Is something fishy going on?
Posted on 11/09/2010 9:15:26 AM PST by Syncro
By SHIRA TOEPLITZ |
11/9/10 11:01 AM EST Updated:
11/9/10 11:40 AM EST
Election officials will tally an additional 30,500 absentee ballots Tuesday in the first stage of what is expected to be a days-long process to determine the winner of the Alaska Senate race.
Republican Joe Miller is hopeful that he can close the 13,439-vote gap between him and the number of ballots cast for write-in candidates, most of which presumably are intended for Sen. Lisa Murkowski.
Alaska Division of Elections Director Gail Fenumiai told POLITICO in an e-mail that election results will start updating to include the new absentee ballot totals around 6 p.m. EST.
Winning a significant portion of the absentee ballots that will be opened Tuesday would certainly boost Miller, but the real battle will begin Wednesday, when election officials begin sorting at least 83,201 write-in votes and determining Murkowski's final tally.
*snip*
"So when you add the numbers from the absentees, from those ballots that are going to be counted on the write-ins, we're right in there," Miller told CNN. "We believe that there is a real reason for cautious optimism."
*snip*
The ballot-counting is expected to continue next week: Additional questioned ballots are scheduled to be counted Friday, with more absentee and questioned ballots to be tallied early next week.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Republican Joe Miller Already Calling Foul Play In Alaska Ballot Count
The write-in ballots haven't even been opened yet, but Joe Miller is already calling foul play in the vote count for the Alaska Senate race.
Miller (R) is the Tea Party-backed candidate battling write-in candidate and incumbent Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) for the seat. Enough write-in ballots were cast last Tuesday to force a count of the votes to determine how many were for Murkowski. Miller has received 69,762 votes, while 83,201 write-in ballots have been counted so far. And with Miller and Murkowski already assembling legal teams, the fight over the seat promises to be a doozy.
Which may be why Miller has already started to raise questions about the fairness of the count.
First, he released a statement objecting to the decision to move up the count to this week. Originally, the Division of Elections announced that the write-in votes would be counted on November 18. But last week they pushed it up to this Wednesday, the 10th.
"Given the geographical and financial challenges of getting observer teams assembled in Juneau," Miller said in the statement, "the earlier date makes it extremely difficult to honor the process, set out by law. The Miller Campaign is concerned with ensuring a fair and accurate counting of the ballots."
Levin had the Lt. Governor for AK on last night. Needless to say, the Lt. Gov. will not be coming back on as he sounded clueless and arrogant.
Correct me if I’m wrong - but in a state like Alaska, I’d tend to think that absentee ballots would heavily favor Joe Miller.
I’m sincerely hoping that a lot of Murkowski’s ballots get tossed out due to mispelling of her name. I had heard mispellings of a candidate’s name was ground for the ballot not being counted.
I think Miller will get the lions share of those 30,000 absentee ballots. I doubt seriously that those absentee ballots which only had the printed names of Miller and the Dem. will have Murkowski’s name written in very often.
1) Assume, M'ski gets 95% of the write in votes (the actual number is likely less).
2) Then assume 95% of those pass inspection (only 5% fail the spelling or marking requirements).
3)The math shows M'ski ends up with 75,089 votes or a lead of 5,337 votes.
Those are optimistic numbers for M'ski, but if they hold up JoeM would have to get 5,338 more votes than M'ski in the 37,000 absentee ballots - certainly doable.
These assumptions did not take into account any write in votes for JoeM.
Is something fishy going on?
Be entertaining.
Yet there was a reporter on Fox from Alaska saying Miller’s chances of overcoming her lead were slim at best.
Write in votes simply makes it easier to be “fixed”.
The GOP has already sent their top voter type lawyer up to Alaska to help her steal this election
She already bought one judge who ruled that her name doesn't have to be spelled right. An illegal ruling as the law says that the name has to be spelled right.
In other words, a ballot with Joe Miller written in could be interpreted as a misspelling of Murkowski.
Also it was stated in one of the articles above that write in votes for Miller would count for him
The polls have to be watched real closely.
That's why Miller complained about them moving up the counting date from next week to this week. The opposition doesn't want to give time for impartial poll watchers to get to all the outlying areas to keep Murkowski's dem type lackeys from stealing votes.
How did Maxine Waters get involved, especially with Mitch McConnell in the background! LOL
If she wins, will this be the very first time someone from the Write-In Party will have won an election?
The reporter in question here is assuming ALL the write in votes are for M'ski and assuming ALL will be valid as well.
Even if all the write in votes are for M'ski and even if all are vaidated as well, JoeM may very well overcome the total with the absentee ballots as they did not include M'ski as a choice IIRC.
I am assuming the original 42,000 was sized down to 31,000 because the dem received the others. Joe Miller could have 20-25,000 of those absentees!!!
It will be fun to watch her go down after she as been acting like the winner since election day!
Strom Thurmond was first elected to the U.S. Senate as a write-in.
If everything you say is true (and I believe you), Miller ought to go to court on this.
It sounds like his rights (as well as the rights of many Alaskans) are being trampled on.
Why the hell do we even bother to have laws when a judge can say “Oh, I see that Alaskan law requires that the name of the write-in candidate be spelled exactly - but gosh, I feel differently!”.
Why the hell do we even bother to have laws when a judge can say “Oh, I see that Alaskan law requires that the name of the write-in candidate be spelled exactly - but gosh, I feel differently!”.Yes, it is a shame that judges can be persuaded to rule on something that is a solid law, and change the rules to benefit those that wish to steal elections.
I think we are going to see many states pass laws to prevent voter fraud, in fact Texas has one in the works as well as other states.
Calif passed 187 in the nineties that forbids illegals to take advantage of education, welfare and other benefits that are there for citizens and citizens only.
One judge said it was unconstitutional and stopped the implementation of it.
Calif would be in pretty good shape if the people's will wasn't unconstitutionally thwarted by one corrupt judge.
There is at least one state that passed a similar law, and the majority of illegals left that state and the economy improved markedly. I forget which state it was.
She was certainly confident the other day on t.v., as if it weren’t possible that she could lose - EVER! Murkowski even sniffed that Palin wasn’t suitable for President because she wasn’t “worldly” enough. - She came across as a snotty brat in the interview who thought she was a shoe-in.
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.