The Democrat controlled King County is stalling for more and more time. The Gov "election" is in the courts. As I've observed before, the Dems nationally and in the State kept saying "count every vote." What they didn't say is where they got the ballots they counted....
From Sharkansky yesterday on soundpolitics.com
[KLP Note: I have posted the links that he references in his post. They are below and marked with **, ***, and ****.]
February 27, 2005
Credit where credit is due
I found more proof that King County Election officials are telling a cock and bull story when they say that **voter crediting is just a "file-maintenance chore" that "has nothing to do with ballot-counting". From King County's ***"STATEMENT FOR ABSENTEE BALLOT COUNT RELEASE; NOVEMBER 10, 2000"
>>>>>For those not familiar with the processing of absentee ballots, all ballots received have to first be sorted by precinct, which is how they are counted, just like the poll votes. Then each has to have the signature of the voter verified against a digitized facsimile maintained in a special computer file, and the voter credited so that no one can vote twice.<<<<<
Confirms **** what I wrote last Wednesday, doesn't it? Crediting is not a post-certification clerical chore, it's an integral part of the ballot-counting process. The number of absentee ballots that King County counted from Nov. 2004 is about 500 more than the number of absentee voters credited. (this is after subtracting the number of federal write-in ballots and Address Confidentiality Program voters, who show up in the ballot count but not the voter file). Almost half of the unaccounted for absentee ballots (226) did not exist in the first certified count, but materialized out of thin air in the recounts.
I suspect that King County is telling the cock and bull story that crediting is unrelated to ballot-counting in a (lame) attempt to cover up the massive number of ballots that cannot be explained by actual voters.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at 11:29 PM | Comments (24) | Email This
888888888888888888
**SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
seattlepi.nwsource.com
Election expert praises King County
Record-keeping called very accurate
Friday, February 18, 2005
By NEIL MODIE
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER
The head of the nation's largest election system thinks King County displayed amazing accuracy in a bureaucratic process that the Republican Party is focusing on in its attempt to overturn the governor's election.
But Los Angeles County Registrar of Voters Conny McCormack also thinks it's irrelevant.
While King County officials defend the process in question as highly accurate and GOP critics call it shockingly inaccurate, McCormack said it's a red herring, a flap over a postelection file-maintenance chore that has no bearing on the accuracy of the election returns.
"It has nothing to do with the ballot-counting. It's a separate process," she said this week. A nationally recognized authority on election administration and reform, McCormack made the comments in an interview given at the urging of King County election officials.
The criticism, she said, is "maligning the accuracy of the count based on something that has nothing to do with the accuracy of the count."
Secretary of State Sam Reed, a Republican, and Bob Bruce, King County's former elections director, likewise said yesterday that the discrepancy for which King County is being criticized is unrelated to election accuracy.
"That's ridiculous," state Republican Party Chairman Chris Vance responded. "If you can't produce an accurate list of who voted in an election, one that matches up to the number of votes counted, how do you know that someone wasn't just stuffing the ballot box?"
He said election officials "are just trying to create as much confusion and smoke and mirrors and jargon and gobbledygook as possible."
The issue is the 1,853-vote variance between ballots cast and voters credited with voting in the 2004 general election -- a discrepancy in the labor-intensive "voter crediting" or "voter history" process that is done after election results already have been certified. The number of people credited with voting was 1,853 more than the number of ballots cast.
"It's a variance that is not unique to King County nor unique to this election," said Dean Logan, the county director of records, elections and licensing services. "So I think it's being used in a way to misrepresent the accuracy of the election."
After election results are certified, election workers electronically scan voters' signatures into records. The purpose is to record, for future elections, who voted in the last one so that registration files can be purged of inactive voters and political parties and campaigns can obtain voters' names and voting-frequency data.
Logan and McCormack said that record-keeping process, which they said is susceptible to human error, is being confused with the process of reconciling the number of ballots cast at each precinct and the number of people who voted at each precinct.
Those two numbers are supposed to be matched up before the final results are certified 15 days after the election
88888888888888888888
*** http://www.metrokc.gov/elections/absstatus.htm
8888888888888
**** soundpolitics.com
Re King County Coverup |
