How would you select an Ohio precinct to recount?

[kiwi_expat]

If you were trying to find a precinct with tabulator fraud in Hamilton or Clermont counties, which precinct would you recount (under the Ohio Sunshine laws)?

(1) The precinct with the greatest deviation between the Kerry NEP RAW percent and the Kerry canvass (vote) percent; or

(2) The precinct with the greatest deviation between Kerry NEP final WEIGHTED percent and the Kerry canvass percent; or

(3) The precinct with the greatest deviation between Kerry NEP RAW percent and the Kerry NEP final WEIGHTED percent; or

(4) The precinct with the greatest BUSH canvass percent?


Cheers!

[garybeck]

1. the one with the stickers on the ballots

that was claremont, right?

[kiwi_expat]

2. Yes it was Clermont. But I don't know the precincts involved.

I checked Raw Story and Vote Cobb to try to find the precincts - to no avail.

Would you randomly select one of the 30-some precincts involved in the Greens recount? I suppose one could quickly examine the ballots for each of those precincts - without taking the time to actually count the ballots - until some stickers were discovered.

Actually, that is not a bad idea. And a precinct could be selected at random to recount (from the Greens-recount precincts) - just to keep the BoE staff from pulling the sticker ballots before the examination.

By George I think we've got it. Thanks, garybeck !


I'll check with ***our hero***, liam_laddie, who would be doing the inspections/recount, to see if it is feasible.

[garybeck]

9. are the precincts mentioned in the affidavits?

these might help:

http://rawstory.rawprint.com/105/ohio_election_0126_s1.php

maybe you could talk to some of these people directly. their names (and addresses) are given.

[emlev]

3. I'm very interested in hearing whether you're able to get access

to ballots to inspect/recount. Will you please keep me posted?

[kiwi_expat]

4. Liam_laddie will post the details of his recount.

So far, the Hamilton County staff have been very helpful to him. He has been to their offices a couple of times, I believe. And they have given him copies of various materials.

They have indicated that he can inspect the (Cincinnati 4-M) ballots. There has been a delay because of preparations for a local election, but we are hopeful they will let him do the recount. He is considering recounting a second HC precinct, as well.


Clermont county might not be so cooperative. :-)

[garybeck]

5. emlev as you know i'm with you on this

let the sunshine in

[adolfo]

6. Follow Greens Recount

The precincts/county with the greatest complaints from the original Greens recount team.

[kiwi_expat]

7. The Greens complained plenty about Clermont county.

Unfortunately, they didn't specify which of the 30-some precincts had the problems. (See #2, above.)

One of the Greens' complaints was that the recount precincts were not selected randomly. Clermont officials chose the smallest precincts, because they reasoned that the smallest precincts would have the fewest problems - and thus would be least likely to trigger a full manual recount.

That reasoning would indicate that recounting the BIGGEST precinct would be best for us.

[johnaries]

8. I'd ask Blackwell which precinct to count,

and then count any precinct BUT that one! :evilgrin:

[KaliTracy]

10. I'd opt for stickers area first, if possible . Also would look at #1. I

noticed this week when I voted in our local election that the Precinct was STAMPED on the back of the punch card. Now, I have to be honest and say before the General Election fiasco, I never even thought to Look at the back of my punch card. Is that how they did it during the general election?

What about counting 1 or 2 precincts that were housed in the same area? Especially since there were candidate rotations per prencint?

[mgr]

11. I hope this is not a poll

Kiwi--Boy you can ask an unfair question, are you limited in time so you can only address one category, or is this a teaser? What assumptions are you making about tabulator fraud--local, statewide?

Categories 2 and 3 are probably meaningless since the reweighing would smooth the local variability, which could be your clue to tabulator issues. So I am sure that if this is a teaser these are where you found it. (smile)

The thing that popped out at me with the 4E precinct was the 10 vote gap between the total for president and the total for senator. The argument that went around is all you had to do was to fudge about 10 votes to bush at each precinct, and viola, 160,000 votes.

I would recommend that you look at 1 and 4, and something that falls in between for each county. What you need to find is a trend, and it won't be discernable in a single precinct. Three will help to fix a pattern, and may allow you to look at precincts not part of the exit poll for confirmation.

If you are just trying to establish that tabulator fraud was within the exit poll, #4.

Mike

[kiwi_expat]

14. Our VERY generous recounter, liam_laddie, does have his limits.

He is already committed to Cincy4M, but has indicated he might consider doing one more in Hamilton County - plus perhaps checking out the stickers in Clermont County.

Cincy4M happened to meet criteria 1, 2 and 3 for Hamilton County.

Your suggestion of 3 precincts to discern a trend does make sense.

Cheers.

p.s. What assumptions would YOU make about tabulator fraud? We just figure that the best way to detect it is by recounts. But we have no specific hypothesis re. how it might have occurred.

[Chi]

12. I'd pick one of these....

I'd pick one of these, for being highest % uncounted Kerry votes,
they were obviously targeted.

Precinct Ballots Cast Uncounted Bush Kerry

CINCINNATI 17-A 168 32 19.05% 4 130
CINCINNATI 24-E 283 40 14.13% 49 193
CINCINNATI 26-D 302 39 12.91% 31 232
CINCINNATI 13-E 400 50 12.50% 18 329
CINCINNATI 24-J 408 49 12.01% 19 339
http://web.northnet.org/minstrel/cincinnati.htm

[kiwi_expat]

16. Thank you for the link regarding Hamilton County under/over votes !

One of the main purposes of the Greens recount was to count the under/over votes. But county officials took great pains to ignore the under/over votes in the 3% recount - to avoid a mis-match with the official totals and thus avoid a complete manual recount of their county.

Greg Palast's original estimate indicated that, if the voter intent had been considered on all the Ohio over/under votes and if provisional ballots had not been rejected for being cast at the wrong precinct, Kerry would have been within shouting distance of the White House (with or without tabulator fraud being discovered).

Thanks again, Chi !

[Chi]

17. Always glad to assist.

Thanx for all you do, I admire your effort (and those around you).

I don't recall that Palast conclusion...I'll have to read up, got a handy link by chance (or a couple of keywords to search by)?

Thanx in Advance

[kiwi_expat]

18. I hope I didn't take too many liberties with Palast's statement.

I was referring to his original comments, right after the election. (I'm sure you read them.)

I tried to include updated implications of his statement, under cover of the word "indicated". I hope Mr. Palast would forgive me, if I went too far. :-)


http://www.tompaine.com/articles/kerry_won_.php

"Kerry Won. . .
Greg Palast
November 04, 2004


"Bush won Ohio by 136,483 votes. In the United States, about 3 percent of votes cast are voided-known as "spoilage" in election jargon-because the ballots cast are inconclusive. Drawing on what happened in Florida and studies of elections past, Palast argues that if Ohio's discarded ballots were counted, Kerry would have won the state. Today, the Cleveland Plain Dealer reports there are a total of 247,672 votes not counted in Ohio, if you add the 92,672 discarded votes plus the 155,000 provisional ballots. So far there's no indication that Palast's hypothesis will be tested because only the provisional ballots are being counted...."

[Chi]

20. I actually just forgot about that.

Musta left my memory when the provi's were counted.

[MissWaverly]

13. the one with the fake terror alert

w fake fbi agent
w lock out of witnesses
I think that's Warren

[KaliTracy]

21. counting the actual ballots there might work though I'd suggest

someone go with liam with a camcorder to record reaction if he is turned down.

just because it was such a secretative place -- and because the poll books have been seen as suspicious...

[TruthIsAll]

15. #3

/

[rightfoot]

19. I'd start with looking at any precinct with something missing

like discrepancy in poll book compared to number of votes, or late arrival of results, or anything at all strange in the records.

Does Ohio have straight party voting? I'd look for something odd in any of those stats, if it has the straight party system.