Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Cuyahoga County Precincts - Revised! (Update at 4:53 PM Tuesday)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
Skinner ADMIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 03:58 PM
Original message
Cuyahoga County Precincts - Revised! (Update at 4:53 PM Tuesday)
Apparently, that mysterious web page over at ivillage has now changed. I wish I understood why the total number of votes reported from some precincts is greater than the number of registered voters. But apparently the nice people over at the Cuyahoga County elections office have explained this to the author's satisfaction.

I must admit, I'm totally stumped. :shrug:

Here is their explanation. You can see it for yourself if you go back to that web page.

Cuyahoga County Precincts - Revised!

Source: http://pages.ivillage.com/americans4america/id20.html

Ok - finally had a chance to figure this out. I apologize for any anxiety that went along with these numbers. It seems that data is useless without knowing how counties arrived at the numbers and this was a particularly tricky process.

There are redundant numbers when looking at what seem to be "extra" votes in various precincts. These redundant numbers represent the absentee ballots. Absentee ballots are added into several districts for unoffical counts, but do not go toward the county total more than once. It is quite tricky and confusing, but it makes sense now after talking with the county (they were quite nice).

I will play a little more with these numbers, just to fix this picture... but sometimes, things aren't what they seem. My sincere apologies - thank you to those who question the data - you are the ones who keep us credible.

Please refer to the Evidence page for information on exit polls versus reported numbers; silly democrats (those allegedly voting republican); and other issues that have made this past election so hotly debated. Do remember though, glitches HAVE been found and proven. Such as Franklin County, dropped votes because machines couldn't handle such large numbers, and other important issues that still need attention.

This isn't so much about who won (for me at least), as the process of voting (computers, op-scanners, etc).

If you wish to play with the numbers, here are some useful links:

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/BOE/results/currentresults...

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/BOE/results/history/2004/E...

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/BOE/results/EL45.txt


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LibInternationalist Donating Member (861 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. This doesn't seem to answer anything
I thought the problem was not more votes than voters at the polls that day, but more votes than registered voters (which should include anyone able to vote absentee)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmc777 Donating Member (155 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'll wait for the next update because...


.....I'm still confused.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
3. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Skinner ADMIN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. This message board is big enough for more than one issue.
If some people want to talk about voting irregularities, that's totally cool. If people also want to talk about why we can't win rural counties, that's also cool. It's a big community.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redsoxliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
4. walk on... nothing to see here folks...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. But where are these absentees REGISTERED???
Sorry, I still don't see how there can be more votes than people registered in any district.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. The answer is simple
To stop yourself being aggravated about what we're doing here, don't read these kinds of threads. There are plenty of others about changing the Democratic party. You'll feel better in those, I think. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbyboucher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #14
29. That newcomer sounds EXACTLY like
I would expect a troll to sound. Coming in here with no cred telling us to question why we support the queers. Give me a fucking break.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pk_du Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Eh...and which "Special interest groups would they be ?"
Please tell?


(Sniffing and Poking)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #10
31. Awww, you joined just to quell the uprising. How patriotic.
Nobody ever uses the term special interest group when referring to his own party. EVER.

Just a hint. You'll get better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #31
43. Uh, I hate to break this to ya, aquart
But UNFORTUNATELY the DLC/NDOL has used that term to signify parts of the party's base THEY don't included -- unions, feminists (one would assume pro-Choicers in that), and minority activist groups. It's just one reason I've been so anti-DLC.

But you're right on one level:

Nobody ever uses the term special interest group when referring to his own party.

I don't consider them part of my party either. :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEAVYHEART Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #10
36. Special interest groups? ?? busted!
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Devil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
6. 18181 votes - Google it Skinner
Edited on Tue Nov-09-04 04:10 PM by Jersey Devil
Some weird stuff!

Different equation to get the repeated numbers you had?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
46. Comal County, TX
I think it was in 2000, not totally sure. Might have been 1998. Three different Republicans in that county won their elections (whatever they were) by exactly that margin of victory.

Never, to my knowledge, explained.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-11-04 02:28 PM
Response to Reply #6
116. 18181
isnt that a ha ha again? suspicious that this keeps turning up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cory Donating Member (52 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
7. Absentees
Skinner, I spoke with county officials yesterday and it was explained that absentee ballots fell within broader Congressional districts rather than specific voting precincts. The absentees were dispersed (it looks like evenly) across the voting precincts within the report, skewing the voter turnout percentages. That's why the media is not covering the story that looks obvious to everyone else.

It's an odd way of doing things and the county is not doing a good job of explaining it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Devil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Then if we find the towns in Kucinich's district it should equal his total
for absentees. Anybody have quick access to that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #7
17. But, are they really distributed evenly?
Why have precincts total the same number of votes? The exact same number. They surely didn't have the exact same subtotals, so the absentees they say are distributed to each of them are not likely to be even, either. It's.... odd. At the very least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #7
34. Absentees register by Congressional District?
Where is the Congressional District register of absentees?

Still not buying this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:09 PM
Response to Original message
8. "ballots are added into several districts for unofficial counts, but "
Quite tricky and confusing. Tallying and reporting tangible ballots could only be made tricky an confusing on purpose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karlrschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
12. I'm perplexed too, David...this part makes no sense at all to me:
"Absentee ballots are added into several districts for unoffical counts, but do not go toward the county total more than once. It is quite tricky and confusing, but it makes sense now after talking with the county (they were quite nice)."
==================================================================
As to the first sentence, why would ABs be added into "several districts"? And even if they -are-, wouldn't that skew the result?
When they are all added up, how would whatever's doing the "addition" know -whether- or -how many- of the sub-totals are "dupes"?

And just how the hell is counting votes "tricky and confusing"? Why should it be any more complex than counting watermelons? This whole thing is so far beyond bizarre, we need a new adjective.
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ohtransplant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
13. I'm with you Skinner.
I'm just an accountant and, forgive me for saying, this sounds like a bunch of double talk and/or ineptitude on the part of Cuyahoga county.

What they seem to be saying is that the municipalities and the county were counting the absentee ballots differently. If that's the case, why would they do that?

Are there no rules that determine how the votes are reported? Is this not public information? If so, don't we want it reported clearly so as to ascertain who won? No? Oh, my mistake.


I feel better now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:29 PM
Response to Reply #13
48. Election officials have gotten very good at doubletalk, esp. if
they also have electronic voting machines (touchscreens and/or optical scanners).

I don't buy it either. OR, I'd have to see much better, more "auditable" numbers and information before I could.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowDoginthehouse Donating Member (406 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #13
62. Yeah, Doubletalk.
It makes no sense whatsoever. My BS detector is going crazy!

This is not how it's done, folks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Devil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
16. Here are Kucinich's numbers
COUNTY Barbara Anne Ferris Edward Fitzpatrick Herman *Dennis J. Kucinich
Non-Partisan Republican Democratic
Cuyahoga ** 17,753 94,120 167,221
Percentage of Votes 6.36% 33.72% 59.92
http://www.sos.state.oh.us/sos/results/11-02-04.htm

Next we have to find the towns in his district since it is only a part of Cuyahoga Co
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cory Donating Member (52 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #16
24. District
Edited on Tue Nov-09-04 04:42 PM by Cory
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redsoxliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
18. disregard my earlier comment...
absentee are registered voters... that is a phony explanation. There were still 93,000 more votes than REGISTERED VOTERS (which include absentee!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #18
50. EXTREMELY important point -- everybody read it, please n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #18
59. Of course absentee are registered voters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YellowDoginthehouse Donating Member (406 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #18
63. EXACTLY.
Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symphony Donating Member (158 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #18
66. I agree ...
also, absentee or not, it doesn't matter what double talk they use to explain it.

What matters is that the numbers REPORTED TO THE CENTRAL ELECTION DATABASE WERE WRONG.

Or maybe I am just too dumb to grasp a complicated issue like this, and crazy :crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elaineb Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:24 PM
Response to Original message
19. Alright, who's the mysterious weisenheimer who caused us such a tizzy?
...and caused some of us hours of wasted time poring over the Cuyahoga BOE canvass report?

:argh:

;) (No real offense intended toward the web site author--There might be other fraud going on that we'll never know about, without someone taking a risk and bringing strange accounting like this to attention. It's ultimately the BOE's fault for calculating their figures in such an inexplicable way).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maryallen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #19
80. The question about this guy is:
Why does he now say that the explanation makes SENSE?

It doesn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AmyCrat Donating Member (721 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
20. I can add I think
Edited on Tue Nov-09-04 04:26 PM by AmyCrat
If there are 30 votes for Bush in County A

and 30 votes for Bush in County B

and 30 votes for Bush in County C

and 10 absentee ballots for Bush

that's 100 votes.

If you add 10 absentee ballots for Bush to all three counties, A B and C, now he has 120 votes.

How does it NOT skew the results if you're adding the absentee ballots to multiple counties?

Honestly, help me understand

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #20
35. All I understand is, using your example,
Ohio is adding a number to each of counties A, B, and C to come out with a designated, like number. Since, as you showed in your example, their 'actual' total is 120, they are deliberately adding 10 to each county. If A had 40, B had 30, and C had 25 in another county, they would add different numbers to each in order to also reach 120. The county totals were irrelevant, the total is what they were after.

They wanted 120, so they made it happen. Only on a much grader scale. In Cuyahoga County, itself, this was done by ward and then the variable number was added to the municipality's total to reach the desired target.

Sound correct?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symphony Donating Member (158 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #20
67. You hit the nail on the head, Amy
Very well put. The final result is still the same - reporting an incorrect number of votes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pointsoflight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:25 PM
Response to Original message
21. This issue is the bigger one, in my opinion....
Cuyahoga county--where Cleveland resides--was critical to this election. The Kerry campaign was counting on this county to carry Ohio, and had that happened, he would've won the majority of electoral votes. What happened in Coyahoga county? Many things have already been reported, but here's another that I haven't seen talked about....

Late into the night when Bush was leading in Ohio with 90% of precincts reporting, the democratic party was still optimistic of pulling out a win because they were still expecting huge numbers of additional votes from Cleveland that they thought would give them the lead. The votes never materialized. What happened?

55 precincts in Cleveland show a turnout of less than 40%. Several show a turnout of less than 20%, and one even shows a turnout of 7%. That's right, SEVEN PERCENT. Despite reports of very strong ground efforts, record turnouts, and long lines throughout Cleveland, 60, 70, 80, even 90+% of the people who took the time to register didn't bother to show up?!? Or did they? Was there massive voter suppression in these precincts? Were voters in these precincts forced to vote via provisional ballots, ballots that are not audited in Ohio, so that we have no way of knowing how many were cast?

We need to get a handle on this. In the 55 precincts I mention, 84.3% of the counted votes went to Kerry, 15.1% to Bush. We're talking about many thousands of votes here, just in Cleveland alone. It could be that we got a horrific turnout, far worse than our expectations. But it could also be that people showed up and there was massive voter suppression, a massive compaign to challenge voters in these precincts, and/or a massive compaign to force voters into using unaudited (and therefore easily "lost") provisional ballots because of challenges, machine malfunctions, etc. Whatever the case may be, we had a HUGE shortfall of votes from Cuyahoga County and Cleveland in particular--literally tens and tens of thousands less than expected--and we need to see if we can find out why.

Here's the raw data from Cuyahoga County for confirmation:

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/boe/results/history/2004/1 ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Devil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. First I've seen of this - 7% turnout in a Dem district?
So they added AND subtracted. Very clever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pointsoflight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #23
28. Here's a bigger sample for you...
Cleveland 6C, 7.1% turnout, counted votes favor Kerry 45-1
Cleveland 13D, 13.05% turnout, counted votes favor Kerry 207-42
Cleveland 13F, 19.6% turnout, counted votes favor Kerry 156-4
Cleveland 13O, 21.01% turnout, counted votes favor Kerry 44-5
Cleveland 6B, 21.8% turnout, counted votes favor Kerry 82-4
Cleveland 10L, 24.72% turnout, counted votes favor Kerry 207-7
Cleveland 6D, 28.43% turnout, counted votes favor Kerry 127-5
Cleveland 5C, 28.97% turnout, counted votes favor Kerry 195-29
Cleveland 7V, 29.25% turnout, counted votes favor Kerry 249-33

and the list goes on and on...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:07 PM
Response to Reply #28
37. Forty six people in Cleveland 6C?
Are they serious? :eyes: So, these folks waited 3-10 hours in the cold rain because there was NO line?

pointsoflight, you do good work! :toast: Glad to meet ya! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigmust Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #37
91. Do you have any information
about how long people waited to vote in Cleveland Precint 6C?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 07:34 AM
Response to Reply #91
95. Not firsthand info., no
But with the lines reported in Ohio, having only 46 people voting in one spot in Cleveland is highly unlikely, to say the least. That works out to, what, less than five voters per hour? In a typical local electon, maybe, but in this election? No way. Both sides were too fired up for that to be the result, especially in a major city.

If you need more info. on the actual turnout in Cleveland 6C, I'd suggest posting the question in the Ohio forum. Folks there might know. Might even have been one of (at least) the 46 voters. ;)

Welcome to DU, bigmust! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #28
54. Have you sent this and related data to
John Conyers?

The Kerry campaign?

Keith Olbermann?

Bev Harris? (I'd sure like to see those voter rolls from those precincts, wouldn't you? Call up a few of them and ask how come they showed up and hardly anyone else did, what problems -- -- if any -- they encountered?)

Stunning, just stunning. GREAT work, too.

You can find submission info in this thread (under Activism and Media - Olbermann):

VOTE FRAUD Links - a DU Compendium
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pointsoflight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #54
61. Done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #21
39. The provisional ballot law was a gift to the Republicans.
Tell me, who wrote it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
George_S Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 07:11 PM
Response to Reply #39
71. Good site, and your answer is probably here
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maryallen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #21
82. Excellent point ...
We need the total number of provisional votes cast from those under-voted precincts, even if they're not eventually counted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kramerico Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
22. Very strange totals in Cuyahoga County
Perhaps there is a simple explanation for this. Please review and let me know if you have any ideas...

Out of curiosity, I totalled up all the posted totals for each listed here for both registrations and cast ballots: http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/BOE/results/currentresults...

The totals for the county came out to a whopping 1,488,672 registered voters in Cuyahoga and 1,248,189 votes cast. I made sure to remove all the subprecints and quadruple checked it to ensure I wasn't counting anything twice and the math is right. The county reported 665,000 total votes cast? I am not sure what it means but I think it is important to review this data. I have searched many blogs and have not found anyone else that has discovered this discrepency so I thought it important to share.

I have links to both the HTML and Xcel versions.

LINKS
http://kramerico.com/ohio.htm
http://kramerico.com/ohio.xls

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Critical Thinker Donating Member (118 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #22
45. Thanks - you have identified another anomaly in the reported voting
These numbers are just totally whacked on so many different levels !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:46 PM
Response to Original message
25. If you use the fuzzy math concept then maybe
But having kids in the education system here in Ohio, I understand. They teach math a little differently here than the rest of the world. That is except for maybe Florida.

Kerry math: 2+2=1
Bush math: 2+2=8
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEAVYHEART Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #25
38. Hahaha! I love it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fliesincircles Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:47 PM
Response to Original message
26. No Congress for Cuyahoga
89,000 LESS votes for congress than president? Almost 14%?
Even stranger, the turnout in Franklin Co.(Columbus) was LOWER than in 2000!!! I guess those 3 hour lines must not have been "reality based".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #26
41. Isn't there an opportunity to vote for a straight Dem ticket in Ohio?
Edited on Tue Nov-09-04 05:14 PM by txindy
If so, and someone didn't want to take the time (after spending 3-10 hours in line) to vote in every race, they could have cast their ballot in favor of John Kerry simply by selecting the straight Dem choice. But they didn't. Not if that many people failed to vote in the congressional races. Which I doubt.

This makes less sense every time new data is found. Which certainly casts suspicion on the system, doesn't it?

Edit: What did the congressional races look like in those districts? Which party won and by how much? Was it undesirable to the people adding votes to the system to give more to those congressional races, too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fliesincircles Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #41
49. Not in Cleveland that I know.
The majority of the congressional votes would be in DK's district, or Tubbs-Jones' district. Heavy Dem districts. If you brought their numbers up, you would bring Kerry's up. NO DOUBT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #49
52. Then there really is no excuse for 14% fewer ballots for Congress
Edited on Tue Nov-09-04 05:37 PM by txindy
Plus the ludicrous, official numbers on turnout in each precinct (or ward?) in Cleveland. Only forty-six voters in one place? Line? What line?!

Do they think we're blind? Geez.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #41
57. No, there was no straight democratic ticket on the ballot in OH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #26
47. Trust me, I am in Franklin county-and there were long lines.
I waited for at least an hour in 2004. There was absolutely no lines in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fliesincircles Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #47
53. Exactly!
My friends say the same thing. For turnout to be lower in '04 than '00, an awful lot of votes "musta got lost".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #53
58. Cleveland had some long lines too. Very long lines in the rain.
Are they seriously saying the turnout was less than in 2000?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fliesincircles Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #58
64. In Franklin Co.
According to Blackwell, 61.3% in 2000. 60.95 in 2004. I don't believe it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #64
65. Then Blackwell should answer-how come there was no
lines in 2000 and long lines in 2004?
:nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fliesincircles Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 06:49 PM
Response to Reply #65
69. Ground = real, Blackwell = ????
If the numbers in Franklin and Cuyahoga even REMOTELY matched what happened on the ground there, Kerry wins Ohio. Plus, figure out who led the last minute cavalry charge of the "Digital Christians" in the puke districts and Kerry wins by 5 points. Just like the exit polls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
candyman Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #65
70. The issue of Lines
This might be slightly off topic, but is enough being made on the issue of how long the lines were is some of these Ohio and Florida precincts?

8-10 hours to vote? Are you kidding me? I know very few people who wanted this scumbag out of office more than me, but I don't think I would have waited in an 8 hour line to vote. In this age of instant gratification, how many people left the lines or more significantly just drove away? Weren't we hoping to have a huge 18-24 hour turnout to vote against our war-mongering president? Do you know any 18-24 year olds who have waited over 8 hours to do anything?

I have seen annectdotal evidence that there were more machines in republican areas. If the lines were significantly longer in 'Democratic' precincts, don't we have a voting rights issue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tobybear Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 07:23 PM
Response to Reply #70
72. this should be verifiable
If there was a reduction in voting machines (and there are stories that this was the case), then it should be verifiable, shouldn't it? What would be the rationale for doing it other than to suppress the vote? This should be raised along with all the other stuff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
intheflow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #70
84. How many people can afford to take a day off to vote?
Edited on Tue Nov-09-04 09:39 PM by jinuu
When I was doing the single parent thing, I couldn't have afforded 8 hours off on a Tuesday, no way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guava Jelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
27. i am noticicing most prople replying have less then 50 post
freepers or nubies
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Since the story started moving around the Internets, yes
I've noticed that most of the newbies have provided very helpful information and/or support. Some keep pounding on the 'Prove it to me' meme which is time-consuming, at best, so... I'm not going into those threads, anymore. ;)

To everyone new here in this thread: Welcome to DU! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pointsoflight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #30
33. I'm a long time reader...
...but started posting for the first time yesterday. I've been dying to post the data I've been finding since Nov 2, but new registrations weren't being accepted until yesterday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nothingshocksmeanymore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #33
87. Welcome to DU
I pretty well go by the content of people's posts. You brought up some great points. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEAVYHEART Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #27
40. Not me. I just started posting today...
because the registration option was not available until today. And I am so glad about that. I've been lurking since November 2nd. If it wasn't for DU, I think I woulda offed myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HEAVYHEART Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #40
42. To add to what I just posted above..
I do believe there are a few freepers here now. And it's pissing me off!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Fuckers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fliesincircles Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #27
44. New....sorta
Don't post much, lurked since summer. 14% of Cuyahoga not voting for congress doesn't seem possible. I'm in Stark, and our gap was only around 2%. I've talked to friends in Columbus, who are stunned that the turnout was "low". The totals in both counties reek of turning away thousands and thousands. Bad as, if not worse than padding numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eloriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #44
56. We really need to get some boots on the ground in those
precincts, make some phone calls and stuff. The Kerry campaign (and the Ohio Dem Party) ought to have voter rolls. Heck, even Democracy For American might have voter rolls.

We MUST find out what caused the low turnout.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:50 PM
Response to Reply #56
60. How can there be low voter turnout?
There were huge lines, huge. There was no lines in 2000.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
intheflow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #60
85. Less is more
I'm not discounting long lines. I live in CO, no idea what went on in OH. But long lines might also be attributed to new technology.

They may have had paper or punch ballots or 1950's-era lever machines in 2000. What's that cost, some privacy curtains? Very cheap to provide 5 or 10 or even 20 voting booths. I imagine computers are more expensive, and so there may also have been many less booths.

Less booths = more lines.
Classist to the core.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nothingshocksmeanymore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #44
89. I'm sure SOMEONE got some pics in some of these districts, no?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
symphony Donating Member (158 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #27
68. "nubies" must come from Nubia
Edited on Tue Nov-09-04 06:53 PM by symphony
Bring me the red pen! ;)


edited for softening of content
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riverwalker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #68
78. welcome all nubians
Edited on Tue Nov-09-04 08:49 PM by riverwalker
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tobybear Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 07:27 PM
Response to Reply #27
73. lots of readers who are now posting for first time
I think a lot of people (like me) who were interested in the election, etc. would check out this site but not post, but given the magnitude of what is happening, feel compelled to throw in their two cents. There are probably a lot of freepers as well (usually give themselves away by posting some contrary comments that really don't add anything other than to piss people off or demoralize them).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Live Free Or Diebold Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:00 PM
Response to Original message
32. There is a problem with the absentee ballots explanation, though.
There just aren't enough absentee ballots in Cuyahoga County to account for the differences in numbers in the results.

This explains how, for the absentee ballots to make up the difference in the totals, the turnout among the registered voters in those oddball cities needs to be 98% or greater (otherwise, the "extra" ballots exceed the number of absentee ballots that Cuyahoga county reports):

XML spreadsheet breaks down the data

Same, only as an Excel spreadsheet
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
faithfull Donating Member (154 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #32
51. 1000%+ overvote in 2 ohio counties
So in the Woodmere precinct, how did 1587% of registered voters cast ballots?! That is just such an enormous discrepency. Even if there were some provisionals, even if there were some absentee - something unbelievable happened. I am a little lost and kind of flying by the seat of my pants with all this information. I still cant match this up. Is that something worth looking at?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Live Free Or Diebold Donating Member (21 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 05:42 PM
Response to Reply #51
55. Supposedly...
...Cuyahoga County just split up the absentee ballots in each congressional district willy-nilly among its cities. Why, to confuse people? Who knows?

But the fact remains that, unless 98% or more of the registered voters in those listed Cuyahoga cities actually showed up to vote on Tuesday (which we know isn't true), the overvote reported is higher than the 80,000-odd absentee ballots in the county. Not so easy to explain that one, I suspect.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasperc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #51
81. they dumped a chunck of the absentees in with the precinct totals
I downloaded the canvas report and am going through it ward by ward and precinct by precint. That as well as other wards jumped out at me. Yes in Woodmere village there are only 558 registered voters and in checking the canvas report you'll find the 301 people voted, 258Kerry and 40 for Bush. The other 8296 votes are a set of the absentee votes which I easily found in the canvas report.
However, some of the rest of the absetee ballots are not reconciling as easily with the total votes cast 665334 and seperately the 80624absentee ballots.
Ultimately, I may start inputing all the individual precinct data to see if I get the 433,262Kerry and 215,624Bush.
Sorry to say precinct by precinct totals are adding up correctly, in a way I'm glad but I pretty determined to figure out where the fuck Bush got 8.5 million votes over the last election and why the fuck the exit polls were so bad in just a handful of states, swing states none the less.

Well, hopefully, those 17,000 lawyers are going through those vote totals precinct by precinct because the truth is buried in those numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nodehopper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #51
99. do you have a link please for the Woodmere issue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr Creosote Donating Member (640 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #32
96. That's really good work
but surely the problem is more glaring than you suggest? You have assumed that ALL the 80,624 absentee ballots were scattered randomly through just those communities were "turnout" exceeded 100%. But surely that can't be the case and in fact even a 100% "turnout" in those communities won't explain it. 77,000 absentee ballots went "randomly" to these communities and just 3,600 to the rest of the County. I don't buy it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlexHamilton Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
74. What we Need
Is for someone to get all the data from every precinct in an .xls file. There are plenty of people out there who can run the data through all sorts of data analysis and tell if there are trends which appear to be odd mathematically(i.e. winning by the same amount of votes among other things). Anyone know how to do these analyses efficiently?

Alex
Impeachment by the People
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucypher Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #74
77. Done
I've made an excel sheet for the data but I need to put it somewhere where I don't have to pay the Bandwidth fees for eveyone and their mother downloading it. Anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlexHamilton Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #77
93. Sure
Lucypher

Send it to me at alex@ibtp.org . I will post it for free and then advertise it on DU for anyone else. Obviously will keep your name as the credits, just providing the hosting.

Alex Hamilton
Impeachment by the People
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucypher Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #93
103. don't worry about it
I thought it would end up being a lot larger -- so I just stuck it on my website.

Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlexHamilton Donating Member (97 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #103
105. ...
What's your website?

Alex
Impeachment by the People
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike from ri Donating Member (214 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
75. i guess for convenience purposes they allocated absentees to
particular precincts regardless of where the absentee votes were cast. thus, they concentrated those votes in particular precincts even tho the voters were registered elsewhere in the county. a stupid practice; but, nonetheless, the explanation makes sense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redsoxliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #75
76. no, because Cuyahoga county reported 80,624 absentee
votes cast, and had precinct by precinct votes cast and included absentee ballots as its own precinct.

http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/BOE/results/currentresults...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
life_long_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #75
108. makes perfect sense , if their lying.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasperc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
79. I downloaded the canvas report and checked the vote total
and for the most part, they are adding up. But I did find anomolies in Strongville ward3, 12108 votes recorded when only 4953 appear on the canvas report and Solon ward6, 4300 votes when only 1488 are on the canvas report. The Salon votes appear to be added in as absentee but I still haven't reconciled the Stronsville extra votes.

I have found it difficult to reconcile the precint totals to match 665334 votes cast and seperately the 80624 absentee votes. The closest I have gotten is 588225 votes from the wards plus 77586 absentee which equals 665811 votes cast. The senate, house, reps all easily reconcile but adding up the wards has been a pain in ass. I was able to cut and paste alot of the data from the summary pages and have checked many of the precints by hand. But nothing stands out but the inability to reconcile the votes cast keeps me looking for those stand out wards where alot of "extra" votes may have gotten dumped. Hopefully, one of those 17,000 lawyers is taking a hard look at each and every canvas report because buried in those numbers is the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
frustrated_lefty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
83. "I will play a little more with these numbers?"
That is THE problem. We want the numbers before they've been played with. Kerry, imo, lacks the balls to force a contestation this time around. This is about preparing the US for 2008.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucypher Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #83
88. Ihave the canvasin data in excel format
on my website PLEASE BE KIND ie DON'T DOWNLOAD IT UNLESS YOU GOING TO USE IT.


The canvasing data comes from the sites listed -- I pulled out the presidential votes only and I totaled up brook parks results and related them to the html web page results.

txt canvasing data is on sheet 2 of the spreadsheet
html data is on sheet one.

BE KIND!!!

http://www.barsmart.com/voteresults.cfm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucypher Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #88
100. Something is wrong with their data
Go to this page:
http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/BOE/results/currentresults...

and look at the total number of ballots cast it says:


BALLOTS CAST TOTAL 665,334
BALLOTS CAST ABSENTEE 80,624


But if you add up all of the numbers in the ballots cast column you
end up with 4,422,303.

On the same page look at the registered voter counts:

REGISTERED VOTERS TOTAL 1,005,807


If you just round up and quickly add up the first five rows the value is already above the registered total, adding up all the rows you get 6,382,676.

I just don't get it?

Now on to the canvassing data.

Data source:
http://boe.cuyahogacounty.us/BOE/results/history/2004/E...

Look at sheet 2 -- this is the canvassing data:
http://www.barsmart.com/voteresults.cfm

This data closely matches their "totals" I spent about an hour reformatting it so I could pull it into a spread sheet. What I did with the EL52.TXT was to tear out only the presidential ballots cast figures, imported int Excel, and then totaled the ballots cast totals/canidates, they equal 652,381, which is much closer to 665,334 then 6 million odd votes.

Anyone want to help me figure this out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AJH032 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 10:05 PM
Response to Original message
86. Did Kerry gain any votes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cavanaghjam Donating Member (355 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 10:32 PM
Response to Original message
90. Maybe I'm a bit obtuse
and not for the first time, but aren't the absentee ballots given ten days from election day to arrive? It was my impression that they were not going to start counting until then. Is it Nov 12 already? Did I oversleep? How can they know the ballot totals if the deadline has not arrived?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-09-04 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
92. How can Absentee Votes Be Counted??
I thought Blackwell said that they won't start counting Absentee ballots until Nov 13?

"This is a very deliberate and cautious process," he told CNN. "And so, you know, I tell everybody just take a deep breath and relax. We can't predict what the results are going to be. We can only guarantee you you're going to get an honest and fair count through our bipartisan system."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RidgeHiker Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #92
101. PROVISIONAL ballots
the contested ballots from people who voted at the wrong place, might be felons, etc. Absentees are counted as they come in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lebkuchen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 06:48 AM
Response to Original message
94. Woodmere Vil had 558 registered voters
with 8,854 ballots cast, which is 1586% voter turnout.

Those working the Woodmere Vil precinct polls, expecting to accomodate 558 voters must have been quite surprised to see the 1500% plus turnout. Would explain the 4-5 hour lines at polling places.

Did anyone here vote at Woodmere Vil precinct?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 08:15 AM
Response to Reply #94
97. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Helga Scow Stern Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
98. Cleveland Plain Dealer: No Vote Fraud in Cuyahoga Canvass vs. Votes
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Nightwing posted an article from the Cleveland plain dealer saying we have it wrong about the precent totals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karla in Ohio Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #98
102. Sorry, folks, but there's a logical explanation...
The Akron Beacon-Journal this morning wrote a piece investigating the irregularities in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland).

Here's the link:

<http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/10143328.htm >

The net-net: all of the absentee ballots for the congressional candidates were added equally to all of the precincts in that district, rather than apportioned out by district.

Yes, they made a mistake, and yes, it should have been caught earlier, but it is the only significant irregularity in the data, which is widely available for anyone to peruse.

I'm not a freeper, just a very, very sad Ohioan.

Now the Florida results, on the other hand.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Critical Thinker Donating Member (118 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #102
110. I'm sorry, but the BOEs explanation doesn't hold water
Edited on Wed Nov-10-04 10:01 PM by Critical Thinker
because when you examine the posted returns, and sum-up all of the "overages" (ballots exceeding the number of registered voters in a precinct) - you will find that the total overages (97,489) EXCEED the total number of absentee ballots (80,624). No matter how you distibute 80,624 absentee ballots into the various precincts, it is mathematically impossible to "create" 97,489 over-votes on the tallies.

BTW, it seems that the raw canvassing data has been removed from the Cuyohoga BOE website - kinda fishy, wouldn't you say? Go ahead, follow this link and click on the "Nov 2 canvassing report" (hint: Error: The page cannot be found)!!!

http://www.cuyahoga.oh.us/BOE/results/canvas.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donkeyotay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
104. these absentee ballots - I still don't get it
Wouldn't you still need to check an absentee against the registration - especially to make sure someone didn't vote twice. If you went to the trouble to check registration, why not just count the absentee in the precinct in which they were registered? In fact, wouldn't you have to do this to avoid any double-votes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shaggy briard Donating Member (50 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #104
109. It's bad math
There are two different reports here -- the canvass report -- in which the numbers match those reported to the state and networks -- and the summary report on the BOE website.
When they created the summary report, which is not the official count but is provided for voter convenience, they added the total absentee ballot count for the congressional district to each ward total -- why, I don't know -- but it doesn't affect the official results. I am a little mad, because I spent a long time trying to work this stuff out.
We should move off of Cuyahoga county -- the numbers -- except for the undercount (another kettle of fish) -- are very good for Kerry here -- he did well even in the affluent areas. Let's try to look at Warren County, where the really fishy stuff is going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Critical Thinker Donating Member (118 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #109
111. something still wrong w/ Cuyahoga BOE's explanation
Edited on Wed Nov-10-04 10:00 PM by Critical Thinker
because when you examine their posted returns, and sum-up all of the "over-votes" (ballots exceeding the number of registered voters in a precinct) - you will find that the total overages (97,489) EXCEED the total number of absentee ballots (80,624). No matter how you distibute 80,624 absentee ballots into the various precincts, it is mathematically impossible to "create" 97,489 "over-votes" on the tallies.

BTW, it seems that the raw canvassing data has been removed from the Cuyohoga BOE website - kinda fishy, wouldn't you say? Go ahead, follow this link and click on the "Nov 2 canvassing report" (hint: Error: The page cannot be found)!!!

http://www.cuyahoga.oh.us/BOE/results/canvas.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shaggy briard Donating Member (50 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-11-04 02:20 PM
Response to Reply #111
114. They double posted
When they issued the summary, they added all of the absentee ballots in the CD to every ward in the CD -- resulting in duplicate counts -- that is why if you add up the wards and then compare to the city total, you come up with the same numbers. I have the canvass results on a spreadsheet if you are interested -- I think the main thing is here there is no way to make the summary numbers in the report we are looking at add up the the officially reported totals -- but you can do that with the canvass
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cct Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 08:51 PM
Response to Original message
106. Remember the BOE official in charge of absentee ballots resigned
I've been trying to make sense of my local precinct (in Shaker Heights - visited by Michael Moore on election day) for the past week.

Absentee ballots are clearly key, and impossible to sort out on any level below that of the county.

I would feel better about the confusion if Sondra Robinson, the Cuyahoga BOE official responsible for absentee ballots, hadn't resigned without explanation on Oct 24.

http://www.wkyc.com/news/news_fullstory.asp?id=25330

Certainly the excuse that the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections Director, Michael Vu, used, "Its an overwhelming year where weve seen overwhelming numbers of applicant who wanted an absentee ballot..." doesn't seem credible: according to BOE figures 80624 absentee ballots were cast this year, and 70,813 in 2000. A 14% increase hardly seems "overwhelming."

Perhaps something more serious took place with the absentee ballots??

And how could we tell?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tarrant84 Donating Member (8 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
107. the revolution will not be televised
This HAS to break by December 13th. If Bush gets sworn in, it's all over. Even if he gets caught rigging the election and is responsible for doing it, the president is the man who took the oath of office according to the law.

Yes, that is very scary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tmore2 Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-11-04 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #107
112. Two things going on ?
Sorry if I'm being dense (and yes, I'm a newbie) - but it sounds like there are two things going on in Cuyahoga. First, on election day, while over a million and a half people were registered to vote, there were only about 665,000 votes registered (with precincts registering as low as 7% turnout). Then, the BOE messed up in posting data online (at least from what they said - that the correct data was buried in another report), and the totals worked out to more than the total number of votes. Basically right?

I'm curious about this low voter turnout. Has THIS been satisfactorily explained? There must be images out there from one of these polling stations - local news coverage?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bones_7672 Donating Member (558 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-11-04 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #112
113. Sorry to say, but ...
traditionally the percentage of actual voters to registered voters is HORRIBLY lower in large urban areas, like Cuyahoga County. You can register voters up the wazoo, but only a minority of them will vote even in hotly-contested elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pointsoflight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-11-04 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #113
117. That's true...
But the data not only shows a low turnout of registered voters in some Cuyahoga precincts, but also a big drop-off from the 2000 numbers, despite the intensified ground effort and the reports of long lines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-11-04 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
115. sounds like evasive bullshit
im sorry but either absentee ballots are counted at the precinct they belong to or seperate at the county level.
there is no way a precinct should ever have more votes than voters.

this explaination is just impossible to believe.

sure they will PLAY with the numbers until they fix it. right....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jul 28th 2014, 08:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC