(Huge) delegate vote anomaly in Alabama verified

[RonRules]

3) No. However, they would match the reports. We post those tapes here at the courthouse as well as at each poll location so anyone can view them and compare our published numbers to the actual tapes. Many of the candidates will have people assigned to various polls to obtain those numbers before the poll workers can drive downtown and would quickly notice a disparity. Also, the reports are compared to the tapes through a canvassing procedure after each election. For a primary election, the party is responsible for conducting the canvass and we facilitate it. For a general election, we conduct the canvass ourselves.

The poll tapes (depending on the machine) often only show totals. Can you ask him if the tapes only show the totals or the individual candidate numbers.

In Bev Harris videos, you'll see the machine output on a tape the results for each candidate. If that's available, that's what we need, regardless of their procedures for having checked it.

Thanks for posting though.

 

[drummergirl]

Brilliant! So, we have Romney flipping and Santorum deleting votes. And it does sound like the poll tapes are checked, which tends to point back to the voting machines... Unraveling the web of deception does take effort and patience. way to go!

So I sent this email to Jefferson County Alabama Election Commissioner:

"
Thank you for your response. I have a request from a couple of analysts that I will relay to you. Any response to these is greatly appreciated:
(1) the answer to the following question: was the enforcement of the delegate overvoting rule any different in 2008, through software or poll worker checks?
(2) the Jefferson EVM listing .PDF for 2008 like the one to which you sent me the link.
(3) Would it be possible to get a copy of the poll tapes for machine #138 and #299? More would be even better (#197, #270, #131, #165 above), and particularly machines with high counts.
Sincerely,"

Here is the response received from him just now:

1) We changed no procedures from 2008 to 2012 regarding delegates. Realize though that in 2008, the presidential race was the only thing on the ballot. The presidential primary was held in February, and the statewide primary was held in June.
2) ftp://ftp.jeffcointouch.com/elections/SummaryReport.html
3) No. However, they would match the reports. We post those tapes here at the courthouse as well as at each poll location so anyone can view them and compare our published numbers to the actual tapes. Many of the candidates will have people assigned to various polls to obtain those numbers before the poll workers can drive downtown and would quickly notice a disparity. Also, the reports are compared to the tapes through a canvassing procedure after each election. For a primary election, the party is responsible for conducting the canvass and we facilitate it. For a general election, we conduct the canvass ourselves.

 

[rb3b3]

my guess is that this vote flipper will 100% be switched to on in these 3 states voting today!! i guarantee it because of rons success this past two weekends.... mark my words!!!!! vote swicth will be in full effect!!! NO DOUBT ABOUT IT! WATCH AND SEE

 

[RonRules]

my guess is that this vote flipper will 100% be switched to on in these 3 states voting today!! i guarantee it because of rons success this past two weekends.... mark my words!!!!! vote swicth will be in full effect!!! NO DOUBT ABOUT IT! WATCH AND SEE

It's also because the machines are quarantined before the elections. If the machines have been locked up in a room with no internet access for a couple of months, then for sure, we'll see flipping.

 

[RonRules]

For a primary election, the party is responsible for conducting the canvass and we facilitate it. For a general election, we conduct the canvass ourselves.

Note that in both 2008 and 2012, the "Canvas" is simply a report that the SOE Central Tabulator spits out. These voting machine companies try to make these election officials jobs as easy as possible. A "canvas report" is now just a report that you run from the central tabulator. I don't find that satisfactory at all.

In Milwaukee County for example, they get a printed (sometimes hand written) sheet from each precinct, which they centrally compare. That's how I was able to see the huge discrepancy of Ron/Mitt 3/133 votes in the Village of Greendale.

The dirty deed may be done at the individual machine level, but the logistics of effecting it that way are much more difficult than at the Central Tab. Based on the Centrally tabulated reports we got from Alabama, I stick with my story of the CT being the main culprit.

 

[drummergirl]

Note that in both 2008 and 2012, the "Canvas" is simply a report that the SOE Central Tabulator spits out. These voting machine companies try to make these election officials jobs as easy as possible. A "canvas report" is now just a report that you run from the central tabulator. I don't find that satisfactory at all.

In Milwaukee County for example, they get a printed (sometimes hand written) sheet from each precinct, which they centrally compare. That's how I was able to see the huge discrepancy of Ron/Mitt 3/133 votes in the Village of Greendale.

The dirty deed may be done at the individual machine level, but the logistics of effecting it that way are much more difficult than at the Central Tab. Based on the Centrally tabulated reports we got from Alabama, I stick with my story of the CT being the main culprit.

The difficulty of canvassing and our present circumstances is that The Flipper is not a ballot stuffer. Canvassing just checks the total number of votes against the number of voters that came to the polling place. It can't detect flipping or (unless it's really excessive) vote deletion.

 

[Liberty1789]

ftp://ftp.jeffcointouch.com/elections/SummaryReport.html

Failed to download that so far. Does it really contain 2008 by precinct/EVM? The "Summary Report" name worries me a bit.

 

[The Man]

Failed to download that so far. Does it really contain 2008 by precinct/EVM? The "Summary Report" name worries me a bit.

Try this link: ftp://ftp.jeffcointouch.com/elections/Archives/Year%202008/Presidentialpref2008/Precinct%20report021508.pdf

 

[parocks]

You sure know how to waste peoples' time. Whenever anyone ANYWHERE begins to demonstrate anomalies in vote counts, with reliable data, with significant evidence of tampering, you show up and start your babbling. Don't you have anything better to do than attempt to undermine this work? They are even quoting your babble on the DailyPaul, that is when threads about the Alabama delegate anomaly are posted.

Yeah, I was in Maine, at the convention. I think people should be focused on things like that, winning delegates, and not staring at charts. It's pretty simple what happened in Alabama.

Seems like theres a lot of people who joined up here in March 2012 who want Ron Paul Supporters to spend lots of time and effort on a wild goose chase that makes us seem crazy. If someone on another site realizes that theres a simple explanation for what happened in Alabama, good for them.

 

[Liberty1789]

Try this link: ftp://ftp.jeffcointouch.com/elections/Archives/Year%202008/Presidentialpref2008/Precinct%20report021508.pdf

No dice... Baffles me. If you have the file locally, would you mind uploading it to filedropper?

 

[The Man]

Yeah, I was in Maine, at the convention. I think people should be focused on things like that, winning delegates, and not staring at charts. It's pretty simple what happened in Alabama.

Seems like theres a lot of people who joined up here in March 2012 who want Ron Paul Supporters to spend lots of time and effort on a wild goose chase that makes us seem crazy. If someone on another site realizes that theres a simple explanation for what happened in Alabama, good for them.

No offense but your "simple explanation" doesn't explain the chart below. I don't have a problem IF you sincerely believe your explanation. Romney has a 200- 300 vote to delegate differential when all the others are reasonably close... I don't find this at all random.

 

[parocks]

Yeah, don't care. I have a basic chart which shows a plausible explanation for what happened. You all can keep starting at charts everyday, 8 hours a day, and try to explain that what we're looking at is fraud. I don't care.

This here is good enough. On to campaigning, or whatever else it is you do.

This topic should've been sent to hot topics long ago. Actually, "staring at graphs, believing there's fraud" should be a sub topic of hot topics, so that they have their own little playground that no one else has to be bothered by.

No offense but your "simple explanation" doesn't explain the chart below. I don't have a problem IF you sincerely believe your explanation. Romney has a 200- 300 vote to delegate differential when all the others are reasonably close... I don't find this at all random.

 

[The Man]

No dice... Baffles me. If you have the file locally, would you mind uploading it to filedropper?

http://www.filedropper.com/precinct20report021508

 

[Liberty1789]

Remember that chart?

Thanks to The Man, we now have the data for Jefferson County in 2008. And it looks like this:

I suppose that, over only 4 years, the vast majority of voters are the same people using an identically formatted ballot.

The difference is stunning.

Given that, when queried about the checks on overvoting, the Jefferson County Alabam Election Commisioner emailed to the Man that:

We changed no procedures from 2008 to 2012 regarding delegates.

we still have no explanation whatsoever for this jaw-dropping difference. Outside the vote tampering hypothesis, that is...

 

[drummergirl]

we still have no explanation whatsoever for this jaw-dropping difference. Outside the vote tampering hypothesis, that is...

Exactly.

 

[RonRules]

Spectacular work, Liberty.

After you take a well deserved break, if you can, please chart (histogram) the number of votes per machine.

It's unusual that 18 of them only had one vote.

 

[Liberty1789]

Spectacular work, Liberty.

After you take a well deserved break, if you can, please chart (histogram) the number of votes per machine.

It's unusual that 18 of them only had one vote.

Does not look unusual. Remember typically 2 machines per site (in case of breakdown I suppose), even in the low count ones.

Last freebie. From now, it is $62/ hour

 

[RonRules]

Does not look unusual. Remember typically 2 machines per site (in case of breakdown I suppose), even in the low count ones.
Last freebie. From now, it is $62/ hour

Thanks for the trouble. 18 machines with one vote seemed strange, but when 13 machines have 2 votes, 11 have 3 votes, etc., it all looks pretty reasonable.

But your 2012/2008 delegate charts need to go on the cover of Statistics Magazine!

 

[drummergirl]

Thanks for the trouble. 18 machines with one vote seemed strange, but when 13 machines have 2 votes, 11 have 3 votes, etc., it all looks pretty reasonable.

But your 2012/2008 delegate charts need to go on the cover of Statistics Magazine!

Oh yeah, that'd make a nice textbook cover.

 

[The Man]

Remember that chart?
Thanks to The Man, we now have the data for Jefferson County in 2008. And it looks like this:
I suppose that, over only 4 years, the vast majority of voters are the same people using an identically formatted ballot.
The difference is stunning.Given that, when queried about the checks on overvoting, the Jefferson County Alabam Election Commisioner emailed to the Man that: we still have no explanation whatsoever for this jaw-dropping difference. Outside the vote tampering hypothesis, that is...

OK Liberty1789. I have found independently of your histogram below that Paul really scored around 13% but was intentionally flatlined at 5%. IF an algorithm was used that utilized a DIVISOR instead of simple subtraction to recalculate Paul's total, would it not totally explain your histogram? Something like Paul new=5%= (Paul old%)/n where n=integer to give Paul new closest to 5%. The noise in between each X-Axis whole number integer is from true delegate voter error.