Tell me why this scenario can not work Re: Kloppenburg-Prosser

[ooglymoogly]

Suppose I am an election official and a proven crook and am on record as one who has done this kind of election theft many times before,(I defer to Rachel on this) with pretty much power to do anything I want as far as elections in my bailiwick are concerned. Suppose I disappear 14000 ballots for Kloppeburg. Thinking 14000 votes would surely fix the election in a way I and my superiors wanted it to go. Then quelle supreez I lose anyway; I miscalculated by 200+ votes. My superiors move in on me to rectify the situation. We make a plan. We dig up the 14000 ballots previously disappeared because they were for Kloppenburg; we replace enough of the ballots to bring the election back into our favor and leave the rest alone to make it all plausible and reconstitute them all and wallah! Prosser wins by just the amount needed to head off a recount. After all I have the keys to the place, to the machines, and to unlimited ballots, I have a sketchy system that does not bear scrutiny and I only need 39 hrs to do it.

The counting and the matching of it is a red herring.

[katanalori]

1. this is not an answer to your question, BUT

related to subject at hand and gleaned from twitter about 1/2 hour ago:

cberg John C. Berg
@MaryErpenbach: So a Brookfield voter is #1,349 at 7:15 p.m. Yet 45 min later 1,545 MORE people have vote. (cont) http://deck.ly/~Gsr89
8 Apr Favorite Retweet Reply
in reply to ↑

@MaryErpenbach
Mary Erpenbach
@jcberg ward was counted that shouldn't have. 629 people voted in four wards (7-10) in last 45 minutes. it's being looked into.

[pnwmom]

3. So in the whole day only 1349 people voted -- and then 1545 in the last 45 min.

That does sound odd.

[Tx4obama]

7. What is odd is that folks are quoting someone named 'Sharon' from twitter

Who the hell is she?
And who says what she tweeted is based on any facts?
Unverified twitter accounts can type out all sorts of nonsense.

[katanalori]

13. I am a bit new to twitter, could be mis-reading, BUT -

it seems the tweet originated from John C. Berg -

John C. Berg
@jcberg Dorchester MA
Professor and political activist, I teach environmental studies and political science.
http://blogs.cas.suffolk.edu/politicsatsuffolku/

[Tx4obama]

16. Here's an explanation

Look at the link you originally posted: http://www.tweetdeck.com/twitter/Sharon1943/~Gsr89

That is the tweet of: Sharon1943 http://twitter.com/Sharon1943
Sharon1943 was responding to something that was said by @MaryErpenback http://twitter.com/MaryErpenbach


Mary Erpenback had said the following:

So a Brookfield voter is #1,349 at 7:15 p.m. Yet 45 min later 1,545 MORE people have voted at same polling place? Seriously? #wiunion 9:48 AM Apr 8th via web

THEN

@jrotering voter 1,349 at that particular polling place at 7:15. 1,545 votes recorded in addition (i.e., in the ensuing 45 minutes). 11:04 AM Apr 8th via web in reply to jrotering

THEN

Brookfield wards 7-10: 2,164 total votes (incl 186 absentee). Man reports #1,349 at 7:15 pm, means 629 people voted after him. #wiunion

THEN

@jcberg ward was counted that shouldn't have. 629 people voted in four wards (7-10) in last 45 minutes. it's being looked into. 3:03 PM Apr 8th via web in reply to jcberg

THEN

@jcberg ward 6 was counted in the citizen analysis, NOT by clerk and NOT reported -- no foul by clerk! correct number is 629 not 1,545.
----------------------------


So, you see Mary corrected herself in the tweets above.
But it appears that Sharon1943 didn't tweet out all of the corrections.

[Tx4obama]

11. See comment #8 n/t

[Ellipsis]

6. Absentee ballots perhaps?

[Tx4obama]

8. What Mary Erpenbach said.... (only 629 people)

Brookfield wards 7-10: 2,164 total votes (incl 186 absentee). Man reports #1,349 at 7:15 pm, means 629 people voted after him.

http://twitter.com/MaryErpenbach

Also, she tweeted:

@jcberg ward 6 was counted in the citizen analysis, NOT by clerk and NOT reported -- no foul by clerk! correct number is 629 not 1,545.

[Ellipsis]

12. good catch.

[pnwmom]

25. Thanks for clearing this up. n/t

[Tx4obama]

2. Wrong.

There were republican and DEMOCRATIC election officials at the local level in the City of Brookfield. The city of Brookfield counted the ballots and then transmitted the totals to the county clerk ON election night. And the City of Brookfield posted their city's election results on their city's website on election night too.

The mistake was only at the county level when the county clerk made a clerical omission AFTER the City of Brookfield transmitted their totals to Nickolaus - the reason there is a canvassing day after the election is to catch errors and correct them which in this case was done.

The numbers at the local level are correct and were overseen by both republicans and DEMOCRATS.

[ooglymoogly]

4. Yeah we know....there are democrats and there are pugs who

are democrats just to make things look legit. Questions about that have already been raised here on DU and elsewhere.

[PeaceNikki]

28. My Democratic County Vice chair confirmed the 14k weren't in county totals sent to media.

She was selected for the board of canvass due to her integrity.

[midnight]

9. I was not aware there were Dem. officials at Brookfield level...

There was a D.U. discussion that talks about the numbers from Brookfield being requested twice....http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=186x33565

[Tx4obama]

10. There are always democratic and republican folks at the polling places. n/t

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

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

[ooglymoogly]

15. Yes in spades. nt

[Tx4obama]

17. I am not defending the republicans, I am stating the events as they have happened.

Texans here on DU are allowed to have a discussion regarding another state's elections other than their own.
I have been in TONS of discussions here on DU. I am not newbie and I am a LIBERAL DEMOCRAT!

Are you following me around for some reason? Why are you tracking where I am and where I have not been?
I am always in Political Videos, General Discussion, and LBN - not that it is any of your business.


Edited to correct typo.
Edited a second time to change 'won' to 'own'.

[murielm99]

19. I visit all sorts of forums at DU, too.

I have been following the Wisconsin situation very closely, because I have a personal stake in it. I live about ninety minutes from Madison. My daughter lives in Madison, and is a public employee. She has been involved in the protests and in the recalls. Her paycheck will be impacted by Walker's plans. She may not be able to stay in Wisconsin, even though she loves it there. She will not be able to afford it.

My parents live in Juneau County. They are lifelong Democrats. My dad would be in a nursing home if it were not for some programs that are under the auspices of Badger Care. My dad has a good union pension, but they do need the assistance Badger Care provides. Not all of it is financial.

I have cousins in Wisconsin, too. One of my cousins has never been able to drive, because she takes seizure meds. She is divorced. She has to work close to home because of transportation issues. She is a wonderful person, who often puts other people first, regardless of her own needs. She works, but needs help getting her meds. She will have to work two jobs if Scottie messes with her health care.

All of this has a human face. Many of us who live in or near Wisconsin can give you facts and figures about the toll the Walker administration will take on our families and friends.

So, to answer your question, I am not following you as much as I am following the Wisconsin situation. I see you in every cotton picking thread. And it is my business. I have family who will be affected. Even if I didn't, it is every Democrat's business. It is every union member's business. It is every DUer's business. It is every middle class American's business.

[Tx4obama]

22. No it is not.

You said, quote: "I see you in every cotton picking thread. And it is my business. "

It is NOT your business as to what threads I post on.
I will continue to read and post on any thread I wish to, I have a right to do so under the rules of DU.

Have a nice weekend.

[ooglymoogly]

26. Oh yes you are.

I wrote this post to bring up just one scenario of what might have happened under this bizarre happening and the equally bizarre explanation.

I WANT TO SEE AN INVESTIGATION and a vote recount. You on the other hand accept these bizarre happenings as just innocent happenstance, defending add infinitum the folks who perpetrated it even though this woman has done this kind of thing before and you appear to work toward making sure there is not an investigation or vote count. So yes indeed you are.

[Tx4obama]

33. You are wrong.

I look forward to an investigation and also the vote recount.

I rooted every minute for Kloppenburg to win on election night, and I still have my fingers crossed that more mistakes in the 'state' will be found and Kloppenburg will still have a chance to come out on top.

I have not been 'defending' republicans. I have been stating the facts. I have not jumped on the conspiracy band wagon like many other have without carefully looking at the 'complete' time line of the event that took place.

The whole point of my several OPs and comments has been to point out the fact that the people in Brookfield voted, the ballots were tallied at the local level, the city of Brookfield posted their election results on their city's website the night of the election, and they transmitted their totals to the county clerk. The City of Brookfield did nothing wrong and their vote total will stand.

And I really don't know what folks think an investigation is going to uncover. Nickolaus played by the rules: she found her error of omission and corrected it on the canvassing day - the process was in place to find errors, an error was found and corrected.

[rufus dog]

20. strange

On Thursday I requested respectfully that it was not the time to defend the Republicans. Even if it was an honest mistake the repubs needed to be put on the defensive. The posts just increased.

[ooglymoogly]

27. +1

[Dawson Leery]

5. Possible

[LisaL]

18. She did not replace or dig up any ballots.

It has nothing to do with any ballots at all. She was adding totals on a computer. The totals are send to her from various places electronically and she adds them up. She claims that she entered totals from a particular city but for whatever reason those totals weren't saved. But it has absolutely nothing to do with any actual ballots.

[ooglymoogly]

21. Yes but in the end paper ballots and Numbers on the computer have to tally.

By not pressing save, 14000 votes disappeared so she says.

That means at some point the same amount of paper would have to disappear if it was indeed an act of election fraud.

As we all know, many, many times paper ballots have been know to disappear under very strange circumstances, almost always redounding to the pugs.

I am not saying this is what happened. What I am saying is the possibilities are endless in the circumstances as described, given the character of this woman and to the secretive and unitary way she kept a tally.

I am imagining one of many possibilities open to a crook with the kind of power she has.

However you look at it ballots have to tally with the figures and signatures of the voters. The figures on the computer represent paper ballots.

[Tx4obama]

23. Please explain why a republican would want republican votes to disappear?

And please explain how having a WHOLE TOWN'S votes show up as 'all zeros' is not a clerical mistake.
It would be a different story if there had been number fudging, but that is not what happened in this case.

The City of Brookfield tallied their votes, at the local level, and transmitted them to the county clerk. The county clerk did not enter the totals properly. The error was caught at the county level on the canvass day and it was correct at the proper time.

There is no sane republican that would purposefully make republican votes disappear.

[Ellipsis]

24. WHY?

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[ooglymoogly]

29. You are pretending to know something you do not

repeating the pug meme. For what reason I can only guess. None of us know what actually happened or how many folks might have been involved or on what or how many levels.

[Yo_Mama]

31. Because it's an impossible theory

First, the county official who "lost" the votes didn't have the power to lose them for more than a day. By the time the certified vote count went in, those votes would be there. At Brookfield, the polls were supervised by representatives from both parties. Those votes went in and were counted, given to the newspaper, etc. It's not as if they were ever in limbo - the only place they didn't show up is on the one lady's computer. Temporarily.

Second, we already know that these weren't 14K Kloppenburg votes. We know that for multiple reasons; the first is that the votes were already counted, and the second is that the election was overseen by reps from both parties. We also know that this is "red" district that votes heavily and was going to vote heavily in favor of Prosser.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/119519294.html

Third, assume a separate conspiracy between Dem and Rep election workers and massive election fraud, plus connivance by the county official. It's still insane. For one thing, no one tries to win elections by disappearing an entire place's votes. Zeroes show up very quickly and will be questioned by absolutely anyone from another party.

Finally, even assuming that no one in WI is going to look at the zeroes and ask a question, your scenario is still insane because this place always votes heavily GOP. You are not going to dump GOP votes if you are trying to skew an election for a GOP candidate.

The only way your theory gets a little less insane is if the conspiracy was by Republicans plus Democrats to steal the election for KLOPPENBURG. If anyone should be running around blabbing this nonsense it would be the Republicans.

But it's still insane even then, because of the fact that an entire city's votes were omitted from the totals. If you are going to postulate some huge conspiracy between nominal members of both parties, you've got to give them enough credit to shift votes here and there within each polling district, rather than by suppressing the votes in entire polling districts.

You were the one who asked why your scenario would not work. This is my honest answer.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

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

[Tx4obama]

34. I agree 100%. n/t

[Dawson Leery]

35. kick