Posted on 01/04/2005 4:38:59 PM PST by chiller
details to come, just heard
that their investigation has revealed a substantial number of illegal votes cast by felons!
Is the "substantial number" a large enough number to throw out the vote?
Go to: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1313884/posts to learn about and possibly support the www.revotewa.com petition for a Re-Vote. Ironically, a democrat, who was disgusted by democrat candidate Chris Gregoire, initiated the petition.
I would tend to think so, unless he's been baiting the Democrats. If fraud is proven, it may not be possible to directly prove who benefitted, but the candidate who "always knew" that the third count would be in her favor when the first two hadn't might be the target of some suspicion. In that case, things may be much better for the Republicans than if the Democrats' fraud had been averted earlier on.
Thanks!
I'm starting to think that the dems have been "cooking the books" on their voter registration numbers, just like the newspapers have been caught doing with their circulation numbers.
"Unfortunately, other that possibly throwing a few token sacrifices on the fire, the 'Rats REALLY responsible will walk."
Just like at the U.N....
Do 300 people in one precinct all have identical handwriting?
It might be difficult to distinguish tell the difference between the wroting of one person and of two people, one of whom is trying to imitate the other. If two people were selected at random, however, and asked to write the same text without being given any model to copy from, it is unlikely (though not impossible) that they would look even remotely alike. If ten people are selected at random, the likelihood of all ten having similar handwriting would start to become astronomical unless all samples of handwriting were linked to some logical common model (e.g. if all the people have just finished a penmanship class).
If all samples of handwriting precisely match those of a third-grade cursive text, that would not necessarily imply they were all written by the same person (though it would seem odd). If all samples, however, have an unusual trait, that would be far more incriminating. It would still not prove that they were all written by one person, but it would strongly suggest that they weren't all written by different people.
I've thought for quite awhile that we should return to those, with a few safeguards to prevent tampering. Most notably, the machines should be constructed with two counters for each candidate lever, to count the number of ballots cast with the lever selected, and to count the number with it deselected. Further, the counters should be individually-sealed tamper-resistant modules whose operating levers should be visible to users of the machine, and should be constructed so they cannot ever be decremented (and so that they'll jam if they reach 999,999. Counters should not be zeroed at the start of each election, but rather the pre-election tallies recorded numerically by members of both parties and protographed large-format camera (I doubt that 35mm would have adequate detail).
If this were done, tampering could be made harder than with most other vote-recording methods.
I should have my petition to recall gregoire completed on Thursday and ready to file on the same day she is inaugurated; IF she is inaugurated. going to be lots of people going to prison.
I've got a busy day at the computer tomorrow. This is going to be fun. Locke, Gregoire and the CJ of the state SC, Gerry Alexander, should be worried; very worried.
Now if the forger had used a quill pen dipped in blood it would be a matter of a simple DNA test..
Add to "cooked" numbers, attendance figures at National Parks. I could write a book on what I know about this. They inflate them astronomically (and lie like rugs) so they can justify more funding.
If they do, I pledge to give up politics altogether. I will never contribute a dime to the Pubbies again. This is just too blatant. "Evil exists when good men do nothing" and all that. If the GOP lets this one go, I will conclude that the GOP is complicit in DEM criminal behavior.
>>Supposing it is ruled that such ballots were fraudulent, is there any way to correct the totals?<<
Absolutely, and glad you asked!
We will be getting a revote.
Absentee or provisional ballots - they have to be filled out - name and address, etc.
WOW! When I enter the polling place here in NC they have computer printouts of voter lists. You just give em your name, they put a check mark by it and hand you a ballot and thats it. You find a booth, vote and stick the card in the counter and leave. No signing. No ID. I've always felt it would be easy to commit fraud in this system.
Please, let's leave Poland out of this. After all they've been through with the Nazis and Soviets, the last thing they need is to be implicated in the Washington state gubernatorial fraud.
bump
Whew! This is a long thread! I didn't read it all, but I'll add this fyi, just in case:
Our info base is sketchy, but the only logical place a group of signatures could be observed for fraud would be on the absentee or provisional ballots.
Visualize looking over the log signatures for the voters who went to the polls. Would it mean anything if the handwriting of a signature on page 12 was similar to the handwriting of a signature on page 41?
No, it wouldn't. Without some way to group the signatures for inspection, this would be a futile task unless some other information of fraud was known or apparent.
However, if you have a stack of absentee or provisional ballots, the examiners can more easily review individual documents and look for trends. Those documents bearing similar handwriting cannot be examined for validity (without seeking out the voter himself), but those documents can be examined to show that the same person may have signed multiple documents.
The handwriting itself cannot be matched, since all the signatures will be of different names and not subject to the type of positive comparison needed in a courtroom, where the questioned signature is compared against a known signature, both being for the same name.
There could be more information on the documents themselves. Was the ink the same on the questioned signatures? Do the documents originate from a particular location, or were they filed on the same date? Things like that, trends, if substantial enough to create doubt about the validity of the group of suspect ballots, will invalidate the vote(s). "Courtroom proof" is not required, logically based doubt is enough.
The info reported by Fund is almost too preliminary to even be mentioned, unless the similarities were just obvious, such as if the defrauder(s) signed them "en masse", one after the other. Visual observation of similarities would be likely in that case, but, IMO, that's about the only scenario that fits the info supposedly coming from Fund.
I'm 60/40 on whether this whole deal is a hoax or not. (60% that it's a hoax.) We should know pretty soon, I guess.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.