It's time, FLORIDA RECOUNT NOW!

[jsamuel]

The best thing is that they have already certified the vote, so we could start NOW!!!

Let us get Cobb or Nader to do so, NOW!!!

Between Volusia (and other op-scan counties) and the touchscreen counties (like the UCB report), there is quite a possiblity that enough fraud turned the state.

LETS FIGHT!!!

COBB AND NADER!
http://www.votecobb.org
http://www.votenader.com

AND WELCOME deansyawp

[ahyums]

1. the fact that they have certified the vote means time is extremely limited

[jsamuel]

4. ON THE CONTRARY, IT MEANS TIME IS NOT HOLDING US BACK!

A recount couldn't have started until they did certify, and they did it already. Blackwell says they will wait until Dec. 6h to certify (in effect, delaying the recount), but that can't happen if Florida.

[ahyums]

5. yes but I think there must be a cut off date for recount applications

and it could well be any day now. Someone has to move on this fast I think.

[jsamuel]

6. Yes, good point. FAST IS BETTER!

[shakerbaker]

29. Correct is more important

We need to be patient and keep our cool. Hurrying increases the chance for error.

[ahyums]

30. problem is though if it was certified last Friday, if we get to Monday and

there's nothing in the courts that's it forget about it, in terms of filling a formal challenge and potentially getting anything changed. What happens later may well be extremely important, but there is a very short deadline on this.

[Carolab]

8. Great background on contesting the results

http://www.thegreenpapers.com/G00/FL-0.html#102.166

[ahyums]

10. does that suggest it's too late?

seems to be saying that a contest needs to be filed prior to certification?

[jsamuel]

11. It can't be too late, Bev has the power to recount any county right now

[ahyums]

14. that's not a recount, it's just a freedom of information act request

it doesn't have any legal significance as far as the results are concerned.

[jsamuel]

15. oh, ok, But we have till 10 days after the certification anyway

[ahyums]

13. ah ok it needs to be a contest, which seems to be somewhat more

complicated, there appears to be a burden of proof attached that something went on.

[deansyawp]

16. Thanks for the link

So as I read it, it is too late to request a manual recount in the usual order as Gore did in 2000 -- according to the statute, that must take place before certification.

It is the second provision, "contesting" the results which can occur _after_ the certification (that is, within ten days after certification). This seems more complicated as it must go before a circuit court judge -- fortunately, the grounds covered include, of course, fraud and illegal voting.

[ahyums]

17. especially given that this would have the character of a law suit there

really is virtually no time for this. The decision to contest would literally have to be made tomorrow as I believe certification was as long as a week ago (it certainly seems that way), it should be contested, but I'm not entirely convinced it can be, would require some real decisive action from someone.

[proudtobeadem]

48. kick

[aikanae]

53. Bev posted that wasn't the final certification

the announcement on the certification was on the weekend because no one was expecting it. at the time, Bev posted something about them still having more time, since it was preliminary (?) not the official. she was using 'sunshine laws' ? of course, things may have changed.

to me, I thought it sounded like she was going to prove fraud in court vs going after the recount.

i was hoping the DNC had kicked in for the Ohio recount (sudden appearance of $150,000). another article mention Dem. lawyers also filing in court, and I assumed that was different than recount.

The article specifically mentioned the lawyers intended to turn it over to Kerry. (but who can believe what's written in the press anymore). The op/ed's i've seen in Ohio seemed pretty calm (except for the $ hassle) saying the margin was wide enough there wasn't a chance.

I'm wondering, if they prove fraud in court - what would happen? would it cause all the electoral votes from that state to be invalid?

I don't see how the lawyers could get it in court fast enough - or could they be thinking....connecting all 3 states and proving bush did it (whadda dream) ousting them all!

[DoYouEverWonder]

55. I remember reading that the deadline to certify the vote

was Monday 15th about 3:00 PM.

Then all of a sudden FL announced that they certified the vote on Sunday PM, Nov 14th. I thought that was odd since they still had one more day.

Anyone know how many days after the certified vote someone can file a challenge and what the requirements are to do that?

[Vincardog]

2. Kick

[Rjnerd]

3. If Nader files for a recount

Boy will Jeb be pissed that he let him onto the ballot...

[Hobbes199]

23. If Nader files for a recount

He's going to need some money.

[bleever]

49. And wouldn't that be a sad thing.

:nopity::evilgrin:

[aikanae]

52. poor jeb, looks like he screwed himself more than anyone else

one of the nicest things that could come out of this
(besides bush being proved a fraud by 'Gore's internet invention'.

[deansyawp]

7. Yes, Now!

Thanks for the welcome!

I thought I had heard that the recount had to be requested within ten days of certification?

Has anyone contacted Cobb and/or Nader to see if they are interested in "sponsoring" such a request?

Can DU help coordinate raising money for this?

[Carolab]

9. I believe 10 days, yes

Read the link I posted above

[go west young man]

12. I just sent him an email...

and it felt goooooooood!!!!!!!!!

[ahyums]

18. just to clarify does anyone know exactly when it was certified?

I remember some news reports at the time, but can't remember when it was exactly

[rockedthevoteinMA]

19. I believe it was last friday/saturday.

I posted this in another thread. Don't know what to make of it. Jeff Fisher has something up about how he has been in contact with Nader about a recount, and Nader has agreed to go through with it, as long as Jeff can provide the cash. Here's the link (he just put it up)
http://www.jefffisherforcongress.com/Campaign2006/indexletterRalphNader111504.htm#nader1a

[shraby]

20. What is the address to contact Nader, and

would there be a provision in an audit for suspected fraud? We have Bev's finding, the Freeman report and the Berkely study.

[rockedthevoteinMA]

21. you can contact them via their website

www.votenader.org . There's a thread on here somewhere (I think) that had a phone # or more direct way to contact them.

[shraby]

22. Done

I hope someone reads his email and acts on it.

[shraby]

24. Kick

:kick: :kick:

[ahyums]

28. would it have to be just Nader were Cobb and Badnarik not on the ballot?

I ask because I think this is going to be pretty difficult for Nader to do by himself, this is not a standard recount if it happens, its a lawsuit and it needs a good team of lawyers to go ahead with it.

[ahyums]

35. I've just checked again and it seems it was on Sunday

which is an extremely odd day to do official state business, anyway that means that by the 10 day rule if that rule is inclusive of Sunday any contest would have to be filed by Tuesday, and if the rule is exclusive of Sunday it would need to be filed by Wednesday.

[Cookie wookie]

25. Just emailed Nader and asked if he would

file for a recount in Florida, in light of the new study by Cal Berkeley and said if he does, I'll send money to support.

[pointsoflight]

32. In Florida it could take a court order to get a recount.

We'll therefore need good evidence beforehand. Hopefully this is where Bev Harris' work will help us.

[Wordie]

42. What if somebody requested a HAND recount in one of the counties where

there is NO paper trail? It would expose a contradiction in the law. The law ALLOWS hand recounts (at least, it did as late as 2000, it's possible they've changed it since then, I suppose). If the law allows hand recounts, but the electronic voting system that the county Election Supervisor chose to count the votes prevents that legal process from happening (which it obviously does) isn't that ALONE enough basis on which to challenge the results? Or at very least the lack of a papertrail itself? Why wait for additional evidence? GO for it NOW!

[JD Lau]

26. Kick

:kick:

[silvershadow]

27. I think if we are contacting Nader or anyone else about this

we should donate to their funds. I am willing to pitch in when I get paid tomorrow.

[Carolab]

31. I e-mailed Ralph

and said we would donate if he contests...others might want to do the same.

[Wordie]

33. Good Idea!

This seems like a good idea to me, after that study that was done by UCB (the one Olbermann mentioned). If they are right, and it does seem that the professor who was in charge of it has the credentials to know, then it means there are serious demonstrable problems in FL that could be proven/corrected with a recount.

Maybe people should make sure to mail a link to the UCB study to Ralph Nader, too, when they email him, and Cobb. That way he will have the relevant data (altough I suppose he has already read about it).

How much would a recount in FL cost?

[Baja Margie]

34. kick

[Chimpanzee]

36. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong

but I thought you couldn't legally get a recount unless the vote was within a certain percenatge difference. Is this true, and how close does it have to be?

[Chimpanzee]

37. I found this in the Florida election laws:

(6) If the unofficial returns reflect that a candidate
for any office was defeated or eliminated by one-half of
a percent or less of the votes cast for such office, that
a candidate for retention to a judicial office was retained
or not retained by one-half of a percent or less of the
votes cast on the question of retention, or that a measure
appearing on the ballot was approved or rejected
by one-half of a percent or less of the votes cast on
such measure, the board responsible for certifying the
results of the vote on such race or measure shall order
a recount of the votes cast with respect to such office
or measure. A recount need not be ordered with
respect to the returns for any office, however, if the candidate
or candidates defeated or eliminated from contention
for such office by one-half of a percent or less
of the votes cast for such office request in writing that
a recount not be made.

[Wordie]

39. I think that may be a provision for an *automatic* recount, but that

doesn't necessarily mean that someone couldn't ask for a recount on a more voluntary basis. At least, I'm pretty sure of that. I don't know what the legal requirements are for recounting in FL. Does it have to be a candidate to request it? Do they have to have a reason, or can they just request one?

[ahyums]

38. depends how you define recount, in Florida strictly speaking that would

have to have taken place before certification, however the result can still be contested up to some point next week in which case a court could order a recount, no doubt that it's more complicated though

[Wordie]

40. Couldn't it be contested just on the basis that there is NO paper trail.

Doesn't just that fact violate the intention of the 2000 Supreme Court decision? Because it mean that votes are not equal?

I have read that for anyone to request a recount there has to be some problem with the vote. Well, NO PAPER TRAIL is a BIG problem! What more of a problem does anyone need? Challenge the Secretary of State who I understand has said that the votes in the counties with no paper trails WILL NOT BE RECOUNTED! Isn't that a HUGE violation of FL law? And the thing is, votes where there is not paper trail, in any meaningful sense , CANNOT be recounted, because there is nothing there to recount. So it is a problem in the law, if it allows recounting, but has some counties that CANNOT be recounted! This is what lawsuits are for: to resolve just these sorts of issues. If we are lucky, it will go to the Supreme Court and there will be a decision that OUTLAWS voting with no paper trail.

[spoogly]

45. Florida Contest Statute

102.168 Contest of election.--

(1) Except as provided in s. 102.171, the certification of election or nomination of any person to office, or of the result on any question submitted by referendum, may be contested in the circuit court by any unsuccessful candidate for such office or nomination thereto or by any elector qualified to vote in the election related to such candidacy, or by any taxpayer, respectively.

(2) Such contestant shall file a complaint, together with the fees prescribed in chapter 28, with the clerk of the circuit court within 10 days after midnight of the date the last county canvassing board empowered to canvass the returns certifies the results of the election being contested.

(3) The complaint shall set forth the grounds on which the contestant intends to establish his or her right to such office or set aside the result of the election on a submitted referendum. The grounds for contesting an election under this section are:

(a) Misconduct, fraud, or corruption on the part of any election official or any member of the canvassing board sufficient to change or place in doubt the result of the election.

(b) Ineligibility of the successful candidate for the nomination or office in dispute.

(c) Receipt of a number of illegal votes or rejection of a number of legal votes sufficient to change or place in doubt the result of the election.

(d) Proof that any elector, election official, or canvassing board member was given or offered a bribe or reward in money, property, or any other thing of value for the purpose of procuring the successful candidate's nomination or election or determining the result on any question submitted by referendum.

[Wordie]

47. No paper trail counties: case could be made for recount under item "a"

The case for a recount under item "a"

It is misconduct of an election official to buy such systems. The systems do not accomodate hand recounts, and hand recounts are something that is allowed by state law. By buying these systems, the election official has effectively denied to the voters something that is provided to them under state law, hence that is misconduct (at least).

Since there is no real way to do a recount, ALL the election results are automatically placed in doubt. Can anyone PROVE that any county's votes didn't really all go to just one candidate? Can anyone PROVE anything about the votes in those counties AT ALL?

It seems if this angle was pursued, ALL the votes cast with no paper trail could be challenged. And of course the election officials or judges or whoever will argue and probably deny the request. But that's when you appeal...all the way to the Supremes, if necessary! And in the end, perhaps we could get the machines without a paper trail completely banned. Because the Supremes have already indicated that there has to be a consistent means of counting; they set the precedent already.

[PATRICK]

54. c is the killer

That circular argument, the burden being to prove HOW MUCH was stolen must equal a change in the result is absurd from an ideal law point of view. Whenever the Catch-22 or circular argument gets codified to thwart the victim's redress of wrongs you know your goose is cooked and the courts uphold these monstrosities. And you know with a good AG or Grand Jury you could find misconduct and fraud, but it only comes down to possible recounts, not lost ballots and trickery.

I think some people are demanding a recount naively here. You never get a full examination of Florida that way but only a narrow path determined by the SOS and crap laws like the above. Someone is assuming that challenging will find redress for paperless BBV and other losses. You'll be lucky to get anything approaching a fair recount and a lot more has sunk into touchscreen limbo for good.

You'd be better off finding a pattern of fraud in other states and kissing off Florida until a future thorough raking over for Castor's sake. Or maybe just Castor, but that again is doing a partial picture and closing the books like in 2000. Proving fraud means nothing compared to the final result of "losing".

Like Gore with his massively better operation and lawyers, you need to play the Florida judicial system and election laws on the ground. No one here seems able to comprehend that. Or that the media will not grant an iota of fraud exposure to the whole fruitless, noble effort.

Then we'll be back to boycotting oranges like last time?

[Election Mess]

41. right on!!

See the site:

[Election Mess]

43. FLA Disparities

Link: http://www.passinglane.com/elections/

Originally published 11/10/04 :: Last updated 11/12/04

Recently I've started paying more attention to the mounting discourse on the internet and in some media outlets about recent election irregularities.

While mainstream media has been showing lots of coverage of democrats beating themselves up over what they could have done differently and their underestimation of the sheer number of passionate and mobile conservatives, very few have been covering the increasing accounts of election tally irregularities. It seems that each day the election passes there are more legitimate questions being asked, and circumstantial evidence revealed, that raises serious question of whether this election was called accurately at all.

In Florida there are 29 counties out of 67 (over 43% of the counties in the state) that have a direct inverse relationship between the percentage of people registered to a party and the percentage of votes received by that party. Examples: Hardy County registrations are 5:2 democratic, results are nearly 2:5 republican; Washington County registrations are 3:1 democratic, results are nearly 3:1 republican; Suwannee County registrations are a bit over 2:1 democratic, results are a bit over 2:1 republican; Bradford County registrations are a bit over 2:1 democratic, results are a bit over 2:1 republican; Holmes County registrations are 4:1 democratic, results are 3:1 republican.

The larger the disparity in registrant affiliation, the larger the reverse disparity of the results. I can't see how anyone can claim that this is due to disproportionately huge voting shifts in the most democratic counties. That would mean, in a county like Lafayette (with only 570 registered republicans) every registered republican voted; every undeclared voter voted republican (169); and of the 3,570 registered democrats, 1,004 did not vote; and of those who did, registered democrats voted republican by more than 2 to 1 (1,721 to 845).

Increasingly, my theory is that counts were reversed in the less populated, heavily democratic Florida counties. These counties all used Optical Scanning machines to read paper ballots. If the wrong candidate was associated with the wrong hole in the punch card (Kerry and Bush were reversed) we would see results exactly consistent with what we received.

Furthermore, If we look at just the Touch-Screen machines in Florida, 8 out of 15 counties using these machines showed more voters moving toward Kerry and away from Bush as compared to the ratios of registered democrats and republicans. As a mater of fact, in each of these 8 counties Kerry/Edwards votes exceeded the number of registered democratic voters, while the number of republican votes were less than the total number of registered republicans in those counties.

I based my comparisons on a table originally constructed and published by Kathy Dopp at: http://ustogether.org/election04/FloridaDataStats.htm (listed on the legend page as a data source). I used the State of Florida's election website at: http://enight.dos.state.fl.us/ to spot check the accuracy of Kathy Dopp's table. In my analysis I modeled reversing the vote tallies in the 29 counties that had the largest inverse relationship between election results and the party affiliation of voters.

On the following pages (links above) Florida election results are compared, county by county, with voter party affiliation. It appears there is very clear evidence of serious fraud, or at the very least, coincidental errors beyond anyone's imagination. I have attempted to lay this information out as clearly as possible. Please take a look and decide for yourself.

Additional Links of Interest:

Subsequent to my publishing these pages I discovered another great analysis by Kathy Dopp titled, "Surprising Pattern of Florida's Election Results". This page further breaks down the vendor of voting machines in each county (I did not see any correlation between manufacturers of optical scanning machines and voting disparity). This page also provides great off-site links, including a document by Steven F. Freeman, PhD at the University of Pennsylvania, entitled "The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy" that examines the issues surrounding the surprising discrepancies between election results and exit polls.

MSNBC's Keith Olbermann is one mainstream reporter covering some of the irregularities. See: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/

Dick Morris, conservative writer for 'The Hill,' writes (http://www.thehill.com/morris/110404.aspx), "Exit polls are almost never wrong. They eliminate the two major potential fallacies in survey research by correctly separating actual voters from those who pretend they will..." Morris goes on to write, "So, according to ABC-TV’s exit polls, for example, Kerry was slated to carry Florida, Ohio, New Mexico, Colorado, Nevada and Iowa..." "This was no mere mistake. Exit polls cannot be as wrong across the board as they were on election night. I suspect foul play." Morris suggests there was foul play amongst the hundreds, if not thousands of exit pollsters on the ground. Many others would suggest that the foul play was perpetrated, not by the pollsters, rather by those in charge of the machinery doing the counting.

For more in depth reporting also see Thom Hartmann's article published at http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1106-30.htm

For a revealing documentary on potential election tampering by way of voting system manipulation please visit the VoterGate website at: http://www.votergate.tv/

To respond to the contents of this site, or share your own evidence of election irregularity or fraud, please email: [e-mail]

[floridadem30]

44. Just curious do you live in florida?

[mary195149]

46. FRAUD AUDIT

BREAKING -- SATURDAY NOV 13 2004: Black Box Voting has launched a fraud audit into Florida. Three investigators (Bev Harris, Andy Stephenson, and Kathleen Wynne) are in Florida right now. We will initiate hand counts on selected counties that have not fully complied with our Nov. 2 Freedom of Information request by Monday (Diebold counties) or Tuesday (other counties).

[Carolab]

51. Check the date

the 13th?

[jsamuel]

50. I used to live in Tampa

[ahyums]

56. Just wanted to remind everyone that if the Sunday14th Certification was

final and official (which there seems to be some dispute over) then there are only 2 days left to legally contest the election in Florida. A contest would need to be filled in court by Wednesday.