Posted on 04/01/2023 7:08:08 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
With Kari Lake's legal complaint alleging systematic signature verification failures in Maricopa County remanded by the Arizona Supreme Court to trial court, closer examination of the signature verification software used by the county reveals a strikingly low threshold for signatures to qualify as "high-confidence" matches.
Since falling about 17,000 votes short in the 2022 Arizona gubernatorial election to Democrat Gov. Katie Hobbs, Lake has continued to contest the election results in court, arguing that there were ballot chain of custody and signature verification issues in addition to thousands of Republican voters disproportionately disenfranchised on Election Day, when voting machine errors occurred in nearly 60% of the voting centers in Maricopa County. Lake has requested that the election results be invalidated or that she be declared the winner.
Last week, the Arizona Supreme Court remanded Lake's claim alleging massive signature verification failure to the trial court, ruling that because Lake is challenging the failure to adhere to current policy rather than the policy itself, her suit was not filed too late, as the lower court had found in dismissing her case. The former candidate must "establish that 'votes [were] affected "in sufficient numbers to alter the outcome of the election"' based on a 'competent mathematical basis to conclude that the outcome would plausibly have been different, not simply an untethered assertion of uncertainty,'" the state's high court ruled.
According to 2020 emails between Maricopa County officials and an employee of the county's election technology vendor, Runbeck Election Services, the election firm's Verus Pro application for signature verification ranks signature matches on a scale of 0 to 100. However, only scores "lower than 10" are "not marked as Accepted by Verus Pro," according to an email from a Maricopa County official, which the county provided to then-Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich after...
(Excerpt) Read more at justthenews.com ...
Pakistan has more secure elections than we do.
bttt
10% would mean that virtually any slight attempt at a forgery would be successful.
10% just means they spelled it correctly
Signatures change radically over the years.
I prefer a photo id requirement at the polls and a requirement to re-register every eight years showing proof of citizenship.
Absentee ballots only for the military overseas (handled by the military) and for those who visit the Dept of Elections 30-60 days in advance of an election, show their photo id and give reason for their anticipated absence, and submit their ballot there. Then marked as having voted already on the voter roll at the polls.
This means if you get suddenly sick or injured around election day you probably dont vote but that is fair it goes across party lines.
Pretty sloppy journalism by Just The News.
The problem is, they won’t let them look at the signatures at all “for the best interests of the people of Arizona.”
Or used the same color ink.
If you present a driver’s license that is a comparative signature.
If you present a new RealID driver’s license that would be even better and RealID since it is vetted could serve as an ideal voter identification.
In a real world yes however, no matter how much common sense it makes to present a RealID driver’s license in order to vote it will probably never happen at least in my lifetime, because voting is the biggest cheat next to taxes; and fleecing the taxpayers over climate change is right up there in the big leagues as well.
Face it, this country is full of cheats, liars, and scam artists, more so on the left but the right has its fair share as well.
We are talking about mail-in ballots here.
You don’t present ANY ID with a mail-in ballot.
If their electronic signature pads are anything like the one I used when I voted 10% is pretty high. The pads where sitting on a table below waist level, at about a 60 deg angle, and you scratched your name on it with your finger nail. I didn’t even recognize it as my signature.
We are talking about mail-in ballots here, not in-person voting.
That builds a lotta confidence seeing ronbeck printing in charge of validating ballot signatures
“We are talking about mail-in ballots here.”
Whoops!
The situation is even clearer. Present yourself to pick up an absentee vote, with RealID. Or early voting in person with RealID if not available on voting day.
And perhaps Institute the military form of absentee voting where the votes are only counted when there is a close election.
Of course that didn’t work in Gore/Bush Florida because a multitude of those mailbags of military absentee votes mysteriously disappeared and have never been found.
Accountable mail-in ballots is by all accounts a bridge too far as far as full accountability is concerned. In so much as possible an honest, secure effort should be made by both the government and the voter. If that is not possible, it’s just not possible. And that small sliver of the pie would just have to be absorbed, not mathematically figured in to the totals.
They weren't. They didn't use Runbeck's software in 2022.
Speaking of Maricopa, anyone know what the adjudication rate was for the last two elections...
And what AZ state law permits...
Signatures change radically over the years.
Perhaps Just the News is sloppy (or toadying to Lake) or perhaps the Democrat “democracy” NGO that promulgated the statement you quote isn’t telling the whole truth.
10% means that they deliberately set the bar that low.
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.