The 2007 VA GOP memo for the 2008 primary asked for volunteers to do a manual ‘hard count’ of the sheets. The volunteers basically eyeballed each sheet to toss out obvious fakes like ‘Mickey Mouse’.
The VA GOP has said no more than 33% of sigs were ever discarded using the non-computer method.
Newt and Perry’s sigs were apparently checked using a new computer-based system to cross reference of names and addresses against voter rolls.
It appears the computer program was quite picky, as Perry’s count dropped from 12000 to 6000 (50% disqualification rate).
We dont know what Mitt’s disqualification number would have been under the new system.
I’ve seen no actual testimony or report that verifies your claim that they basically “eyeballed” each sheet in 2008. I don’t know where that comes from — not from the RPV, and not from any source I can identify.
I have also not seen verification that there was some new computer program, or that the problem with ballots was address mis-matches.
We know that Gingrich’s problem with ballots was that he had a paid operative who forged 1500 signatures. That’s not an “address” problem, that a “fake signature” problem. If the eyeballing wouldn’t catch that, then eyeballing isn’t a good process, because we certainly want to catch cases where a candidate turns in fake signatures just to get on the ballot.
Without the 1500 fake signatures, Gingrich did not have enough signatures to qualify, with or without good addresses. You can only put him on the ballot if you believe it is OK for a candidate to pay an operative to forge signatures. I have a hard time believing anybody but a Newt Gingrich supporter would argue for that now, and I doubt the Newt people would accept that if it was ANY candidate other than Newt.