Here’s one thing I’ve wondered about: surely it should be possible to review the pattern of changes or “corrections” after the original vote totals were submitted and study them in comparison with the party affiliation of the officials involved etc.
It should not be the case that all of the “corrections” are favoring one candidate, right? If numerous precincts have “corrections” that all favor the Demagogue candidate then that should be a prima facie indication that something suspicious is going on....
The first count is almost always the correct (or most correct count). Even if vote counts were indeed changing, they should change up or down proportionally for each candidate. In these cases, they seen to be change for only Frankin; in counties that appear to be Democrat counties where there should have been no initial errors. There is no plausable reason they would have written 27 rather than 127. They would have double checked. Coleman needs to hire lawyers not poll watchers. With this much discrepancy, they need to do an entire do over. Then hire poll watchers to descend on each of the various precincts.
“It should not be the case that all of the ‘corrections’ are favoring one candidate, right? If numerous precincts have ‘ corrections’ that all favor the Demagogue candidate then that should be a prima facie indication that something suspicious is going on....”
You have a problem when people like Lori Swanson and Mark Ritchie are in positions of responsibility.