Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: PapaBear3625

“the surprise discovery of 14,000 votes”

As I understand it it wasn’t a surprise discovery of votes. It was just a mistake in what was reported to the AP.

The votes were always there. Does someone have a different understanding?


10 posted on 04/09/2011 11:39:16 AM PDT by Castigar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Castigar

The liberal view is that these 14,000 votes were fraudulent. My understanding is the same as yours, however, the liberals are crying foul because they thought their candidate won the election by 200+ votes. Due to the timing of it all, they suspect fraud.

Of course, the same criteria did NOT apply in that Al Franken election in Minnesota, when new numbers, math errors, and uncounted votes kept appearing for Franken until he ended up winning.


15 posted on 04/09/2011 11:42:38 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Castigar
"Does someone have a different understanding?"

You are correct. The totals were posted to the City of Brookfield's website on election night. The only error that occurred was that which was reported to the Assoc. Press. In that report the City of Brookfield was omitted. The truth of the matter is irrelevant to the Dems who are just throwing everything at the wall in hopes that something sticks.

18 posted on 04/09/2011 11:44:00 AM PDT by gorush (History repeats itself because human nature is static)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Castigar

No.


19 posted on 04/09/2011 11:45:26 AM PDT by rabidralph (http://www.conservativedna.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Castigar

“As I understand it it wasn’t a surprise discovery of votes. It was just a mistake in what was reported to the AP”

That is completely correct, which is why this whole thing is SO hilarious! Even the Democrat in charge of that precinct said the numbers were correct.


21 posted on 04/09/2011 11:46:03 AM PDT by Sporke (USS-Iowa BB-61)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Castigar

Exactly....actually, if the stupid Dem candidate had waited unti all the votes had been checked before declaring victory by 250 votes, there would have been no problem. OF course, that was her aim... to declare victory before all the votes had been counted.

It has nothing to do with the votes not being there...it was that a whole precinct’s votes were not included on the tally sent to the AP. The votes were always on the offical lists. Even the Dem who was there the whole time agreed with the official figures. NOt only that, the press should have caught it because the city’s votes were so incredibly low compared to the rest of the turnout in the state.

Now, if they want to get upset because she made the clerical error to the AP...that’s one thing. But should her clerical error to the AP that was properly caught before the official certification results were in negate the thousands of votes cast by the city in question? This was not a case of finding votes in a box in somebody’s trunk!


32 posted on 04/09/2011 11:59:17 AM PDT by t2buckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Castigar

The only people surprised are the Democrats. But this is a good idea. Let’s hold back some votes from Republican precincts in every election. Then the Democratic frauds won’t know how many votes to fabricate.


45 posted on 04/09/2011 12:28:09 PM PDT by popdonnelly (Democrats = authoritarian socialists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Castigar
From reports I have heard you are correct. This is how the dims call a legit election into question. Pubbies...are you paying attention here? Tactics, tactics, tactics.
131 posted on 04/09/2011 3:26:21 PM PDT by Nuc 1.1 (Liberals aren't Patriots. Remember 1789!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Castigar
As I understand it it wasn’t a surprise discovery of votes. It was just a mistake in what was reported to the AP.

You are absolutely correct! The AP is not the arbiter of elections, period!

142 posted on 04/09/2011 5:13:24 PM PDT by Road Warrior ‘04 (I miss President Bush greatly! Palin in 2012! 2012 - The End Of An Error! (Oathkeeper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

To: Castigar

Nope...you have it right...


154 posted on 04/09/2011 11:09:06 PM PDT by Crim (Palin / West '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson