Posted on 06/26/2014 2:36:06 PM PDT by ConservativeMan55
The Chris McDaniel campaign has identified multiple Mississippi counties in which enough improper ballots have been cast that a legal challenge to the outcome of the election is warranted.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Just let statistics do the work. When a sample is big enough, it's makeup is the same or very close to the same as the total population. No need to know any particular individual.
Assume the margin of victory is 2,000, and the race is really close, 50.01% to 49.99%. That means a little more than half of the total ballots cast went to the winner. If you grab 4,000 ballots, without looking at ANY of them, you can figure a majority went to the winner. If you grab 5,000, the range of votes to the winner is probably in the range of 2,400 to 2,600, with 99.9999999% confidence. More than enough to overcome the margin of victory.
If the winner won by a fat margin, then more of any given sample is winner's votes, and it takes a smaller sample (maybe 110% of the margin of victory) to conclude, with high confidence, the contest was decided wrongly.
Highly suggestive, yes.
But if you have something highly suggestive in an overwhelmingly large quantity, that also stretches imagination, and if this presents an average in terms of the rolls, there are grounds for a second runoff.
“...If that’s the way it is in Mississippi, it will be impossible to tell a) if a person had voted in the Dem primary on June 3rd....”
***************************************************************
As the insurance commercial says “that’s not the way it works, that’s not the way any of this works”. The Mississippi electoral process records which (Republican or Democrat) ballot the person was given. The voter is NOT given both; the voter tells the poll workers which ballot he wants to have for the primary vote.
THROWING OUT BLACK VOTES!!! RACIST!!! RACIST!!!! HE WANTS THEM IN CHAINS WHERE THEY CAN’T VOTE!!!! RACIST!!! RCASIT!@!!1!!!
The courts generally look at the probability of harm.
If the victory is by 100 votes and you identify 5 fraudulent votes then it’s mathematically impossible to have harmed the election.
If McDaniel can identify enough fraudulent votes in the election to account for his margin of loss then the probability exists he was cheated.
If I recall correctly, Bob Dornan lost by just over 1000 votes but an investigation turned up a couple hundred fraudulent votes. Not enough to spoil the election though.
McDaniel needs to identify roughly 6,000 illegal voters. If he does, he has a good shot at getting another election.
Yeah, like thats gonna happen. Can this not be in conjunction with the actual vote tallies from Hinds? (how many voted in the Democrat primary, how many voted in the Republican, then how many voted in the runoff, the increase in the rolls, etc)
You’re assuming that the Democratic Poll Book is more than just a record of people who normally vote Democrat. I have yet to see proof of any sort that it’s an actual record of people who did, in fact, vote Democrat on June 3rd.
In my state, although Democrats would be keeping track of their typical voters, they would not be able to ascertain that a particular individual actually cast a DEM ballot. They could have chosen a GOP ballot instead, as we also have an open primary system (which, as this shows, is idiocy to the nth power.)
It is an image of the Democratic Poll Book so it is safe to say that that it does show that these individuals voted in the Democrat primary on 6/3. That's what the book is for, after all. At this point, it doesn't really matter who they voted for on 6/24; their vote was illegally cast. Now, they may have cast that illegal vote for McDaniel but if you're going to go to the trouble of voting illegally is it likely that you vote for the good guy?
Thank you for the clarification! Then this PROVES illegality!
Certainly, enough evidence could be brought that there was fraud at a level sufficient to influence the result.
But I can't see an election being reversed on statistical testimony -- which must necessarily be premised on something like "the 95% level of confidence".
Statistical evidence, though, might be sufficient to authorize a re-vote as a remedy -- if Mississippi law provides for such.
It all depends on the judge they take it to.
BTTT
I notified Kim Wade (a black Mississippi republican - yes they do exist) who has contacts in media.
This needs to go to Breitbart, Hannity, Beck, Rush and every talking head.
This is Kim’s Facebook post that accompanied the same picture:
“...I have been at the Hinds County Court house this morning.
Here’s a page from Hinds County voter roll book.
The column on the left is where the voter voted in Democrat primary on June 3rd 2014.
The column on the right is where that same voter voted in the Republican run off on June 24th 2014.
This is patently illegal!
The problem is the Hinds County Republican Party in my opinion is dragging its feet in allowing access to “all” the voter information in a timely fashion to complete the audit.
It appears they are trying to run the clock out and certify the election results on Monday of next week preventing Chris McDaniel from completing an audit of the vote.
Please call the GOP at 601-948-5191 fax 601-354-0972 email info@msgop.org ask that they have an impartial member of the Hinds County Republican Committee oversee the audit, certification instead of the present county chairman.
Hinds County chair Pete Perry is wearing too many hats and can’t be impartial or fair.
In addition, ask Joe Nosef to ask the Republican county chairs across the state to hold off certification until a audit can be completed
Please repost and share...”
Misssissippi, like my state, has an open primary system. You choose the primary you want to vote in that day.
Apparently, Mississippi law states that, having already voted DEM on the initial primary, you’re not legally entitled to vote in a GOP runoff, which would make sense. Proving it happened is another matter.
Again, though, it’s not obvious that the photo everyone is getting worked up about actually “proves” that a particular voter voted DEM on June 3rd. It might just indicate that they usually vote DEM, and did in fact vote on June 3rd, but not which ballot they chose. In fact, I doubt that information is recorded, although aggressive poll watchers will no doubt do their best to see that “their voters” vote the way they want them to vote.
Yes. I'm assuming it is the book managed by the poll worker; that those listed as voting asked for a Democrat primary ballot on 6/3. I don't know that for a certainty. It would be good if someone in MS can confirm this.
I guess we need some factual input here as to exactly what MS records. As mentioned before, the public records in TN indicate that I (and my wife) have voted in past Rep primaries. I have an app from Beat Lamar! that gives me the name and address of every voter in my precinct who has voted in Rep primary over, I think, the past 8 years.
Totally echo it. The shills have run away now. This is ILLEGAL and we need to get the word out. It should be frontpage Drudge
You assume wrong.
On June 3, when we entered the polling place we picked a station, either Democratic or Republican.
Our voter ID was checked and we signed a book at that station that was CLEARLY labeled June 3 REPUBLICAN PRIMARY. We were then given a voting card and sent to a voting machine in the REPUBLICAN side of the polling place. Once inserted, that particular voting card ONLY brought up the names of the REPUBLICAN candidates. Once we selected our choice we returned the card to the REPUBLICAN polling table.
It was the SAME for democrats. You have no idea WHICH Republican or democrat was voted for but you DO know WHICH primary they voted in. You were NOT given ballots for both.
If they voted in the democratic primary on June 3 and then voted AT ALL on June 24, they broke the law. And so did whoever LET them.
I don't mean to be rude, but I don't believe what your telling us is accurate.
Pro-Cochran Barbour backed PAC have failed 2 file ANY legally required FEC expenditure reports. Nada since statement of organization. #mssen
“...I Cochran’s camp succeeds in holding up the certification...which is what they are trying to do....it will give McD even LESS time to view the rolls and collect the evidence need to challenge it....”
*************************************************************************8
Paging TRUE THE VOTE, paging TRUE THE VOTE.
True The Vote (TTV) is VERY good at this type of thing. In the Wisconsin recall petition “validation” process (checking signatures and other information on petition sheets against voter registration information) several years ago, TTV set up a secure internet based process to allow volunteers from ACROSS THE NATION to help out in the effort. That worked out VERY well and was considerably more complicated than what would be needed in Mississippi.
So I hope True the Vote is involved in this fraud detection effort doing “advance” planning. Hell, I’d volunteer as I’m sure would thousands of others who are HIGHLY pissed off at the GOPe.
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.