Are those 7000 votes legit at this point?

[Ramulux]

So technically speaking have we now officially lost the Wisconsin supreme court race? Maybe I'm just in denial, but did this really just fucking happen and is it all totally legal?

[PeaceNikki]

1. Not 7k, stop saying that. It's 14,000 with a net gain of 7.7k for Prosser.

That was a whole city. If it were blue, I'd want them certified, too. It was confirmed that the 14k was missing from #'s given to media Tuesday.

The claim is that the City of Brookfield's #'s were not in the #'s given to media (mistakenlyomitted from the Access database on her PC). Unofficial #'s. During certification, they caught it yesterday and contacted GAB. Since then, they've been counting and verifying - confirming the gain of 14,314 votes.

My Democratic CD chair spoke to the Democratic rep who was overseeing.

Should it have happened? no
Is the clerk an incompetent asshole? yes
Fraud? Doesn't look that way

[elleng]

6. Thanks for this analysis, Nikki, which looks sound.

x(

[RB TexLa]

7. Why would the clerk have to give the media any information they didn't want to?

[PeaceNikki]

10. I don't understand the question.

The clerk always gives #'s to media election night. The claim is that a whole city was mistakenly omitted from totals but it was caught the next day while certifying.

[bluestate10]

22. The city has an estimated population of about 40000.

An estimated 25% of the population is under 18 years old. Yet the county delivered close to 15000 votes. You claimed in a earlier thread that the city delivered 20000 votes in 2010. 14000 plus votes works out to 48%, possible. Democrats need challenge the numbers. I watched video of the press conference today, if the democrat behind the official was the confirming democrat, I wonder. I rather see a computer expert validating votes.

[TomClash]

9. Watch her press conference

I suspect she is lying.

[PeaceNikki]

11. I did.

It was 6 miles from me.

[TomClash]

24. And you believe her?

You know much more than me but . . . I'd be surprised.

[PeaceNikki]

28. I believe my Democratic reps who are canvassing.

I think the clerk is an incompetent piece of shit.

[movonne]

13. How was she overseeing??? that woman had control of the computer

and no one else...I will not believe it if the president said it let alone a dem rep...everything can be bought and made to look good..this was in the works long before the election happened..

[PeaceNikki]

15. She counted the ballots.

Crazy, huh?

[hlthe2b]

37. She hand counted 14,000 ballots in one day?

I believe you, PeaceNikki, but I'm trying to understand the process....:shrug:

[PeaceNikki]

39. Per my Democratic Party CD chair (who I met years ago on DU and now know IRL)

She validated the information that she had. She compared the tape to the totals that she was given. That's the job of the Board of Canvass. Let me first state that in 2009 & 2010, I was the Wauk County Dem Chair and Ramona was my Vice Chair. She is a great Democrat and a retired union member. She also is the most honest person I know. (Which is why we selected her.) The board of canvass can only operate with the information they are given. If Nickolaus did something improper, we likely can catch her with technology and proper accounting. (Not to mention that Kloppenburg has the best lawyer on the planet.

[hlthe2b]

40. Thanks, PN.... Who is Kloppenburg's lawyer?

I hear Ben Ginsburg has reared his ugly little head again for Prosser. :eyes:

[PeaceNikki]

41. The attorney who represented Al Franken. Marc Elias, an attorney with Perkins Coie,

a Washington D.C.-based firm with an office in downtown Madison. Elias is the same attorney who represented Democratic challenger Al Franken in his eight-month epic recount battle with incumbent Republican Norm Coleman. Franken eventually prevailed, winning his U.S. Senate seat by 312 votes.

[keroro gunsou]

25. i quote bartcop's law

well, paraphrase it at any rate:

any time someone stands to gain through action or inaction, expect them to do what benefits them the most with the the least amount of effort involved.

the clerk is question is an incompetent, republican loyalist. there is NO way this is mere coincidence, given she's been in trouble before for election results.

[deacon]

31. +1,000

[Canuckistanian]

35. I believe Bartcop's law says..

Whenever someone makes a "mistake" that benefits them, expect them to make that same "mistake" over and over again.

[keroro gunsou]

45. eh...

close enough for rock and roll...

[midnight]

2. Deception is a cruel teacher....

[RagAss]

3. yup...in a fascist state...whatever they decide is legal.

[DoBotherMe]

4. Is the evidence of the vote legit?

That is the question. Dana ; )

[FiveGoodMen]

5. Will it even matter if they're legit?

We've seen this movie before.

[PeaceNikki]

8. Have you been paying attention the last 8 weeks? WI Dems will deal with this.

If there's fraud, we'll find it.

[upi402]

12. Republicans will fight like hell to claim they are

Dems?... well maybe in WI

[RoccoR5955]

14. She's lying about having to hit the save button

in a "regular Access file."
If it is, in fact a regular Access database, there IS NO SAVE BUTTON. ONCE DATA IS ENTERED INTO THE DATABASE, IT IS AUTOMATICALLY SAVED.

I say that with more than 20 years experience of supporting Microsoft software for 2000+ people!

Now if it's a custom app, that's different, but that's not what she said.

[Iwasthere]

17. She looked very nervous too

She was bought and I hope that she is found out.

[karnac]

20. well, don't rely on what she enters into the database.

Count the data that was supposed to be competently entered into it. if it's wrong, its wrong, period.

Remember, we are not talking about a competent person here. Uses antiquated PC equipment and probably even an older microsoft office suite. probably one without nifty auto-save features.

Personally, I think she simply inputted her data onto a Excel spreadsheet, and imported it into an Access database AFTER she made her mistake. Probably calls potato potatoe too.

[AdHocSolver]

21. Her excuse doesn't pass the smell test.

You are correct. I haven't used Access, but I did program for twenty years, and no properly designed database allows data to be lost in the way that she claims.

Either the entered data is applied to the database right away, or, in the old days, it was saved to a transaction file, in which case the main data file was updated after a group of transactions were entered. In either case, the data would not be lost in the way that she claims.

Moreover, it seems highly improbable that an entire town's votes could be "lost" without someone noticing right away.

This is a case of attempted fraud, and we can't allow these cheats to get away with it.

[SlimJimmy]

29. If it had a "save" button, then it was on a form, and that would

indicate that it was a custom app. Since we're talking inside baseball here, the programmer could have disabled the automatic save feature when moving from a record and made saving each record an option using VBA. Not smart (in my opinion) but possible.

[RoccoR5955]

38. She didn't say it was a custom app, she said it was "a regular Access file."

Having shown literally thousands of people over the years, I know the difference.

If they are using VB, it's instant fail, because Access is THE MOST HACKABLE DATABASE ON THE PLANET! It also has more bugs than a lower east side tenement.

And someone who writes in VB is NOT a programmer, they're a script kiddie!

[SlimJimmy]

42. If that is the case, then why did she say "save" button? It could not have been an off the shelf

version if she was using a form. I really don't feel like bowing to your expertise, since I've been programming very complex ACCESS apps for ten years and understand the intricacies of the program as well or better than most. And while it is not "unhackable" by any standard, it's not like she was keeping actual votes on her computer. She was tracking vote totals from various counties/districts.

[RoccoR5955]

43. maybe she was lying? n/t

[SlimJimmy]

44. That's always a distinct possibility. (nt)

[karnac]

16. Probably.

Essentially 14,000 people(a whole town) would have to have their vote disenfranchised for us to win. The error in releasing to the public WRONG and incomplete information is incompetent but legal.

what would be illegal would canvassing and certifying wrong results. The clerk could go to jail.

7000 is a huge margin to overcome just by nitpicking small votes all over the state.

[Tx4obama]

18. Prosser appears to be leading Kloppenburg by 5,510

Excerpt:

County election officials still are canvassing results.

But Wisconsin Reporter on Thursday totaled official results from 39 of the state’s 72 counties.

Twenty-three reported changes from the unofficial tallies reported Tuesday.

Adding Waukesha into those results, Prosser appears to be leading Kloppenburg by 5,510.

http://www.wisconsinreporter.com/forgotten-results-from-1-city-push-prosser-into-lead-in-supreme-court-race

[fishwax]

26. that margin would be less than 1/2 of 1%, right?

so a recount is still a possibility?

[former9thward]

30. Anyone can have a recount.

If the margin is above 0.5% they have to pay for it. The cost would be in the $17,000 range which is a trivial amount considering the amount of money that both sides spent on the race.

[Tx4obama]

32. Here's the amounts....

Between one half of 1 percent and 2 percent, the cost to the candidate is $5 per ward. If the difference is more than 2 percent, the candidate requesting the recount has to pay for all of the costs.

[Imajika]

19. Unless equal incompetence in reporting numbers...

..turns up in our favor in Dane Country or elsewhere, yes, it appears we lost.

An entire city's votes were not reported, now they have been reported. It netted Prosser such a large number of votes that it is not likely the remaining canvassing and a recount will overturn the result.

[damntexdem]

23. It is mid recount.

The difference of less than 1% started a recount. That does not necessarily mean that if a difference reaches 1% that a recount stops.

[Tx4obama]

34. Here ya go....

Between one half of 1 percent and 2 percent, the cost to the candidate is $5 per ward. If the difference is more than 2 percent, the candidate requesting the recount has to pay for all of the costs.

----

A recount has NOT yet started. What is happening now is a canvas of the votes BEFORE they are certified.
After the votes have been certified then a recount can be requested.

[fishwax]

27. wow, I've been offline all day, and didn't hear about this until logging into DU a bit ago

What a :argh:

[Tresalisa]

36. Me, too.

Just got home from work, starting dinner, and logged on to see what was up. I am :nuke:

Not disagreeing with Peace Nikki about the validity of the votes, just want to know how the hell this could happen.

[pacalo]

33. Of course it is!!!

If you ignore the FitzWalkerstan phase. :evilgrin: