Commentary:Tulsa World on Oklahoma Vote Totals: We Have No Idea

[genieroze]

If this is a dupe tell me

Commentary - Nov 30, 2004
Tulsa World on Oklahoma Vote Totals: We Have No Idea
by Mark Faulk
On November 3, the Tulsa World reported that Sen. John Kerry was winning in 57 Oklahoma counties with 70% of the vote counted. But, by the time the rest of the votes were added in (or subtracted out, as the case may be), George W. Bush carried every county in Oklahoma, one of only two states where he managed that feat. It was a simple case of the Bible Belt voting for yet another Republican Presidential candidate, just as we have every year since 1980 (maybe longer, but you get the point). Or was it?

Why then did the Tulsa World report that Kerry was leading in 57 counties with 70% of the vote counted, and why then did Kerry actually lose in every one of those counties when the final vote was tallied? Because when the final votes were tallied, Kerry actually LOST votes in all 57 counties, 37,9982 to be exact, while Bush GAINED an incredible 393,825 votes in the same counties. That's right, as the Oklahoma Independent Media Center put it, "Voting Machines Count Backwards in Okla". http://okimc.org/newswire.php?story_id=344

For example, with 70% of the total vote counted in Bryan County, the Tulsa World had Kerry leading Bush by a whopping 4,016 votes, with 6,864 votes to Bush's 2,848. But, after the official vote was tallied, Bush had 8,615 votes (a gain of 5,767 votes), while Kerry ended up with 5,745 votes (a LOSS of 1,119 votes). In Carter County, Kerry led by 2,947 votes with 70% counted, 7,955 to 5,008, but once again, when the "official" vote was finalized, Bush won with 8,615 votes (a gain of 5,767 votes), while Kerry ended up with only 5,745 votes (again, a LOSS of 2,210 votes). It truly appears as if the voting machines counted backwards....but only for Kerry. This pattern is repeated in all 57 counties. Kerry lost votes, while Bush gained massive amounts of votes.

Now, truthfully, I'm as skeptical as the next guy (provided the next guy isn't a neocon) about our current system of voting, especially when the votes are tallied by EE&S Corp (as they are in Oklahoma), who have clear ties to numerous ultra-right individuals and organizations, and have already been implicated in several other voter fraud investigations. But let's be honest about this - why would anyone waste their time rigging the election in a state that Kerry didn't even bother to campaign in, and that Oklahoma Democratic Party officials conceded to Bush without even a semblance of a fight?


http://www.faulkingtruth.com/Articles/Commentary/1022.html

[RevCheesehead]

1. That's a really good article, well worth the read...

I think this is the main question:

" Then, finally, on Tuesday afternoon (actually Tuesday evening), Worley called me back. Now we would put an end to this mini-voter fraud scandal once and for all. Simple question: "What was the source of the information that you printed in your newspaper....in other words, where did you get your vote totals from?"

"Actually, we've spent a good part of our day looking into that very issue. We subscribe to the AP wire service, and that's where those numbers usually come from, where they're supposed to come from. However, as of right now, we have no idea where we got our numbers from. When we do find out, we'll make a statement in the Tulsa World newspaper, and I'll answer any other questions at that time."

"Wait a second here.....let me get this straight. The Tulsa World printed the election totals from what many considered the most important Presidential election of the last forty years, and they don't know where those numbers come from? They had Kerry leading in 57 counties with numbers that actually went in reverse from their published figures, and after two days of looking, they still can't figure out who gave them those numbers?"

[Old and In the Way]

3. So when do we start recanvassing all the votes?

Seems to me that a first comprehensive action by the Democratic Party needs to involve a national/local coordinated campaign to ask some fundemental questions of it's constituents. How to accomplish this?

How about sending a postcard to each registered Democratic voter in the country with the following questions:

(1) Who did you vote for?
(2) What Party were you enrolled in on 11/2/04?
(3) What is your most important domestic priority?
(4) What is your most important international priority?
(5) What changes and actions do you want Congressional Democrats to undertake, starting in January?

I'd make these questionnaires available to Republicans, too. I doubt we can expect any support from rabid Bush Republican supporters...but perhaps there are more than a few Kerry Republicans who are interested in knowing if their vote was counted properly in this election.

Coordinate the collection with Democratic notary publics and local activists to get this information back for collation, analysis, and publication.

We can no longer expect Republican corporate media or biased polling companies to deliver our message to/from the Democratic leadership. We need to pipeline our communication more directly so we can get our own answers and insight on this election.

Secret ballots and a criminal party that controls the machines to record the vote, the process to count it, and the media to announce it ; it's a recipe for a bloodless transition to a fascist, totalitarian country.

[Merlot]

2. Why waste time?

I think that's obvious. By gaining votes in an undisputed state, w gets even more votes to add to his popular vote tally. A safe state where there would be no reason to rig the votes is an even better place to gain votes.

My guess is they did that everywhere, even in solid red states. Even easier to rig in safe states.

[s-cubed]

4. The numbers came from a cockfighting ballot question

from 2 or 3 years ago. All the numbers except 1 or 2 matched exactly. Highly improbably that the actual numbers from 2004 would match like that. Somehow they got the wrong file: if anyone can find that the 2004 election numbers do match the cockfighting numbers, I'll start believing in magic. :)

[k8conant]

5. Yes, cockfighting!

I posted this before on another thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=86153

The question remains why the Tulsa World published that as Bush-Kerry votes.

[shuffnew]

9. And the Cock's names were...

GB & JK :crazy:

Sounds like they are trying to weasel out (cover up)true numbers to me. The chart is clearly labeled with GB and JK. Doesn't look like any cockfight bill to me. I assume a cockfight bill would be titled FOR and AGAINST (or something like that anyway). I just can't buy their cockfight bill story. They need to dig a little deeper than that. A newspaper of their caliber to make such an insane honest mistake is almost unbelievable.

Oklahoma would be one of the better states for them to use to prop up the "popular vote" (where they would not suspect much focus on the fraud). But from the TW chart and comparing it to the CNN finals, it looks like Kerry could have had the potential to win electoral, showing Kerry with a lead in 57 of 77 counties at 69% of votes tallied on the TW A-10 chart and was only lagging by 124,747 total votes at that time.

In comparing the two results (TW pg A-10 chart at 69% vote in & CNN final results), Kerry votes went in the negative in 57 counties (but they were not all the exact same 57 counties that he showed the lead in the 57 counties on page A-10 - most were, but several were different).

I put all in a spreadsheet to do the one-on-one compare. Actually Kerry went backwards on votes in 57 counties for a total of 47,084 votes negative (most of which were of the original 57 counties that he showed having leads in the TW chart on A-10 Nov 3rd) and gained 109,941 in the remaining 20 counties, giving him only a net gain of 62,857. If TW A-10 were an accurate chart, then you would still have no idea how many votes Kerry actually lost, as the 47,084 does not count any new votes that were squashed and/or moved to Bush between 69% & 100% final tally. Being only 124,747 behind in the 69% tally timeframe (and leading in 57 of 77 counties) he could have actually won the "electoral" by final tally timeframe.

[Coyote_Bandit]

6. Typical for Crazy Red F*cking JOklahoma

where about ten days ago somebody from the Tulsa World knocked on my door and asked to speak with a previous homeowner (from 1987) who apparently was a former Tulsa World subscriber. Kid you not. Who works from 17 year old subscriber lists?

The previous homeowner they were seeking was not the one from whom I purchased the house. But he did live here around 1987. I know because he left a signed and dated note under some really ugly wallpaper that I stripped.

Oh, yeah, and I was sure to tell the Tulsa World guy what I thought of their politics.

Edited to add: God, I've got to get out of this crazy place!

[genieroze]

7. How about weird?

http://www.weirdnj.com/

[jhgatiss]

8. What are the exit polls like in OK?

What were the deviations there? How does this story jive with that?