Screen-shots: Wisconsin vote totals don't match ballots cast

Shocked. Shocked, I say.

But in a strange way it's also an homage to Hillary Clinton. Who else would trigger this level of corruption for the election of a ham sandwich?

I can't say that dude's name. Ham sandwich is a good one. I also like Mr. Tangerine Man.

Yes, I take much solace in knowing more than 2 million more people voted for her in the popular vote. That's a lot!

Hope you & your loved ones enjoy a happy thanksgiving, ucrdem.

Not the TG I'd hoped for but we still have much to be grateful for. And our best days lie ahead!

Our best days lie ahead. Well, except for the agonizing lonely death part! We'll continue laughing & holding each other up. This year I'm going to some friends. Some of my funnest TG's have just been hanging out eating raman noodles or turkey pot pie & laughing by myself that I don't have the 'family get-together with odd distant relatives' stress, lol.

Wish everyone here felt the same

Enjoy your holiday!

we're not fuckface von clownstick.

Happy thanksgiving to you too ailsagirl!

Thanks for the laugh, lovemydog!!

But we've known that since 2002, and use them anyway.

Someone just doused us with gasoline again. Anyone got a match?

She just quit so suddenly. It reminds me of Al Gore after Bush was selected for President. He seemed scared. And I have thought that Obama had a "been threatened" feeling a few times.

If Stein is serious and this election gets flipped, the Republicans will hound HRC to the ground, I don't know if I can take more of their witch hunts with HRC as president.

You can't be serious! Besides, if anyone is ready for their opposition in that circumstance, it would be Hillary Clinton.

that's funny

Sorry. I take back what I said.

Let's fight.

I was thinking out loud!

...We are in this together.

What if these dear people, who care about others, are being told, "Look, we could do dreadful things to such and such a population," or something like that?" "Say, you'd better do as we say, or such and such group gets something horrible," or something like that?

I worked with his son-in-law

never will be.

Wouldn't be surprised

that more votes were cast than were cast.

Do the election officials have any explanation for this? I could see overvoting having an effect, depending how they deal with it there. I could also see changing votes or mistaken votes mistakenly being in the totals.

Is there any way to audit and recount the actual voting-- if these are from scanned paper ballots at least sampled scans would show if there was a problem counting. If there is no paper ballot, is there a realtime copy of the choices made?

haven't found anything yet.

Those were the unofficial returns though - in the official returns, the numbers add up correctly.

Sauk County official returns

https://www.co.sauk.wi.us/sites/default/files/fileattachments/2016november8generalelectionofficialresults.pdf


Explanation from Outagamie County about discrepancies in unofficial counts

http://wbay.com/2016/11/22/discrepancies-in-unofficial-outagamie-county-election-results-explained/

Sauk County turnout (hint: nowhere near the 85% claimed above)

http://www.wiscnews.com/baraboonewsrepublic/news/local/article_e1aa9aa7-ffb8-5134-8a41-721d0938425a.html

If they rigged it of course they would have all that thought out.

I'm guessing not, otherwise you would be aware of the number of insertion points for human error in the process.

and actually it does make sense to me about the human error thing.

However, taking a cue from the "winning" republicans, I say don't be reasonable, just keep repeating whatever sounds good until majorities believe it ! Just keep repeating that they stole it - you know that is what they'd do.

There are people who actually believe Obama is a Muslim. Due to repetition of that ridiculous assertion. Let's pretend and get people believing it. They've shown they deserve it anyway.

And not the best quality, either. Maybe Mr T stiffed the plumbers.

What you're suggesting, i.e., intentional human intervention in order to manipulate the vote count, would mean that both Democratic and Republican election officers, county canvassing boards, etc., worked together to accomplish said manipulation.

Is that your claim?

Gee who could it have been.

The screenshots were taken as the data was being inserted, I mean collected.

And those were all unofficial results that have since been corrected.

That's why they canvass the votes after the unofficial results are in, to correct mistakes.

A thousand votes here, a thousand votes there, and voila, a battleground state turns red. Nothing to be alarmed about.

That will give you a better understanding of how hectic the end of day procedures are - in an effort to post the immediate vote totals everyone demands. It will also give you a much better idea of the checks and balances built into the election process and - from the two BOEs I've observed in a battleground state - how careful the election officials are to ensure that every step of the process is carried out in full view of at least one member from each major political party.

Most jurisdictions could use more, of higher caliber.

Then you don't just see the hectic closing-end procedures, you have to do them and you know where mistakes happen.

Misread 171 as 111. Write down "148" as "184." Copy numbers down twice. Put them in the wrong column for for the wrong race.

Watched my precinct chair screw up a dozen or more (D) votes, making them invalid and uncountable. Provisional ballots had to be cast, put in an envelope, and witnessed, then that put in an envelope and signed by the voter. Upon counting, the various bits of paper are verified from the outside in, and discarded. The precinct chair got it backwards and signed where the voter should have. He knew a lot of the voters, and made sure that he specifically helped voters he knew were (D) or who volunteered the information. Now there's grounds for paranoia!

Then again, for years he'd served as the chair of the local Democratic Party and was still very active in local party politics. When one of us watched him with the little flip-card to make sure we knew how to help a voter cast his ballot late in the day (it was the guy's dinner break) we spotted the problem and very nearly put the precinct captain on suicide watch.

You also see the mid-day disasters. "This terminal isn't working, I'll check the connections." And a minute later the precinct's down, those voting at the machines are casting votes that can't be recorded, and everybody has to wait for an hour or two until a tech worker shows up to fix things and the line goes from 3 people to 50 people and stays there as another 50 people come and go.

Be that as it may it also makes a careful post-election audit essential.

Double votes would be counted as over votes, not as actual votes for president.

what if anything can be done?

WI apparently has some kind of paper verified ballots so a recount would be a good place to start if there's enough interest in conducting one. It would have to be an awful lot of interest though because the media are going to go ballistic the second Hillary asks for a recount.

by republicans who have no conscience and seem to scream louder than democrats. apparently ethics and rationality are disadvantages if not actual character flaws.

Recount time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is nothing right wingers won't stoop to. That is suspicious.

That's when the real show starts.

To steal the vote is unimaginable. Couple of thoughts. Audit them. Track them down. If any election official is standing by with these glaringly gross errors, maybe it is time for them to go. In essence, they are stealing. May the folks that are directly involved in something like this, go to Gitmo for six months. To me, silence is guilty. And they lose their voting rights. If and when they get to any computer companies, take them down. Employees, owners, shareholders take their assets.

Thank you to all the investigating journalists out there.

The election is rigged. WE SHOULD BELIEVE HIM. What's he going to say to that? No, is not rigged now that he won? Kind of a double edged sword that projection.

What's his people going to say? No? He was just lying? He opened the door to this, actually, and we should oblige....

namely 85.36% turnout:



http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/pressure-builds-presidential-recounts-key-2016-swing-state

For starters, it should have cross-check totals and flag (**) any variance in total ballots cast and print the over/under tally for ready reference.

One assumes when you see "Total" it means total for the category, including blank ballots.

Voter turnout was larger in 2012 than in 2016 and Romney received a larger percentage of the larger turnout than has Trump 48 versus 47. The unusual pattern of voter turnout cannot be explained by looking at the raw numbers. How much of this was voter ID laws, fewer polling locations and suspicious vote totals such as this.

Good!