Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What R the odds of PERFECT RECOUNTS in multiple counties

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
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-16-04 09:41 PM
Original message
What R the odds of PERFECT RECOUNTS in multiple counties
News: Election 2004: Ohio Counties Allegedly Reject Illegal Advice on How to Return a Perfect Recount -- Then Proceed to Return a Perfect Recount

By ADVOCATE STAFF

<snip>

...Triad Governmental Systems allegedly instructed Hocking County (OH) elections officials on how to do: match preliminary hand and machine recounts perfectly in order to avoid a state statute requiring a countywide manual recount if a 3% sample of county ballots uncovers even one mis- or un-counted ballot.

So, today, The Advocate celebrates those Ohio counties whose elections officials -- having publicly decried the recount effort and expressed their determination to avoid any countywide manual recount -- have done such a "double-plus-good" job on their preliminary recounts that, conveniently, they've made their own dearest wishes come true: Butler, Lucas, Richland, Sandusky, Seneca, and Summit counties, who, all told, recounted well over 23,000 ballots without uncovering even a single mistake in tabulation.

Not even one.

<snip>

Of course, in none of these counties were recount observers allowed to stand close enough to elections officials to actually see any of the ballots being counted; every county in which an observer asked to inspect an actual electronic voting machine rebuffed such request; one county, Delaware County, continues to refuse to even conduct a recount; and, as mentioned above, it would be a great surprise if Diebold and Triad representatives hadn't visited all the counties mentioned above, because the presidents of those companies seem to admit that they did --

<snip>

If the F.B.I. continues to be the only investigative body on the case, the world may never know.

Meanwhile, other Ohio counties conducted recounts with less paranormal results. Whereas the six counties above counted 23,000+ ballots with no errors disclosed, tiny Knox County got a perfect score on its 3%-of-ballots recount, then saw approximately 25 votes change columns in the countywide machine recount. The Advocate wonders about the remaining 27,000+ votes never hand-counted in Knox County, given that a machine recount -- notoriously and spectacularly less effective than a hand recount in finding under-, over-, and un-counted votes -- nevertheless led to 25 ballots being re-identified. .

<snip>

http://www.nashuaadvocate.blogspot.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-16-04 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
1. "recounts with less paranormal results"
That just about sums it up. It must be supernatural forces at work, aligning everything just so, matching everything up so hunky-dory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viva_La_Revolution Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-16-04 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. God did it.
Apparently. Hmph! :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-16-04 09:54 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Oh, you mean like with the actual "election" - the initial count?
Oh, I see, it's the miraculous AGAIN. Wow. What are the odds that would happen twice in less than two months? Gee whiz that B* sure is one lucky guy huh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genieroze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-16-04 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. He's Satan. eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-16-04 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Well, yes, I agree he is evil to the core but my point was that
Edited on Thu Dec-16-04 10:40 PM by texpatriot2004
just like the "election" the "recount" stinks to high heaven.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 06:25 AM
Response to Reply #5
22. They planned for it, most likely. And both were done on Gop's terms
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bj2110 Donating Member (802 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
6. I didn't realize that so many county 3% totals were perfect...
how convenient.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Yeah, pretty disturbing recount. I wonder if Nader's recount
was like this? Or were his hand recounts? I don't recall. I liked the article. I think it makes many good points. I don't think many people who are working the elections are computer literate, much less skilled. I think they get a relationship with a vendor and trust that person to handle things. It's really scary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
merwin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 12:44 AM
Response to Original message
8. Compare to Washington State recount
http://vote.wa.gov/general/recount_resultsbycounty.aspx

Only 7 counties out of ~40 had perfect recounts... only one of those had over 10,000 people in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Wow, that put's it in perspective doesn't it n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JetCityLiberal Donating Member (706 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 12:47 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Welcome to DU
:hi:

JetCityLiberal
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
regularjoe Donating Member (358 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 03:22 AM
Response to Reply #8
18. Great point! Can't have a fair recount with dishonest county officials
that hate the fact they have to do a recount. Good gravy, these people have no sense of responsibility. I don't know where it is but earlier there was a link to a Daily Kos summary of observers experiences in all different counties. These county boards just vote on whatever they feel like and call it a good recount. They also seem to call the SOS office any time they are asked to do something they don't want to. Suddenly the SOS office says they don't have to. And some don't let the observers talk. We need 2 or 3 lawyers at every county to file lawsuits every few minutes as the county officials try to side-step every little requirment. With corrupt officials in a lot of the counties there doesn't appear to be much we can do but pick a few at a time and sue.

regularjoe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MrUnderhill Donating Member (650 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 06:48 AM
Response to Reply #8
24. Yes, but how many of them had 33 or more votes changed?
Remember that Ohio is only hand-counting 3% of the ballots while Washington did ALL of them. If a county had 25-40 (or so) changes, you could expect to see one of them pop up in a 3% partial count. But if only, say, eight votes were changed... that likely would translate in Ohio to a "perfect recount" that would lead to the machines recounting the rest of the county.

Add to that the fact that some counties are reassessing all ballots, and not just recounting an existing pile (far more Ohio counties would change if they were simultaneously re-canvassing provisionals, etc) - and it looks like over 20 counties in WA might have shown up as "perfect recounts" on that initial 3% count. Many of the "perfect" Ohio counties ARE coming up with vote discrepancies when they're 100% counted, just not enough that you would expect it to show up in a 3% count.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ccarter84 Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
11. this isn't a recount...this is a retake of the same scene
"in none of these counties were recount observers allowed to stand close enough to elections officials to actually see any of the ballots being counted; every county in which an observer asked to inspect an actual electronic voting machine rebuffed such request"

so...we can complain right?
were they afraid we'd see them feeding blank ballots into the machines with 'preconfigured' totals courtesy of that friendly triad employee who visited last week?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Complain to who? That crooked K. Katherine Blackwell SOS?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #11
13. It's sick
I was going to go and help until I realized what was happening and how we were being "rolled". I finally gave up, told the campaign I wouldn't participate in a charade. I was told that it was still important to observe what is going on. To what avail? Is anyone actually doing something about all of this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashuaadvocate Donating Member (514 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. Hey all --
Just a note to say that The Advocate has published a follow-up to the story you're discussing here.

The News Editor
The Nashua Advocate
http://www.nashuaadvocate.blogspot.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 01:15 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Hey Thanks Nashua, You guys are great over there unlike the
yahoos in Ohio running those recounts. UNBELIEVABLE! "Against statutes" to pre-select precincts. What a miraculous recount. No mistakes, none...I think the odds are slim and none and slim was just shoved under the rug like the pink elephant that ate this election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
breadbox Donating Member (62 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 02:08 AM
Response to Original message
16. fair machines, not tampered with, clean ballots?
If the machines are fair machines, and have not been tampered
with, and the ballots are well punched, and the precincts are
small, it shouldn't be toooooooo surprising if a hand count and
a machine count agree. Think of it: how often has a Diebold bank
machine counted out $20 bills to you and given you too many?
Never happened to me!

I have not seen any reports about the machine recount/hand count
versus *original machine count*. To me, it seems obvious that the
comparison to be made should be hand recount versus election night
count. Any discrepancy there should trigger a countywide hand recount.

Does anyone know what the numbers are in each of these counties for
the recounts versus original counts on election night? Perhaps we
can use these to make a stink?

Ah the heck with it. Let's just move to paper ballots and hand counts
in the first place, can't we?????

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr Grieves Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 06:26 AM
Response to Reply #16
23. Thanks for asking this...
That's the question I'm interested in. Why are they comparing the manual counts to ANOTHER machine count when there is a perfectly good machine count to compare to from election night?? I mean, those are the results in contention, not the "new" machine counts. I feel like I'm missing something. This comparison IS being made, right? If so what are the results?

- I am utterly confused and baffaled and growing more so every day since N2.

G
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. Hi Mr Grieves!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mgr Donating Member (616 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. Think of it as a calibration test
The logic of Ohio's recount procedure, which probably assumes that there is no fraud, but faulty counting, so you would test the machines. So the requirement is first, run a test deck through to see that everything is running properly, e.g. that it can read and tally. Then, manually count a random 3% of the ballots, run the same ballots through the machine. If there is a discrepancy, it would follow that there is a discrepancy throughout the rest of the ballots, so you have to manually recount those. If there is no discrepancy, then run the rest of the ballots through the machine for the recount.

With Fraud, the entire prescription should go out the window. Now you are dealing with possibly a cluster effect, or a programmed miscounting in the tabulators. With the first, you are not likely to sample a cluster of stuffed or altered ballots, and the second would be undetectable if you have an algorithm that does not kick in until a critical number of ballots are read.


Mike
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chasing Dreams Donating Member (294 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 02:32 AM
Response to Original message
17. The answer is: a BIG FAT ZERO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Judged Donating Member (613 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 03:50 AM
Response to Original message
19. Triad to one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thedutch Donating Member (37 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 05:03 AM
Response to Original message
20. Im wondering if
anyone has reported on, or looked into, the possibility that there might be some intimidation of officials. Katie Blackwell would only need a few state police captains on his side to send out the gooning orders to every county in the state.
Was it Operation Pipeline(?) that had the entire Cali state police force conducting racially profiled drug searches; many officers came forward with their objections only after some nosy reporter began snooping around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 06:20 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. Good point. Anyone hear from Katrina, recounter in OH
who was being tailed and harrassed? She can go home. The elections people themselves have to live, work there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mostly_lurking Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-17-04 02:56 PM
Response to Original message
27. Actually, I would expect them to be perfect
Edited on Fri Dec-17-04 02:57 PM by mostly_lurking
My understanding is that undervotes and overvotes have been removed from this process (and only ballots that initially registered a vote are being counted). In such a case I would fully expect most of the 3% manual counts to be perfect. The only exceptions would be due to ballets that have become "soiled" (i.e. an extra chad was knocked out (rare), or a card was folded, etc.)

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 Wed Sep 19th 2018, 05:32 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