Boston Globe...Front Page...I can't be the first posting this...

[EMunster]

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/12/01/voting_errors_tallied_nationwide/

[snacker]

1. First I've seen of it.

Thank you for sharing.

[papau]

15. Voting errors -at least a dozen states-"stat proof doesn't stand scrutiny"

Posted at DU - but I may not have posted in the correct area? -02004 Election Results and Discussion... sigh :-)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x97267

and another DU thread by Rose Siding
Boston Globe: Voting Errors Tallied Nationwide

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x97198

my thread was :
Voting errors -at least a dozen states-"stat proof doesn't stand scrutiny"

at least a dozen states, each involving from scores of ballots to as many as 12,000 votes

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/12/01/voting_errors_tallied_nationwide


Voting errors tallied nationwide
By Brian C. Mooney, Globe Staff | December 1, 2004

More than 4,000 votes vanished without a trace into a computer's overloaded memory in one North Carolina county, and about a hundred paper ballots were thrown out by mistake in another. In Texas, a county needed help from a laboratory in Canada to unlock the memory of a touch-screen machine and unearth five dozen votes.

In other places, machine undercounting or overcounting of votes was a problem. Several thousand votes were mistakenly double-counted in North Carolina, Ohio, Nebraska, and Washington state. Some votes in other areas were at first credited to the wrong candidates, with one Indiana county, by some quirk, misallocating several hundred votes for Democrats to Libertarians. In Florida, some machines temporarily indicated votes intended for challenger John F. Kerry were for President Bush, and vice versa.

In the month since the election, serious instances of voting machine problems or human errors in ballot counts have been documented in at least a dozen states, each involving from scores of ballots to as many as 12,000 votes, as in a North Carolina county. On Election Day, or in later reconciling tallies of ballots and voters, local officials discovered problems and corrected final counts. In some cases, the changes altered the outcomes of local races. But in North Carolina, the problems were so serious that the state may hold a rare second vote, redoing a contest for state agriculture commissioner decided by fewer votes than the number of ballots lost.

After the disputed vote in Florida four years ago, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and authorized $4 billion so states could create central computerized voter lists and replace outdated voting systems such as punchcards by 2006. But many states have not completed the overhaul, and this year's election unearthed enough problems -- both with older technologies and newer electronic touch-screens -- that two federal agencies plan unprecedented nationwide inquiries. The investigations by the Government Accountability Office and US Election Assistance Commission will begin early next year and be completed by mid-2005, at the earliest.

In addition, minor presidential candidates requested recounts in four states -- a partial one completed yesterday in New Hampshire, and statewide in Ohio, New Mexico, and Nevada.

None of the recounts or inquiries is expected to affect the results of the presidential election, which Bush won by more than 3.3 million votes.

Those who believe that either or both of the past two presidential elections were manipulated by a vague conspiracy to elect Bush have done statistical analyses of voting patterns in Florida and argued that the voting discrepancies were much larger and systemic, but their studies have not stood up to scrutiny from academics and other analysts.<snip>

As a poster said " Funny how battleground states saw the most irregularities FL, OH, NM, PA, CO"


And why does Boston Globe Stat review end with Dixiecrat error? The best math is showing theft across the country but they knock down the reports based on one analysis of Florida - and that dixiecrat Dem registration review analysis may have found something - just not as big a deal as originally suggested,

[hippiegranny]

37. Here's the part that pisses ME off

>None of the recounts or inquiries is expected to affect the results of the presidential election, which Bush won by more than 3.3 million votes.<

That is because no one is willing to believe the unthinkable: that voting machine fraud and programming devices may have padded Bushitler's count at the same time it subtracted from Kerry's.

[stevedeshazer]

42. And what pisses me off is

that the 3.3 million vote figure has nothing to do with it. Instead, it's all about electoral votes. Ohio's electoral votes; Florida's electoral votes; New Mexico's electoral votes.

[bpcmxr]

2. You're right,

but it bears repeating.

[crispini]

3. Well, I missed it.

Is it up in LBN? If not, you might wanna put it up there too.

[Ian David]

4. They're still seriously downplaying this

[smartvoter]

17. Downplaying? They're dismissing it.

[Wordie]

22. Don't you think though, that by mentioning so many of the problems in

the article, that many people are going to start wondering? Asking themselves questions about the problems? Especially as more information begins to come out?

[smartvoter]

24. Better than nothing -- agreed.

[Wordie]

29. And that map packs a whollop. How many really read the articles anyway? nt

[forgethell]

5. This issue is not

going to go away, and it should be fixed. however, from what I've read, the problems seem to be due more to incompetence (not necessarily *'s, but at the state and local levels) than true fraud. And unless fraud can be shown, and proven in a court, this is not going to affect Bush's 2nd term.

[texpatriot2004]

6. Read the Actionable Fraud thread here at DU and

you may see things differently.

[forgethell]

16. link?? n/t

[texpatriot2004]

49. Link to Actionable Fraud Thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=95878&mesg_id=95878

[anamandujano]

7. the incompetence favored bush

each and every time--'splain that.

[texpatriot2004]

9. If we toss a coin 50 times and every time it falls on heads

we better look into why. It's not chance that all the issues favor Bush.

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. They won't

I wonder if some of the check that Madsen refers to is meant as hush money for the press too?

Oh silly me the hush money is all their bidness in front of the FCC

[Melodybe]

10. Does the repug congressman bragging about counting the votes

change you mind at all?

[understandinglife]

8. pathetic article.....

.....and this paragraph is a perfect example of how lame the reporter is:

""Those who believe that either or both of the past two presidential elections were manipulated by a vague conspiracy to elect Bush have done statistical analyses of voting patterns in Florida and argued that the voting discrepancies were much larger and systemic, but their studies have not stood up to scrutiny from academics and other analysts."

I'm sure plenty of folk will wave this pathetic piece of straw in their faces or at least send them this jewel from truthisall:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x97201

"Halt, Audit & Prove My Vote Counts, Now"

and a new banner I'll be using from now on:

"I Delcare The Election Invalid: Someone I do not know was prevented from voting"

[reality_bites]

12. TruthIsAll study...

is the type of study the auther was referring to when he said "studies have not stood up to scrutiny from academics and other analysts"

No study relying on the accuracy of the exit polls will pass "scrutiny from academics."

[understandinglife]

13. and the author is totally incorrect given the...

...outstanding statistical analysis studies by several academics (including a member of the NAS) during the past two weeks.

"I Delcare The Election Invalid: Someone I do not know was prevented from voting"

[reality_bites]

26. What about these outstanding statistical analysis studies...

by several acadedemics during the past 2 weeks ?

The results are questioned, but not debunked by a Columbia University scholar here:

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives/2004/11/vote_swings_in.html

A non-fraud explanation for the Berkely result is pointed out by a University of Arizona professor here:

http://www.kieranhealy.org/files/misc/election.pdf

Another author adds another variable to the Berkely study - the Jewish vote - which entirely nullifys the Berkely anomoly. See Here:

http://newmarksdoor.typepad.com/mainblog/2004/11/more_on_the_stu.html

A George Mason University scientist completely debunks Berkely here:

http://elections.gmu.edu/Berkeley.html

Patrick Ruffini makes short work debunking Berkely:

http://www.patrickruffini.com/archives/2004/11/the_last_word_o.php

This site also makes the case that there are non-fraud related reasons for the results in the Berkely study:

http://rightonthemark.blogspot.com/2004/11/did-democrats-cheat-in-2000.html

If the mainstream media were to cover this story, the headline would read:

SCHOLARLY BERKELY STUDY PROVES ELECTION FRAUD. SEVERAL OTHER SCHOLARLY STUDIES SAY OTHERWISE

This is a lot of the reason there is no mainstream coverage of this isse. Media outlets have looked at the evidence, and the case is not made, or is contradicted somewhere else.

[understandinglife]

32. If someone works for an msm and diligently attempted to..

..determine what is bunk and what isn't, they'd require Hout and his colleagues to respond to folk like the one's you've listed.

That would be responsible investigative journalism.

We'll see if anyone is capable of that type of journalism.

I have no doubts that Hout will honor and respond to the peer-review process.

Thanks for your comments.

"I Declare The Election Invalid: Someone I do not know was prevented from voting"

[FogerRox]

60. this link dont work

http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~cook/movabletype/archives

This person talks of Broward county--I was there--they voted for Kerry like 2 to 1. There was no Repub presence- to speak of.:

http://www.kieranhealy.org/files/misc/election.pdf

[reality_bites]

31. Sorry, the columbia link stopped working

I have it cached on my laptop if you want it.

[pauldp]

20. Read Dr. Freeman's latest Paper

appliedresearch.us/sf

it absolutely holds water and so does the Berkley study.

The Boston Globe is perpetuating horsesh*t spin

[reality_bites]

33. No it doesn't; Sort of; And no they aren't

Freemans study also relies on the assumption the exit polls are always accurate. He has the same problem as TruthIsAll - despite the Phd.

Berkeley is a nice scholarly study; unfortunately, so are these:

A non-fraud explanation for the Berkely result is pointed out by a University of Arizona professor here:

http://www.kieranhealy.org/files/misc/election.pdf

Another author adds another variable to the Berkely study - the Jewish vote - which entirely nullifys the Berkely anomoly. See Here:

http://newmarksdoor.typepad.com/mainblog/2004/11/more_on_the_stu.html

A George Mason University scientist completely debunks Berkely here:

http://elections.gmu.edu/Berkeley.html

Patrick Ruffini makes short work debunking Berkely:

http://www.patrickruffini.com/archives/2004/11/the_last_word_o.php

This site also makes the case that there are non-fraud related reasons for the results in the Berkely study:

http://rightonthemark.blogspot.com/2004/11/did-democrats-cheat-in-2000.html

If the mainstream media were to cover this story, the headline would read:

SCHOLARLY BERKELY STUDY PROVES ELECTION FRAUD. SEVERAL OTHER SCHOLARLY STUDIES SAY OTHERWISE

See the problem ? This is a lot of the reason there is no mainstream coverage of this issue. Media outlets have looked at the evidence, and the case is not made, or is contradicted somewhere else.

[Bread and Circus]

14. Hotspots FLORIDA, OHIO, PENNSYLVANIA! Coincidence?

[smartvoter]

27. I saw that, too.

[skids]

18. My LTE

(I live in Massachussetts. Also, the fact that the Globe is the 14/100 on the top papers list is signifigant.)

To the editor:

I would like to congratulate Brian Mooney for a well written overview of the many problems that occurred during the 2004 elections. It is s breath of fresh air to see a major publication acknowlege the depth of the issue.

Two comments. The first is, when you dig, you find that a disproportionate number of the irregularities favored Republicans and their candidates. Some of this is obviously due to bias after the results of November 2nd. But anyone who follows this story should start keeping score now, and at top of each inning, they should ask themselves "what are the odds" and "was Bush's margin of victory really as large as 3.3 million votes?"

The second is that the media need to take a second look at Kathy Dopp's research. This woman cannot seem to get a break with the media, as her work is always portrayed as being debunked. She is serious about her work, and of three attempts to discredit it, the third being the Miami newspaper's hand recount which involved counties which were not implicated by Dopp, have all missed the mark.

[skids]

36. My response from Mooney

He writes:

"I don't believe the Miami Herald story was a response
to Dopp's research (which I have reviewed) but to the extrapolations of
Panhandle counties that made it into other Internet stuff and was sent up by Keith Olbermann on MSNBC ..."

This just goes to show you folks, vet analysis before spamming the media with them. And if you notice a bad analysis is being vetted, spam the good analysis to the media and warn the media about the bad one. And, if you see someone in a group complaining that an analysis doesn't hold water, DON'T JUMP ON THEM, LISTEN TO THEM.

[merh]

38. I'm sorry to sound dense, but I don't get where the language

you quote says anything at all. :shrug: Explain it to me like I am a 6 year old!

[skids]

43. What he's saying

...is that the reason why the Miami Herald article, which was manufactured by our opposition, was used to "refute" us in the media is because we handed them the opportunity to do that.

We were the ones who held up the numbers from Dixie county and said they were unusual, even though the Dopp/Liddle reports didn't say that they were unusual. We were the ones that fed that statistic to Olbermann, and when he used it on his show, he was attacked for it.

We have to make sure when we take something to the press, that what we understand the material. We can't continue to take a few sentences out of a report and blow them all out of proportion.

How do we do this? Start making your own private list of which of the election fraud statistics and evidence you personally understand well. Only put one of these items on the list after you have read a few discussions where the numbers and facts are questioned and found to be solid.

Then, when you send a letter to the media, only use those facts and statistics that you understand.

[merh]

45. What are your links that support what you just wrote?

Just curious - I think I would like to see the links that you feel back up what you say, that is only fair.

[skids]

51. You can't browse twenty pages...

...of google without running into one.

The first story to really start running was Hartman's peice on commondreams and became a big hit among bloggers/etc. I wasn't around that early in the whole thing, so this part is secondhand, but it has been pointed to in a response from a letter to the editor I sent into a paper a couple weeks ago:

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1106-30.htm

Note how they make big hey out of Baker and Dixie. Then, they start quoting the Dopp's work (which has now been moved to uscountvotes.org). This made it look like the Liddle/Dopp stuff was saying something which it did not say. They even included a link (http://ustogether.org/election04/FloridaDataStats.htm) where it is explained quite clearly that the relationship breaks down in the smaller counties... if they had read their own links, they wouldn't have made such claims. This resulted in us getting slapped down. See Olberman's blog for a few weeks ago where he talks about being criticised for using the figures, though Olberman didn't get it quite as bad as some newspaper people did.

And after that there have been several places where people have run with numbers they didn't understand and gotten them wrong.

[merh]

55. That is their interpretation of the story. Since only 3 counties

were counted (okay really 2.6 since they never finished the 3rd counting the votes in the 3rd county), I don't give much credence to their efforts, given the Miami Herald is a repuke owned paper.

[merh]

47. A link you should check out - you might appreciate the

discussion.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x91921

[skids]

53. Yeah, seen it.

It is good that people were around to start reeling in the overstatements that were made at first here. And then there was another thread about the margins in Ohio versus minor candidates, where some poor DUer was trying very hard to get across to folks that they were getting the numbers wrong, to the point of ALLCAPS which is something that people trying to be reasonable rarely resort to, and noone was really listening to him.

I think even Jesse Jackson may be saying the wrong thing about that point right now to the media, but I haven't had a chance to go back and check if what Jackson says is the hyperbolized version or the real story.

[merh]

56. And again, that is your understanding and interpretation!

Opinions are like belly buttons, we all have them. It just isn't right to condemn others for voicing their opinions. imho

[McCamy Taylor]

19. Looks like a one two punch from Kerry timed for Dec 1.

This being the front page of his state's big city daily and all.

[Wordie]

23. Could you expand on your thoughts about that? I'd like to understand. eom

[McCamy Taylor]

28. Kerry makes first legal move, Globe makes first front page story

both happen on same day, which happens to be two days from the date of expected certification of the Ohio election results aka "Recount Ohio or Open Season on GOP Vote Fraud."

If the documentary "Weapons of Mass Distraction" is to be believed, MSNBC, CNN, FOX, CBS and ABC coordinated all their Iraq news coverage before and during the invasion with the White House to give it the proper administration slant. So why shouldnt Kerry and a newspaper in his home state decide to put Votergate 2004 in the spotlight on the same day?

[Wordie]

30. Interesting... Kerry is no dummy, so you may be right! :)

[Wordie]

21. Here we GO! Hold on to your keyboards, this is gonna be a wild ride!

Although this article isn't as supportive of some of our efforts as might be hoped, it is a major article in an important newspaper, and it outlines SO MANY of the problems in the election.

I think this is just the start of lots more coverage, coming your way soon! This is very good.

[understandinglife]

25. I hope 'truthisall,' Freeman and the Berkeley group ....

....write to the reporter and the BG managing editor.

Peace.

"I Declare The Election Invalid: Someone I do not know was prevented from voting"

[myschkin]

34. are they dumb?

I think the article is ok - but if the editors would looking at their own card, they would see that the voting errors are concentrated in the battleground-states (Ohio, Florida, New Mexico...) Why?

It's not too much asked for that a journalist think...

[Eloriel]

35. You can check here for news and updates you may have missed

VOTE FRAUD LINKS - A DU Compendium - Thread #4
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=201&topic_id=6166&mesg_id=6166

VOTE FRAUD LINKS - A DU Compendium - Thread #3
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=201x4927

VOTE FRAUD Links Compendium - Thread #2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=201x3223

VOTE FRAUD Links - a DU Compendium
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=201&topic_id=1984#


I don't claim they're all-inclusive, but I capture a lot. Updated at least once daily, usually twice.

Welcome to DU!

[Liberty Belle]

39. My letter to the Boston Globe editor

Dear Editor,

Finally, a major newspaper puts the voting fraud scandal where it belongs--on the front page! Congratulations to the Globe.

I wonder, however, why you failed to alert your readers to the fact that the four major voting machine companies are all owned by Republican loyalists? Diebold's Wally O'Dell boldly promised a crowd at a GOP fundraiser that he would "deliver the election" to President Bush. Moreover, each of these Republican-backed voting companies has executives, programmers or owners who are convicted criminals. Their crimes are far from petty--reportedly including bribery and suborning public officials! Blackboxvoting.org has demonstrated that even a chimpanzee can be trained to hack into central computer systems, stealing votes electronically. Individual voting machines can also be programmed to add, delete, or alter votes.

Why on earth did state and federal officials entrust our voting process to criminals?

Ask the Republicans. Or better yet, just look at the election returns--which don't match up with exit polls. In fact, one mathematician calculates, the odds that so many vast "discrepancies" would all skew in favor of one candidate--Bush--are 250 million to one.

In the Ukraine, they call this "fraud." Mobs took to the street. Parliament declared the election invalid, and even the state-run media declared it would no longer report "lies."

It's obvious that our commander-in-thief was not re-elected honestly. This story is bigger than Watergate. When will our leaders and the honest journalists in our media acknowledge the truth--and call for a new election in America?

[Liberalynn]

40. This Got Me

"In South Florida's Broward County, ''multiple misrecordings" occurred when votes for Kerry on touch-screens made by Election Systems & Software Inc. appeared as Bush votes, and there was at least one account of a Bush vote going to Kerry,"

at least one for where a Bush vote went to Kerry but plural instances where Kerry votes went for Bush. Doesn't that look suspcious even to them?

I bet they really had to dig hard even to find that one instance and I bet Bushies are demanding that one vote back too.

This would be almost funny if it weren't so sad or so serious.

[4democracy]

41. What about the recount not starting until Dec. 13th, the day Electoral

College meets and finalizes Shrubs reelection. Is that true? If so what happens if the votes show Kerry won Ohio?

[demo dutch]

46. It's not finalized until the the vote is certified in congress on Jan 6

I am sure you remember that Gore presided over the 2000 process. When the complaints were read by the reps from the House and no senator came forward to support them.
Anyway, Jan 6th is the last day to contest the election, it takes one member from the house and one senator to call the whole thing off. Unless the results in Ohio change with the recount, I am sorry to say that I can't see it happen.

[4democracy]

44. kick

[rdmccur]

48. Texas and california

Interesting that both Texas and california are in the 2nd highest categories (recall Madsen's statements regarding the padding of Bush's popular vote)

[rainbow4321]

50. TX Diebold meeting video....

http://safevoting.org/

Take a peek at the meeting video snippits in this link..it's probably surfaced but thought it needed to be brought up again given the Texas voting padding stuff coming out. CLOSED door Diebold meeting Jan 2004 in Texas with phrases used like "the race isn't going to match the tally, is that OK with everyone" when they were practicing with the machines. Pretty damn scary how matter-of-fact they are with everything that will probably go wrong with people's voting!!! Guess cuz they already KNEW what the problems would be and who they would benefit...
Other highlights:

Diebold acknloweding that they, and they alone, will decide when changes to their code are "significant" enough to disclose to public officials;
* A test run resulting in e-voting tallies that do not match;
* Admitting that some e-voting machines have trouble adding correctly; and
* Acknowledging that it is sometimes possible for voters to cast multiple votes on a ballot, and that those ballots may end up being throw out in court because of machine errors.

[KaliTracy]

52. it's a start

a drip, becomes several drips, becomes a gush, becomes a flood.... the more "little" accounts will go into bigger accounts (one would hope).

[GetTheRightVote]

54. Yes, it is a start, it may finally ripple across all the major media grps

[skids]

57. kick n/t

[BradBlog]

58. EASY E-MAIL LINK to BOSTON GLOBE HERE!

Please see the coverage I provided on this non-article.

These guys were repeating, not reporting. Anybody who reads DU already knows everything they "reported".

Let them know you'd like them to actually INVESTIGATE rather than simply repeat what we already know!

http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001015.htm

By the way, they are owned by the NY Times, and the Globe piece is reminiscent of similar failures in the NY Times as previously reported here as well:
http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00000979.htm

(Easy Email link to write to everyone at the Times is included in that piece.)

This is up to US, guys! We have to spread these words, and write these letters and make noise! It IS helping, however, as I'll be reporting at BRAD BLOG later tonight.

Brad
THE BRAD BLOG
http://www.BradBlog.com

[november3rd]

59. The truth will out

There HAS to be a SKUNK underneath it all.

This election just STINKS too badly!

It's going to come out and Bush & Company are going to burn. Americans are stupid, but not stupid enough to RE elect George W. Bush!