Cobb, Badnarik, Ohio, New Mexico, and Nevada

[Whacker77]

I just saw more good news compliments of Cobb and Badnarik.  They released a press statement yesterday stating they were requesting recounts in Nevada and New Mexico.  A "non-partisan" 527 group will reportedly pay for the recount.  The two fringe candidates asked for the recount because they were concerned about voting "irregularities".  Apparently, supposed voting irregularities only took place in Bush states.

In other news, Ken Blackwell appeared on the looney tune hour with Keith Olbermann.  I didn't see the show, but I read a recap of the segment.  Olbermann threw every kook conspiracy theory at Blackwell and he shot each and every one down.  Olbermann was frustrated that he didn't get a eurika momemt.  Later in the day, he used his blog to claim that his show has brought the "irregularitiess" in Ohio to the forefront.  When I discover what the irregularities were, I'l let everyone know.

It may also interest some that 75 of 88 counties in Ohio have certified their provisional counts.  Thanks to Cuyahoga, Kerry has now picked up about 5200 votes.  Prior to those results, Bush led the count by 3800 votes.  Currently, only 78% of the provisional ballots have been approved.  There are only about 28,000 provisional ballots left to count and if the spoilage rate continues, only 22,000 will be verified.  As it stands now, Bush leads the state by around 128,000 votes.  That includes the mystery 4000 votes for Bush and the double count votes from Sandusky County.

As each of you know, I think the idea of a recount is sheer lunacy.  I have yet to see any evidence of fraud anywhere.  That includes the states Bush lost.  These are just the last gasps of the far, far left kooks.  I'm sure I would have been devasted had Bush lost, but I would have moved on and not wasted my time on lost causes.  As if I didn't need any more evidence of this, Jesse Jackson has now gotten involved in the push for an Ohio recount.  Now we know that this is a total waste of time.

[MODU]

And money.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Nader is going for a recount in the Kerry state of NH.

[Whacker77]

This ought to make things even more interesting and insane.  According to a nutjob Cobb press release, the Kerry/Edwards campaign has filed papers in support of Cobb's request for a recount in Delaware County in Ohio.  I don't have any idea what this means or why they are doing it.  Regardless, the safe harbor rule is effective on December 6 this year.

[minionofmidas]

The two fringe candidates asked for the recount because they were concerned about voting "irregularities".  Apparently, supposed voting irregularities only took place in Bush states.
When I discover what the irregularities were, I'l let everyone know.

Just check JFern's thread, man.
(Note: There's quite a difference between Irregularities and Fraud, and a whole world of difference between Evidence of Irregularities, and Proof of Fraud.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If the aim is to overturn Bush's statewide, and nationwide, victory - yes, waste of time. Bush won.
If the aim is to bring some sanity to the way America votes, well, frankly, every day spent doing something else is a waste of time.

[jimrtex]

This ought to make things even more interesting and insane.  According to a nutjob Cobb press release, the Kerry/Edwards campaign has filed papers in support of Cobb's request for a recount in Delaware County in Ohio.  I don't have any idea what this means or why they are doing it.  Regardless, the safe harbor rule is effective on December 6 this year.

The Cobb campaign is apparently planning on asking for a statewide recount (they can't until the vote is final - and they have also filed in federal court).  The Delaware County election offiicials have filed to be excluded, claiming that it is a waste of money (while the party demanding the recount has to pay for the recount, the charges are limited to $10 per precinct).  Supposedly the Democrats are opposed to excluding Delaware County.

[jimrtex]

If the aim is to bring some sanity to the way America votes, well, frankly, every day spent doing something else is a waste of time.

If Ohio goes through a recount, it will eventually result in curbing the insanity of a frivolous contest for a giveaway price of $10 per precinct.

[Whacker77]

I don't think a recount will bring any amount of sanity to the voting process.  It will only embolden the fringe elements of both sides.  I also think a recount won't calm any conspiracy theories.  The looney left will still claim fraud of some sort.  They will never believe that Bush won the election.  In their minds, it's obvious he stole it.  To make matters worse, Keith Olbermann will be there to push the wacko stories.

[Will F.D. People]

After taking a stroll through ohvotesuppression.blogspot.com, I have come to the conclusion that the people behind the site are idiots, but not total idiots.

I actually agree with them that a system where there are different standards in different counties for accepting provisional ballots is a problem. If Bush and Kerry were 130 votes apart instead of 130,000, I can envision being upset if highly partisan counties were going to great lengths to let in as many questionable provisional votes as possible.

However, some of the things on the web site are just laughable for their stupidity. For instance, the site shrills about how in one county, the provisional count is 11 percent off from the non-provisional count, the highest difference in the state! This must be looked into! But if you look at the numbers you see that the county had on the order of 100 provisional ballots. It is hard to see a major discrepancy when all it would take to correct it would be a handful more people voting provisionally or a smaller handful changing their mind.

The site also is alarmed that a county reports the exact same number of provisional votes for Bush and for Kerry -- one of two such counties where this happened! I say that the election was close, which means the candidates get about the same number of votes, so what is so unusual about a tie among a small sample of voters?

I think the loonies hurt their cause by using a shotgun approach to question the election when many of their complaints just don't hold water. This casts doubt on their legitimate points. I think it would be better for them to focus on one issue, like standards for accepting provisional ballots. In Ohio's case, where the outcome of the election is not in doubt, a reasoned discussion after the election with an eye to improved election law should be the goal.

[minionofmidas]

I actually agree with them that a system where there are different standards in different counties for accepting provisional ballots is a problem.

Goes further than that. Different parts of the voting area (in this case, the state) using different ballots is a big enough problem in itself. And it applies almost all over America. So, of course, is not having a national register of voters. Just get that done and all that counterfrauding "challenging" bullsh*t is devoid of any justification.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I haven't checked the site, but judging by what I read from American Liberals, this kind of stuff sounds familiar.
(The operative word being American, btw - American Conservatives are worse in these respects.)

[jimrtex]

Goes further than that. Different parts of the voting area (in this case, the state) using different ballots is a big enough problem in itself. And it applies almost all over America. So, of course, is not having a national register of voters. Just get that done and all that counterfrauding "challenging" bullsh*t is devoid of any justification.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[minionofmidas]

Goes further than that. Different parts of the voting area (in this case, the state) using different ballots is a big enough problem in itself. And it applies almost all over America. So, of course, is not having a national register of voters. Just get that done and all that counterfrauding "challenging" bullsh*t is devoid of any justification.

Are you're saying that I won't be able to vote in Texas elections if I'm not on some national registry?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

All this stuff I hear about people being registered where they don't live, people being registered twice and voting twice etc would be impossible if there'd be some sort of national register. It needn't actually be administered by the feds, it could be done by the states following a uniform standard (and automatically deregistering a person in State A when they register in state B.)
That's what I meant.