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.
Newt’s campaign tweeted he had 12000-13000 (IIRC) just before everything fell apart. Perry’s campaign said they had 12000.
The 11500 that Newt’s campaign actually submitted was after his campaign pulled the bad 1500. (Newt said they caught it not the RPV.) I didnt see anything that it was after (though maybe it was).
Theres a 2007 memo from the RPV detailing the procedure last time. It was quoted over at Red State.
I agree that Newt and Perry screwed up (should have gotten the recommrnded 15000). Newt’s campaign is moving on. Perry should too.