Should there be a revote?

[J. J.]

No/No.

There is no reason for a revote.  No one has produced any real evidence of fraud in either case.

[J. J.]

I'm going to point out that, in the case of Florida, the Constitution requires a uniform election day.  The question isn't should there be a revote in Florida, but should there be a revote in the United States.

[J. J.]

Possibilty number 4; they abstained.

What type of ballots are being used?

[J. J.]

I'd need something really solid before calling for revoting.  So far I'm seeing a whole lot of nothing.

It's a close election, but so what, that doesn't mean fraud.

[J. J.]

I'd need something really solid before calling for revoting.  So far I'm seeing a whole lot of nothing.

It's a close election, but so what, that doesn't mean fraud.

Here's another example (numerous other examples have been posted in other threads on this forum)"

Anne M. Witte passed away in February 2004. Her obituary reports that Mrs. Witte lived in Sammamish with her husband Vernon E Witte, who survives her.

The King County voter database shows that Vernon E Witte and Anne M Witte of 248th Ave SE are the only people with that last name registered in Sammamish and that they both voted absentee in November.

I'm thoroughly disgusted by this. Ironically, Mrs. Witte's obituary describes her as an active Republican. Whoever cast her ballot should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

The King County Elections office also has a lot to do to explain why a person who passed away nine months before the election is still being sent an absentee ballot.

That's one.  128 to go.

[J. J.]

I fraud could be shown to to have possibly effected the results, maybe.  Nobody has shown that yet.

[J. J.]

Carl, how many of those were discovered to have been invalid; so far, it's a whole bunch of nothing.

[J. J.]

Answer a simple question:

Where votes counted in King county that should NOT have been legally counted?

Does the number of votes equal or exceed the 'victory' margin of Gregoire?

Basically, you have to be the one to present the evidence that there were illegal votes counted and the amount.  The burden of proof is on the Rossi forces.

[J. J.]

The King county administration has already publicly admitted that votes were counted which were NOT verified.

The total number appears to well exceed 'victory' margin of Gregoire.

So, when both sides admit that votes which were counted which should NOT have been counted, what's the problem?

Yes, further specific evidence will be presented in court.

I suspect that the courts will not overturn the election even if they find that the number of votes counted which should not have been counted exceed the Gregoire victory margin.

However, state and federal charges may lie against against King county officials.

Because something is "NOT verified" does not make it invalid.  They should have a list of the voters who went to the polls.  It is entirely possible that those votes were completely valid.

[J. J.]

The King county administration has already publicly admitted that votes were counted which were NOT verified.

The total number appears to well exceed 'victory' margin of Gregoire.

So, when both sides admit that votes which were counted which should NOT have been counted, what's the problem?

Yes, further specific evidence will be presented in court.

I suspect that the courts will not overturn the election even if they find that the number of votes counted which should not have been counted exceed the Gregoire victory margin.

However, state and federal charges may lie against against King county officials.

Because something is "NOT verified" does not make it invalid.  They should have a list of the voters who went to the polls.  It is entirely possible that those votes were completely valid.

JJ

Perhaps you have NOT been followng the extensive details in my posts.

First, MORE votes were tallied in King county than persons shown to have voted, either by the precinct registers and/or the requests for absentee ballots.  Logan specifically admits to this.  He brags that there are at least 1,500 votes counted that he can never attribute to persons shown to have voted! 

Second, a number of specific absentee ballots have been shown to be fraudulent.  In one, the woman who supposedly voted had been dead for nine months at the time.  In another specific example, the same person voted twice, having listed the same mailing location on both requests (with one of the reistrations showing the 'residence' being the exact location of Dan Logan's department).

CARLHAYDEN, I have been following it and I read the MSNBC story on it.  There is a HUGE difference between something "unverfied" and something "invalid."  Something unverified can be verified, for example.  The complaint is, at worst, that election officials did not follow textbook procedures in counting the votes.  As for the difference in the numbers, first those registers (and I'm assuming you are referring to a "voting book" type register), there could be other reasons, such as incomplete registrations or possibly military personal not using the county absentte system.

You have shown that there are two invalid ballots; okay, show another 127 and I'll consider it.

[J. J.]

First, due to the King county NOT following the law, the unverified ballots are not only unverified, but unverifiable.

Second, more specific lists of illegal votes are on their way.

Oh, and BTW, from the official King county website:

The county has stressed that it is still reconciling this list with its vote total in the governor's race. This list shows 895,660 votes counted, and there were 899,199 votes certified by the county in the governor's race. County officials are researching the difference of 3,539 as they work to reconcile computer records with poll books and other election records

The voters are potentially verifiable.  Let's see what happens after the reconcilliation.

On a second point, a revote is not permitted under the state constitution, from everything that I've heard.

[J. J.]

First, due to the King county NOT following the law, the unverified ballots are not only unverified, but unverifiable.

Second, more specific lists of illegal votes are on their way.

Oh, and BTW, from the official King county website:

The county has stressed that it is still reconciling this list with its vote total in the governor's race. This list shows 895,660 votes counted, and there were 899,199 votes certified by the county in the governor's race. County officials are researching the difference of 3,539 as they work to reconcile computer records with poll books and other election records

The voters are potentially verifiable.  Let's see what happens after the reconcilliation.

On a second point, a revote is not permitted under the state constitution, from everything that I've heard.

With respect to the first point, the King county officials have admitted that many of the ballots are unverfiable!

With respect to the second point, while the constitution does NOT specifically provide for a revote, where sufficent irregularities are found, the Supreme Court has the right to order a revote.

With respect to the first point, they have not finished the reconcilliation yet.  The only think that can do is separate the ballots.

What are you using as you (state) constitutional basis for the second point?

[J. J.]

First, the King county administration has admitted that ballots were counted which cannot be attributed to a source.

Second, the Supreme Court could order a revote under either state constitution of federal constitution provisions.

CARLHAYDEN, here is what you said about 16 hours ago:

The county has stressed that it is still reconciling this list with its vote total in the governor's race. This list shows 895,660 votes counted, and there were 899,199 votes certified by the county in the governor's race. County officials are researching the difference of 3,539 as they work to reconcile computer records with poll books and other election records

They are by you own admission researching the difference.  Before anybody even suggests a problem, let's see if that reconcilliation takes place.

Second, there are no federal constitutional provisions for a re-vote.  In two cases, the Federal courts have invalidated an election based on fraud (Phila, State Senate and Miami, Mayor); they did not order a revote.  What are you using for your claim that they can.

[J. J.]

First, the King county administration has admitted that ballots were counted which cannot be attributed to a source.

Second, the Supreme Court could order a revote under either state constitution of federal constitution provisions.

CARLHAYDEN, here is what you said about 16 hours ago:

The county has stressed that it is still reconciling this list with its vote total in the governor's race. This list shows 895,660 votes counted, and there were 899,199 votes certified by the county in the governor's race. County officials are researching the difference of 3,539 as they work to reconcile computer records with poll books and other election records

They are by you own admission researching the difference.  Before anybody even suggests a problem, let's see if that reconcilliation takes place.

Second, there are no federal constitutional provisions for a re-vote.  In two cases, the Federal courts have invalidated an election based on fraud (Phila, State Senate and Miami, Mayor); they did not order a revote.  What are you using for your claim that they can.

First of all JJ, while the King county administration has stated that they are still researching the votes, they have also admitted that they expect that they will not be able to account for about 1,500 votes.

Second, read you own point two, and then contrast it with my previous post.  The contest is going to the Washington Supreme Court, where the plaintiffs can alledge violations of both federal and state law.  The difference between the cases you cited and the case in point is not only that it will be decided in a state court, but that legislative history since those cases has given the court a background for butressing a federal constitutional claim.

Again, there is a difference between expecting and reaching the conclusion.

And again, you claim there should be revote.  You also claim there is no state constitutional basis.  There is no federal constitutional basis.  What do you claim as your basis?

[J. J.]

While the equal protection clause has been used in the two cases cited, it has not led to a "re-vote."

I'll be happy to wait until the information is "divulged," but until then, you havve whole bunch of nothing.

[J. J.]

Okay, you have demonstrated that a revote could be ordered in this case (and I'm assuming that this is a Washington case):

"Where appropriate, these necessary and proper powers would include the power to order a new election where no other remedy would adequately correct distortions in election results caused by fraud or neglect."

I'm not convinced that you are at the stage of "no other remedy."  I'm very skeptical of this.

[J. J.]

Okay, you have demonstrated that a revote could be ordered in this case (and I'm assuming that this is a Washington case):

"Where appropriate, these necessary and proper powers would include the power to order a new election where no other remedy would adequately correct distortions in election results caused by fraud or neglect."

I'm not convinced that you are at the stage of "no other remedy."  I'm very skeptical of this.

A coule of brief excerpts from the Wall Street Journal:

In Washington state, the errors by election officials have been compared to the antics of Inspector Clouseau, only clumsier. At least 1,200 more votes were counted in Seattle's King County than the number of individual voters who can be accounted for.

More than 300 military personnel who were sent their absentee ballots too late to return them have signed affidavits saying they intended to vote for Mr. Rossi.

Not really an issue.  People who voted too late don't get their votes counted.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What it all the "enhanced" show votes for Rossi?  You also might be able to verify the original votes.  It is possible to remove wite-out.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Can you determine if the voters that cast them were or were not legitimate votes.  If they were legal voters, this isn't an issue.  I'm not impressed.  You are still not showing either grounds for a revote or evidence that Rossi won.

[J. J.]

With respect to the first point, federal law requires that military ballots be mailed out in a timely fashion.

All the other states were in compliance.  Washington was NOT.   

Second, altering ballots in prohibited by law!  Geez, I thought you knew that!

Third, since it impossible to prove who the persons where who supposedly cast the ballots, it is impossible to either verify whether they were eligible voters, much less how their vote was cast.  Elections officials have a positive duty under law to follow established procedures which are (in part) designed to prevent ineligible voters from casting ballots.  This is pretty elementary.

First, military ballots do operate under different rules, but WA was not the only state.  WI had similar problems.  In PA a suit was filed and the Governor caved in.  It looks like they missed the deadline here, but that happens.

Second, we are not talking about if the act is illegal.  We are talking about if the vote is invalid because of the illegal act.  Can the effects of alteration be removed to reveal the intent of the voter.  If so, I see no problem.

It is not impossible to prove if the provisional ballots were cast by legitimate voters.  The don't have provisional ballots laying around at the post office; they are given out and signed for by the provisional voter.  It becomes a question of how many ballots were cast by people that were an illegal voters.  That answer could be zero, but the number could be established.

[J. J.]

They should attempt to account for them prior to any action.

[J. J.]

Yes. And if Mrs. Gregoire won the first time, why wouldn't she win again? Oh right, she's been tarnished by the fact that everyone in the state thinks she stole the election.

Why should there be a revote? Even if there was corruption or fraud, the fradulent votes should simply be thrown out. A revote is ridiculous in any circumstances.

In any event, I don't see any real proof of fraud. My motto in these matters is to never chalk something up to evil when it can easily be explained by incompetence. The votes should have all been counted the first time, and a lot of people need to be fired for not having done so.

I have general agreement with Nym.  There is however another factor.  From the court decisions that CARL posted, it seems that WA permits a revote.  I am not happy about that, but that is the law.

If there is evidence that there were enough illegal votes, as defined by the caselaw, to have affected the result, and there is no method for factoring that out, a revote might be necessary.  I favor using every legal method to factor out those votes prior to any revote.  That process should continue.

[J. J.]

The question is, has the vote count been so badly managed that it is totally irreparable.  I am far from convinced that this the case.

Much has been made of the counting of some provisional ballots.  Okay, they should have been verified first, but why can't, if there is a list of who used them, the voters be verified now?  If they all turn out to be illegal ballots, yes, a remedy might be needed.

[J. J.]

"Very interesting," and I agree that is, does not translate into, "Let's have a 'do-over.'"

I would want to see if they could factor in the votes cast by legal voters prior to any revoting.

[J. J.]

And if everyone else agrees that votes well in excess of the 'margin of victory' for Gregoire cannot be acounted for to legally eligible voters, then what?

Then possibly adjudication or a revote.  The courts, at times, have determined that someone really won and ordered the results to be changed.  This happened in a PA Senate race in Phila and the mayorial race in FL.

However, before we even appoach those steps, let's try to determine what the will of the voters was.