Unofficial Tallies in (New York) City Understated Obama Vote

[Algorem]

Source: NY Times

By SAM ROBERTS
Published: February 16, 2008

Black voters are heavily represented in the 94th Election District in Harlem’s 70th Assembly District. Yet according to the unofficial results from the New York Democratic primary last week, not a single vote in the district was cast for Senator Barack Obama.


That anomaly was not unique. In fact, a review by The New York Times of the unofficial results reported on primary night found about 80 election districts among the city’s 6,106 where Mr. Obama supposedly did not receive even one vote, including cases where he ran a respectable race in a nearby district.

City election officials this week said that their formal review of the results, which will not be completed for weeks, had confirmed some major discrepancies between the vote totals reported publicly — and unofficially — on primary night and the actual tally on hundreds of voting machines across the city.

In the Harlem district, for instance, where the primary night returns suggested a 141 to 0 sweep by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the vote now stands at 261 to 136. In an even more heavily black district in Brooklyn — where the vote on primary night was recorded as 118 to 0 for Mrs. Clinton — she now barely leads, 118 to 116...



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/nyregion/16vote.html?hp

[Kittycat]

1. I can't access the link.

Do they state how this impacts the delegate count? Also, is there any word about who or why it was reported as such on election night?

[Capn Sunshine]

2. Delegate counts will be adjusted to reflect the official totals

But the publicity for winning New York goes to Hillary. The adjustments will add probably another 8(?) delegates -not sure on my math- to Obama's score if these trends hold up.

Bill Clinton's office is in Harlem btw.

[HowHasItComeToThis]

3. SCRAP THE MACINES THAT MUST BE PROGRAMMED

HAND COUNT PAPER BALLOTS.

[JackRiddler]

8. New York has lever machines - not programmable.

This looks like old-fashioned vote fraud - of the kind that requires conspirators on the ground and can be more easily detected and caught. (If it had been programmable machines, we'd have 30 threads pursuing it fruitlessly.)

But we agree! Hand count paper ballots. If Canada can manage it, so can we.

[tishaLA]

10. Yup. Good, old fashioned, voter fraud

[Roland99]

23. No, it's not voter fraud. It's election fraud, perpetrated by those who count, not those who vote.

[JackRiddler]

49. Sure. I wrote "vote fraud," but to be clear...

that would mean election fraud, that's the clearer term, we agree.

[kestrel91316]

74. This is NOT voter fraud, my friend. The voters committed no fraud.

The voters are the VICTIMS of election fraud.

Every time we repeat the meme of "voter" fraud we perpetuate the RW myth that voters are the problem.

[grace0418]

121. Child abuse isn't perpetrated by children but people get it.

People who care understand the meaning of the phrase voter fraud. RWers who don't care believe what they want to believe anyway.

[brooklynite]

101. I wonder how many people here actually READ the article?

Jerome A. Koenig, a former chief of staff to the State Assembly’s election law committee and a lawyer for the Obama campaign, suggested that some of the discrepancy resulted from the design of the ballot.

...snip...

Mr. Koenig said he seriously doubted that anything underhanded was at work because local politicians care more about elections that matter specifically to them.

...snip...

City election officials said they were convinced that there was nothing sinister to account for the inaccurate initial counts, and The Times’s review found a handful of election districts in the city where Mrs. Clinton received zero votes in the initial results.

[drm604]

45. I don't see how voter fraud could cause a miscount.

This sounds like an error (intentional or accidental) in the registering or counting of votes. If it's intentional then it's electoral fraud, not voter fraud.

Lever machines can be rigged. The wheels could be set to something other than zero at the start of the election, or gear teeth can be shaved down so that some votes aren't recorded.

[Laurab]

57. Is that true for all of New York?

I know it's true where I live (Western NY), and where my daughter voted near Brooklyn, it was also lever, but I thought I'd read that some parts of NY used DRE's or Optical Scan.

[JackRiddler]

63. Polls in NYC are all lever machines - absentee ballots Sequoia optiscan.

"Polls: Lever machines; Accessible: Avante SPR - Vote-Trackker; Absentee: Sequoia OpScan 5 w. NYC modifications"

We need more info, but if the original vote was 118-0 and the corrected vote was 118-116, but you're not going to tell me that the 116 that appeared in the correction were all absentee or accessible. The vast majority are at the polls on the day. I don't get this at all. This has to be followed up.

[Laurab]

88. Oh, I agree, completely. I just wondered about the machines.

I thought Obama did quite well here, but my daughter, who lives somewhere near Brooklyn told me there were Obama signs everywhere, and virtually none for Hillary. I just didn't think it was as possible to mess with lever machines - I kind of felt secure using them.

There is no way they were all absentee - I agree, and I'm glad it was discovered, and is apparently being followed up on.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

71. they use Lever machines (not computers) in New York n/t

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

86. The EAC Report on Lever Machine Failures in 2004

Can a lever machine produce undervotes? YES. The lever for any ballot item can be jammed.
The EAC reported this happened on levers in the 2004 election.

From the EAC report:

14b. Broken counter
A malfunction of a lever voting machine that renders the machine incapable of counting additional votes on any votable position

14d. Printer failure
A malfunction or interruption of the printer hardware, software, or mechanical components consti-tuting the mechanism for creating a printed result of all contests voted (includes printers on electronic and mechanical lever voting machines).

For lever machines, reasons for equipment malfunctions included stuck levers, incorrect ballot strips, broken curtain mechanisms, and printer failures (e.g., printer unplugged). For punch cards, reasons for equipment malfunctions included voter units not recognized (computer failure), data pack failures, broken counters, and ballot cards not punched through.

See
http://www.eac.gov/clearinghouse/docs/eds2004/eds-2004-part-2-chapter-11/attachment_download/file.

[Botany]

4. I even doubt the corrected vote.

In the Harlem district, for instance, where the primary night returns suggested a 141 to 0 sweep by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, the vote now stands at 261 to 136. In an even more heavily black district in Brooklyn — where the vote on primary night was recorded as 118 to 0 for Mrs. Clinton — she now barely leads, 118 to 116.

[Window]

15. This is just RIDICULOUS!

Just when in hell are we going to stop this shit. This is totally unacceptable.:thumbsdown:



Peace:thumbsup:

[Botany]

29. This was not random chance or a glitch

Precincts in Harlem and Brooklyn that are basically all black
produced zero votes for Obama?

[Window]

51. Indeed!

I can't wait until this is straightened out. With everything else that's going on, we certainly don't need this now...nor do we especially need this in November -- even though NY's a blue state.


Peace:thumbsup:

[loudsue]

53. Blue State/Red State/ BULLSHIT!

This is why the Dems haven't been SCREAMING about these secretly programmed voting machines! The whole fucking government is broken, and all of our elected officials are fucking crooks! :argh:

I can't take it anymore!!!

:kick:

[ClintonTyree]

55. They're lever machines....

in NY, as explained above. Just sayin'.

[Window]

76. LOL! I knew I should have put "blue" in quotes, or just used Dem.

I, personally, don't like that "blue state, red state, purple state" meme.




Peace:thumbsup:

[trthnd4jstc]

108. Please Stay Involved: Constitutional Convention Anyone?

We need a 3rd Constitutional Convention. There are others on the Right, Center, and Left that wish for another convention. We need to protect our rights more, and to protect ourselves from those elected in Government. Can anyone else support this?

Justice Department to be made into its own branch of government, separated out of the Executive branch.

Or, a super-majority of the citizens to have a right to a referendum, and initiatives to over-rule the elected representatives, senators, and president. The people need to be the final check on the government, and not simply at election time.

End tyranny now.

Larry J. Sabato, Towards a More Perfect Constitution ---- http://media.www.csucauldron.com/media/storage/paper516/news/2007/10/29/News/Jablonskis.Political.Notebook-3065322.shtml

[IsItJustMe]

65. From my reading of it, since it occured in different locations, there is a pattern and thus can't be

be an accident. Doesn't look good at all.

[mod mom]

110. This is why we have but 1 party that wins: THE MONEY PARTY

:mad:

[truebrit71]

5. Okay...just so you know..if you AREN'T logged in on this thread you get some rethuglican Nazi ad...

...running AGAINST Dick Durbin..

Seriously what the fuck is wrong with this place when those sort of ads get to be run...???

Skinner REALLY needs to get that shit sorted out ASAP....

[IsItJustMe]

66. I have seen that also. That's as jacked up as it gets. WTF?

On edit: I have not donated and I know there is a place where you can turn off ads. I don't know if it would turn off that one. I actually became physically ill when I saw that ad.

[AZ Criminal JD]

83. Maybe if you donated once in awhile those ads wouldn't have to be run

Then you could bitch about something else.

[juno jones]

117. We don't tolerate trolls here, why should we tolerate spam for nazis?

The ads ought to reflect our demographic. Hell, otherwise they're just a waste anyways.

edit because part of the message didn't post.

[AZ Criminal JD]

146. Who is the "we" that you refer to?

You are not paying for the site, obviously.

[Oldtimeralso]

6. This almost sounds like an old time Chicago election. n/t

[Chisox08]

30. What do you mean old time?

That is politics as usual in Chicago but the guy Daley likes gets the vote in his favor.

[Capn Sunshine]

44. Old time, like last year

.

[reggie the dog]

125. vote quimby

[The Doctor.]

7. It is damn near to statistically impossible for that to happen.

I've read more than enough analysis, esp. from TIA, to know that shit like that just doesn't happen.

But there's nothing to worry about... I mean... it's not like the Clintons have people in Harlem or anything. :popcorn:

[qanda]

16. TIA-- that's a name I haven't heard in a long time

I wonder how he's doing. I miss him a lot.

[Twist_U_Up]

20. TIA was an impressive work horse here at DU

But like most, they are no longer.
Things that make you go hmmmm

[OzarkDem]

28. Or you could look at it the other way

Maybe those votes were nefariously switched from Clinton to Obama.

:popcorn:

[catgirl]

48. Sorry, can't spin this one

He had ZERO votes. BS.

[rosetta627]

33. What is especially disturbing is that the article called out

Charlie Rangel. Not that I trust the NY Times. But...

[Just-plain-Kathy]

40. Not all people in Harlem LOOOOVe the Clintons...

...many are mad because when Bill set up his office there, property values went up. That was great for the owners of apartment buildings, but it raised the cost of renting.

[The Croquist]

70. It almost had to be pure incompetence

Only a moron would believe that either Obama was shut out 141 - 0 in Harlem or that people wouldn't question it. I mean, come on. Obama would do better then that in David Duke's home precinct.
What scares me is that it looks like he was shut out in about 80 election districts of New York Cities over 6,000. Clinton was shut out in a few as well. That means it wasn't just one moron but lots of morons. If it was a concerted plan the tracks would have been covered up better.

This strikes me more as an indictment of the poll workers and management then anything else.
Who hired these people? Even if they are volunteers judgment must be made to their competence.
Who trained these people?
Who monitors for obvious errors?
Is anybody responsible?

I'd like to see the republican numbers in general and in these specific districts. If you see a similar pattern of incompetence it would support the idea that it wasn't intentional.

[quakerboy]

9. What the hell

If this is true, its really really bad.

[usregimechange]

11. What the hell is going on???

[JackORoses]

77. Hillary did not win NY by the margin reported on Super Tuesday

Obviously, the totals were manipulated to make it appear as if Hillary's victory there was by a much wider margin than it actually was.

Why?

Perception. Perception. Perception.

She expected to close this thing out on ST, she had to appear to have a very large lead in her home state.

Unfortunately for her, ST was not the end, and now these 'discreprancies' are coming to light.

They didn't think that anybody would still be lookiung at these totals.

This is just further proof that Hillary is InItToWinIt, whether the people approve or not.

[ShadowLiberal]

12. That's pretty bad if it's true

That's pretty bad if it's true that people decided to rig the elections in favor of their home state favorite.

No matter what the make up of any town or city, I find it very hard to believe that either Obama or Hillary could get a 100+ to 0 vote victory.

[aquart]

13. So the voting machines were correct in their tallies.

But the press reported "unofficial figures" which were untrue.

Why would the press report "unofficial figures"?

Are the current results from an official recount? At whose request?

[Igel]

119. It works like this.

After the polls close, the poll workers crack open the back of the machines. There are forms for them to fill out, reporting the totals for each race.

The forms aren't always the friendliest things, but when you open the back of the machines you have an array of numbers facing you, sort of like having a mess of odometers lined up for you (little wheels with numbers on them, each vote advances the appropriate wheel).

You have call off numbers by column and row to match up the numbers with the race/measure/etc. Then you close up the back of the machine, lock it down, and seal the machine (with a little tabbed seal stunningly similar to the one that you took off the machine in the morning).

The paperwork goes to the local BOE. They tally up the unofficial numbers, assume they're correct, and add in absentee ballots. Voila, the unofficial totals released to the press. The BOE assumes that the octogenarians actually staffing the polls from 6 am to 9 pm with a couple of potty breaks and a break for voting haven't made any mistakes and are competent. (This is sometimes a valid assumption; sometimes, not so valid.)

The machine stays locked up until it's retrieved by the BOE. Then, over the next week or two, the BOE unlocks each machine and retrieves numbers for the official count. The official numbers are double checked and replace the unofficial numbers. By then affadavit ballots have been verified or rejected and those have joined the absentee ballots and been merged with the results. The results are certified by the local BOE and forwarded to the state. When there are no challenges, no recounts requested, and the state and everybody else are satisfied that the counts are acceptable the technicians are told to reset the machines when they can get around to it.

So all the problems reported in this article are caught by the usual process. People complain about the machines, but in my experience human error is a serious problem, as well. Just not one that can be rectified.

[pnwmom]

14. The anomaly wasn't limited to Obama. HRC also had a "handful of districts"

that supposedly yielded her zero votes.

According to the article, some people whether wonder the ballot design might have contributed to error.

But obviously, nothing justifies this kind of error.

[Johnny Noshoes]

17. I don't know..

I don't know if the ballot design was uniform all over the city but here in my district in Queens I don't see how anyone could've been confused by the layout. Across the top were the names of the candidates and they're delegates were listed underneath, there was one lever to click right next to the name of each presidential candidate. Seemed pretty simple to me I voted for Edwards and was done in less then a minute.

[HamdenRice]

50. VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION ABOUT YOUR POST

Sorry to post in all caps, but this has been bothering me since the day I voted.

I also voted in Queens, but I disagree that the layout was simple.

On the top line was the name of the candidate. Then below that was a list of 5 or 6 delegates for that candidate.

I have a terrible suspicion that if you just voted for the candidate your vote did not count. You had to turn the lever next to the cadidates name, and then turn the 5-6 levers next to the delegates for taht candidate.

Can anyone answer that question: What happened if you voted for the candidate, but not all the candidate's delegates???

[Johnny Noshoes]

87. I don't remember

if there were levers next to the delegates names. If there were levers then yeah I blew the vote 0h DAMN.

[pnwmom]

92. Wow. What a good question. If you call up your district to find out the answer

I hope you'll post a thread about it. This could explain a lot.

[HamdenRice]

97. Whew! Your vote still counted

These two knowledgeable DUers answered the question. All you had to do was vote for the candidate.

The delegate vote has to do with a complicated mechanism for who actually gets to go to the convention

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4614741&mesg_id=4614741

[pnwmom]

118. That's good. But it doesn't clarify whether those particular votes got

counted in the unofficial tally, or not until later. If they only counted delegate votes in the unofficial tally, then that could explain why someone who voted only for a Presidential candidate (and not delegates) didn't get counted till later.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

128. I voted for the delegates pledged for my candidate.

I don't recall ever seeing that before, but the instructions implied that you had to vote for them as well. :hi:

[dansolo]

75. If you didn't vote for delegates, than your vote may not have counted

When they tallied the votes, they may have disregarded ballots that didn't have any votes for delegates. If you only voted for Edwards, then your vote may not have been reflected in the original tallies. I suspect that this was the case, and the counting was reconfigured to accept under-votes. Unless there is a different explanation coming out, I suspect that there was no fraud, unless the counting was deliberately misconfigured with the expectation that Obama voters would be more likely to vote for only Obama, and not for any delegates.

[yellerpup]

18. Westchester County poll workers reported that people were not voting

for delegates in the morning of the primary, so they started trying to explain how as people went into the booth in the afternoon. The workers also complained (in our local, weekly newspaper's op ed pages) that there was not pamphlet to give to voters about voting for delegates and few of them knew how to explain how the selection of delegates works because they had not been briefed or educated on the procedure either.

[Twist_U_Up]

19. two heads same monster

[pjt7]

22. 2 heads same monster is right

The way I look at it the Republicans have their hands in cheating in the last 2 general elections, but the Democratic party is also guilty of the same crimes in their own primary in Harlem & I would say Hudson County NJ, as well.

Any & all cleanising & above the table voter counting would be appreciated.

[rosetta627]

37. Nice, good graphic Twist_U_Up

Too true

[Guava Jelly]

21. Holy hell

I got nothing...
Democrazy in action

[ClayZ]

24. Figures never lie, but liars figure!

RECOUNT!

K and R

[Honeycombe8]

25. Why aren't we hearing this on the TV news? ????? nt

[alteredstate]

32. I'm sure the MSM will pick this up.

This is a big story.

[Vinca]

26. Zero votes in 80 districts. They need a savvier programmer

if they expect to cheat to win.:mad: The whole state of New York should be reviewed.

[OzarkDem]

27. That's why they call them "unofficial"

Mistakes happen during the initial tallying of votes. With increased voter turnout and more volume at the polls, its not unusual for the initial vote to be wrong. That's why the totals are verified later and an "official" count comes out.

[JackORoses]

78. these aren't mistakes, they are deliberate omissions

if they were mistakes, then there would be 0 votes for both candidates.

But the case is that Hillary votes were tallied, and Obama votes were not.
The only way this was done was on purpose.

[pnwmom]

95. Wrong. There were other districts that had zero votes for Hillary.

Upthread, several people explained that if you voted for a candidate, but didn't go on to pull several votes for delegates AS WELL, then your vote wouldn't have counted, at least on the first go-round. That could be the explanation.

[JackORoses]

107. but those areas with 0 for Hillary also had 0 for Obama

How do you explain the places that had Hillary votes but 0 Obama votes?

[pnwmom]

116. Where in the article does it say that? n/t

[Zhade]

135. RIGHT HERE:

"In the Harlem district, for instance, where the primary night returns suggested a 141 to 0 sweep..."

Clinton got votes, Obama got none? Bullshit.

[pnwmom]

140. That wasn't my question. The article also said that in a handful of districts,

HRC was the one that got zero votes. Someone claimed that Obama got no votes in those districts either, and I asked where that was in the article. Do you know?

[Zhade]

158. Ah, my apologies for misreading you.

I don't have info on that allegation, no.

[rosetta627]

31. The only surprise is that the NY Times is reporting

on (potential) election fraud. They're part of the propaganda machine. Weird.

[Bread and Circus]

34. That's what I noticed too.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

42. that's what I thought?

[LifeIsSweet]

68. I agree

I'm so tired of the press propaganda. It's worse then Fox now on CNN and MSNBC (except for Dan Abrams)

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

73. Amen! and they really are reporting, just wait till Ohio and Texas fraud happens

but Obama has worked with Project Vote on protecting voters, so his campaign has probably
been looking out for this sort of thing.

[wildflowergardener]

35. machines

Can anyone explain how these lever machines work - how you vote with them - where they record the votes and how a person might go about reading what the votes?

I've never used anything like that.

Meg

[lurky]

43. You flip a bunch of switches on the panel.

Each switch corresponds to someone you are voting for. When you are done, you pull a crank, and it records your votes. There is no paper -- it tallies votes on a set of mechanical counters, similar to odometer counters in old cars.

[HeraldSquare212]

60. But when you sign the voting book, they give you a slip with your number on it

i.e., what number voter you are; it's sequential from the prior voter. Then when you go to the machine you give that slip to a poll worker, who checks your number against the total votes cast showing on the counter. That way, there's a constant, ongoing check of the machine, at least with regard to number of votes cast. Obviously, the workers don't see the candidate totals; I think those counters are hidden behind a sealed panel, and the seal is broken at the end of the evening.

[halobeam]

111. I didn't get a piece of paper when I signed the book.

I never did in any election. These are lever machines, I'm located in NY.

[Igel]

120. Not important.

In Rochester we didn't hand out slips of paper. We just monitored the voters to make sure nobody was in line that hadn't signed the voter registry.

The details vary slightly from place to place, the overall process is pretty much defined by law and by the hardware.

[halobeam]

123. thanks

[HeraldSquare212]

144. You know what's funny though?

if the machines give a count of total voters, which the ones in NYC do, then at the end of the night the total reported would have to match that number, i.e., the poll workers would check the number on the machine. So, if there were errors, I think they happened at a level above the polling station.

[Igel]

152. The machines do give a count.

Of course, it's the number of voters since the machine went into operation, but that just means you write down the starting and ending numbers and subtract them to get the number of voters that used the machine that day.

If the number of votes cast for any one office on a given machine exceeds the number of voters that used that machine, you know something's up. But invariably somebody--or lots of people--skip at least one issue or office. I only worked the polls in Rochester for a few years, but I don't think I ever saw a case where the votes for an office equaled the number of votes cast. They were always under the maximum limiit: 120 people use the machine, you get 20 votes for dog catcher, 100 votes for senator, 95 votes for representative, 70 votes for mayor, and 110 votes for president. Or something like that.

But it means that you have to care enough to do the arithmetic--after you read off the numbers and have them entered in the form, you have to add up the votes for all candidates for an office and compare them with the total voters for the machine. I did the first few times, it was a novel situation. After that ... nah. You just care that the number of voters per the voter registration book matches with the number of voters for the machine. I.e., you do your job and then race home to the family.

[Johnny Noshoes]

91. You have to watch that crank/handle..

when you go in you pull it left to right and when you're sure you're finished voting you pull it right to left.

[wildflowergardener]

103. thanks

Thanks to everyone who answered my question - I have used the paper ballots with the chads and optical scans and wasn't sure how that all worked.

Meg

[HockeyMom]

36. 57% in NYS total

That was not very good for her home state. Is she possible with all this, she may actually may not have won to begin with?

[Botany]

39. Despite what you hear Obama did quite well in N.Y. & MA too

Look at the polls v the vote.

He went from 17% to 40% in New York ...... he got 90 to 94* delegates out
of Hillary's home state. And now it looks like he might have done even better.

In MA he went from 15 to 37% .... Kerry & Kennedy did help Obama.




* 4.7% of the total he needs for the nomination.

[Omaha Steve]

38. 7 years since the Supreme Court voted 5-4 for W we still can't get true counts

ZZZZZZZZZ The sound of the public snoozing.

[CRH]

41. I'm wondering now if the 5-4 decision was miscounted? n/t

[HeraldSquare212]

46. I went to the warehouse and checked the numbers on voting machines

against reported results after Tasini's challenge against Clinton in 2006, along with five other people who did the same. There were only very, very minor discrepancies, and only in a small minority of machines. Based on that, I's say this is more than the usual human error that creeps in.

[Stephanie]

72. I'd suggest contacting Bill Perkins' Harlem office about this.

He's been organizing for Obama in NYC, he'll be all over it if something's up here.

http://www.nyssenate30.com/

[mwb970]

47. Clearly, holding elections is now beyond America's ability.

I know we've been getting dumber for years. We don't think, we don't read, we spend a lot of time on sports, celebrities, and junk TV. But have we really reached the point where, as a nation, we are unable to organize and conduct fair elections?

I don't know whether to be ashamed or embarrased for my country. I've beeen feeling a lot of both in recent years.

[Johnny Noshoes]

93. Your post reminded me...

I watched "Idiocracy" the movie last night and I hope it was NOT a preview of things to come.

[martymar64]

143. C'mon, it's got what plants crave

Electrolytes!

[Johnny Noshoes]

156. nt.

:rofl:

[Johnny Noshoes]

157. I can't wait

I can't wait for this whole process to be over so we can get on with the business of trouncing Gramps McCain.

[lisainmilo]

52. *sigh*

It is so tiring.....this B.S. has been going on for so long now! :-(

Paper Ballots should have been put in place years ago now! But noooooo......year after year now we have to endure this endless crime of FRAUD!

[bagrman]

98. Vote by Mail , Vote by Mail, Vote by Mail. Change it now before November.

[intheflow]

104. I just don't get the whole vote by mail craze.

I have a hard time getting my bills via my post office, never mind that they lost my birthday presents from both my boyfriend and my mother. Plus, who's receiving the mail, who's opening and counting the ballots? What's to guarantee votes won't get thrown away? What oversight in in place day-to-day to ensure the process is above board?
:shrug:

I favor pen and paper ballots, though I wouldn't have a problem if the polling places were open 48-hours straight so everyone can vote--even people whose work schedules may not allow them the time off to vote on one day only, between 7am and 9pm.

[bagrman]

134. Here in Oregon it's on the radio when the ballots come out.

If you don't get one, ya call and ask for one or go by and get one. Never heard of anyone having a problem getting their ballot. You fill out your ballot stick it in the plain envelope supplied, then you stick that envelope into another envelope and sign it. When your envelope gets to the polling place , your signature is checked to make sure your registered, your checked off and the plain envelope is thrown in with the rest. Those envelopes are taken and opened en mass and the ballots are counted. No one knows how you voted and if there is a question the ballots are there for a recount. With the black boxes it's to easy to steal 1000s of votes at a time.

You get your ballot a month ahead with a voters pamphlet that tells you whats on the ballot fill it out a week ahead of the voting day and send it in. i f you want to be old fashion then you take it by the polling place on voting day. Ideally we would have a day off of school and the juniors would count the ballots with the seniors overlooking the process, that way we are training the next generation of voters in the process.

Too easy.

[intheflow]

138. Right, but what about the ballots that are mailed in?

What oversight is there? Who picks up that mail? Who delivers that mail? Who holds that mail until election day? The oversight questions are huge for me. Just seems like too many people would be handling my ballot from the time it leaves my mailbox until it gets to its intended destination.

It's also been theorized that illegal overseas absentee ballots could have been used to steal the 2000 election. Surely something similar could happen with mail-in ballots domestically.

[bagrman]

145. If you don't trust the mail system then take it to the polling on voting day and put it in the box.

Better then having someone program a machine to steal 2 out of 5 votes for one candidate. And how many people handle your ballot from the polling place to the spot that it's counted. The post office delivers a box of ballots or some political hack takes the box and delivers them. The purging of voters in FL. was more to blame then mail in ballots for FL being called for bu$h.

[npincus]

54. so Obama picks up delegates?

[Igel]

122. Not a meaningful question.

The delegates haven't been awarded yet. The numbers cited on Super Tuesday were unofficial, now they're checking and coming up with the official numbers.

It means that Obama will probably get more delegates than the unofficial projections by his staff, CNN, etc., etc. believed he'd get; key word here is "unofficial". But he'll get neither more nor fewer delegates than the official number ever was going to say.

[LifeIsSweet]

56. It's Ironic

Obama says they've had 18 debates already, when in reality, there has only been 1 one on one debate with him and Hillary, that was on 1/31/08 on CNN.

He is DEFINITELY afraid to blow his momentum with a one on one debate, where he is weakest.

[Botany]

58. It's Ironic

That your post has not a damn thing to do w/ the idea in this thread.

[LifeIsSweet]

67. oops

Yeah I posted in wrong thread. I made a new post to this thread, on topic.

And to add to my latest post in this thread, isn't it strange the spin that if you're black and don't vote for Obama that you're not supporting your people? Doesn't seem like a fair stance. I don't see Hillary having her surrogates putting out stories hinting that if you don't vote for her as a women, you're letting you are betraying your sex.

[Danger Mouse]

85. It's not spin, chuckles. It's logic.

Don't try to tell me that not one black voter in HARLEM cast a vote for Barack Obama.

[Botany]

96. chuckles is a plant

100% trying to stir shit up.

BTW it wasn't all of Harlem but some precincts that didn't have any votes
for Obama .... just as far fetched though. KInda like all those Jewish people
who voted for Pat Buchannan in Florida 2000.

[Danger Mouse]

131. no doubt.

[dogman]

59. Will MI anf FL be counted eventually?

Disenfranchisement is wrong everywhere.

[Yupster]

90. That's the compromise we're looking for

Florida and michigan will be counted, but Tammany Hall gets to count the votes.

As Boss Tweed once said, "it's important to know the law. But it's even more important to know the judge,"

[me b zola]

109. First MI & FL need to hold primaries with the candidates names on the ballot

[dogman]

133. They did.

Some withdrew their names to gain political points in Iowa. Should Iowa be redone also?

[me b zola]

141. Yeah, some candidates played by the rules and withdrew their names...

---you know, party unity and all of that. And then there were others waiting to exploit the rules.

If MI & FL would like to hold a Democratic primary, I'm sure that a deal could be worked out with the DNC--that is if those state's party officials are done throwing their tantrum to get their way.

[dogman]

142. Those were not the rules, just political posturing.

You know, same old politics. If those were the rules, Obama and the others would have removed their names in FL also.

[Eric J in MN]

61. Regarding the idea of weary clerks writing down the wrong number,

...the clerks should have representatives of campaigns looking over their shoulder to make sure they get it right.

Or at least the clerks should work in pairs who check each other.

[JackORoses]

79. 'weary clerks' is a red herring. They weren't too weary to count Hillary's total, just Obama's.

That is not 'weariness'.

[tgnyc]

112. read the whole thing. the same thing happened in reverse to HRC in other NY districts.

[Divine Discontent]

62. ?!?! obvious election fraud ?!?!

:wow: :wtf: :thumbsdown: :mad: :wow: :wtf: :thumbsdown: :mad: :wow: :wtf: :thumbsdown: :mad: :wow: :wtf: :thumbsdown: :mad: :wow: :wtf: :thumbsdown: :mad: :wow: :wtf: :thumbsdown: :mad: :wow: :wtf: :thumbsdown: :mad: :wow: :wtf: :thumbsdown: :mad: :wow: :wtf: :thumbsdown: :mad: :wow: :wtf:

[LifeIsSweet]

64. How frustrating

to see the Clintons being called racist, and now behind voter fraud. The innuendo put out by the Obama campaign and it's surrogates is disturbing. If you don't vote for Obama you're either racist or don't want change. It's unfortunate that their campaign has run the American people down to this level.

It's refreshing to see Hillary putting facts out, experience, what you'll do as president, etc. instead of stooping to the levels the Obama campaign has. I've donated to both campaigns in the past and belong to both mailing lists. I was on the fence but now I'm now supporting Hillary.

Obama says that him and Hillary have had 18 debates, that's not true. Hillary and Obama have had 1 one on one debate, back on 1/31/08 on CNN.

Funny how the Obama campaign spins. He doesn't want to debate because he's weak when it's one on one, face to face, no pre set sermon to the Obamanods. Wake up people, see through the hot air.

[Botany]

100. You do the grammar much?

Obama says that him and Hillary have had 18 debates, that's not true. :dunce:


<An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.>

BTW I take it you didn't bother to read the article because there wasn't one word about
the Clintons being racist or being behind this obvious election problem.

[Coexist]

69. I have a headache.

[goclark]

80. I do too ~ this is way beyond what America is about!

We need CHANGE!

:bounce:

[LifeIsSweet]

82. Change in politics without experience and connections

is reckless :spank:

[goclark]

99. He sure has enough experience and connections

to make it thus far -- and he sure has enough "experience" to not run out of money in the middle of his campaign.

He has enough "experience" to realize how to select a TEAM that he can depend on to manage his campaign.


For someone that has been through many campaigns, guess her Experience didn't count for much.

And if she was so skilled at getting items pushed through -- why didn't her "experience" in the WH - as the First Lady lead her to push through Universal Health Care?

That's a lot of time wasted for such an "experienced" politician with "connections."

[LifeIsSweet]

105. Experience comparisons

Has anyone created a thread anywhere with posts comparing the experience of each candidate?

[L0oniX]

81. Can anyone get elected honestly anymore? America ...home of the cheat!

[Name removed]

84. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dana_b]

89. argh!! It doesn't make it easy

to convince the people in my life who refuse to vote, who refuse to have any interest in what's going on, when this kind of crap is still happening. I know a few people who think "all politicians are crooks" and that "voting is a waste, it doesn't matter anyway". How can I argue with them when stuff like this continues to occur? It's like we haven't learned anyhting from past elections.

I hope the candidates are on top of it in Ohio, TX and the other states. It would be a darn shame to disenfranchise so many people who are so excited about this election.

[KamaAina]

94. It's bad enough when the repukes do it to us

now we're doing it to ourselves??!! :grr: :banghead:

[mod mom]

106. wonder why there was so much silence about the stolen elections of 2000 & '04?

It's the money party that controls the vote and those who control the vote control the outcomes! :mad:

[Cassandra]

102. I'm not surprised there could be an error but...

considering that official said that no candidate ever gets 0, I'm surprised that anyone would report the count that way, rather than saying it makes no sense and needs to be done over.

[1776Forever]

113. And now comes OHIO and TEXAS - Is this going to happen once again? Disgusting!!!!!!!

:wow:

[From The Left]

114. Manhattan is the Clinton's Plantation

I'm not surprised to see their machine steal votes from African Americans to favor Hillary.

[goforit]

115. This is outlandish!!!! Whoooaaa!!! What a steal ...hillary!! The BUSHCO way!!!

[mysteryman2]

124. Great

Factor the Mexican vote and Asian vote. You will if Obama wins. Obama won't get it I have been to lots of meet ups in spanish. Most of them say no way will they vote for Obama didn't you watch CNN.

Just like Kerry go for who ever. I worked on the Kerry campaign. They kept saying any democrat can beat Bush think again. Think again if you think just anybody can beat McCain.

What if Bush decides to support his party and start pulling out of Iraq. I doubt it. But they are good at messing with your mind. They know who ever wins will do the same. They could almost guarantee a republican win if so. Especially if gas prices drop after the primary. Bush has connections he is in Africa now. No telling who he is talking to on the phone.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ikonoklast]

127. 'No telling who he is talking to on the phone.'

He must be calling you.

You sound like his speech writer.

[mysteryman2]

129. I'm not

I am not his speech writer. You need to examine everything in a race. His party is known for doing tricks, like the exaggeration of the Dean scream.

Like some of the people here who are worried about spelling. I think they may be republicans. They just are trying to get people banned and start lots of stuff I will be ignoring their posts or not reply.

[Zhade]

130. Yeah, that's not suspicious at all.

:sarcasm:

So... who's doing the cheating? Republicans to get Clinton as a candidate, or pro-Clinton forces?

Either way, it's another subversion of the voters' voices.

[Name removed]

132. Deleted message

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

[Zhade]

136. This thread is an eye-opener on trolls, that's for sure.

NT!

[Name removed]

139. Deleted message

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

[Umbram]

137. So this is how to get to over 2k posts in short-order.

Post after post of nothing. I have some catching up to do!

[NoodleyAppendage]

147. Obama Robbed in NYC

Source: NY Post

OBAMA ROBBED IN NY
By GINGER ADAMS OTIS

February 16, 2008 -- Barack Obama's primary-night results were strikingly under recorded in several congressional districts around the city - in some cases leaving him with zero votes when, in fact, he had pulled in hundreds, the Board of Elections said today

Unofficial primary results gave Obama no votes in nearly 80 districts, including Harlem's 94th and other historically black areas - but many of those initial tallies proved to be wildly off the mark, the Board of Elections confirmed.

Truth is, in some districts getting a recount, the senator from Illinois is even close to defeating Hillary Clinton.

Initial results in the 94th District, for example, showed a 141-0 sweep for the New York senator, but Board of Elections spokeswoman Valerie Vazquez said today that the ongoing recount had changed the tally to 261-136.



Read more: http://www.nypost.com/seven/02162008/news/regionalnews/obama_robbed_in_ny_97932.htm

---

Hmmmm...something we can expect for Ohio or Texas, maybe?

[SoFlaJet]

148. I wonder how this will affect

the delegate count if and when this ever gets sorted out...IF...the operative word. Oh yea where is the outrage from Camp Clinton at the disenfranchisement of democratic voters this time?

[Fredda Weinberg]

149. The NYPost enjoys pulling your chain. Election officials and lawyers for both Mr. Obama

and Mrs. Clinton agree that it is not uncommon for mistakes to be made by weary inspectors rushing on election night to transcribe columns of numbers that are delivered first to the police and then to the news media.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/16/nyregion/16vote.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

[NoodleyAppendage]

150. Give me a break. A few errors here and there I can buy, but 0 vote tallies for Obama...no way!

There are mistakes, and then there is out-and-out vote fraud. This is a case of the latter.

J

[brooklynite]

153. Unless its not...

The only tally on the records is the unofficial preliminary tally done at a late hour by the election officials (with pollwatchers in the room), and then reported by the Police to the media reporting services. After having worked a 16 hour day (polls open at 6 AM) the odds are somebody's going to skip over a number somewhere (hence "0"). Or is it easier to believe that the Campaign got corrupt officials in a small handful of districts (therefore having no significant impact on the outcome) to misreport the interim results, knowing that the numbers would be officially double-checked and corrected on the machines later?

[Wilms]

154. Ding-ding

:applause:

[NoodleyAppendage]

151. Obama Robbed in NYC

This thread has been combined with another thread.

Click here to read this message in its new location.

[Bill Bored]

155. See this explanation in the Election Reform forum:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=497454&mesg_id=497534