What if NY Times was right about massive Dem. increase in OH voter reg.?

[Time for change]

What If Kate Zernike and Ford Fessenden were right about the massive increases in voter registration in highly Democratic areas of Ohio prior to the 2004 election?

In a previous thread I noted that, contrary to various reports of massive increases in new voter registration in heavily Democratic counties of Ohio (compared to Republican counties) prior to the 2004 election, Kenneth Blackwell’s official registration figures indicate that voter registration in 2004 (compared to 2000) was more pronounced in Republican counties: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=384361 . Therefore, Blackwell’s numbers apparently deviate heavily from what is suggested by journalists who reported on voter registration in Ohio prior to the election. The important question to ask about this apparent huge discrepancy is, what does it mean in terms of what really happened in the Ohio election?

If the reporters are correct about the relatively massive increase in voter registration in heavily Democratic counties, then why would Blackwell’s numbers diverge so much from this assessment? I can think of two reasons:

1) Massive increases in voter registration in Democratic counties were followed by massive, perhaps illegal purges of voter registration in those counties

OR

2) Blackwell’s office manipulated the voter registration numbers in order to hide the fact that Bush’s victory in Ohio depended largely upon massive electronic deletion of votes in Democratic counties.

Either of these explanations for the discrepancy between the Blackwell numbers and the stories written by Zernike and Fessenden would indicate massive fraud committed to help Bush win the Ohio election. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the possible effects of this fraud. This analysis attempts to do that by assessing how the election might have turned out if the reporters are correct, and fraud was NOT committed by Blackwell’s office.


Methods

Voter registration numbers by county were obtained from the Ohio Secretary of State’s Office for November 2000, March 2004 and November 2004. The official Kerry and Bush vote percentages by county from the 2004 election were applied to the November 2000 and March 2004 registration numbers by assuming that the number of votes for each county was proportional to the number of registered voters. This would provide the likely final outcome based upon registration numbers from 2000 and March 2004, assuming that Blackwell’s numbers were correct.

Then, this was compared with how these results would likely have changed if we assume that the reporters, rather than Blackwell’s numbers are correct.


Results (mixed with a little discussion)

Assuming that Blackwell’s voter registration numbers are correct
Assuming that Kerry and Bush received the exact same percent of the vote in each county as indicated by the official 2004 vote tallies, but with the number of voters in each county proportional to the number of registered voters in November of 2000 (compared with November 2004), Bush would have won by 87,531.

Assuming that Kerry and Bush received the exact same percent of the vote in each county as indicated by the official 2004 vote tallies, but with the number of voters in each county proportional to the number of registered voters in March of 2004 (compared with November 2004), Bush would have won by 112,080.

That's about the time when, according to Fessenden and Zernike, voter registration in Democratic counties increased massively compared to Republican counties. Assuming that these new voters would have voted approximately in the same manner as the already registered voters in each county (which according to the DNC report was the case), this should have resulted in substantial improvement for Kerry, compared with the March 2004 number of 112,080. Instead, it got even worse, with Bush's margin rising to 118,426 as the final official count. So, that confirms a massive discrepancy between the Fessenden/Zernike report and Blackwell's voter registration numbers.

What happened in Cuyahoga County?
Due to a paucity of specific numbers in the newspaper reports, it's not possible to calculate what the total difference in total votes would have been if the reports were accurate. But there were some specific numbers given for Cuyahoga County. According to a October 4, 2004 New York Times article by Ford Fessenden and Kate Zernike http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/100504W.shtml , there were 230,000 new registrations in Cuyahoga County in 2004. Yet, according to official Ohio SOS figures, there were only 119,273 new registrations in Cuyahoga County between March and November of 2004. If we assume the Zernike/Fessenden article to be accurate, there would have been 110,727 additional registered voters in Cuyahoga County, and if they would have voted in the same proportion as indicated by the official figures, Kerry would have received a NET of 37,492 extra votes in Cuyahoga County.


Discussion

This analysis shows that if we assume the reporters to be right and Blackwell’s registration numbers to be wrong, Kerry would have received a net of 37,492 extra votes in Cuyahoga County alone. But this almost certainly would represent a substantial underestimate, for the following reasons:

1) The report was written a month before the election. There would probably have been substantially more registrations in the last month (unless of course it would have been too late to register voters at that time, which I haven’t determined).

2) According to the DNC report, newly registered voters voted at greater rates than already registered voters.

3) Assuming the Zernike/Fessenden report is accurate, the targeting of Cuyahoga County would have almost certainly been aimed at the most heavily Democratic precincts -- thus producing probably a far greater margin.

And this analysis involves only one county, though a big and important one. I could not do a similar analysis for other counties because specific numbers were not supplied in the report, although the report did definitely indicate that the trends were similar throughout Ohio.

I have written to the New York Times in order to try to get in touch with the reporters, in the hope that they could supply more specific and documented information. Thus far I have not received a reply.


Conclusion

This analysis expands upon newspaper reports prior to the 2004 Ohio election, which show massive increases in voter registration in heavily Democratic areas of Ohio (compared to Republican areas), which are hugely inconsistent with voter registration numbers from Kenneth Blackwell’s office.

It shows that if the reporters were correct and Blackwell’s voter registration numbers are fraudulent, the 2004 Ohio election results in the absence of fraud would have been much more favorable to Kerry and probably IMO would have given him the election. This cannot be established with certainty however unless and until more specific documentation is obtained from the reporters who reported on this.


Acknowledgment

Thank you to Nothing Without Hope and KaliTracy and Voters Unite! for supplying me with the data, which I could not find, to do this analysis.

[applegrove]

1. With 40% of Americans never voting this is entirely possibly Rove

just motivated the churches elders to pressure their voters better.

I mean - 40% of Americans not voting? That sucks eggs.

We need to work on that!

Remember nobody is saying that that many people showed up and were not counted. They just didn't show up.

There are so many ways the Rovbots pulled this election off. Give up the machines as the easy excuse.

We have work to do to get our vote out!

[CrispyQ]

2. Ariana Huffington made the same point on the Bill Maher show

last summer. She said instead of going for the undecided voters (& honestly, who was really undecided last election?) we should be going for the ones who didn't vote at all. Of course, I believe it would have helped if Kerry had made a strong anti-war statement instead of his -- knowing what I know now I would still vote the same way. I think there we lost countless new voters with that line.

[Time for change]

3. If the reports referred to in my post are correct

that means that a lot more Democratic voters showed up than were counted. Probably tens of thousands more in Ohio alone.

Are you saying that you don't believe that?

[kiwi_expat]

4. The urban Democratic vote was limited by the length of the lines to vote.

The suburban Republican vote had no such limit.

Has anyone, anywhere, worked out how many people could have voted per hour in a downtown Cleveland precinct, given the speed the lines were moving?

[Time for change]

8. Two things about this

I don't know that it's been worked out in Cleveland. But it's been extensively studied in Franklin County and found that insufficient voting machines per registered voter is in fact manifested by "low voter turnout" because of the fact that so many people have to leave before voting. See item # 3 of this thread for some references:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=380878

Anyhow, what I'm saying about Cuyahoga County in this thread is not related to long lines or insufficient voting machines. That may have indeed also been a problem. But the issue that I am trying to deal with here is the registration numbers. The SOS official figures appear to be much smaller than what is suggested by the NY Times reporters (and other I believe as well). And if those official figures represent fraud, that fraud probably accounted for tens of thousands of votes in Cuyahoga County alone.

[kiwi_expat]

13. I was just trying to establish an independent method to check your numbers

I realize you are not talking about the long lines or their cause.

I thought that the speed of the lines might be used to help estimate the number of actual voters - to help you decide if the official vote count was indeed too low ("massive electronic deletion of votes").

However, I'm afraid it was quite an impractical idea. Such calculations would take far more data (speed of the lines, number of lines at each polling place, etc.) than is available. Sorry.

[Time for change]

14. There were numerous apparent serious problems in Cuyahoga Co.

According to the DNC report, it was the only county in the state where the "voter turnout" was inversely related to machines per registered voter. The general pattern throughout the state was the opposite of that: "Voter turnout" is positively correlated with machines per registered voter, because when there are not enough machines, long lines form, many voters leave the polls before voting, and that is manifested as "low voter turnout".

Also, 30 precincts were found by Richared Hayes Phillips to have inordinately low voter turnout, as low as 7.1% (See item # 2 of link I included in my last response to you).

I don't doubt that fraud in Cuyahoga County accounted for well over half of the final vote margin.

[kiwi_expat]

34. Two items of particular interest from votecobb.org

Cuyahoga County recount observers stated:

"Precinct selection was done on the basis of only choosing precincts with 550 or more votes, and a cross-section of areas — one East side, one West side, one affluent, one non-affluent."

"From what they were able to get through, witnesses found that signature counts were very much different from the official recorded number of ballots."


Anyone want to do a manual recount and book inspection (under Ohio's Sunshine Laws) of some of the 30 precincts which were found by Richard Hayes Phillips to have inordinately low voter turnout?

Cheers.

[applegrove]

41. I believe the accounts of too long lines. Still - turnout was abysmal

in this election and has been in the USA for years. In Canada it is something like 72%.

Look for data around the world to see how you compare. Check Europe too. I wonder if it doesn't have something to do with the huge "underclass" in the USA. I'm from Canada and we have poverty - but things are pretty mobile over the generations.

I'm sorry but I do not believe the machines were jerked with. Not one bit.

All the other anecdotes sound plausible.

We need to work on transparency in elections. That is for sure.

And not let Bush & his pals tribalize the big Democratic tent by giving us different realities and using that as a wedge. Like many people, I just cannot believe in some theory until there is actual proof. And there will never be on those machines. The real value of the machines to the Repukes is that they separate us. Because they took transparency away. It is new technology and i believe transparency is one of those issues the GOP will keep as an issue, like being gay and wanting to get married, or thinking abortion is a shame. None of these three issues will ever be solved by the Rove team. They are there as wedges. They need them all come election time.

For people who don't trust the diebold machines and have to vote using them in the future - apathy will keep them home. The GOP is counting on that. Just like they count on abortion as a continued tragedy. They don't want to increase access or science of birth control. That would stop abortions. They want to keep the issue alive and divisive.

Very sorry for your country.

Peace!

[Time for change]

43. You keep on saying that you don't believe there is a problem

with the machines.

Have you read Clint Curtis' testimony. Do you think he was lying?

Do you have any thoughts on why Blackwell did everything in his power to prevent a full recount in Ohio? Do you want to explain that?

Do you have an explanation for why in Hocking County they had a Triad technician manipulate the machine and then give instrections to the recount officials on how to cheat to make the 3% recount come out identical to the original count so that they wouldn't have to do a full recount?

Have you read Bob Fritakis' book?

Have you read the Conyers report?

Did you respond at all to the link I sent you in my last post and tell me what part of that summary you didn't find convincing.

No, you just keep saying the same thing over and over again. "I don't see any proof". That's a great argument. If you came home from work and saw a guy with a gun standing over your dead children with the gun smoking, would you do nothing because you didn't have any proof, because there was no eye witness to the murder and you didn't think there would ever be any proof?

I'd appreciate it if the next time you said "I don't see any proof" or tell us that you don't find the evidence for fraud convincing that you at least give a single reason for believing that.

[applegrove]

46. I am discerning with what I read. I wouldn't doubt that there are

rumors about Diebold. And that the GOP squigglies are stirring the pot.

I believe there were all sorts of frauds committed during the election. There always have been. Usually under some local boss. But this time the time honored traditions were brought to bear in an organized and unprovable way. Long lines, stopping recounts, are part of how Bush won close races. So was redistricting, rule-making at the polls 'if they look like a hippie - then jump on them for some issue like ID'.

I believe it was organized and should be illegal. I believe that the biggest assholes in the Republican game were flown into places like Ohio or Florida to run the show on election day. And by vetting the lists in the areas that counted and where the races were close.

I also believe that the Vatican helped out by pushing the abortion issue. Rove had elders appeal to African America Church leaders to pressure their voters.

I believe Rove & his team have build a big tent on wedge issues and tribalization.

I believe part of that tribalization in the case of democrats is to scare people until they shatter. The moderates don't see that diebold would be fooled with - the lefties would put nothing past the WH. And that is used - the lack of transparency - to separate us from each other.

They will not solve the transparency issue because it pays the GOP a big dividend by isolating the lefties from the moderates.

I don't want to fall into that trap. I don't want you to either. I don't believe the diebold machines were fooled with. I believe rumor has been spread to keep the issue alive and democrats at each others throats.

I just wonder what will happen during the 2006 elections if a whole bunch of moderates show up and mix with lefties who really put nothing past Bush & his team (have every reason to feel that way - but feeling that way is not the facts we have). There will be strife. Already people are angry with Carter. What leader will be able to speak to us all. If we are so divided amongst ourselves.

Me I am from Canada but am involved because I care and have life experience that is pertinent. And because my country will be the first to fall if the neocons cannot be beaten back to the caves they belong in. Chintz will go fine in a cave I think.

I don't want to see the big Tent pulled apart by tribalization. And if you believe something to be true - that is not going to bother anyone. That is your experience. But if a whole gang of you believe and me and my gang don't. And you insist I have to see it your way.

Then we have been tribalized.

Tribalization is how the British ruled the world. In every nation they went they found disparate tribal leaders and played that up. So people couldn't get together and say "hey - colonials out". Worked like a charm. Is why the neocons go off on the 19th Century they love it so. We are at a point where we can barely talk to each other. It was not until the fight for democracy that people started talking to each other across cultural and tribal lines - because it takes empathy for others to be democratic.

I got called a bitch because I believe a hijacked plane was flown into the Pentagon. And I won't listen to somebody's theory that it could not have happened. I think some of them are pot stirrers. Some of them are true DUers. And on diebold - you could be right. Nefarious types will play with your personal shit and played with our hearts and minds - so why not machines. But I don't think the machines were directly tampered with. It was new technology and was a change for the Repukes to create another wedge - this time within the democratic fold.

So I do not need to be convinced. Nor do I want to. And you have your feelings on my actions and I have my feelings on yours. And we should stop there. And stop trying to convince each other. I post in threads because I don't want moderates to be shut up. And if someone wants to ask me why I feel the way I do - I will tell them. And I'll go back and forth a bit. But you do not need to convince me. We are okay together you and I - who see things a little bit differently. Probably because we have somewhat different belief systems - though I think we are very much alike. And also because we have different life experience. So we are okay like this. We don't have to exactly fit. We are a big tent the Democrats. You may paint zigzags on your tummy and I may pierce my nose with bone. And we can be different and see beyond the fact that we emotionally and intellectually cannot quite connect 'exactly'. We are tribes today it seems.

I come from Canada and even here the British way was to govern one tribe from the leaders against another. The Catholic Church was given so much free reign in Quebec. English Canada had other leaders. And after the British really left - why it wasn't twenty years later that the English were saying "what was that - why do we treat the French like we do? we really were favored" and the Quebecors and the French were saying "what was that - why didn't we do anything - we are as good as anyone - we can lead ourselves". And we had to deal with it then and learn to live together. And we still are.

Me - I rather not learn how to not be able to hang with you. I'd rather do what I have always done and say - not exactly me but so much of what they say is so true. Bush is a Fink. A liar. They will stop at nothing. I'm not sure what that means. I don't happen to believe in one part of the song.

We will have to heal from these wedgies sometime. It is a long and hard process. Ask India & Pakistan. Or the Hutus and the Tutsies. I'd rather nip this one in the bud. Cause the thing is - with the neocons out of power - I could live happily beside you no matter what you think or Diebold machines. I'd even vote hard for transparency and fight for it. Because it matters to you so much - and really I think most of the issue is very real.

Let's think beyond the 2008 election. Or beyond the 2006 election. We stayed together and empathized with each other even though we experience things differently. And we were not tribalized and forced to follow my narrow god (moderation) while you followed yours (diebold). Because we will all have what we want if we don't let them do this to us. They will be gone. Canada will be safe. USA will have some form of health care to keep costs someone reasonable. Those Diebold machines would be torn apart. There would be a transparency in election commission reporting to Congress in 2007. So none of this - what you and I feel - would matter. The issues would be solved. And you didn't have to change my thinking to match yours on every detail and with each huge emotion you must be feeling (I'm Canadian - so not so heavily invested emotionally).

So again. I'm saying not that you are wrong. But that I don't believe in the Diebold machines being played with. I don't mind discussing it - but I don't want your sources..I have my own routine for learning. And that should be fine and it would have been before these GOP monsters got power and mixed all our emotions up.

[Time for change]

48. I just don't understand you

You come here and post 8 times on this thread, none of them dealing with any of the issues I raised my original post, but all of them telling me that I'm wrong to make a big deal of this issue.

You repeatedly say that you don't believe that election fraud by electronic manipulation of our vote is a big problem, and you don't offer a single reason for believing that, or for refuting any of our arguments. You just say it over and over again.

And then you say that you're not trying to convince me of anything.

Neither I nor anyone on this thread once tried to convince you not to deal with the issues that you think are important in order for good candidates to win future elections. We all agree that they are important, and we realize that plenty of people are working on them, and that's great.

We are here working on an issue that we believe is very important, largely because we believe that it is sorely neglected in this country and will mean disaster if something isn't done about it.

If you want to argue that we are dealing with a bogus problem, then give us an argument. But PLEASE don't keep repeating your belief over and over again without backing it up with logic or argument.

[adolfo]

50. A matter of TRUST

Given enough time someone can hack your computer and watch everything you do online. They can log your keystrokes and view everything on your screen. Best of all, they don’t even need to be a master programmer since the tools are available freely online!

Does it sound like fantasy to you? It shouldn’t be. Please consider these folks will do it without any monetary gain.

Now imagine a corporation with full control of the hardware and software from day one. Their system counts the votes and does not need to provide physical proof. Would you trust them to count the votes accurately?

Before you answer there is one last question,

How much do you think it will cost to bribe the employee(s) behind the corporation to insert “special” code? (Don’t forget how the presidency is worth in billions $$ so money is not an issue.)

If you still consider corporations and their staff incorruptible then I have a bridge to sell you.

As someone with over 10 years experience in the technical field I can provide references that supports the above if you are interested.

[mgr]

53. daknapp in december. n/t

[Time for change]

54. Are you sure you have the spelling right?

I can't find any thread started by him/her.

[kiwi_expat]

55. Could that be jmknapp ? n/t

[Time for change]

56. Here are a couple of excellent studies on that subject for Franklin County

These show how "voter turnout" decreased markedly with decreasing numbers of machines per voter.

http://copperas.com/machinery/

http://uscountvotes.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=65&Itemid=63

[mgr]

58. Could be, its been a long while. n/t

[applegrove]

31. So now you are saying that the voting lists themselves were messed

with at 'reception'? Not just the diebold machines? Sorry - we don't have proof of that either.

The kids. The kids didn't show up to vote. The White men did. The white women did. They both voted Repuke. The disenfranchised and the poor - perhaps usually don't.

We need those people.

[Time for change]

33. If the voter registration lists weren't manipulated by Blackwell's office

then how do you explain the reports by Zernike, Fessenden, and others?

[applegrove]

38. I'm saying fix the long line ups, peruse and nail the assholes for

any voter registration shenanigans. But you seem to be saying that we don't need those people who stayed home and didn't care or didn't think it would matter.

40% or even if it is 35% or 30% or 15% NOT VOTING. That is bad. Don't you think the creeps will have new tricks up their sleeves come 2006?

[Time for change]

40. I am not saying we don't need those people who stayed home

Please tell me where you think I said that.

[adolfo]

36. Public records have been manipulated before

Sorry I can't go into further details. Perhaps at a better time.

[Peace Patriot]

26. Bullshit, applegrove! BULLSHIT!

The Democrats blew the Bushites away in new voter registration in 2004, nearly 60/40. And that's INCLUDING the purges of Dem voters in Ohio, Florida and elsewhere. 60/40 WITH THE PURGES. People were FLOCKING to the Democratic Party!

The great majority of new voters voted for Kerry. The great majority of independent voters voted for Kerry. And the great majority of Nader voters voted for Kerry. Gore/Bush 2000 switch voters were a wash (and not a factor). Gore 2000 voters--still pissed off about 2000--were the ones who GOT all their non-voting family members, co-workers and friends to register and vote THIS TIME ("the most important election in our history"). They didn't just vote. They were highly motivated to oust Bush and his gang of thieves, liars and murderers.

WHO ELSE IS THERE? The "entirely possible Rove motivation of church elders"???!!! Rove's "invisible" get out the vote campaign???!!! You believe this Rovian crap? You're putting it forward as "entirely possible"???

So, tell me, where are they NOW? Where is Bush's support NOW? 49% approval on the very day of his inauguration (unprecedented for a recently elected 2nd term president), and sinking like the Titanic, to...what is it today? 42%?

Where are the "elders," applegrove? You think they're stonewalling the liberal pollsters? I'll bet you're going to say: well, yeah, that's "entirely possible."

You think we should IGNORE an election system that is privately owned by rightwing billionaires and Bush-Cheney campaign chairs, who tabulated our votes with SECRET, PROPRIETARY software?

That's real good advice, that is. That's BULLSHIT!

[applegrove]

32. I'm saying work on electoral transparency & fairness at the state level.

And get the youth vote out. Nader had 2% of the vote. Work on the whole package. Get the poor and the kids out to vote. And yes - make dam sure there are enough resources for the population. Fight for it all. Don't assume there are no votes to be found in that 40%. You need them all!

Don't just focus on one little aspect and assume that when that is fixed all will be well.

[Time for change]

35. Are you saying that trying to ensure a fair election

is focusing on "one little aspect"

We could have every singly demographic group voting for our candidates (or trying to, rather), but if the Republicans have control of the voting machines who do you think is going to win?

[applegrove]

37. Well if you teach people "there is no point" if the machines are still

in place come 2006 - and you have taught 1 out of 20 people you come across that this is the case... what happens when the machines are still there?

I'm saying the repukes are using this as a way to divide and demoralize us. That is the true weapon. The big DU tent torn apart by people who spread the word that there is no point in voting. Not one case of shred of evidence will take those machines down. Because we have not seen any court case go through. So machines will likely be there. Sure some kids will go out and get an absentee ballot. Some will stay home.

It is a self- fulling prophecy. Can't we concentrate on issues where there is plenty of proof like: redistricting, long line-ups, unequal rule-making, etc.

I don't want to see moderates run away from the Democrats because they are not as angry as you. What happens when we all get together and volunteer? In 2006. There will be a group talking about the machines and a group who think they are grasping. And they will hate each other.

Now who does that help?

[Time for change]

39. We are not telling people not to vote

We are not saying that we shouldn't find good candidates to run for office, or that we shouldn't do everything that we need to do to win an election.

We are just saying that doing everything possible to ensure a fair election is one mandatory task that needs to be addressed.

Are you really saying that there is not a shred of evidence that electronic manipulation of our votes has not occurred on a large scale? If so, please take a look at this, and tell me what specific part you disagree with: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=380878

In any event, even if fraud did not occur in 2004, do you believe that our current system doesn't make it easy for fraud to occur, or that the Republicans wouldn't take advantage of a system like this? Why shouldn't we work to develop an election system that is transparent and that we can all have confidence in?

[applegrove]

42. I'm discerning in what I believe. I need proof not opinion or stats

studies. Just like the Plame Affair. I don't know all the details yet - but I have been given factual information in layer after layer. And I can guess what might come next. But until I see 'testimony of a reliable witness' I am only guessing. So I believe Rove & X went after Plame. And tried to backpeddal and reduce the meaning of their words and contacts because they did something wrong. I believe that because I see it from sources who would be sued if they didn't state the truth. From sources all over the world. From sources who I have admired and known for a long time.

If you teach people "there is no hope" if the Diebold machines are still in place come 2006 - they will get apathetic and stay home. That is how bullies win elections. I say 40% or 30% is not good enough. Lazy, beer drinking university students who are not into politics will stay home. Don't teach them that their vote doesn't count.

I'm just saying!

[Land Shark]

5. Whenever i see a virtually unquestioned assumption, i ask myself

if perhaps it is time to question the assumption.

Assumption: Something like 40% of adults didn't vote at all.

that means nearly 1 out of 2 adults on the street. We all say 'wow', what apathy?

But what if votes are being 'lost' for various reasons, as we know happens for sure to some extent?

One of the easiest ways to prove the inaccuracy of an election may be to simply measure the voted/didn't vote numbers and see if the percentages match up or not.

[NoBushSpokenHere]

6. In Ohio political parties are not declared upon registration but

I worked phone banking and called the newly registered as soon as we received the lists. They were breaking 9 to 1 Kerry.

Also, Triad was responsible for purging the registrations in several Ohio counties. They would dial up the county computers in the middle of the night to purge.

I am aware of some churches registering voters for Bush, but the ones I called stated, "That is why I registered, to vote for Kerry!"

I think alot of the church votes actually went to Kerry. When the people I was calling thought I was calling from a distance, they would tell me that their minister wants them to vote for bush, but they were voting for Kerry. If they thought I was calling locally, they often refused to answer. I know this because I called the same people twice, once from a phone with a local number, once with a blocked ID phone. It was as if they were afraid their minister would find out they were not voting for bush.

[Time for change]

10. Some of this sounds like potentially really good information

Do you have specific numbers and/or documentary evidence on some of this?

[NoBushSpokenHere]

23. Trying to obtain it. n/t

[Time for change]

11. I agree that probably a lot more people voted than official #s suggest

Especially in Democratic areas.

I don't understand your suggestion. How would you measure the voted/didn't vote numbers to see of the percentages match up? We have one set of numbers, which is the official vote tallies. But what would we measure them against?

[Land Shark]

44. The total vote in a given area directly implies a total nonvote

then you take a poll and simply measure whether or not someone voted in the presidential election. That will give you a percentage figure to match up to results and see how they compare.

I was just thinking that everyone focuses on voters, why not look at alleged nonvoters to get a measure of lost votes.

[Time for change]

45. That might work

But I'm afraid that some people might be embarassed to say that they didn't vote. I think that for that reason, it would be difficult to rely on such a poll.

[adolfo]

7. Ohio Voter History Registration Data

Download:

http://www.recountflorida.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=viewdownload&cid=2

(Microsoft Excel File)

[Time for change]

9. Thank you, but this appears to be a Florida site

with some articles on Ohio, but I don't see any voter registration data. Can you be more specific about what you had in mind?

[adolfo]

12. The file is listed on the web page

- Registration Stats History (Excel)-


It is a zipped spreadsheet file that contains Sept/1999-April/2005 Registration Stats of Democrats, Republicans and Non-Partisans.

[Time for change]

15. I'm sorry, but I just can't find it

The name of the web page that the link takes me to is Recount Florida.com. I see no spreadsheets there, or links to spreadsheets.

Can you be more specific about the name of the file, or where on the web page I can find it? Thank you.

[althecat]

16. Its a link to a zip file containing a stats for florida I think...

You could apply the same analysis to Florida I guess and see what it shows?

[adolfo]

17. Ohio Registered Dems History Report

Here is a direct link.

http://www.recountflorida.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Downloads&file=index&req=getit&lid=8

To open and read the file you will need tools like WinZip,
Microsoft Excel or a spreadsheet viewer.

http://www.winzip.com

http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=c8378bf4-996c-4569-b547-75edbd03aaf0&displaylang=EN


If there was a massive Dem increase these reports will provide
a better picture assuming the totals were not manipulated. 

 OHIO REGISTRATION HISTORY 


County		Dems 11/2004	Dems 5/2004		Difference
ADAMS		1,935		2,153			-218
ALLEN		9,424		9,525			-101
ASHLAND		4,551		4,878			-327
ASHTABULA	15,898		13,880			2,018
ATHENS		9,665		10,826			-1,161
AUGLAIZE	4,385		3,936			449
BELMONT		17,943		18,047			-104
BROWN		4,695		4,691			4
BUTLER		22,384		22,477			-93
CARROLL		3,772		3,786			-14
CHAMPAIGN	3,227		3,226			1
CLARK		18,272		18,233			39
CLERMONT	10,191		10,248			-57
CLINTON		2,039		2,034			5
COLUMBIANA	17,929		14,270			3,659
COSHOCTON	4,443		4,455			-12
CRAWFORD	5,061		5,146			-85
CUYAHOGA	237,054		238,330			-1,276
DARKE		5,415		5,452			-37
DEFIANCE	4,324		3,978			346
DELAWARE	12,506		11,823			683
ERIE		13,792		14,856			-1,064
FAIRFIELD	12,795		12,885			-90
FAYETTE		1,378		1,759			-381
FRANKLIN	110,930		111,461			-531
FULTON		4,091		4,099			-8
GALLIA		4,397		3,028			1,369
GEAUGA		12,938		10,219			2,719
GREENE		16,186		16,150			36
GUERNSEY	4,605		4,620			-15
HAMILTON	58,360		63,449			-5,089
HANCOCK		5,034		4,288			746
HARDIN		2,742		2,750			-8
HARRISON	3,704		3,703			1
HENRY		2,932		2,991			-59
HIGHLAND	2,570		2,574			-4
HOCKING		3,292		3,296			-4
HOLMES		1,908		1,679			229
HURON		5,342		5,342			0
JACKSON		2,495		2,506			-11
JEFFERSON	18,032		18,088			-56
KNOX		4,545		4,546			-1
LAKE		30,716		32,990			-2,274
LAWRENCE	6,513		5,860			653
LICKING		15,533		15,685			-152
LOGAN		3,356		3,357			-1
LORAIN		52,227		45,338			6,889
LUCAS		46,453		46,846			-393
MADISON		2,930		2,933			-3
MAHONING	62,574		63,338			-764
MARION		8,375		8,405			-30
MEDINA		17,826		17,990			-164
MEIGS		2,471		2,478			-7
MERCER		6,004		5,265			739
MIAMI		7,495		7,496			-1
MONROE		5,180		5,190			-10
MONTGOMERY	60,323		60,373			-50
MORGAN		1,495		1,498			-3
MORROW		3,373		3,395			-22
MUSKINGUM	7,416		7,429			-13
NOBLE		2,142		2,144			-2
OTTAWA		6,557		5,858			699
PAULDING	2,539		2,545			-6
PERRY		4,611		4,164			447
PICKAWAY	5,517		5,527			-10
PIKE		2,905		3,394			-489
PORTAGE		24,274		24,369			-95
PREBLE		3,976		3,976			0
PUTNAM		4,881		4,890			-9
RICHLAND	14,820		16,580			-1,760
ROSS		7,475		7,494			-19
SANDUSKY	7,908		6,762			1,146
SCIOTO		6,678		9,973			-3,295
SENECA		6,973		7,014			-41
SHELBY		4,779		4,818			-39
STARK		55,699		55,881			-182
SUMMIT		76,854		76,895			-41
TRUMBULL	56,479		56,803			-324
TUSCARAWAS	11,045		13,145			-2,100
UNION		3,120		3,126			-6
VAN WERT	2,261		2,269			-8
VINTON		1,564		1,570			-6
WARREN		10,243		10,323			-80
WASHINGTON	7,575		4,777			2,798
WAYNE		10,198		10,311			-113
WILLIAMS	2,395		2,984			-589
WOOD		12,272		12,524			-252
WYANDOT		1,898		1,920			-22

		1,405,079	1,403,585		1,494

[Time for change]

20. Thank you very much. There are one thing I don't understand about this

I've been told by several sources that Ohio does not register voters by party affiliation. But apparently the layout in your post indicates that the numbers apply specifically to registered Democratic voters.

The data from the SOS website that I have apply to total registered voters, not by party affiliation. Are these numbers you gave me official numbers from the Ohio SOS office?

[adolfo]

21. Yup, straight from the SOS.

[Time for change]

22. Thanks, I'm going to have to take a good hard look at this. n/t

[adolfo]

24. No Problem, anytime.

You brought up a very good issue that should be looked into.

[adolfo]

27. Totals do not match official results

The results I provided you does not match the official results when combined (Reps,Dems, Non-P) even though the reports are directly from the BOE.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x385181#385223

[liam_laddie]

25. OH registrations

Please see my post #18 on alolfo's other thread "WTF!!, Ohio..."
Maybe some clarification about what the Excel's mean...HTH

[adolfo]

18. Ohio Registered Republicans History Report

County		Reps 11/2004	Reps 5/2004		Difference
ADAMS		4,013		4,461 			-448
ALLEN		17,382		17,547 			-165
ASHLAND		9,223		9,933 			-710
ASHTABULA	11,561		8,598 			2,963
ATHENS		2,589		3,258 			-669
AUGLAIZE	8,541		6,474 			2,067
BELMONT		3,723		3,757 			-34
BROWN		3,826		3,821 			5
BUTLER		41,089		41,205 			-116
CARROLL		4,305		4,312 			-7
CHAMPAIGN	6,552		6,546 			6
CLARK		15,812		15,781 			31
CLERMONT	22,457		22,577 			-120
CLINTON		6,737		6,721 			16
COLUMBIANA	14,035		9,380 			4,655
COSHOCTON	5,869		5,880 			-11
CRAWFORD	5,058		5,133 			-75
CUYAHOGA	68,920		69,282 			-362
DARKE		7,142		7,155 			-13
DEFIANCE	7,363		6,350 			1,013
DELAWARE	27,462		21,838 			5,624
ERIE		5,238		6,947 			-1,709
FAIRFIELD	21,996		22,140 			-144
FAYETTE		4,009		4,885 			-876
FRANKLIN	77,997		79,718 			-1,721
FULTON		7,744		7,766 			-22
GALLIA		7,325		5,142 			2,183
GEAUGA		20,533		14,302 			6,231
GREENE		23,506		23,456 			50
GUERNSEY	4,473		4,502 			-29
HAMILTON	66,694		76,255 			-9,561
HANCOCK		18,873		15,312 			3,561
HARDIN		5,258		5,266 			-8
HARRISON	1,763		1,765 			-2
HENRY		5,875		6,047 			-172
HIGHLAND	4,850		4,858 			-8
HOCKING		2,308		2,311 			-3
HOLMES		5,569		4,482 			1,087
HURON		5,754		5,756 			-2
JACKSON		6,064		6,087 			-23
JEFFERSON	5,018		5,034 			-16
KNOX		6,561		6,563 			-2
LAKE		22,059		25,425 			-3,366
LAWRENCE	7,623		6,922 			701
LICKING		20,556		20,737 			-181
LOGAN		8,042		8,046 			-4
LORAIN		27,963		19,396 			8,567
LUCAS		17,011		17,146 			-135
MADISON		5,877		5,876 			1
MAHONING	14,545		14,799 			-254
MARION		7,785		7,824 			-39
MEDINA		19,237		19,425 			-188
MEIGS		4,106		4,127 			-21
MERCER		8,085		6,766 			1,319
MIAMI		12,460		12,466 			-6
MONROE		1,001		1,002 			-1
MONTGOMERY	57,440		57,880 			-440
MORGAN		3,143		3,146 			-3
MORROW		5,241		5,296 			-55
MUSKINGUM	10,880		10,887 			-7
NOBLE		2,682		2,691 			-9
OTTAWA		5,129		3,515 			1,614
PAULDING	3,306		3,318 			-12
PERRY		4,884		4,132 			752
PICKAWAY	4,957		4,972 			-15
PIKE		1,701		2,492 			-791
PORTAGE		10,945		11,098 			-153
PREBLE		6,466		6,464 			2
PUTNAM		6,333		6,343 			-10
RICHLAND	15,148		16,797 			-1,649
ROSS		5,484		5,512 			-28
SANDUSKY	9,520		7,457 			2,063
SCIOTO		7,391		6,018 			1,373
SENECA		9,303		9,360 			-57
SHELBY		4,628		4,675 			-47
STARK		38,514		38,646 			-132
SUMMIT		38,137		38,149 			-12
TRUMBULL	12,066		12,111 			-45
TUSCARAWAS	4,244		5,659 			-1,415
UNION		7,899		7,924 			-25
VAN WERT	5,802		5,829 			-27
VINTON		1,878		1,885 			-7
WARREN		28,068		28,223 			-155
WASHINGTON	9,097		4,917 			4,180
WAYNE		15,605		15,692 			-87
WILLIAMS	5,634		7,360 			-1,726
WOOD		14,584		14,834 			-250
WYANDOT		3,631		3,662 			-31

		1,137,157	1,115,504		21,653

[adolfo]

19. Ohio Registered Non-Partisan History Report

County		NP 11/2004	NP 5/2004		Difference
ADAMS		11,673		9,839			1,834
ALLEN		40,984		35,657			5,327
ASHLAND		19,418		17,812			1,606
ASHTABULA	34,730		35,521			-791
ATHENS		33,218		25,102			8,116
AUGLAIZE	19,800		20,880			-1,080
BELMONT		25,827		23,276			2,551
BROWN		20,820		18,065			2,755
BUTLER		175,756		150,994			24,762
CARROLL		12,545		11,350			1,195
CHAMPAIGN	16,498		14,194			2,304
CLARK		58,098		47,300			10,798
CLERMONT	93,167		80,392			12,775
CLINTON		17,095		14,162			2,933
COLUMBIANA	47,254		52,096			-4,842
COSHOCTON	12,496		11,156			1,340
CRAWFORD	19,102		17,761			1,341
CUYAHOGA	714,801		596,490			118,311
DARKE		26,600		24,614			1,986
DEFIANCE	14,365		13,966			399
DELAWARE	59,944		54,572			5,372
ERIE		35,388		30,065			5,323
FAIRFIELD	56,707		47,561			9,146
FAYETTE		10,858		7,869			2,989
FRANKLIN	657,016		563,748			93,268
FULTON		17,122		15,130			1,992
GALLIA		11,710		14,640			-2,930
GEAUGA		31,538		35,026			-3,488
GREENE		65,382		53,628			11,754
GUERNSEY	18,236		16,772			1,464
HAMILTON	435,419		365,938			69,481
HANCOCK		25,824		26,561			-737
HARDIN		11,403		10,321			1,082
HARRISON	6,293		5,825			468
HENRY		10,980		9,744			1,236
HIGHLAND	21,712		19,198			2,514
HOCKING		12,610		11,405			1,205
HOLMES		10,447		10,777			-330
HURON		27,246		24,931			2,315
JACKSON		16,251		15,376			875
JEFFERSON	27,099		23,894			3,205
KNOX		26,404		22,027			4,377
LAKE		107,793		89,998			17,795
LAWRENCE	27,205		25,716			1,489
LICKING		76,613		64,327			12,286
LOGAN		18,461		16,642			1,819
LORAIN		116,677		113,438			3,239
LUCAS		221,291		231,192			-9,901
MADISON		14,223		11,961			2,262
MAHONING	118,092		108,859			9,233
MARION		27,128		25,213			1,915
MEDINA		81,155		69,496			11,659
MEIGS		8,609		7,876			733
MERCER		18,561		18,773			-212
MIAMI		54,408		49,078			5,330
MONROE		4,276		3,909			367
MONTGOMERY	277,380		235,406			41,974
MORGAN		4,813		4,322			491
MORROW		15,635		13,888			1,747
MUSKINGUM	33,251		29,215			4,036
NOBLE		4,240		3,926			314
OTTAWA		18,583		18,699			-116
PAULDING	8,748		8,150			598
PERRY		13,663		13,587			76
PICKAWAY	19,898		16,506			3,392
PIKE		15,410		12,883			2,527
PORTAGE		76,258		64,491			11,767
PREBLE		17,597		15,828			1,769
PUTNAM		13,722		12,844			878
RICHLAND	62,671		52,369			10,302
ROSS		30,416		27,186			3,230
SANDUSKY	20,459		22,333			-1,874
SCIOTO		33,947		27,177			6,770
SENECA		21,695		18,709			2,986
SHELBY		19,053		16,539			2,514
STARK		177,553		154,295			23,258
SUMMIT		261,446		216,518			44,928
TRUMBULL	74,191		62,897			11,294
TUSCARAWAS	42,041		34,394			7,647
UNION		18,957		16,470			2,487
VAN WERT	13,239		12,263			976
VINTON		5,240		4,581			659
WARREN		87,608		72,342			15,266
WASHINGTON	23,678		28,754			-5,076
WAYNE		43,869		37,693			6,176
WILLIAMS	19,106		15,468			3,638
WOOD		63,070		54,030			9,040
WYANDOT		10,303		9,627			676

		5,452,068	4,775,503		676,565

[bettyellen]

28. well in my town, even though you were registered with the county...

there'd be a good chance your registeration didn't make it to the roll books at your precinct if certain signature such a mine was your witness. then you'd have to go to the county and get a court order to vote.
hundreds of people were turned away because they were not on the books. and people who were on the books were sent to the wrong book so they could also be told that they weren't in the books. they profile out who they don't want to vote. the same people tried to convince me for years i wasn't in the books. every single time i walked in for eight years they sent me to the wrong book. that's how it's always been here. :(

[NoBushSpokenHere]

29. Registration signatures

In at least one Ohio county, the BOE threw out ballots if the absentee or provisional voter did not sign their names EXACTLY like it was on the registration. For example, one voter signed their registration with the first two letters of their name in script, the last two letters were printed, when this voter signed the ballot envelope, they signed with 3 letters in script, one letters printed. This ballot was not counted. Another had signed their entire name in print, instead of script as it was on their registration, this vote was counted. When recount observers questioned this, they were told they knew the second voter, it was an older person that probably couldn't sign correctly, so they counted it. They stated the first one was younger and should have been able to sign their name exactly as on their registration.

Well, you know what? I registered to vote so many years ago, there is no way my signature could have matched, either. I am very doubtful my vote was counted.

The board chair said that they make alot of judgement calls and he was on the board with 2 republicans and if they couldn't make a determination on something, then Blackwell does. He said instead of arguing, he normally just agrees with what the republicans want.

There are many more ways to cheat on an election than fixing tabulators.

[Time for change]

30. I re-did the analysis using the #s that adolfo obtained from the BOEs

I used the same methods as described in my original post to this thread. The numbers were the ones that adolfo obtained from the BOEs, presumably pertaining to November 04, adding up the Republican, Democratic and "non-partisan" voters. It needs to be noted that the good majority of the so-called "non-partisan" voters are really Republicans or Democrats, but they did not vote in the primaries, so they're listed as non-partisan.

What I found, using those numbers, was that Kerry would have done almost the same with those registration numbers as he actually did, losing by 118,332 instead of 118,426.

Remember, going back to my original post to this thread, that if you use the March 04 registration numbers, Kerry would have lost by 112,081. But between March and November, according to journalists who reported on this, there were massive increases in voter registration disproportionately in Democratic counties, such that Kerry should have won by at the very least an additional 37 K votes in Cuyahoga County alone.

In other words, regardless of which sets of "official" numbers we use, they all fail to account for the massive increases in registration in Democratic counties. And that's a major reason why we need to consider fraud as an explanation for this.

[Nothing Without Hope]

47. I agree. This needs to be ONE of the points in a rebuttal to the DNC

Ohio election report. Done up with judiciously chosen graphs to make the point as clearly as possible.

[Time for change]

49. Yes, a rebuttal to the DNC report should cover lots of issues

I've been pursuing this particular issue because it seems to me that it's relatively unexplored and could potentially bear some new fruit.

[philb]

51. There was obvious manipulation of registrations, absentees, and

provisional ballots- and manipulation and dirty tricks to reduce the number of minority votes counted

The problem is compiling the plentiful evidence and getting someone interested in looking at it and doing something about it.

From a paper distributed in Nashville:
http://www.flcv.com/ohiosum.html

[Time for change]

52. Do you have any suggestions? n/t

[riqster]

57. Bump for today's Cuyahoga Meeting!

[Time for change]

59. Can you give us a report on what happened?

Maybe even post a new thread? Thanks.