Why are there no concerned citizens organizing recounts?

There were a few posts awhile back with the idea of going to the individual counties in Ohio and selecting a precinct that looks suspect and doing a hand count. The ballots are available for review and most of Ohio is not touchscreen voting. Why don't we see more enthusiasm and activism with regards to this idea? It may not definitively answer the question of fraud, but it would certainly give us a better understanding of what we are dealing with in Ohio. I could foresee a situation that if say 30 precincts were recounted and ALL were off AND all favored Bush, that Conyers and Boxer would make this fact heard and push for further independent review of more precincts in Ohio and around the country. Then maybe the MSM would be forced really cover this critical issue.

I look everyday on DU hoping that activists in Ohio will start the process of the aforementioned. This will be key in continuing the fight to get serious election reform.

But who's to say they haven't "replaced" the original ballots in the counties that were stolen?

that anything will be found in such recounts, and those who do find it a lot easier to type away on DU instead of actually doing the work.

People tried to recount Ohio and were obstructed at every turn.

any private citizen in Ohio can request to hand-recount any precinct. It doesn't cost much either. No one is doing that. Why do you think that is?

depressed and discouraged. That's what would be expected given the trauma since 9-11, when the world turned upside down. We have had to face things about our government and our fellow citizens that are almost unspeakable. I believe the day will come when these reactionary
responses will give way to more constructive activist moves toward
regaining Democracy and fellowship in the U.S. Right now we mostly feel like people who have been thrown into jail without recourse.
Take heart, a better day will come. Americans have many faults, but
cowardice isn't one of them. They will fight for what they believe in.

...but it's too much of a leap to believe that widespread election fraud could take place here.

They don't know how easy it is to manipulate central tabulators.

That's why we must get the message out and repeat, repeat, repeat...

included with the problem before they will get on board. If they feel the situation is hopeless they will be very reluctant to admit the problem exists in the first place. When we draw attention to election problems we need to offer potential remedies to the discussion as well.

As I posted on another thread:

We are challenging some very dearly held beliefs about elections and democracy. I think that most people have faith in their democracy (rightly or wrongly). They will be very unwilling to question this faith at first. They will need two things to begin to seriously question the validity of Nov’04 or any other election. One they need to keep hearing about suppression, bias, irregularities, and fraud. Secondly as they slowly assimilate this information they will begin to look for some way out of the mess, some hopeful vision of how their faith can be restored if they take the big step of questioning it. For many (most?) people it is just too scary to question their beliefs about democracy and elections in America.

The effort to bring questions and information to the general public’s attention must continue and grow stronger and be relentless. But it will be for naught if there is no leadership willing to take on the fight and offer some kind of vision for its success. The posters here are critical thinkers; inquiring minds willing to ask hard questions and consider even more difficult answers to those questions. The general public is not. If they are to question their democracy and get on board comprehensive reform they will need leadership that points the way to a solution.

It's looking (to me at least) that the real issue in Ohio was voter supression. No matter how many times you count the ballots, you won't see the ballots from the people who couldn't wait four hours to vote in the first place.

That said, it would still be a good idea to do it. There have been a few scattered private recounts (as reported previously here), and they have turned up small (but consistant) differnces. As I recall, it took part of a day and cost about $50 to recount a precinct.

--MarkusQ

the recount you think about turned up nothing. No "small but consistent" differences. See www.recountflorida.com

I can see why no one wants to do private recounts. There are people who are 100% sure that there was fraud in counting the votes. Just like Ida Briggs was 100% sure that there was fraud in counting the votes in New Hampshire. Ida did something about it, she convinced Nader to go and recount some of the most problematic precincts. Result - huge disappointment for Ida Briggs, the recounts turned up nothing. It is probably very painful to have your 100% belief shattered. You can't blame people for not wanting to recount because they don't want this to happen to them.

you should check your facts more closely.

From the site you linked to:

http://www.recountflorida.com/reports/report1.htm

The offical count consistantly showed morevotes than the recount.

--MarkusQ

http://www.recountflorida.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=14&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

After they counted absentees etc. the results matched almost exactly - with 1 vote difference I think.

Seriously.
Honestly, I didn't much either, until I found DU and read all I could here.
Most people don't read DU, or other bloggers.

I would do that. I'm not in Ohio.

all over the country - on the scale of millions of votes. So chances are there was fraud in your own precinct. You can recount your own precinct.

Look at the posts on this forum here:

"We must not give up on trying to convince key people of election fraud"

"WE CAN´T ACCEPT THE LATEST FRAUD"

and the endless "numerical analyses" of exit polls.

Yet how telling is it that when there is actually a way to prove fraud unequivocally by going and personally recounting ballots, no one is doing that.

if we can do it in New Jersey. But first, I need to figure out if there was fraud, where it most likely was.

Poll books also took place prior to January 6th. Don't know outcome of what we were looking for in the Canvass (and I'm not at liberty to speak about it in case things are still being looked at) -- but as Andy posted, there were pages ripped out of poll books, and signatures that didn't coordinate with original signatures. That's not insignificant, given that the numbers were so odd there to begin with.

Some of us have day jobs that they wish desparately they could take a sabatical from and do the work that needs to be done. I am willing to be a "weekend warrior" -- not sure that that's possible with what needs to be done.

COUNTY MB Bush Kerry MAP Total UV K.-C.

Auglaize 66 17,016 5,903 47 23,032 263 -1642
Butler 412 109,872 56,243 286 166,813 2,165 -5316
Clermont 149 62,949 25,887 89 89,074 733 -4181
Darke 82 18,306 7,846 79 26,313 709 -1175
Highland 41 12,211 6,194 35 18,481 383 -104
Mercer 74 15,650 5,118 46 20,888 443 -1801
Miami 103 33,992 17,606 56 51,757 344 -164
Putnam 46 14,370 4,392 40 18,848 320 -454
Shelby 56 16,204 6,535 60 22,855 432 -1508
Van Wert 26 10,678 4,095 28 14,827 698 -492
Warren 193 68,037 26,044 144 94,418 1,090 -2426

Where MB = Michael Badnarik
MAP = Michael Anthony Peroutka
Total = Total number of votes for president
UV = Number of people voted but didn't vote for president
K.-C. = Kerry's votes - C. Ellen Connally's votes. That means
Connally got more votes than Kerry there.

NOTE: The votes for David Keith Cobb (WI), Richard A. Duncan (WI),
James Harris (WI), John T. Parker (WI), Joe Schriner (WI) and
Thomas F. Zych (WI) were not included as the numbers are small.

To take one precinct where we are sure there was hanky-panky, take the poll books (hopefully intact and truthful), and ask everyone in one precinct how they voted?

Is that in the realm of possibility?

to make sure that people you ask will answer thruthfully, or even answer you at all, of course it is possible. But there is no way to ascertain that, is there?

I mean, if the point is to determine if the election was fair or not, I cannot imagine people who voted for Bush would say they had voted for Kerry. They would not want to see that happen. And Kerry voters, same thing.

What would anyone have to gain by lying?

who tell you to go jump in a lake, we have secret ballots for a reason?

Kerry's lawyer wanted to exam all 94,488 undervotes in Ohio in Dec.
Can we verify some undervotes at precincts level? For example, in
Franklin county, OH, there are 7748 people voted without voting for
the president. While precinct 12101B (GAHANNA 1 B) gave Bush extra
3893 votes when only 638 people voted. Could these extra votes for
W shifted from the undervotes? The following are top 30 precincts in
Franklin county with highest undervotes, as of initial vote counting
on 11/3:

code precinct Kerry Bush undervote

01066E COLUMBUS 66 E 347 310 49
01008B COLUMBUS 08 B 467 233 40
01051C COLUMBUS 51 C 640 60 37
01025E COLUMBUS 25 E 600 30 34
05000B CLINTON TWP B 343 239 32
01011D COLUMBUS 11 D 334 253 30
01038A COLUMBUS 38 A 438 221 30
01021C COLUMBUS 21 C 359 225 29
01025G COLUMBUS 25 G 818 91 29
01048C COLUMBUS 48 C 493 89 29
09102B GROVE CITY 2 B 286 477 29
01023D COLUMBUS 23 D 501 239 28
01031A COLUMBUS 31 A 572 97 28
01057G COLUMBUS 57 G 257 250 28
01052C COLUMBUS 52 C 276 254 27
09104B GROVE CITY 4 B 300 499 27
08000D HAMILTON TWP D 218 327 27
01006C COLUMBUS 06 C 502 34 26
01007E COLUMBUS 07 E 774 40 26
01013B COLUMBUS 13 B 440 28 26
08000A HAMILTON TWP A 302 388 26
06000D FRANKLINTON D 297 322 25
01015B COLUMBUS 15 B 325 257 24
01035B COLUMBUS 35 B 695 27 24
01047A COLUMBUS 47 A 442 173 24
11000F MADISON TWP F 415 430 24
01014A COLUMBUS 14 A 717 190 23
01020B COLUMBUS 20 B 814 170 23
01045F COLUMBUS 45 F 317 203 23
01058A COLUMBUS 58 A 525 352 23

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1116

To uncover real hard evidence of what exactly happened, where, on what scale, who was organizing it much more of this kind would be needed.

It is a bit frustrating for those observing from a distance that we don't know or can't find out whether investigations of the kind needed are going on in Ohio, or are being planned, and if so, what.

It may be that great work is being done (e.g. by Phillips and his people), but kept quiet for strategic or legal reasons, but it may also be that we don't hear anything because there is no activity anymore.

Perhaps someone on the ground could give us a clue?

Provisional ballots are more likely to be discounted and temptations to rig & cheat.

ALSO MORE CHANCE TO CREATE DOCUMENTATION OF RIGGING AND CHEATING !

THANK YOU Lucas county investigators, the state senator Theresa Fedor is one of my hero's also.

ALERT here comes Arkansas- vote migration, excellent article

Arkansas in 2004: Did Bush Really Win?
by Max Standridge
January 24, 2005

Past Election Patterns, Pre-Election, Tracking and Exit Poll Patterns, Bill Clinton, Vote Discrepancies, Undervotes, and A "Convenient" Power Failure in Little Rock, All Combine to Suggest Otherwise

(snippet)
To any or all: Were computer technicians employed to re-boot and re-activate the computers after the power failure? If so, what companies were the technicians affiliated with, and do you have any records as to their names, schedules and activities that day? Do you have any contact information for the elections offices personnel in the West Little Rock polling places that were affected that day, and/or any contact information as to the computer technicians employed to ensure proper re-activation of the affected computers?

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/11...

RESIST the Privatizing of Truth

Recounting faked, rigged and padded ballots is not the answer. We need to look at poll books and match the ballots, then canvas individuals to see if that matches. Check the precinct count against the official state count. We need full investigations. Not the same kind of rigged recount Blackwell tried to pass of as fair. I'm not sure what Ida paid for, but were the machines doing the counting checked? Were the poll books checked? Were people canvassed? I really have a problem with simply recounting the same rigged ballots.

mandates public access to the ballots and to the poll books. You can recount and examine the poll books. You can canvas anyone you like at any time, limited only by whether the people answer you. All you have to do is come up with money to pay the hourly rates of the county employees who will handle the ballots and poll books while you're counting (since you're not allowed to touch them).

request and then get back to us.

You will see what we are talking about. IS this the best talking point you guys can come up with? :shrug:

claims that there is massive vote-counting fraud. You're the one who thinks that, you should be the one who would want to recount - instead you keep trying to come up with reasons why not to do it. Why is that?

first we need to find out for sure if the ballots are accessible while there are ongoing lawsuits. we need to be sure before people start driving across the state to do a recount and end up not even being able to do it.

now how to find that out for sure is the question.

once we know that FOR SURE, and if it is possible to do, then those WHO CAN AFFORD TO EITHER TAKE OFF WORK, or those who are not scraping by just to eat, preferably citizens who LIVE in Ohio - maybe then there can be some kind of organizing to get it done.

Have you posted in the Ohio forum yet? I would think you'd have more success there, being those people DO live in Ohio.

but this is the third time i have said this to you. why are you still arguing about it with merh?

ballots, despite the fact that others have told you that (1) Blackwell has been preventing recounts in any precinct except his chosen precincts (2) the on going litigation is relevant to the options available (3) YOU HAVEN'T A CLUE AS TO WHAT ANYONE IS DOING IN ANY STATE RELATIVE TO A RECOUNT!

As one poster pointed out to you in the other thread where you continue to post this "talking point" (careful, don't spill your kool aid), there is a woman that is doing recounts in Nevada.

The problem with recounts is very simple - NOT ALL STATES, COUNTIES, PRECINCTS HAD PAPER BALLOTS THAT CAN BE RECOUNTED! That is why the litigation regarding the computers is important.

SO, if you insist that no one wants to recount because they know that ta recount will not prove that the election was stolen, I INSIST YOU FIND OUT HOW EASY it is to get the requested recount.

BTW: The lady in Nevada had to sue the SOS to be afforded the opportunity to RECOUNT!


As I posted before - try to get to know some of the facts before you runneth off at the mouth!

1. Blackwell cannot prevent public access like he did before because before the "canvassing period" was in force, and Blackwell was within the law to prevent access. Not so now.

2. In the ongoing litigation no orders were issued to prevent public access to ballots AFAIK. If you know differently, please point to one.

3. Most counties in Ohio have paper ballots that can be recounted. Just a few had DREs.

State laws and Federal laws. He can do it because the AG and the prosecutors are partisan and the FBI is controlled by members of the weeds admin.

Those are not talking points, those are the facts.

Guess what, the precincts that were stolen are the ones without paper ballots. How hard is that to understand?

in the precincts that did not DREs there was no fraud?

repug SOS's continue to try to prevent recounts!

You know, you need to go read Conyer's report. Maybe then you will get a better understanding of the issues!

with the "official" recount of the paper ballots in OH, then I would presume you would be interested in another recount, with no machines whatsoever, that you can fully control. Why this idea is met with such hostility here I can't figure out. Everybody is coming up with (bogus) reasons why it can't be done - even before it is tried. Can you explain why you're opposed to it?

was no fraud and that you can conduct a recount. So you go ahead and make the arrangements and let me know how it went when you tried to arrange for the recount.

The idea is not met with hostilitiy, it is your accusataions that no one has tried to conduct a recount (Bullshit) and that everyone knows a recount would be fruitless.

AGAIN, go read Conyers report and pay attention to his hearings in Florida.

Pay attention to the woman in Nevada.

AND BY THE WAY, did you know that the independent recount in 2000 proved that Gore won the presidency?

"recounting will prove that there was no fraud"? Never once did I say that. What I do say is that this is the only solid, surefire way to PROVE that massive fraud has occurred - recount and find big discrepancies.

As for the statement of mine that no one is doing such recounts, it is not an "accusation", it is a statement of fact. Show me someone who is doing it (apart from the guys in Florida who recounted those two precincts that I posted about). Have not seen the URL for the Nevada case, do you have it?

I don't know whether everyone knows such a recount would be fruitless. I think it would be. Do you think it would be fruitless?

Yes, the recount in 2001 showed that depending on what rules you recounted under, Gore would have won the presidency in most cases. Even more reason to do the recounts today, don't you think?

I can see why no one wants to do private recounts. There are people who are 100% sure that there was fraud in counting the votes. Just like Ida Briggs was 100% sure that there was fraud in counting the votes in New Hampshire. Ida did something about it, she convinced Nader to go and recount some of the most problematic precincts. Result - huge disappointment for Ida Briggs, the recounts turned up nothing. It is probably very painful to have your 100% belief shattered. You can't blame people for not wanting to recount because they don't want this to happen to them.

I am sure there was fraud - every election has fraud. What I am also pretty sure about is that there was no massive vote-counting fraud.

Because I don't believe there was massive vote-counting fraud and the personal recount would be an exercise in futility.
(my favorite)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x303656

"depending on what rules you recounted under" - this line just cracks me up! Who are you interning for anyway? I can guess with this type of statement.


I have often wondered if they teach how to lie at the kool aid parties or do they serve kool aid at the "how to lie" seminars? :shrug:

an exercise in futility because it would not find any serious discrepancies, but that would not "prove there was no fraud". That's a leap of logic that you seem to be making. You cannot prove a negative.

As for Gore's recount - that statement of mine "depending on what rules you recounted under" is factually correct. Not sure what you're objecting to there.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A12623-2001Nov11¬Found=true

Your positions are contradictory and, if you believe there was no fraud, why are you in this forum?

and if you just want an echo chamber, maybe you should look for one.

You have not demonstrated anything but a negative position on the voting issues that exist and MUST BE REFORMED.

Have you read Conyers report?

Since you are so big on URL's, you might want to check out this thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=304358#304484

I find it funny how folks that get cornered by their own posts and find themselves in a position where they cannot defend their positions turn on the one asking them legitimate questions.

in that last sentence of your post.

Yes I have seen the URL. It is ridiculous that we have places in this country where no means of recount is possible. California and other states should outlaw such methods of voting. This should be something that the electoral reform people should concentrate on, not the ridiculous exit poll analyses that "prove" that fraud occurred.

Can you answer them?

who appointed you the Grand Inquisitor.

:D


just kidding

you are so quick to challenge others for their action or inaction, yet you won't answer simple questions. :shrug: Go figure!

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

My questions are legitimate questions related to the forum.

Have you read Conyer's report?
Why are you frequenting this forum if you don't believe there is fraud? If not fraud, why is reform necessary?

1. Yes I did. Lots of evidence of screwed up elections. Very little proof of fraud.

2. Because this forum is not only about fraud. I think election reform is necessary, not because there was fraud, but because the election system is screwed up beyond belief. It is not a system as much as a patchwork of kludges that "just growed".

3. If you stop addressing people in an adversarial manner, you may get more answers to your questions.

have been working hours on this for months, then you might not find replies to your posts as adversarial.

Let me know when you get an answer from the Ohio SOS about whether or not they will allow a recount and what they require. I mean it only seems appropriate that you make that type of inquiry before you accuse others of being too lazy or too afraid to conduct a recount.

A URL that you might find interesting!

http://www.ag.state.oh.us/sections/opinions/2004/2004%2D050.pdf

Since the federal case is still pending and it involves a request that the election materials for the 2004 election be seized for purposes of inspection and the Triad officials be deposed, it would appear that Blackwell can use this opinion to prevent recounts.

There is also the matter of the case filed by the AG seeking sanctions against Arnebeck and the other attorneys that filed in the Ohio Supreme Court. The AG is accusing Arnebeck of filing a frivilous lawsuit, so one would assume that Arnebeck's defense is that the lawsuit, if timely ruled on, would have been legitimate, therefore, due process would allow him the opportunity to depose parties and conduct discovery in an attempt to prove the validity of his case.

Again, litigation is on going and under the AG's opinion, it is possible that Blackwell can deny independent recounts until the litigation is complete or dismissed. That might be why Petro filed for the sanctions. :shrug: It might have been his way of preventing recounts and punishing Arnebeck.

Here is the link to the Ohio AG opinions. It is a very easy search to find all sorts of interesting opinions.

http://www.ag.state.oh.us/sections/opinions/ag_opinions.htm

Enjoy!

Ohio. There was another thread on here where people were offering to help pay for the cost at $20 each, which I also offered to do. I never heard any more from that thread. I am still willing to do both count and pay $20 to help with a total hand recount, if someone here in Ohio is willing to organize. I think we should count every vote in every county.

I live in a town of 50,000 in WI. I was a ward leader and I would not go to the city clerks office and ask to count the ballots as I would be afraid of reprecussions on my kids. If you don't live in a "smaller" town it is hard to imagine. When I lived in the Los Angeles area of CA I would not have believed this was true but it is. Everyone is related or knows someone someplace and you pay a very large price for "stirring up trouble". For most of us that volunteered to be ward leaders that was a huge deal. We were actually wearing campaign buttons and talking to people about their vote, it is radical for here, no joke.

The most response I have gotten has been doing an email, letter writing , phone call type campaign. I organized it and send all the items on to my group and they do the action items.

www.caseohio.org

I think they maybe have something going along these line.

though I've not found a link about it besides the post it came from on this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=299650&mesg_id=299650&page=

<snip><snip><snip>

"On January 30 there will be a meeting at (time and location in Columbus to be announcd) to meet the new attorneys and launch a consolidated campaign. They will present a range of possible legal options and offer recommendations as to how to proceed. We are depending on your input. This will be a time to share your ideas and help determine our course. We will establish working committees which will handle various ongoing tasks. The new legal team will issue regular updates and maintain a website for announcements. This will be a true community effort where everyone's contribution is valued. Please attend. If you can't be present, call (614) 946 -3834 (this number can be used temporarily until we establish a voice message line) to be added to our contact list. Someone will get back to you promptly. We look forward to working together and continuing this groundswell for electoral reform.
Regards,
Evan Davis"


anyone know anything more about it?

Counterproductive, wasteful, obvious, lame, ultimately inconsequential.

Have fun.

help us sharpen our argument and bolster our positions. I am hoping he takes the time to find out if independent recounts are allowed yet. I doubt he himself will do it, I would think he will ask others to do it for him and he will only focus on 1 county as opposed to all of the Ohio counties.

Just wait and see, good things can come from those with negative motives. :evilgrin:

So far, imho nothing has even bubbled up to 'requires restating'.

{edit}I'm not claiming 'qziyuqh' has done anything 'alertable', just illustrating my point.{/edit}

:thumbsup: Have you read this thread yet. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x304358 I do like this article and will definitely be following this story.

:loveya:

I am trying to think of his name, but one such recount is being continued by the gentleman who was on a starvation strike concerning the election of 2004. I will see if I can find his name and repost it. He is still in Ohio recounting. I met him at the RedefeatBush Counter-Ag in DC on the 20th done by David Lytel.

Addition: John B. Kenney is his name with web site as follows, HungerForDemocracy.org. Also, he backs the paper ballot.

:kick: