Posted on 05/23/2011 8:26:35 AM PDT by smoothsailing
MADISON, WI – The Government Accountability Board today certified David T. Prosser Jr. as the winning candidate in the April 5, 2011 election for Supreme Court Justice, following a recount of ballots conducted by Boards of Canvassers in Wisconsin’s 72 counties. The Board’s certification notes that Justice Prosser received a total of 752,694 votes and that JoAnne F. Kloppenburg received 745,690 votes, a difference of 7,004 votes, or 0.46%. A total of 1,729 write-in votes were cast for other individuals.
The initial official results submitted by the county canvassing boards after the Spring Election indicated that Justice Prosser received 752,323 votes and that Ms. Kloppenburg received 745,007 votes, a difference of 7,316 votes or 0.49%. After the recount, the official totals reflected a gain of 371 votes for Justice Prosser and a gain of 683 votes for Ms. Kloppenburg.
After signing the official certification, Board Chair Thomas H. Barland praised the work of county clerks, county canvassing boards, and the thousands of municipal clerks and tabulators who completed the first statewide recount since 1989 – the first one involving candidates since 1858. “Elections in Wisconsin are conducted at the local level, and we appreciate the dedication of local election officials and volunteers who conducted this meticulous task,” Judge Barland said. “They have provided an invaluable service not only to the candidates involved, but to the voters and the public who are entitled to a great degree of confidence in the election process and results. I also wish to publicly acknowledge the work of the G.A.B. staff in organizing and supervising this effort.”
During the recount, the Board posted unofficial results reported by the counties each day, as well as a comparison of those results to the initial official results. The Board also sought explanations for any variance of 10 or more votes in a reporting unit. A total of 23 reporting units, out of more than 3,600 reporting units in the state, indicated such differences. A county-by-county comparison of the original official results and the recount official results can be found at http://gab.wi.gov/elections-voting/recount/county-by-county.
Director and General Counsel Kevin J. Kennedy noted that the county canvassing boards discovered and corrected errors made in counting ballots on Election Night and during the original county canvass process. “As expected, the recount process identified issues to address and procedures which can be improved, Kennedy said. “Each of the 1,500,130 ballots was reviewed during the recount to determine the correct results. Both candidates were able to raise questions and challenge ballots in a completely open and transparent manner. To the extent that either candidate believes any decisions or procedures affected the outcome of the election, they may seek a court review of the results.”
The recount results may be appealed to circuit court within five days of the Board’s certification. Due to the Memorial Day holiday, the appeal deadline is May 31, 2011.
Elections Division Administrator Nathaniel E. Robinson said the Board intends to conduct a review of the recount process and issues which arose to assess areas for future improvement. “The recount served the dual purpose of verifying correct vote totals for the candidates and public, as well as providing an opportunity for state and local election officials to evaluate procedures for conducting elections and canvassing results,” Robinson said. “Overall, I am very pleased and proud of the performance of our election partners at the municipal and county level in conducting the recount. We recognize that this is an unexpected and unbudgeted task, and their efforts will help us to further improve our training and election administration.”
A copy of the official canvass certification and report can be found at http://gab.wi.gov/elections-voting/results.
Reid Magney, Public Informaiton Officer, 608-267-7887
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| NR GAB Supreme Court Recount Certification 05-23-2011.pdf | 20.28 KB |
Hugh. The unions put millions into this campaign, only to lose. There is hope, my friends.
Good news, but I’ll be VERY surprised if there isn’t a challenge/appeal by the commies.
>> I’ll be VERY surprised if there isn’t a challenge/appeal by the commies.
Me too. But — unlike the recount, the cost of which the taxpayers bore — any court challenge will have to be funded by the crybabies themselves.
Maybe I’m an idiot, but, on what basis could she file a lawsuit? There was canvassing done before the recount, which confirmed the original results. And now the official statewide recount, which with minor changes, also confirmed the original results, and leaves a 7000+ vote margin between the candidates.
We know the liberals are p*ssed off that she lost, but, legally speaking, to drag this into court, what possible grounds could there be? Minor changes in vote totals happen in all elections, as canvassing and reviews are done, even if it’s not a close election.
Legally, doesn’t there have to be evidence of lawbreaking or fraud to get this into court? Maybe I’m an idiot, but, I just don’t see what legal issues she could have at this point.
That leftists have a natural right to be in power?
Cool! Now we just have to wait for Kloppie to file her lawsuit.
She could sue under a theory that the recount wasn’t properly conducted...which would fail.
They know she has no chance of winning a lawsuit. But, as with everything else with liberals, that is no the point of the lawsuit. The lawsuit is to be filed simply to possibly prevent Prosser from taking his seat on the appointed day, so he will not be able to vote on the constitutionality of the government unions lawsuit. That is the target....................
See POST #10...........
Kloppenberger: The Lady of the Lake, her arm clad in the purest shimmering samite held aloft Excalibur from the bosom of the water, signifying by divine providence that I, Kloppenberger, was to carry Excalibur. THAT is why I am your Supreme Court Justice!
It's all about keeping their base angry and stirred up for the next election and trying to de legitimize the Republicans
Not to put too fine a point on it, but since when do Commies need a legitimate issue in order to file a lawsuit, stage a violent protest, call their opponents ‘racists’, or do just about anything that’s fraudulent, abusive, or evil?
A historic 50 state sweep would have been nice, but Fritz would finally complete his 50 state loss some 14 years later as a last minute stand-in for Paul Wellstone.
Yep, she's got until Tuesday, May 31st. If she is advised to appeal she'll wait until the last day, just to stretch the process out. This has always been about delaying the inevitable, in order to keep Prosser from being re-seated.
" Ugly, liberal, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony. "
Prosser already sits on the Supreme Court, this election is for the next term, which doesn't begin until August 1st.
Correction: It took 18, not 14 years, for Mondale to complete his 50 state loss.
Democrats don’t want the solution they want the issue.
They want the suit so they can point to the union busting being upheld as “illigitimate”
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.