elections, Vickie Koelman, said she was waiting until all precincts had closed in order to release election results.

"You got people out there waiting to vote, and (if) I release those results, so what does that do to the people that have been there since 7 p.m.?" Koelman said.

In Davidson County, more than 100 precincts out of 174 hadn't returned results nearly three hours after the official close of polls, said Ray Barrett, administrator of elections.

Some lawsuits were filed byDemocrats in other states where voters encountered long lines and overly crowded precincts, but election monitors for Tennessee declined to do so.

<snip>

Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Harold Ford Jr. claimed that a precinct in Jackson shut down because their voting machines weren't working.

...

Most of the voting machines in Hawkins Countywere down until about noon, said Peggy Fleenor, the county's election administrator. Paper ballots were cast in all 22 of the district's precincts, which was expected to delay the reporting of results Tuesday night....

continued at:

http://www.wkrn.com/nashville/news/ap-many-voters-stuck-in-line-for-polls-after-closing-time/58150.htm

[kimpossible]

63. TN Senate Update

Snipped from http://www.state.tn.us/sos/election/results/2006-11/en4uss.pdf

Updated 11/8/2006 2:36:44 PM

Ford         Corker
876189     926445
48.0%     50.7%

[autorank]

24. Texas 22nd Congressional District

'22nd Congressional District Delay’s DeLay’s old seat (not on the big list but we’ll cover it just for old times sale

elehhhhna

[autorank]

25. Virginia Senate

Senate DEM Webb versus Allen

autorank

[autorank]

43. Results Late Last night

[autorank]

44. Voter suppression reported

Virginia State Board of Elections Secretary Finds Widespread Incidents of Voter Suppression
Submitted by davidswanson on Tue, 2006-11-07 00:39. Elections

The American Chronicle

Threats of incarceration, changed polling locations, and fliers to "Skip the Election."

Over the past several days, voters throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia have filed complaints of incidents aimed at suppressing voter turn out in heavily Democratic and African American neighborhoods. Today, the Secretary of the Virginia State Board of Elections Jean Jensen concluded that the incidents appear widespread and deliberate.

"There are now credible reports from multiple jurisdictions around the Commonwealth that establish a pattern of dirty tricks being employed to confuse and frustrate Virginia's voters from exercising their right to vote tomorrow. In addition to reports that have been received by the Democratic Party of Virginia, these local election officials have been receiving reports from concerned voters," said Jack Young, co-chair of Promote the Vote.

Jay Myerson, General Counsel of the Democratic Party of Virginia noted the irony that our troops are fighting to create democracy in Iraq at a time when those very rights are being tested here at home. Myerson and Young urged voters to recognize that voting precincts are not changed by telephone calls and called upon the US Department of Justice to vigorously investigate these matters.

Documented incidents of suppression incidents include:

1) Calls That Voting Will Lead to Arrest.

Tim Daly from Clarendon got a call saying that if he votes Tuesday, he will be arrested. A recording of his voicemail can be found online at: www.webbforsenate.com/media/phone_message.wav

The transcript from his voicemail reads: "This message is for Timothy Daly. This is the Virginia Elections Commission. We've determined you are registered in New York to vote. Therefore, you will not be allowed to cast your vote on Tuesday. If you do show up, you will be charged criminally."

Daly has been registered to vote in Virginia since 1998, and he has voted for the last several cycles with no problem. He has filed a criminal complaint with the Commonwealth's attorney in Arlington.

"This is a clear attempt to erroneously lead voters to believe they cannot participate in the Virginia election. Nothing is further from the truth. You have the right to vote in the Virginia election as long as you are a Virginia resident, registered to vote in Virginia and have not voted in any other general election this year. We've seen this tactic before and it is about time the Republicans learned that it will not work," said Jay B. Myerson, General Counsel of the Democratic Party of Virginia.

[autorank]

53. AVS Systems - Possible Hacks - Northern Virginia

I just got this. Don't give me a hard time about the source please, its all data now.

I have real problems with how Northern Virginia's vote was handled in 2005 and have data to support
that. Now this.

It's highly relevant

Virginia has a lot of uncertified hacked up Advanced Voting Solutions systems --
there is a hot, hot thread on them at BBV in the Dear Black Box section.

Bev Harris
Founder - Black Box Voting

* * * * *
This Tool Kit is a Declaration of Independence for Citizens:
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/toolkit.pdf

- It's time for you to recognize your own power.
- You don't need us.
- You don't have to find someone to follow.
- Pick any module. Pick a single action in it. See it to its completion.
- You've just opened the door to an unexpected evolution.

"Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the
consent of the governed." -– Declaration of Independence

Be part of the solution: Please sign up for the NATIONAL HAND COUNT REGISTRY:
http://www.bbvforums.org/cgi-bin/forums/board-profile.cgi?action=register

Black Box Voting is a nonpartisan, nonprofit 501c(3) elections watchdog group
funded entirely by citizen donations. If you believe we provide a valuable
service, please help support our work -- go to
http://www.blackboxvoting.org/donate.html or mail
to:
Black Box Voting
330 SW 43rd St Suite K
PMB 547
Renton WA 98055

----------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

[autorank]

55. Virginia Recount Law Plus link for other state recount laws

This law is unusual.

1) You can't recount optical scan ballots because they're not "paper." We have no paper ballots left.

2) In 2005, the VA A.G. race went to a recount. 200,000 Diebold optical scan ballots should have been hand counted. This was not allowed.

3) Cheigh Deeds, the very good Dem AG candidate said it will be long and drawn out. It wasn't. There was a wait until the recount happened but once it started, it happened very quickly.

Link for sections below & and other state recount laws.

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/ebook/part5/procedures_recount07.html

[autorank]

56. § 24.2-800. Recounts in all elections.

§ 24.2-800. Recounts in all elections.

A. The provisions of this article apply to all elections held in the Commonwealth.

B. When there is between any candidate apparently nominated or elected and any candidate apparently defeated a difference of not more than one percent of the total vote cast for the two such candidates as determined by the State Board or the electoral board, the defeated candidate may appeal from the determination of the State Board or the electoral board for a recount of the vote as set forth in this article. In an election of electors for the President and Vice President of the United States, the presidential candidate shall represent the vice-presidential candidate and slate of electors and be the party to the recount for purposes of this article.

C. When there is between the vote for a question and the vote against a question a difference of not more than fifty votes or one percent of the total vote cast for and against the question as determined by the State Board or the electoral board, whichever is greater, fifty or more voters qualified to vote on the question, by signing and filing their petition, may appeal from the determination of the State Board or the electoral board for a recount of the vote as set forth in this article.

(1979, c. 293, § 24.1-249; 1981, c. 570; 1993, c. 641.)

[autorank]

57. § 24.2-801. Petition for recount; recount court.

§ 24.2-801. Petition for recount; recount court.

The petition for a recount of an election, other than an election for presidential electors, shall be filed within 10 days from the day the State Board or the electoral board certifies the result of the election under § 24.2-679 or § 24.2-671, but not thereafter. The petition shall be filed in the Circuit Court of the City of Richmond in the case of any statewide office and in the circuit court of the county or city in which the candidate being challenged resides in the case of any other office. The petition shall be filed in the Circuit Court of the City of Richmond in the case of any statewide referendum and in the circuit court of any county or city comprising a part of the election district in the case of any other referendum.

The petition shall set forth the results certified by the Board or electoral board and shall request the court to have the ballots in the election recounted or, in the case of mechanical or direct electronic voting devices, the vote redetermined.

In an election for office, a copy of the petition shall be served on the candidate apparently nominated or elected as provided under § 8.01-296 and within 10 days after the Board or electoral board has certified the results of such election. In a referendum, a copy of the petition shall be so served on the governing body or chief executive officer of the jurisdiction in which the election was held.

The chief judge of the circuit court in which a petition is filed shall promptly notify the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Virginia, who shall designate two other judges to sit with the chief judge, and the court shall be constituted and sit in all respects as a court appointed and sitting under §§ 24.2-805 and 24.2-806.

(1979, c. 293, § 24.1-249; 1981, c. 570; 1993, c. 641; 2003, c. 268.)

[autorank]

58. § 24.2-802. Procedure for recount.

§ 24.2-802. Procedure for recount.

A. The State Board of Elections shall promulgate standards for (i) the proper handling and security of voting and counting devices, ballots, and other materials required for a recount, (ii) accurate determination of votes based upon objective evidence and taking into account the counting device and form of ballots approved for use in the Commonwealth, and (iii) any other matters that will promote a timely and accurate resolution of the recount. The chief judge of the circuit court or the full recount court may, consistent with State Board of Elections standards, resolve disputes over the application of the standards and direct all other appropriate measures to ensure the proper conduct of the recount.

The recount procedures to be followed throughout the election district shall be as uniform as practicable, taking into account the types of ballots and voting devices in use in the election district.

B. Within seven calendar days of the filing of the petition for a recount of any election other than an election for presidential electors, or within five calendar days of the filing of a petition for a recount of an election for presidential electors, the chief judge of the circuit court shall call a preliminary hearing at which (i) motions may be disposed of and (ii) the rules of procedure may be fixed, both subject to review by the full court. As part of the preliminary hearing, the chief judge may permit the petitioner and his counsel, together with each other party and his counsel and at least two members of the electoral board and the custodians, to examine any mechanical or direct electronic voting device of the type that prints returns when the print-out sheets are not clearly legible. The petitioner and his counsel and each other party and their counsel under supervision of the electoral board and its agents shall also have access to pollbooks and other materials used in the election for examination purposes, provided that individual ballots cast in the election shall not be examined at the preliminary hearing. The chief judge during the preliminary hearing shall review all security measures taken for all ballots and voting devices and direct, as he deems necessary, all appropriate measures to ensure proper security to conduct the recount.

The chief judge, subject to review by the full court, may set the place or places for the recount and may order the delivery of election materials to a central location and the transportation of voting devices to a central location in each county or city under appropriate safeguards.

After the full court is appointed under § 24.2-801 or § 24.2-801.1, it shall call a hearing at which all motions shall be disposed of and the rules of procedure shall be fixed finally. The court shall call for the advice and cooperation of the State Board or any local electoral board, as appropriate, and such boards shall have the duty and authority to assist the court. The court shall fix procedures that shall provide for the accurate determination of votes in the election.

The determination of the votes in a recount shall be based on votes cast in the election and shall not take into account (i) any absentee ballots or provisional ballots sought to be cast but ruled invalid and not cast in the election, (ii) ballots cast only for administrative or test purposes and voided by the officers of election, or (iii) ballots spoiled by a voter and replaced with a new ballot.

The eligibility of any voter to have voted shall not be an issue in a recount. Commencing upon the filing of the recount, nothing shall prevent the discovery or disclosure of any evidence that could be used pursuant to § 24.2-803 in contesting the results of an election.

C. The court shall permit each candidate, or petitioner and governing body or chief executive officer, to select an equal number of the officers of election to be recount officials and to count ballots, or in the case of mechanical or direct electronic voting devices to redetermine the vote. The number shall be fixed by the court and be sufficient to conduct the recount within a reasonable period. The court may permit each party to the recount to submit a list of alternate officials in the number the court directs. There shall be at least one team of recount officials to recount paper ballots and to redetermine the vote cast on mechanical or direct electronic devices of the type that prints returns for the election district at large in which the recount is being held. There shall be at least one team from each locality in the election district to redetermine the vote on other types of mechanical voting devices. There shall be at least one team from each locality using electronic counting devices to insert the ballots into one or more counting devices. The counting devices shall be programmed to count only votes cast for parties to the recount or for or against the question in a referendum recount. Each team shall be composed of one representative of each party.

The court may provide that if, at the time of the recount, any recount official fails to appear, the remaining recount officials present shall appoint substitute recount officials who shall possess the same qualifications as the recount officials for whom they substitute. The court may select pairs of recount coordinators to serve for each county or city in the election district who shall be members of the county or city electoral board and represent different political parties. The court shall have authority to summon such officials and coordinators. On the request of any party to the recount, the court shall allow that party to appoint one representative observer for each team of recount officials. The representative observers shall have an unobstructed view of the work of the recount officials. The expenses of its representatives shall be borne by each party.

D. The court (i) shall supervise the recount and (ii) may require delivery of any or all pollbooks used and any or all ballots cast at the election, or may assume supervision thereof through the recount coordinators and officials.

The redetermination of the vote in a recount shall be conducted as follows:

1. For paper ballots, the recount officials shall hand count the ballots using the standards promulgated by the State Board pursuant to subsection A.

2. For mechanical lever machines without printouts, the recount officials shall open the machines and read the counters.

3. For mechanical lever machines with printouts and direct recording electronic machines (DREs), the recount officials shall open the envelopes with the printouts and read the results from the printouts. If the printout is not clear, or on the request of the court, the recount officials shall rerun the printout from the machine or examine the counters as appropriate.

4. For optical scan tabulators, the recount officials shall first examine the printout to redetermine the vote. Only if the printout is not clear, or on the request of the court, the recount officials shall rerun all the ballots through a tabulator programmed to count only the votes for the office or issue in question in the recount and to set aside all ballots containing write-in votes, overvotes, and undervotes. The ballots that are set aside, any ballots not accepted by the tabulator, and any ballots for which a tabulator could not be programmed to meet the programming requirements of this subdivision, shall be hand counted using the standards promulgated by the State Board pursuant to subsection A.

5. For punchcard tabulators, the recount officials shall first examine the printout to redetermine the vote. Only if the printout is not clear, or on the request of the court, the recount officials shall rerun all the ballots through a tabulator programmed to count only the votes for the office or issue in question in the recount and to set aside all ballots containing write-in votes and, if possible, overvotes and undervotes. The ballots that are set aside and any ballots not accepted by the tabulator shall be hand counted using the standards promulgated by the State Board pursuant to subsection A and the standards set forth in this subdivision. The following standards shall apply in determining whether a ballot has been properly voted and should be counted. A chad is the small piece of a punch card ballot that, when removed by the voter in the voting process, leaves a hole that is recognizable by a ballot tabulator. A ballot on which the chad indicating the selection of a candidate or position on an issue is broken or separated from the card at two or more corners shall be deemed a vote and counted; a chad on which only one corner is broken or separated from the card shall not be considered a vote. No other depression, dimple, or other mark on the ballot shall be counted as a vote. On any ballot on which two or more corners of the chad indicating the selection of a candidate or position have been broken or separated from the card and the voter has also cast a vote for another candidate for the same office or position on the same issue, the partially punched chad also shall be deemed a vote and, if the voter has cast more votes than the number for which he was lawfully entitled to vote, the ballot shall be deemed an overvote and shall not be counted with respect to that office or issue.

There shall be only one redetermination of the vote in each precinct.

At the conclusion of the recount of each precinct, the recount officials shall write down the number of valid ballots cast, this number being obtained from the ballots cast in the precinct, or from the ballots cast as shown on the statement of results if the ballots cannot be found, for each of the two candidates or for and against the question. They shall submit the ballots or the statement of results used, as to the validity of which questions exist, to the court. The written statement of any one recount official challenging a ballot shall be sufficient to require its submission to the court. If, on all mechanical or direct electronic voting devices, the number of persons voting in the election, or the number of votes cast for the office or on the question, totals more than the number of names on the pollbooks of persons voting on the devices, the figures recorded by the devices shall be accepted as correct.

At the conclusion of the recount of all precincts, after allowing the parties to inspect the questioned ballots, and after hearing arguments, the court shall rule on the validity of all questioned ballots and votes. After determining all matters pertaining to the recount and redetermination of the vote as raised by the parties, the court shall certify to the State Board and the electoral board or boards (a) the vote for each party to the recount and declare the person who received the higher number of votes to be nominated or elected, as appropriate, or (b) the votes for and against the question and declare the outcome of the referendum. The State Board shall post on the Internet any and all changes made during the recount to the results as previously certified by it pursuant to § 24.2-679.

E. Costs of the recount shall be assessed against the counties and cities comprising the election district when (i) the candidate petitioning for the recount is declared the winner; (ii) the petitioners in a recount of a referendum win the recount; or (iii) there was between the candidate apparently nominated or elected and the candidate petitioning for the recount a difference of not more than one-half of one percent of the total vote cast for the two such candidates as determined by the State Board or electoral board prior to the recount. Otherwise the costs of the recount shall be assessed against the candidate petitioning for the recount or the petitioners in a recount of a referendum. If more than one candidate petitions for a recount, the court may assess costs in an equitable manner between the counties and cities and any such candidate if both are liable for costs under this subsection. Costs incurred to date shall be assessed against any candidate or petitioner who defaults or withdraws his petition.

F. The court shall determine the costs of the recount subject to the following limitations: (i) no per diem payment shall be assessed for salaried election officials; (ii) no per diem payment to officers of election serving as recount officials shall exceed two-thirds of the per diem paid such officers by the county or city for service on election day; and (iii) per diem payments to alternates shall be allowed only if they serve.

G. Any petitioner who may be assessed with costs under subsection E shall post a bond with surety with the court in the amount of $10 per precinct in the area subject to recount. If the petitioner wins the recount, the bond shall not be forfeit. If the petitioner loses the recount, the bond shall be forfeit only to the extent of the assessed costs. If the assessed costs exceed the bond, he shall be liable for such excess.

H. The recount proceeding shall be final and not subject to appeal.

I. For the purposes of this section:

"Overvote" means a ballot on which a voter casts a vote for a greater number of candidates or positions than the number for which he was lawfully entitled to vote and no vote shall be counted with respect to that office or issue.

"Undervote" means a ballot on which a voter casts a vote for a lesser number of candidates or positions than the number for which he was lawfully entitled to vote.

(1979, c. 293, § 24.1-250; 1980, c. 639; 1981, c. 570; 1982, c. 650; 1983, c. 461; 1984, c. 480; 1993, c. 641; 2000, cc. 938, 1057; 2001, cc. 639, 641, 646; 2002, cc. 601, 647; 2003, c. 268; 2004, c. 410; 2006, c. 689.)

[autorank]

60. Preliminary Comment on Webb Race in No. VA

(This is preliminary. But I may be on to something)

comments from althecats excellent thread on Elections: http://tinyurl.com/ykjbuv

I'm totally wiped out but I saw the totals for Webb in Northern Virginia. He ran significantly behind Keane, our victorious Democratic Gov candidate in 2005.

Turnout was up from 2005 in my very large precinct - like a lot may be 30%

It was not them turning out because there are no "thems" in my precinct. It went 65% to 35% for
Keane and the whole ticket in 2006.

My precinct isn't any happier with Bush or the Republicans. In fact, the 2005 increase to 65% Dem from 54% Dem in 2004 was based on a strong aversion to extremist right wing candidates. What was Allen?

AVS, the voting machines for all of Northern Virginia, produced a significant down ballot bump for the Republican right wing clone Lt. Gov and A.G. candidates in 2005. Nobody can really explain it since the 2005 Republican Gov, Lt. Gov., and A.G. candidates were all of the same Pat Robertson/Jerry Fallwell mold.

So you tell me, do we look into this?

[autorank]

70. Exit Polls - Senate including Virgiia - From TruthIsAll

Which senate races deviated the most from the 
pre-election and 7pm exit poll to the recorded vote? 

Virginia and Montana, the elections which were
"too close to call" for hours after the polls
closed.

Here are the probabilities:
Dev: Discrepancy between Democratic 7pm Exit poll
vote share and the recorded vote share.
Prob: Probability of discrepancy

.. Dev Prob
MT 4% 1.61e-04 or 1 in 6,196 
VA 3% 3.37e-03 or 1 in 297 

As usual, the Final Exit Poll was MATCHED to the RECORDED
vote.

Please don't ask WHY. 
It's par for the course.
Edison-Mitofsky always assume ZERO fraud.
Remember 2004? It's deja vu all over again.

Only this time, everyone was watching.

So which exit poll do you believe, the 7pm or the Final?

	Pre-elect	2-ptyProj	7pmExit	         FinalExit	FinalVote	
Avg	46.4	45.6	52.5	47.5	53.0	45.9	52.5	46.4	52.3	46.5
	Dem	GOP	Dem	GOP	Dem	GOP	Dem	GOP	Dem	GOP
MT	48.0	47.0	51.0	49.0	53	46	50.0	47.5	49	48
MO*	47.8	46.2	51.4	48.6	50	48	48.8	47.7	50	47
OH	51.0	43.3	54.4	45.6	57	43	56.0	44.0	56	44
PA	52.3	40.8	56.4	43.6	57	42	59.0	41.0	59	41

RI	48.3	40.5	55.0	45.0	53	46	53.8	46.2	53	47
TN	43.0	51.5	46.3	53.7	48	51	48.1	50.9	48	51
VA*	46.4	45.8	51.1	48.9	53	46	50.1	49.9	50	49
NJ	48.0	42.0	54.0	46.0	53	45	54.2	43.9	53	45

Dev1: Discrepancy from the 7pm Exit Poll to the vote.
Dev2: Discrepancy from the Final Exit Poll to the vote.
Dev3: Dev2-Dev1
Prob: Probability of discrepancy between Democratic 7pm Exit
poll
vote share and the recorded vote.



	Dev1	Dev2	Dev3	MoE	>MoE	Prob	       1 in
MT*	6.0	1.5	-4.5	2.18%	yes	1.61E-04	6,196
MO	-1.0	-1.9	-0.9	1.92%		5.00E-01	2
OH	2.0	0.0	-2.0	2.04%		1.68E-01	6
PA	-3.0	0.0	3.0	1.97%		9.77E-01	1

RI	1.0	1.6	0.6	2.86%		5.00E-01	2
TN	0.0	0.2	0.2	1.95%		5.00E-01	2
VA*	6.0	-0.8	-6.8	2.17%	yes	3.37E-03	297
NJ	0.0	2.3	2.3	2.18%		5.00E-01	2

[autorank]

26. Wisconsin 8th Congressional District

8th Congressional District DEM Wall versus Green
Web Site http://www.wallforcongress.com/district

[stillcool]

27. error

[kimpossible]

36. North Carolina 8th Congressional District

8th Congressional District: DEM Kissel vs. Hayes

Web site http://www.larrykissell.com


From the SBOE's unofficial results page at http://www.sboe.state.nc.us/voterweb/elections.htm -

2006 UNOFFICIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS
US CONGRESS DISTRICT 08

The contest data below was updated on 11/8/2006 1:06:47 AM.
Name on Ballot                   Party         Statewide Ballot Count
Robert C. (Robin) Hayes       REP         44,585
Larry Kissell                       DEM         40,394

[kimpossible]

37. Still too close to call

"Hayes was barely holding onto his seat over grass roots challenger Larry Kissell, leading by less than one-half of one percentage point - just 468 votes out of more than 120,000 cast. All precincts were reporting, but provisional ballots had yet to be counted and a recount was all but assured."

http://dwb.newsobserver.com/politics/ncwire_politics/story/3016808p-9436442c.html

[autorank]

49. Lets watch this one closely. Great work

[kimpossible]

62. NC 8th Update

2006 UNOFFICIAL GENERAL ELECTION RESULTS
US CONGRESS DISTRICT 08

The contest data below was updated on 11/8/2006 10:01:09 PM.
Name on Ballot               Party   Statewide Ballot Count
Robert C. (Robin) Hayes   REP     61,168
Larry Kissell                   DEM     60,822

[autorank]

50. Summary from Understandinglife - solicited for this link

Understandinglife did this summary on election night. It's on it's own thread, so go say hello but
it's here by original request:

understandinglife Tue Nov-07-06 01:05 AM
Original message
Be America. --- That's the real deal, my fellow citizens. Updated at 12:27 PM

That's the mandate for 7 November 2006.

And, for EVERY day, thence.

We the People ... must never relent ... must be constantly vigilant ... must participate in every issue.

Our Republic is not a once in a while task.

It is Our Republic, 24/7/365.

It is NOT a spectator activity.

It is OURS to Live and Breath and Think and Nurture - Every Day.


Never, Ever Forget: George W. Bush willfully violated National Security to cover-up his willful launch of a war of aggression and illegal occupation of Iraq .... and, now he willfully provided nuke-making instructions to terrorists -- if you doubt it, just check 'the google' ....

[autorank]

52. MONTANA SENATOR

My apologies for not posting Montqana in Sequence. Here's an amazing message:
http://tinyurl.com/ycurhp
Jeffersons Ghost Tue Nov-07-06 10:12 PM
Original message
Private Message on MEDIA from an insiders perspective...

This correspondence was between myself and in my humble opinion one of the best writers at DU, who I will not name without permission. It is a short but VERY revealing read.

Thanks for your positive, encouraging message but it's still a bit too early for me to buy champagne. You write extremely well, which I'm sure others mention regularly. Have you ever worked in media?

Much of my experience is in advertising where repetition is the key to producing results. As Shakespeare wrote "ay, there's the rub." A quick two week exposure of a new idea like DIEBOLD, which can easily be construed by the public and, perhaps later even media, as "conspiracy theory," has little long-term impact.

In writing, a pitfall for many with good command of language and grammar, is over-estimating abilities of a reader to understand. Work you present at DU, does not suggest that you have any problems relating to THESE readers but at this site I've noticed a higher intellect and education than we might find in the public of most media markets. In other words, those idiots outside DU have very short memories and even the simplest concepts must be hammered into their heads for months, which is the main reason they ever vote Republican.

I've become quite spoiled writing for this demographic. Even with my musical/graphic renditions, it is nice to realize that a fairly broad cross-section of viewers grasp subtle suggestive nuance in the presentations. Outside DU, offering that type media is like casting pearls before swine.

In media, broadcasters usually read the same copy at least twice in a row before a show, which is what news is often called, with each reading offering the probability of carrying a viewer or listener in different directions. It's as simple as a magician's thumb trick for pros to divert the eyes or cast slight inflection into their voice to totally change audience perception, which is why Clear-Channel has so few live broadcasters, actually on the air. What amazes me is that if a silly electronic box offers information, it is as if Moses just brought down stone tablets of profound truth. People in America better wake up. It is and always was, simply a slight-of-hand trick. The only difference is that back then, we engaged in black magic far less.

While, FOX might strike us as idiots on cocaine, make no mistake -- master propagandists sit just outside the foot-lights, meticulously coaching every broadcast. To think it stops at FOX is a plummet into folly. Anyone with enough millions to lose money for so long on that dog has resources to reach ANY demographic, including mine. Like cocaine, FOX - and all media - can be addictive with an unseen, dangerous impact on consumers. While that is indeed troubling, it is more upsetting that intelligent people can no longer enjoy the History Channel. Those reasonably accurate broadcasts once felt like a pair of comfy old slippers but now their programming fits like six-inch heels, which would look ridiculous on me, like most men.

If you have noticed a sharp increase in advertising per quarter hour, again we look to history. Before Reagan dismantled the FCC, stations ran only a specific amount of commercials per quarter hour. These ads that blast us out, as volume suddenly increases were forbiden. These laws not only served consumers but also media because back then people might actually listen to some advertising. By reducing 10 commissioners to 3 Reagan made the FCC less able to monitor media. Even worse, it creates a situation where a small number of people can easily agree on bad regulations. Worst of all, one radical change in the FCC allows a single person to buy up gigantic blocks of media, conceivably owning every news source in America. In the old days, if you owned a radio station, for example, restrictions kept you from buying the local newspaper. Now, ClearChannel owns nearly every station in the country and, while your local station may sound live, it is likely pre-recorded. I toured a Clear-Channel facility years ago. Twenty radio stations broadcasting from a single facility with NO DISC JOCKEYS made me want to vomit. I left media for good, not long after that job interview.

In proofing my PM, it occurs to me that if we present this material to DU as a whole, it might benefit this highly intelligent group. Some mental armoring in upcoming months will not be a bad thing for this audience.

[autorank]

71. Exit Polls - Senate including Montana- From TruthIsAll

Which senate races deviated the most from the 
pre-election and 7pm exit poll to the recorded vote? 

Virginia and Montana, the elections which were
"too close to call" for hours after the polls
closed.

Here are the probabilities:
Dev: Discrepancy between Democratic 7pm Exit poll
vote share and the recorded vote share.
Prob: Probability of discrepancy

.. Dev Prob
MT 4% 1.61e-04 or 1 in 6,196 
VA 3% 3.37e-03 or 1 in 297 

As usual, the Final Exit Poll was MATCHED to the RECORDED
vote.

Please don't ask WHY. 
It's par for the course.
Edison-Mitofsky always assume ZERO fraud.
Remember 2004? It's deja vu all over again.

Only this time, everyone was watching.

So which exit poll do you believe, the 7pm or the Final?

	Pre-elect	2-ptyProj	7pmExit	         FinalExit	FinalVote	
Avg	46.4	45.6	52.5	47.5	53.0	45.9	52.5	46.4	52.3	46.5
	Dem	GOP	Dem	GOP	Dem	GOP	Dem	GOP	Dem	GOP
MT	48.0	47.0	51.0	49.0	53	46	50.0	47.5	49	48
MO*	47.8	46.2	51.4	48.6	50	48	48.8	47.7	50	47
OH	51.0	43.3	54.4	45.6	57	43	56.0	44.0	56	44
PA	52.3	40.8	56.4	43.6	57	42	59.0	41.0	59	41

RI	48.3	40.5	55.0	45.0	53	46	53.8	46.2	53	47
TN	43.0	51.5	46.3	53.7	48	51	48.1	50.9	48	51
VA*	46.4	45.8	51.1	48.9	53	46	50.1	49.9	50	49
NJ	48.0	42.0	54.0	46.0	53	45	54.2	43.9	53	45

Dev1: Discrepancy from the 7pm Exit Poll to the vote.
Dev2: Discrepancy from the Final Exit Poll to the vote.
Dev3: Dev2-Dev1
Prob: Probability of discrepancy between Democratic 7pm Exit
poll
vote share and the recorded vote.



	Dev1	Dev2	Dev3	MoE	>MoE	Prob	       1 in
MT*	6.0	1.5	-4.5	2.18%	yes	1.61E-04	6,196
MO	-1.0	-1.9	-0.9	1.92%		5.00E-01	2
OH	2.0	0.0	-2.0	2.04%		1.68E-01	6
PA	-3.0	0.0	3.0	1.97%		9.77E-01	1

RI	1.0	1.6	0.6	2.86%		5.00E-01	2
TN	0.0	0.2	0.2	1.95%		5.00E-01	2
VA*	6.0	-0.8	-6.8	2.17%	yes	3.37E-03	297
NJ	0.0	2.3	2.3	2.18%		5.00E-01	2

[Kurovski]

54. Thank you to all for a great job on this thread.

Bookmarked.

(I love you guys)

[autorank]

72. We love you too and its not over. We'll keep going until its all cleared up;)

You know my motto (form the family crest): "F'em if they can't take a joke!"

[Kurovski]

73. And from the other side of the family...

"It never ends." :hi: