Congressional Special Election (last call! unstickied after NY-27 final results)

[jimrtex]

Are there enough votes in the precincts where the results look fudged that McCready could have won the election?

Vosem,

That's a very good question, and unfortunately NC is not as transparent in posting precinct level election results at a Statewide level.

So, in States or Counties where it is difficult to obtain public official election results, such as Bladen County NC, it becomes a bit more challenging....

Go to:

NC State Board of Election

Click on 2018 Election Results in Lower Middle.
Select the election of interest: 11/8/2016 and Office: Council of State.

Then click on Display Large Map at lower left, then click on Bladen County, and then under Governor's race, click on Display Vote Details. You can just scroll over the precincts or select Display by Precinct.

Four of the anomalous precincts for 2018 are on the western edge of the county. P30 in the southeast is also anomalous, but it is in the other CD.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You want P60 instead of P201.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There are results for both CD's for P25. So perhaps even if a district splits a precinct, they simply provide different ballot styles. The Bladen precincts appear to match the townships.

There was an effort to not split precincts in the re-redistricting, since that was used as an indicia of racial gerrymandering.

The precinct results do not include the early voting in-person or by-mail. Since more than half the votes were cast early, this is a problem. The official canvass may include this information.

There was only one early voting location, at Elizabethtown, the county seat. It is about 15 miles from places like Bladenboro or Tar Heel. A 40-minute round trip might be OK to vote for president, senator, and governor, but less so when the top race is a congressional race where you are a rural county on the extreme end of the district away from Charlotte.

***OK I found it. In 2016 there were four early voting locations, including ones in Bladenboro, Dublin, and East Arcadia. The one in Bladenboro was 74% for Burr(R), The one in Dublin was 67% for Burr, and the one in East Arcadia was 9% for Burr.

Election day voting was up in all these areas relative to 2016 (P60 North of Dublin), P15 (Dublin), P202 (Bladenboro), P201 (Bladenboro), and P30 (East Arcadia)). That is, the absence of local early voting, pushed voters into election day voting and perhaps vote-by-mail.

In 2016, election-day turnout was down in most of those precincts, even though more votes overall were cast. This means they likely shifted to early voting when there were convenient early voting sites. 2016 election day turnout was also down in P501 and P502 (both in Elizabethtown). But it did not rebound in 2018, likely because there continued to be convenient in-town early voting.

[jimrtex]

If nothing else, I want a reporter to visit the precinct which doubled (!) turnout between 2016 and 2018 while the county as a whole saw turnout go down 12%. Must be a fascinating place.

Likely has something to do with the early voting location in Bladenboro being closed in 2018.

In 2016 early voting at that location was 74% for Burr(R) in the US Senate race.

I would be fascinated if your reporter, would mention that.

[jimrtex]

http://www.wfae.org/post/nc-elections-investigator-seized-absentee-ballots-bladen-county#stream/0

They note the 2016 election, but omit some important details.

In 2016, the allegations were that  the Bladen Improvement Political Action Committee, whose leader was Horace Munn had harvested votes, including writing in the name of a write-in candidate for a non-partisan election for a conservation district. The write-in votes appeared to use similar handwriting. Munn said at the time that they had been informed that they should have signed the ballots as giving assistance, even though they didn't (according to Munn) provide assistance in filling out the bubbles.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Horace Munn, is incidentally a Black Democrat, and his organization received funding from the Democratic Party as a GOTV effort.

Munn may be related to county commissioner Ophelia Munn-Goins who is a Black Democrat.

So a volunteer goes to door of some voter who is harassed and intimidated at the polls, in the 75% Democratic-registration county. The volunteer is working for a Democrat-funded group headed by a Black Democrat who may be related to a Black Democratic county commissioner.

"Mrs. Johnson, I'm here to help you with your ballot. I've brought a sample ballot so you know how to vote. Be sure to write in Franklin Graham. You don't know how to write in, or maybe are afraid the Klan will recognize your printing? I suppose I can help you with that. Is your lumbago acting up, and need help with some bubbles. You're right, it was better when we used X's. I don't know why they changed. You say I know how you vote. I guess I do (chuckle). Straight-ticket Democrat. There, I'm finished. I'll seal up the envelope and you can sign the envelope. I'll make sure this gets to the election folks. If I bring enough in, I'll get some scholarship money."

So a dedicated young Democratic runner who is just trying to make some money to pay for college, helps an elderly widow or couple, and goes a little bit extra by filling out the ballot, but never actually telling them how to vote beyond providing a sample ballot for them to copy, may have inadvertently committed an election offense.

Also in 2016, it was reported that Michael Cogdell had taken pictures inside the early voting site, apparently using the motion recording option. Cogdell is a county commissioner, and incidentally a Black Democrat, took his phone outside and showed the pictures to Horace Dunn (see above) and a news reporter.

There was a second election complaint in Bladen County. Kenneth Register (D) lost a district race for commissioner to a Republican. This may be the first election in the 21st, 20th, or late 19th century where a Republican had won a commissioner district in Bladen County.

Three at large seats are elected by limited voting. At the time of the 2016 primary it was noted that the Democrats had chosen their two commissioners. But at the general election Republicans won two seats, because 54% of the votes for a Democrat, were for Cogdell, while the remainder were split between two candidates. The Republicans ran two candidates and they finished 2nd and 3rd.

Register's complaint said that there had been tampering with memory sticks and also irregularities in absentee voting. Register had been nominated in the Democratic primary, defeating an incumbent Democrat by a 19 vote margin, 948:929, which was one vote outside the 1% margin needed for a recount. Register had received 93.1% of the absentee ballots, while receiving 45.3% of the in-person voting. Register was said to be supported by the Bladen Improvement Political Action Committee (see above) and two witnesses on his complaint were Michael Cogdell and Horace Munn (see above and above). Register received 65% of the absentee votes in the general election, vs. 44.3% of the in-person votes.

An affidavit from one woman said that an individual had told her that he could get some money for getting so many absentee ballots. She liked to help young people out, so she requested a ballot for herself, her forty-year-old daughter, and twin 20-year-old sons. Her daughter was not eligible for an absentee ballot because she didn't live in North Carolina, but she received three ballots. Presumably, her daughter also did not live in the same house, and perhaps had not for close to two decades. The young person persisted in coming back to collect the ballots, but she had not have a chance to fill out the ballots (plural, sic). I don't know why it never occurred to her to let her two sons fill out their own ballots.

At the hearing before the Bladen County Board of Elections, the board ruled that there was not probable cause for the alleged tampering with the memory sticks. Register replied that it was not alleged tampering, he had witnessed it himself. The board also said they could not review the allegations about absentee voting because the state board had taken jurisdiction because of the allegations in the other case.

So move forward to 2018, and the state board seizes the applications for absentee ballots the day after the election, probably before it was clear that the congressional race would be close. A Democratic member from the state board from neighboring Robeson County admits "sadly" there is a history of vote harvesting in his part of the state. Rest assured, it wasn't the Republicans who had been doing the harvesting in an extremely Democratic Party of the state. There has always been a Republican presence in the western part of the state since the Civil War, and this gradually spread to the cities (Wake voted for Ford in 1976, and Mecklenburg was only narrowly carried by Carter, but the rural eastern part of the state has been a holdout.

The only Republicans to carry Bladen County were Hoover in 1928 (Smith was Catholic and a wet); Nixon in 1972 (McGovern was a peacenik ultraliberal); Bush in 2004 (by 65 votes); and Trump in 2016. BTW, Wallace had a plurality in 1968.

The bipartisan state board unanimously voted to withhold certification of the congressional race because of

(1) Even the Republicans were embarrassed by the shenanigans in Bladen County. The Democrats gleefully went along.

or

(2) The Republicans wanted to complete the investigation so that they could embarrass Roy Cooper. The Democrats couldn't afford to quash the investigation - so they got a fig leaf of not certifying the results.

[jimrtex]

Can someone provide the Cliffs Notes version of jim's post? It looks like the explanation for fraud that caused incredible and atypical Republican results is "Democrats did something bad" but that is so confusing that I won't believe it.

In 2018, the Republican candidate for Congress in Bladen County got 60% of the votes on election day. He received 61% of the absentee ballots

In Anson County, the election day race was about 50-50. The Democratic candidate got about 75% of the absentee vote.

Which is more atypical?

Here is the story from 2016.

Protest filed in Bladen County over alleged fraudulent absentee ballots

There was an unopposed candidate for a non-partisan office in Bladen County. There was a write-in challenger. As a election clerk was going through the ballots he noticed the similarity in hand-writing of "Franklin Graham", the candidate favored by the Bladen County Improvement PAC, an organization that is funded by the Democratic Party and some Democratic candidates. For example, in 2016, Ken Spaulding, Roy Cooper's opponent in the Democratic Primary, contributed to the PAC, and Bladen County was his best county in the state. Statewide, Cooper had about 2/3 of the vote, but 2/3 of the vote in Bladen County.

This is even more pronounced for absentee ballots. In the 2016 primary:

President: Hillary Clinton 54% statewide, 83% absentee in Bladen.
US Senator: Chris Rey 17% statewide, 84% absentee Bladen.
Governor: Ken Spaulding 31% statewide, 74% absentee Bladen.
Lieutenant Governor: Robert Earl Wilson 11% statewide, 77% absentee Bladen.
Attorney General: Marcus Wilson 47% statewide , 90% absentee Bladen.
Commissioner of Labor: Charles Meeker 57% statewide, 90% absentee Bladen.
Superintendent of Public Instruction: June Atkinson 85% statewide, 95% absentee Bladen.
Treasurer: Dan Blue III 58% statewide, 89% absentee Bladen.

Election day and early voting had somewhat similar results, but not as pronounced. That is, the Bladen County Public Improvement PAC can suggest how to vote, but a voter would be free to vote their choices in private. I suspect, white voters may be less inclined to follow the recommendations of the PAC (Bladen County is 38% black. To see geographic distribution display a political map of the county).

North Carolina requires the marking of an absentee ballot to be witnessed by two persons (one, if a notary). A runner can help you apply for an absentee ballot, which will be mailed to the voter's mailbox. But before it can be marked, there has to be two witnesses. So presumably two runners come back to witness the voters marking the ballot. The statute says that the witnesses should respect the secrecy of the ballot.

But if you are the witness, could you stand out on the front porch and be sure that the voters actually marked the ballot? Besides what kind of rural North Carolinian is going to leave a visitor standing on the porch. They might do that in Fayetteville or Wilmington, and who knows what kind of stuff goes on in Charlotte or Raleigh, but not in Bladen County. A voter may ask for assistance. The assistant is to mark the ballot at the voter's direction.

So the witnesses hand the voter the sample ballot, and avert their eyes as they drink their lemonade, and murmur their assent when the voter says she wishes that Obama was running again, "Yes'm".

Perhaps the voter doesn't have her eyeglasses, or her arthritis is acting up and it is hard to hold a pen. So the witnesses read the sample ballot. "For governor, it says to vote for Ken Spaulding. Should I mark the ballot for Spaulding?"

Or maybe the voters finishes the ballot, and the witness asks if they had voted for Water & Soil Supervisor (it was 29th office on the ballot, the only non-partisan office, and only had one on-ballot candidate). Maybe the witness takes a look at the sample ballot, and notes, "I see that there is a write-in candidate Franklin Graham, do you want me to write his name in?" The witness then writes the name in at the "request" of the voter.

The witness is then to observe the voter placing the ballot in the envelope and sealing it. The voter then fills in a form, and signs it, and the witnesses sign it. In addition, if someone assisted the voter, the assistant is supposed to sign the form.

Horace Dunn's explanation was that the runners didn't realize that they were supposed to sign as assisters, even if they only wrote "Franklin Graham" even if they didn't do the bubbles. The runners may or may not have actually been paid per voter, but only compensated for gas and other expenses. If any runners took advantage of the PAC it was only due to poor bookkeeping.

This was all brought up after the McCrory-Cooper election, when the curiosity of dozens of ballots with "Franklin Graham" written in the same hand, was claimed to be an example of widespread election fraud that had cost McCrory the election.

But it is difficult to prove actual fraud, since there were likely actual voters, and they were willing to be influenced by persons who were supposed to be witnesses as they marked the ballot (if someone is supposed to maintain the secrecy of the ballot, should they hand the voter a sample ballot recommending to the voter how they should vote?). It is a system that is susceptible to corruption.

At the 2016 primary, Ken Register upset an incumbent Democrati county commissioner, Wayne Edge. By a 948:929 margin. The 19 vote margin was just outside the one percent margin to trigger a recount. Register won the absentee vote 189:14. Edge received 54.7% of the in-person voting, both one-stop and election day, but only 6.9% of the absentee vote.

Register would go on to lose the general election to a Republican who I suspect is the first Republican elected as county commissioner in an Bladen County district since Reconstruction. Register made a claim that memory sticks had been tampered with and also claimed absentee ballot fraud. The Republican, Ashley Trivette received 55.8% of the live vote, but only 28.5% of the absentee vote.

Edge ran for the county commission as a Republican in 2018, but narrowly lost to an incumbent Democrat. There are two commissioners from each of three districts, who are elected to overlapping 4-year terms.

Meanwhile in another district, a Democrat-turned Republican was re-elected with 64% of the vote. He had been unchallenged as a Democrat in 2014. The NC representative for the county was also re-elected as a Democrat-turned Republican (he had voted for the Republican redistricting plans and generally sided with the majority).

The three at-large members of the county commission are elected under a limited voting scheme where each voter is limited to one vote. At the 2016 primary, the press noted that the Democrats had chosen their two commissioners, apparently assuming that the normal pattern on one black Democrat, one white Democrat, and one Republican would hold. But in the general election, the black Democrat took so much of the Democratic vote, that two Republicans were elected.

38% of the county is black. That is enough to control the Democratic primary, but not to prevent Republican dominance if they do take control of the primary.


So what is being missed by the press is this longtime practice of curious absentee voting in Bladen County. The NCSBE Democrat member from Robeson County when he noted this long sad history in his part of the state, was not talking about Republicans. What eventually will be determined is that absentee voting is susceptible to corruption, but that no actual fraud took place. Mark Harris will be elected.


Fun fact. The composition of the NCSBE has been ruled unconstitutional by a state court (in October). They stayed their decision until the NCSBE has certified the election results. Does the NCSBE stay in place with their current nine-member board, or does Cooper demand a 3:2 Democrat-dominated board take its place and take over investigation?

[jimrtex]

One reason this is such an issue... is not only did Harris win the general by less than 1000 votes... he won the Primary by 850 votes [and Harris had close to 900 more absentee votes than Pittenger (the incumbent) in Bladen Co.]

Also- the person supposedly at the center of the vote shenanigans... worked for a different candidate in 2016.  That candidate finished 3rd in the 2016 primary... yet overwhelmingly won the absentee vote in Bladen Co.

So the issue is as much about the Primary as it is the general... equally so.

Supposedly the numbers (to a lesser extent) in neighboring Robeson Co were also affected... but for various reasons its harder to prove statistically.

Pittenger was elected from a much different district in 2014.

He finished third in every county outside of Mecklenburg in the 2016 primary.

In Bladen County, Pittenger received 9.5% of the vote in person.

The 2016 congressional primary was a stand-alone primary (there was also a judicial race, but that won't draw voters). The presidential, senatorial, gubernatorial, etc. primaries had been held three months earlier. Even regular voters might be inclined to skip such an election.

North Carolina does not have permanent Vote By Mail. You have to apply for each election. Relatively few voters vote absentee. If you are in a rural area, you might not trust the use of mail box along a rural road. You prefer to drive into town a couple of days a week to pick up your mail out of a locked box at the post office, and do whatever business you have, maybe stop by the cafe for lunch or a cup of coffee. Since the House primary was the only race, it would be the candidates doing GOTV, and helping voters apply for an absentee ballot, which in this case would be a convenience.

The "third-place candidate" in 2016 received 30.6% of the vote in a true three-way race. He had 54.5% of the in person vote in Bladen County.

[jimrtex]

Though it would seem they have to know who a mail in ballot is coming in from as they keep records of who votes. Maybe it’s on the envelope outside and not identifiable where the votes/choices are made, but for verification purposes, it would have to be somewhere. So they should be able to ask those who requested if they returned, just not if it has been altered.

Harris did slightly better in absentee ballots than in-person ballots.

Absentee: 61.4%
Election Day: 58.9%
One Stop: 55.8%

The One Stop is going to skew a bit since it is located in Elizabethtown. McCready carried P501 with 56,8% of the two way vote.

In 2016 there were One Stop (early voting) in Bladenboro, Dublin, and East Arcadia, in addition to the county seat of Elizabethtown.

Relative to 2014, election day turnout was down in P60, P15 which are near Dublin, P202, and P201 near Bladenboro, and P501 and P502, and P40 near Elizabethtown, despite overall turnout being up for the presidential election.

In 2018, with the closing of the three branch One Stop locations, turnout on election day rebounded in P60, P15, P202, P201 around Dublin and Bladenboro, and increased in P30 near East Arcadia. It remained at the same level in P502, P501, and P40 near Elizabethtown where there was still a One Stop.

This indicates that One Stop voting will be overly represented by Elizabethtown which is more Democratic-leaning than the remainder of the county.

The Republican state senator candidate had about 4.2% more election day votes in the district. But he is at least from eastern North Carolina, albeit from Southport in Brunswick County on the Coast. Wayne Brisson the Republican state representative ran 9.7% ahead of Harris. He switched parties this election and is from Dublin in the county.

Harris ran behind the local Republicans in Bladen County.

[jimrtex]

https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1069402488078573568

Plot 55.1% election day, 86.6% absentee. Would that be an outlier?

Also, the underlying model is flawed.

If 0% of election day vote was for a Democrat, I would expect 0% of mail ballots.

And if 100% of mail ballots were Democrat, I would expect 100% of in person ballots.

A larger share of Democrat votes were cast as mail ballots than any other county in the district.

[jimrtex]

Jim- Spin as you will. Harris hired a man who engineered the illegal taking of ballots from old black rurals and either changed them or threw them away. Your “no, do this with the numbers; look over here” “state senator...one stop...blah blah” doesn’t change the anomalies in Bladen and Robeson. It’s sad you’ve been here this long and don’t get election stats better than that.

Plus, you weren’t even responding to what you quoted of mine. Why’d you bother?

“Harris ran behind the local Republicans in Bladen County.”

Harris is clearly a misogynistic sleaze who feels the need to cheat to win, so that’s not surprising.

I have no idea why I quoted you. I apologize for that.

Harris is from Charlotte. The senate candidate was from Brunswick County, albeit on the coast. The representative is from Bladen County (Dublin) and was previously elected as a Democrat. You would expect that.

A county commissioner who had run as Democrat before, ran as a Republican and won with 65% of the vote.

The black population of Bladen County is 38%, You don't start knocking off white Democrats in the primary and expect not to push the county into the Republican column.

The number of total votes cast in Bladen County (in NC-9) relative to 2016 was higher than any other county in the district outside of Mecklenburg.

If all those ballots were tossed in the trash, the high vote anomaly would be even higher.

Are there other places in the US where absentee votes are expected to favor Democrats by 20%? !?!?!  From a Texas perspective that is the anomaly.

[jimrtex]

No, agreed about Bladen ballots- they weren’t placed in the trash, they were turned in. The anomaly is that Bladen had a comparatively LOW percentage of Republicans turn in absentee (and, in turn a high percentage of Dem and unaffiliated), yet in absentee votes cast, Harris cleaned up and had an unexpectedly high percentage of non- Republican votes. That definitely implies either many Dems and unaffiliated voted for Harris in much greater numbers OR someone completed or changed the ballots. The affidavits certainly suggest the latter.

In 2016,

Democratic registration was 59.1%, Republican 15.3%, and unaffiliated 25.5%.

Roy Cooper got 46.1% of the vote.

This indicates that 22% of Democrats voted for McCrory, assuming that turnout was the same for all groups, and every Republican and affiliated voter voted for him.

[jimrtex]

And to someone else's point, it is strange that this story is pretty massive but is not really getting airtime. Though I guess they're just waiting to get official word on what exactly happened before really giving it a lot of play.

They are concentrating on the resignation of the Democratic chair of the NCSBE for his hackish partisan comments.

[jimrtex]

Hate to point out the obvious, but Bladen and Robeson SHOULD NOT BE IN THE 9TH!!!!


I hope there is a new election, and I hope the State Supreme Court puts this map through a paper shredder, burns the shreds and then forces Mark Harris to eat the ashes.

It'll be nice when Bladen County ends up in a Likely D Fayetteville-Robeson seat.

[jimrtex]

Absentee ballot envelopes in North Carolina fit into "a pattern of fraud"

https://popular.info/p/exclusive-absentee-ballot-envelopes

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Back in 2016, when it was noticed that all the "Graham Franklin" write-ins were the same handwriting, Horace Munn, leader of the Bladen County Improvement PAC, explained that whoever wrotein the names in must not have realized that they had to also sign the ballot as an assistant even though they didn't do the bubbles.

Remember, BCIPAC claimed that they simply provided a sample ballot "suggesting" how the voter should vote. My presumption is that the sample ballot would be provided when the "volunteers" who were only receiving "expense" money to witness the filling in of the ballot.

In theory, a voter should be able to to vote autonomously. If the voter has a vision disability, a person assisting them can read them the ballot. But they can't say "do you want to vote for the witch, the troll, the witch doctor, or the pot head?" or "You want to vote for that nice Miz Clinton, right?" Similarly, if a voter has a motor disability, an assistant may mark the ballot, but only at the direction of the voter. Presumably, inability to write-in a name legibly enough for it to count might be considered a motor disability.

Now think what happens when you vote in person. If a state requires picture ID, the election judges verify the voters identity, otherwise they accept that the voter is who they say they are, and the voter signs the voting roll confirming that they are that person. Pollwatchers could object. Then the voter is given a ballot and they go over to a voting station. It can be observed that they are voting, and that they took the completed ballot and dropped it in the ballot box. If a voter needs assistance, they can choose their assistant, who takes an oath that they will only act as an agent for the voter. While it may difficult to fully comply, it at least reminds the assistant of their duties.

The election judges in effect witness hundreds of voters casting their ballots.

The absentee voting experience is, in theory, equivalent.

A voter makes an application for an absentee ballot. The blank ballot is sent to the address they are registered at. In theory, this is equivalent to handing a voter a ballot at the polling place. They will sign the ballot envelope when they complete voting.

If a runner helps the voter make an application for an absentee ballot, it is not much different from a volunteer driving a voter to the polls. Likely as not, the person is being politically selective in who they assist.

When the absentee ballot is sent out, the runner(s) reappear. They may even be so helpful as pulling the ballot out of the mailbox and walking it to the door. That is only being neighborly.

The runners/witnesses make sure that it is the actual voter voting the ballot. They hand the voter a sample ballot ("only a suggestion, but Mr. Munn thought you might appreciate it"). The witnesses are supposed to make sure that it is the voter who is filling out the ballot, but also to protect the secrecy of the ballot. "I don't know how she voted, she may have glanced over at the sample ballot, and she might have voted for someone else. I was sitting across from the table and so the ballot was upside to me and I couldn't be sure"

After the voter marks the ballot, she puts it in the ballot envelope (equivalent to putting the ballot into the ballot box), fills out an affidavit on the envelope (the equivalent to signing the voting roll), and the witnesses sign it. If anyone provided assistance, such as writing in "Franklin Graham" or filling in the bubbles, they are also supposed to sign as an assistant. According to Horace Munn the witnesses who also assisted by writing in "Franklin Graham" should also have signed as an assistant. If the witnesses who had handed the sample ballot to the voter, had also assisted a voter who had misplaced her eyeglasses, they should have signed as an assistant who was neutral.

Because North Carolina requires two witnesses, the runners work in pairs. The "expert" Gerry Cohen is naive/disingenuous if he thinks that it works where the witnesses are family members, neighbors, are work mates.

If we look at NC-7 in Bladen County we observe:

Election Day: Horton(D) 55%, Rouzer(R) 44%, (L) 1%.
Early Voting: Horton(D) 61%, Rouzer(R) 36%, (L) 1%.
Absentee: Horton(D) 87%, Rouzer(R) 13%, (L) 0%.

Horton did approximately 30% better among absentee voters, vs. in person voters.

And just for fun:

P30: Horton(D) 81%, Rouzer(R) 18%, (L) 1%.

P30 is Carver's Creek township in far southeastern Bladen County. The township is 60% Black, 18% White, and 18% AIAN (Waccamaw Siouan). So the least white township in the county was less strong for the Democratic candidate than the absentee votes.

It appears that news stories have been conflating countywide absentee votes by party, with absentee votes received in NC-9, ignoring those in NC-7.

The NCSBE has ordered Bladen County not to certify the results of the county commission race in District 3, which was apparently won by the Democrat, but had stronger support by absentee ballots.

[jimrtex]

No, agreed about Bladen ballots- they weren’t placed in the trash, they were turned in. The anomaly is that Bladen had a comparatively LOW percentage of Republicans turn in absentee (and, in turn a high percentage of Dem and unaffiliated), yet in absentee votes cast, Harris cleaned up and had an unexpectedly high percentage of non- Republican votes. That definitely implies either many Dems and unaffiliated voted for Harris in much greater numbers OR someone completed or changed the ballots. The affidavits certainly suggest the latter.

In 2016,

Democratic registration was 59.1%, Republican 15.3%, and unaffiliated 25.5%.

Roy Cooper got 46.1% of the vote.

This indicates that 22% of Democrats voted for McCrory, assuming that turnout was the same for all groups, and every Republican and affiliated voter voted for him.

Are you implying 2016 general could have been fraudulent, too, or that anomalies exist all over the place so there’s nothing wrong with the 2018 numbers? A “therefore...” or the like in some of your posts here would help. Unless you’re just throwing data out with no real conclusions relating to 2018.

The 22% Dem vote going to the Repub stands out but not nearly as much as the absentee data from Bladen and Robeson this year.

What I am saying is that in a rural county in The South, with a particularly large black population (38% in this case) you can not assume that persons who are registered as a Democrat will vote for the Democratic candidate, particularly for federal or state office. In the past, there might not be a contested Republican primary for federal or state office, and you could vote in the Democratic primary. At the local level, being a registered Republican, is a lot like being a registered Libertarian. They can vote in the Libertarian primary, where there might be a blank space for a write-in since no one was actually running.

Columbus County to the south just elected its first Republican sheriff ever. It is 54.4% Democrat, 19.5% Republican, and 25.8% unaffiliated. Without carrying all the Republicans and all of the unaffiliated,  and some of the Democrats, this would be impossible.

I assume you know that Bladen County is split between two congressional districts, NC-7 and NC-9. The Bladen County portion of NC-7 is more Democratic than NC-9. The western portion of the county is whiter, the southern portion is blacker, and the eastern part is emptier.

In NC-9, the absentee result was quite similar to the in person result. That is, absentee voters were similar to in-person voters. You could even say that absentee voters were a representative sample of the electorate.

In NC-7, the absentee result was 30% more Democratic than the the in-person electorate. If the absentee voters were polled, you would have selection bias. Your poll would be way off. Alternatively, if you did an exit poll, your results would be off the other way, but not as much because their were fewer absentee voters. This is the anomalous result, not that in NC-9.

BTW, it appears the percentage of Republican absentee voters is countywide, while the percentage of Republican votes is for NC-9 alone.

If we look at Court of Appeals Seat 1, the Republican candidate received 51% of the absentee vote. So he received very little of the Democrat absentee vote (voters will have no idea what a Court of Appeals is, much less who the candidates are. The names don't indicate race, and their first names are Andrew and John (not Andy or Johnny) and both use a middle initial. The only distinction was their party. You could make up an office (for example Interlocutor of Esplanades) and fictional names and get the identical results).

[jimrtex]

Harris supposedly got 96% of the absentee vote by mail in Bladen County. What is the precedent for scoring in the high 90s in absentee vote in a county that is roughly evenly split in a race that is roughly evenly split?

I'll take my answer off the air.

"There are people who are registered Democrats in the South who don't always vote for Democrats" is not a meaningful reply.

Huh? You are mixing things up.

Absentee Vote: Harris 61%, McCready 38%, Libertarian 1%
Election Day: Harris 59%, McCready 39%, Libertarian 2%
Early Voting: Harris 56%, McCready 43%, Libertarian 1%.

Note that the Early Voting location is in Elizabethtown, which is more Democratic than the district as a whole. While anyone in the county may drive to to the Elizabethtown it is less convenient. If one compares the election day turnout to population, that for Elizabethtown is depressed. One can drive or walk over to the library any day for about two weeks and vote, or wait until a particular Tuesday. Ealy voting cannibalizes election day voting.

The absentee voting is representative of the in person voting.

Are you confusing NC-7 with NC-9?

[jimrtex]

https://twitter.com/NickOchsnerWBTV/status/1070044877298249728

Quite interesting!

Jeff Smith is portrayed as some sort of whistleblower in the general election.

North Carolina election-fraud investigation centers on operative with criminal history who worked for GOP congressional candidate

But in the primary election, Billy Ward, the candidate favored by Jeff Smith, got 55% of all his votes from absentee ballots. Jim McVicker, the  candidate supported by McRae Dowless got 92% of the election day votes, but only 55% of the absentee vote.

[jimrtex]

https://twitter.com/ActorAaronBooth/status/1070078822790455297

The NCSBE sent letters out between October 29 and November 2nd, informing voters who had requested absentee ballots that only they or family members should return absentee ballots; that they had a right to a secret ballot, and how to check the status of an absentee ballot. It included a notice that it was important that the envelope be opened, and included a hot line number.

The 71 pages are 2 per page envelopes that were returned by the USPS. They were pretty weird. The USPS would say no such address, but I could type the address and find it on Google. One even showed up on Zillow. There were a bunch that said that there was no mail receptacle. It is possible that the NCSBE sent the notice to the voter's address, and not the address that they received mail at.

The dump also includes lists of who brought in the requests for absentee ballots. The voter (or a near relative) must make the request, but it can be delivered to the BCBE by anyone. Dozens were brought in by McRae Dowless, but also Democrat operatives. Others appeared to be from individual families.

There is a 2720 page document made up pf absentee ballot requests. Some of the requests have the voter name, address, etc. printed on them, all the voter had to do was sign the request. An oddity for many of this was that the voters marked that they wanted a Democratic ballot for the general election. Apparently Republicans are better able to read insructions that the check box applies to primary elections. There was also a batch with the voter's names and addresses printed in the same handwriting, the signatures were redacted, but the signing dates were in unique scripts. Another had written set consistently used "E'town" for "Elizabethtown".

There are a few where the BCBE sent a form back to the voter to complete. Some voters were not registered to vote. North Carolina permits a voter to register at the same time they early vote (i.e. One Stop) or vote by absentee. If the voter was not registered, the BCBE would send a registration form, and a new absentee request form, with the name and address typed in.

I only looked through the first 303 pages (of 2720). Based on that sample there were around 1850 absentee ballot requests.

There was also a file with the names and addresses of the voters who made an absentee ballot request, but did not receive a ballot. Nothing like tainting an investigation by making public the list so the press can go interview the voters.

Race breakdown: 134 Black, 335 White.

Party breakdown: 167 Democrat, 121 Republican, 195 unaffiliated.

With campaigns enabling/encouraging voters to make absentee ballot requests, it is not remarkable that a large number were not returned.

Campaigner: Can we count on your vote?
Voter: I don't know. I might have to go down to Wilmington that day.

or

Voter: Didn't we have an election last year? What was that guy who wore the baseball caps?
Campaigner: Donald Trump?
Voter: Yeah that's him, he's married to Obamalenia, right?
Campaigner: That was two years ago, He is president.
Voter: So why are we having another election?

Campaigner: You can vote absentee.
Voter: Abson Teague? Who's he?
Campaigner: You can vote by mail, they'll send you a ballot and all you have to do is send it back in. Here just fill out this form.

The campaigner knows that the voter won't vote, but he gets paid for collecting the form anyhow.

[jimrtex]

Called it:

https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1070102416828325896

Virginia, what would the bill H 1117 do?

[jimrtex]

Harris supposedly got 96% of the absentee vote by mail in Bladen County. What is the precedent for scoring in the high 90s in absentee vote in a county that is roughly evenly split in a race that is roughly evenly split?



I'll take my answer off the air.

"There are people who are registered Democrats in the South who don't always vote for Democrats" is not a meaningful reply.

Huh? You are mixing things up.

Absentee Vote: Harris 61%, McCready 38%, Libertarian 1%
Election Day: Harris 59%, McCready 39%, Libertarian 2%
Early Voting: Harris 56%, McCready 43%, Libertarian 1%.

Note that the Early Voting location is in Elizabethtown, which is more Democratic than the district as a whole. While anyone in the county may drive to to the Elizabethtown it is less convenient. If one compares the election day turnout to population, that for Elizabethtown is depressed. One can drive or walk over to the library any day for about two weeks and vote, or wait until a particular Tuesday. Ealy voting cannibalizes election day voting.

The absentee voting is representative of the in person voting.

Are you confusing NC-7 with NC-9?

He’s talking about the primary, for which Dowless was also employed by Harris. See the image above?

Harris got 437 to 17. In no way is that representative of normal. And recall the candidate who got 17 votes was a sitting Congressman.

To add



Is the graphic that shows why the 61% figure in the general is an outlier.

For in-person voting, McCready got 53% of the vote in Mecklenburg County, but only 38% in Union County.

Why the 15% difference? I would attribute it to demographic differences. What is your theory?

But in the absentee vote there was only a 4% difference 65% to 61%? How do you explain that?

[jimrtex]

Do we think the large number of returned ballots means someone was filling requests out en masse from the voter rolls?

There are bunches of ballot requests that were turned in en masse. Some have the names printed in. Others appear to have been hand-written by the same person (though some managed to use three different styles of "2" in an address.

But they are signed and dated. The signatures have been redacted, but the black boxes are quite varying in size, and the style and shape of the dates is quite variable.

The application form has check boxes for requesting a primary ballot. North Carolina permits unaffiliated voters to choose a party ballot. This was not a primary election, so the boxes were irrelevant, but there would be bunches in a row with Democratic selected. On some batches, there would be crude X'es in a shaky hand. On  others, the box was checked with a very distinct style, with the long tail of the check extending way outside the box. They had to have been marked by the same person. Either they had been pre-marked to indicate the the voter was a Democrat, or they were marked with a flourish to indicate that the runner can be trusted.

North Carolina has partisan registration, and also records the race of the voter. If you were working for McCready it would quite normal to get every black voter in the county to vote (and remember North Carolina permits registration during early voting). The best option is to get them to vote absentee, because the voting has to be witnessed by two persons.

So the volunteers go to a voter's home with a pre-filled application for an absentee ballot. They ask if the voter wants to vote in the upcoming election. The voter assures them that they do want to vote. The volunteers don't have to tell the voter of the other options such as voting early or on election day. North Carolina does not require a reason to vote absentee. So the have the voter fill in the application, and the volunteer takes it to the county elections office.

A few days later, the volunteers go back to "check" to make sure the voter received her ballot. It may be a hassle to get two witnesses. If it is a married couple, they still need another witness, and maybe they don''t want to have a neighbor watch them vote, or the daughter only comes up from Wilmington or Raleigh or Charlotte every few weeks. If the voter lives alone, it is even harder.

The voter tells them she has it here somewhere, and finds it. Or maybe she set it aside because the volunteers assured her they would help her vote. "You know it requires two witnesses." We can do that, and oh by the way here is a sample ballot, you can use." The witnesses are supposed to ensure that the ballot is secret, but also to make sure that it is the voter who is marking the ballot.

"OK, Now. Put it in the the envelope and sign it. And we'll sign as witnesses. Now you have mail it. I think I do have a stamp" (makes a show of looking for a stamp) "I guess not. I'll tell you what. I'll drop it off at the post office for you. Save you the trip."

Incidentally, in Texas, Democrats were extremely opposed to putting numeric limits on how many ballots a non-related person may possess. Apparently, some young Democratic runners were especially thoughtful about their neighbors, and carrying dozens of ballots.

If you can't get the voter to vote absentee, then you try to get him to vote early, offering rides, etc. Block walking is not for the purpose of convincing voters or arguing policy. It is to identify supporters and make sure that they vote. During early voting, you can check whether they have voted, and phone a reminder before the last day of early voting. If they have Sunday early voting, you run 'Souls to the Polls' with church buses leading a caravan of parishioners to the voting location.

Finally, you make an effort to get them to vote on election day, calling back around noon nd three P.M.

Some of the absentee requests were from out of state. One was from Gainesville, Florida, so presumably from UF. They e-mailed a PDF. If they got the ballot, they probably voted. Someone who had been handed an application, and all they had to do was sign it and hand it back, is less likely to actually vote when they do receive their ballot. Maybe nobody came back to help them vote. Maybe they put the ballot under a pizza box, with a pile of laundry on top.

[jimrtex]

Why do you keep bringing up different data and not responding to the data I and others bring up? You implied Harris’ 61% in absentee was in line with his ED vote in Bladen. Do you now see it’s a red flag?

The reason why is that I am capable of looking at data and making an independent conclusion.

Others (perhaps including you) have certain prejudices. You hear that the Republicans committed vote fraud. You think, "I knew that". You are shown some evidence that supposedly supports your conclusion, and simply keep repeating it. You are like a student who keeps giving the teacher the answer they expect, rather than critically thinking.

Imagine you are asked how Nonesuch County will vote. You ask about the percentage of black population. Whether it is urban, suburban, or rural. Manufacturing, white collar, age profile. Etc. You eventually make an estimate even though Nonesuch County does not exist.

But now you are asked about the absentee vote. You instantly reply 60% Democratic. But don't you to need to know anything about the county? Not at all. It's 60%. If not it is fraud.

In Texas, absentee voting is invariable more Republican, but there is also a relationship to the in person voting. This year, in the various congressional districts, in-person and absentee voting was

60% (in person) 68% (absentee)
60% 66%
59% 61%
53% 58%
50% 56%
48% 51%
23% 29%

See the pattern?

absentee_i > inperson_i

inperson_i > inperson_j implies absentee_i > absentee_j

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In Bladen County, the Republican congressional candidates got 6.6% of their total votes from absentee ballots, compared to 6.7% for the Democrats.

(You probably didn't know that Kyle Horton got 87% of the vote in NC-7 in Bladen County did you?)

Both are relatively high (I think there may only be one county with a higher percentage for Democrats - Yancey). In many areas of the state, the percentage of absentee ballots was one or two percent. But also remember that the top of the ballot race this year was the congressional race, whose competitiveness varied by district. No reason to make much effort if there were no competitive races. The Democratic effort appeared to a bit stronger in urban areas, where the GOTV was more intense, and campaigns could spend more money.

Perhaps Bladen has a highly engaged electorate. Maybe it is highly competitive, and the absentee GOTV effort has developed. Maybe there are effects from Hurricane Florence which dumped 3-feet of rain on Elizabethtown in mid-September. How many homes where absentee ballots were sent are not habitable, or the ballot was washed away.

[jimrtex]

NC-9 scandal: More than a thousand absentee ballots possibly destroyed

https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2018/12/05/lead-drew-griffin-dnt-live-jake-tapper.cnn

These scum were filling out ballots for literal blind people. Gee wonder if that is legal!

Interestingly, the letter shown by CNN specifically mentioned the Bladen County Public Improvement PAC, but then zoomed in on the next sentence about McRae Dowless. Beginning the sentence with an ellipsis ...

You may remember reading that in the 2016 it was noticed that dozens of ballots had "Franklin Graham" written-in in a way down ballot race (29th race on the ballot, the only non-partisan race on the ballot, and with only one on-ballot candidate). Horace Munn, the leader of the PAC said at that time that maybe his runners had helped write in the name, even if they didn't do the bubbles, but didn't realize they had to sign the ballot envelope as an assistant in addition to the envelope.

The two voters interviewed by CNN were Audrey Atkinson (not Aubrey Atkinson as CNN misspelled it) said that he couldn't read and write - and CNN had to humiliate him by making him admit it on national TV. The other was Lacy Allison, who couldn't remember if he voted for "Harris" or "McCready", though he said the names sounded familiar. He is a registered Republican.

[jimrtex]

Called it:

https://twitter.com/marceelias/status/1070102416828325896

Virginia, what would the bill H 1117 do?

Not Virginia, but HB 1117 would revert the state & county election boards back to where they started before the past nearly 2 years of legislative & judicial maneuvering regarding the boards. The potential change back to 3-member county boards comes after an October decision by a 3-judge panel in Wake County that ruled the current makeup that was implemented in December 2016 is unconstitutional (the court left the current 9-member board in place until Dec. 12th while the election investigation is underway) & after NC voters declined to give lawmakers power over the elections board through a constitutional amendment.

Basically, the bill would have the county election boards revert back to 3 members. Out of those 3-member county boards, 2 of the members will have members from the Governor's party. The state board would go from the current 9-member configuration of 4 Republicans, 4 Democrats & 1 independent voter to 5 members, with 3 from the Governor's party.

In particular, the bill would once again split the agency under the oversight of two boards. The 5-member board, controlled by the Governor, would handle only the administration of elections. As has been the practice in the past, the Governor would appoint 3 members of his own party & 2 members of the other major party from lists of candidates recommended by the respective party leaders. A 2nd, 8-member bipartisan board would handle ethics, campaign finance & lobbying, w/ 1/2 the board appointed by the Governor & the other 1/2 by state lawmakers.

At the county level, the 4-member bipartisan boards instituted by lawmakers but scuttled by the courts would return to their traditional 3-member format, w/ the state board appointing the members and the Governor's party having a 2-1 majority. However, the law would still require Republicans on each county board to serve as chair in election years.

The bill would also repeal the long-standing law that state political investigations are handled by the Wake County District Attorney's Office, moving those investigations instead to the prosecutorial district in which the candidate resides.

The proposal would also repeal 6 boards & commissions whose structures were found unconstitutional by judges last month: the State Building Commission, the Child Care Commission, the Clean Water Management Trust Fund Board of Trustees, the state Parks & Recreation Authority, the Private Protective Services Board, & the Rural Infrastructure Authority.

And in what appears to be a rebuke, the measure would repeal the Constitutional Amendment Publication Commission, the 3-member panel charged w/ writing descriptions of proposed constitutional amendments for voter information materials. The 2 Democrats on the commission this year, Secretary of State Elaine Marshall & Attorney General Josh Stein, were outspoken on their opinion that state lawmakers wrote deceptive ballot descriptions of the 6 proposed amendments in the the November election. 4 of the 6 were approved.

However, the bill is likely to change in its next version after having been heard in the House Elections committee.

Thanks for the rundown. That is what I generally thought it did.

My understanding is that the October court decision rendered the current statutes inoperative, and meant that the former statutes were active, though no longer statutes. This is fine for lawyers, who can read the annotation "Ignore This, Go Read the Old Statute", but is confusing to others. This bill would simply factually make the statutes match the law. I noticed it gave the code reviser the authority to make sure all the section numbers and references are the same.

Then they took prosecuting authority from the Wake County (Raleigh) prosecutor. This is similar to what happened in Texas, where Travis County elected Democratic prosecutors and judges, and the state had placed an agency of the state under the Travis County DA. The DA for Travis County was arrested for DUI (she was driving about 15 MPH on the edge of a road with an emptied bottle of vodka, and then was extremely belligerent at the jail, where she had to be belted to a chair. It doesn't help to demanding to see the sheriff and telling everyone who you are, if you are slurring your words and are kicking). Governor Perry vetoed funding for the unit, saying he would sign the bill if the DA resigned. She refused. Perry was actually charged with bribery - withholding funding in exchange for forcing an elected official from office. Eventually, he was acquitted because a governor can veto a bill for whatever reason he desires. The DA took a leave absence for the time she was locked up and going under rehab. She did not seek re-election.

The unit was eventually transferred to the Texas Rangers, which is under state control.

My understanding is that the NC court, stayed the reversion of the NCSBE until they certified the results of the election. I think Harris has intervened in that case to keep the current body until his election is certified (i.e. if the board doesn't certify the election it is not replaced).

The wording of the resolution that called for an evidentiary hearing was carefully worded since it calls for a hearing by the board "as then constituted" which meant that the five-member board appointed by Cooper would decide the case. There was another election case which was left out of the resolution. Someone asked about the omission. It was explained that it was not certified, but not in limbo because of that. But there must have been a reason for leaving it out of the unit.

I suspect what happened is that after it was seen how close the NC-9 race was that Joshua Malcolm raised the issue of the ongoing investigation in Bladen County. His resolution states that it is the "taint of corruption", rather than the number of votes that might have been affected. If the race had been further apart, the investigation might have eventually concluded with some indictments. Nexus for Wake County, is likely based on Red Dome being HQ'ed there.

The Republicans probably scored an own goal by demanding the resignation of the chair of the NCSBE because of his Facebook hackery, but now Malcolm is the chair and will be the chair of the 5-member board, unless it is revealed to what extent Malcolm was communicating with Cooper, the DCCC, etc.

Marc Elias should be considered a red flag. He and Perkins Coie were the ones who funneled money from the Clinton campaign for the Russian dossier (it showed up as legal fees on Clinton campaign expenditures). The dossier was used to justify the FISA warrant for Carter Page.

Lawyers are paid by their clients to paint a particular viewpoint, to shade the truth, as advocates for the client.

[jimrtex]

Jimrtex- I’m loving your narrative technique: Pizza box under laundry? Goldmine! In earlier posts the down South repartee! LOL, man!

Didn't you see the CNN interview where the voter admitted that Dowless had helped him fill out his ballot because he couldn't read or write. Let's humiliate the Southern hick on national TV.

The other voter who said he couldn't remember whether he voted for "Harris" or "McCready" is a registered Republican. He did remember who he voted for sheriff. Why didn't the reporter ask him whether he had voted for McVicker or Brown?

Who did the CNN reporter vote for?

[jimrtex]

Why do you keep bringing up different data and not responding to the data I and others bring up? You implied Harris’ 61% in absentee was in line with his ED vote in Bladen. Do you now see it’s a red flag?

The reason why is that I am capable of looking at data and making an independent conclusion.

Others (perhaps including you) have certain prejudices.

You should consider a third category here besides 1) election data and 2) personal prejudices. The third category is artifacts from the reporting and incipient criminal case here which is being heavily investigated and reported on and which led the bi-partisan board of elections to refuse to certify the election.

You haven't made the argument for throwing all of that out and only considering speculative and possibly tendentious interpretations of data in order to reach a conclusion. And it looks like you're choosing not to engage with what's being reported or investigated, and that's confusing.

What is being "reported" is incomplete or biased.

It seems that you are suggesting if something is "reported" it is facially truthful and complete.

Have you spent any time looking at the actual data dumps from the NCSBE?

Have you spent any time comparing the population of the votes cast in different precincts relative to their population?

Did you notice that three One Stop locations from 2016 were not operated in 2018, and that election turnout was up in those precincts relative to 2016, even though overall turnout was down.

Have you looked at past elections results from Bladen County?

[jimrtex]

ONLY ON 3: Bladen County voter fraud accusations investigated

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Fair use precludes me from quoting the entire article, but fill free to click on the link for a trip down memory lane - it's from 2010.