Paul supporters 'freak out' town clerk

[Molly1]

These "mistakes" do not happen in casinos.

Yeah try telling the casino owner you made a little ten percent honest mistake in counting his money and see how far that gets you.

 

[diesirae]

The Concord Monitor piece was ANOTHER MSM discrediting job of Ron Paul. They have no idea who the people were who called up, as we do not. They could have been in the Huckster's camp for all we know. The point is they brush off their either sloppy vote counting, or outright fraud. Not one stinking word about how serious that is, and how it needs to be investigated. NOTHING. They also LIED, saying NH has no machines. The hell they don't, and the paper just lied to the people of NH. They have Diebold optical scanners that can be programmed to give ANY result.

This is patently untrue. The article says that the town in question does not use voting machines.

 

[Berri]

Very different situation, very different potential effect on the outcome. The (NH) mistake was corrected anyway.

Every vote should count. In reality, things get flubbed up here or there, then we try to catch it and fix it. And then we leave poor clerks alone when they fix it.

Threats and harassment like this harm our movement, period.

I really don't know what your movement is anymore. END VOTE FRAUD is our movement! Call got busted making votes disappear! and to make it worse she is claiming being incompetant as a defense, UNACCEPTABLE. You want that you can have it CJP, but we are not taking it so STFU!

 

[PatriotOne]

For the love of Pete; there were something like a dozen candidates filed for the Republican nomination. It's not unreasonable at all to think that there might accidentally be a mistake which leaves one entry blank -- especially when you consider the fact that many candidates in the primary got zero votes.



Yes, they do. People just don't get harassed over them.

Wow. A whole dozen different candidates? I suppose it could have just been a mistake if a freaking 5 year old was in charge .

 

[susano]

For the love of Pete; there were something like a dozen candidates filed for the Republican nomination. It's not unreasonable at all to think that there might accidentally be a mistake which leaves one entry blank -- especially when you consider the fact that many candidates in the primary got zero votes.



Yes, they do. People just don't get harassed over them.

Bullshit. When someone leaves nn office blank, out of the whole ballot, there simply is no vote for that office. That is the fault or decision of the voter, and those who do the counting are only to count what has been voted on. It is not their concern if someone chooses to skip an office.

NO MARGIN OF ERROR IS ACCEPTABLE. There is nothing difficult about counting ballots.

 

[Molly1]

Wow. A whole dozen different candidates? I suppose it could have just been a mistake if a freaking 5 year old was in charge .

A dozen? It's understandable--they didn't have enough fingers.

I could see if they didn't question a zero vote for Vermin Supreme, but how could they not question a zero vote for Ron Paul?

Would they have questioned a zero vote for Rudy Guiliani?

 

[diesirae]

Wow. A whole dozen different candidates? I suppose it could have just been a mistake if a freaking 5 year old was in charge .

Have you ever worked an election? I've worked as a voter registrar, tracking people who have voted to ensure maximum turnout -- believe me, it's easy to make a mistake with 4 people, let alone a dozen.

A mistake is not unreasonable, and your incredulity tells me a lots about your degree of experience with electoral processes.

 

[diesirae]

Bullshit. When someone leaves nn office blank, out of the whole ballot, there simply is no vote for that office. That is the fault or decision of the voter, and those who do the counting are only to count what has been voted on. It is not their concern if someone chooses to skip an office.

NO MARGIN OF ERROR IS ACCEPTABLE. There is nothing difficult about counting ballots.

What the heck are you talking about? There is nothing difficult, but believe me that accidents happen. I've worked elections, and I've seen it happen first hand.

 

[PatriotOne]

And then we leave poor clerks alone when they fix it.

Poor clerk? Wow..,.you do know that the City Clerk is not some minimum wage job right? You do know she is an elected official who is the top person in charge of that city's elections right?

 

[Molly1]

Poor clerk? Wow..,.you do know that the City Clerk is not some minimum wage job right? You do know she is an elected official who is the top person in charge of that city's elections right?

well to give her credit, she did produce the votes when questioned by blackboxvoting in a phone call.

Which now that I think about it, is strange all by itself.

Why was it so easy to produce the vote when questioned about it?

And if they had not been questioned, does that mean we would never know about those votes at all?

And why did the other zero towns also produce votes for Ron Paul after Sutton was questioned?

I think it's time to hire a PI.

 

[diesirae]

Poor clerk? Wow..,.you do know that the City Clerk is not some minimum wage job right? You do know she is an elected official who is the top person in charge of that city's elections right?

The top electoral official in a town of 1500! My gosh, how can we expect anything less than robotic precision from small town officials!

well to give her credit, she did produce the votes when questioned by blackboxvoting in a phone call.

Which now that I think about it, is strange all by itself.

Why was it so easy to produce the vote when questioned about it?

And if they had not been questioned, does that mean we would never know about those votes at all?

And why did the other zero towns also produce votes for Ron Paul after Sutton was questioned?

I think it's time to hire a PI.

Because it was written down on the one tally correctly, as she said in the article. It just was missed when they were transcribing it for submission. To correct the mistake, she simply faxed the original tally to demonstrate the error.

 

[PatriotOne]

Have you ever worked an election? I've worked as a voter registrar, tracking people who have voted to ensure maximum turnout -- believe me, it's easy to make a mistake with 4 people, let alone a dozen.

A mistake is not unreasonable, and your incredulity tells me a lots about your degree of experience with electoral processes.

And your acceptance of this "simple mistake" tells me you are not competent to be working in any capacity during the election process. Do us all a favor and steer clear of them.

 

[Berri]

The top electoral official in a town of 1500! My gosh, how can we expect anything less than robotic precision from small town officials!



Because it was written down on the one tally correctly, as she said in the article. It just was missed when they were transcribing it for submission. To correct the mistake, she simply faxed the original tally to demonstrate the error.

Only after she got a call from Blackbox voting did the figures suddenly appear, correct?

 

[Molly1]

The top electoral official in a town of 1500! My gosh, how can we expect anything less than robotic precision from small town officials!



Because it was written down on the one tally correctly, as she said in the article. It just was missed when they were transcribing it for submission. To correct the mistake, she simply faxed the original tally to demonstrate the error.

But if the second tally was not right, how did she know the first tally was right?

And what person turned 31 into zero?

 

[MikeFallopian]

The top electoral official in a town of 1500! My gosh, how can we expect anything less than robotic precision from small town officials!

And even if she is grossly incompetent, political campaigns are all about perceptions. The public sees this as a bunch of arrogant jackasses going on a campaign of harrassment against a nice small-town lady, in Ron Paul's name. This is not an intelligent thing to do when your candidate is already viewed negatively by most voters.

 

[diesirae]

And your acceptance of this "simple mistake" tells me you are not competent to be working in any capacity during the election process. Do us all a favor and steer clear of them.

It's not acceptance; it's recognition of the simple fact that people make mistakes despite all the attempts and systems they have to minimize them. I know when I work an election, I do my utmost to check and recheck data -- that does not mean I will have a 100% success rate. No one could, does, or can expect that -- except, apparently, uniformed partisans who have nothing better than to harass a town clerk over a mistake she identified and fixed.

But if the second tally was not right, how did she know the first tally was right?

And what person turned 31 into zero?

The first tally is the original record; it is transcribed when it is submitted for approval. In the transcription process, there was a miscommunication and one of the entries was left blank when it should have read "31". The article explains who was probably responsible, but it's impossible to tell for sure after the fact -- try thinking about this the same way you lost your keys last time.

 

[CJP]

Quit making excuses for vote fraud. Quit focusing on Ron Paul supporters.

There is zero evidence of "fraud." Fraud is a crime committed with intent. I am not excusing "fraud." I do think that isolated imperfections in a human being are excusable.

Do you think an imperfection in a human being is inexcusable. If so, you are indeed scary.
- - -

The reason I'm focusing on supporters here should be obvious. Threats, harassment, and the like -- in the name of our movement -- are being celebrated and promoted here. This is behavior that has done and will continue to do great harm to our cause, until the instigators wake up and realize what they are doing.

I'm hanging out here in this thread in the (perhaps vain) hope that some of you might stop and think. Remember, we are Dr. Paul's ambassadors and the messengers of freedom. We are engaged in politics, which is all about the art of persuasion.

There are times when malice and injustice should be fought as fire with fire, regardless of the consequences. This is not one of them.

Leave the poor woman alone.

 

[Molly1]

It's possible they reported it correctly at 31 votes and it was changed to zero at the central location.

If we had a free press, we might be able to get to the bottom of this.

Or if we had a PI.

 

[PatriotOne]

well to give her credit, she did produce the votes when questioned by blackboxvoting in a phone call.

Which now that I think about it, is strange all by itself.

Why was it so easy to produce the vote when questioned about it?

And if they had not been questioned, does that mean we would never know about those votes at all?

And why did the other zero towns also produce votes for Ron Paul after Sutton was questioned?

I think it's time to hire a PI.

I think your right.

 

[diesirae]

It's possible they reported it correctly at 31 votes and it was changed to zero at the central location.

If we had a free press, we might be able to get to the bottom of this.

We do, and they reported exactly what happened -- it even walks you through it. The original form has "31"; the return she submitted had a blank. There was no change at a "central location" -- as the article says "Paul's 31 votes got lost in the shuffle, lost in translation between moderator Greg Hill's voice and Call's pen."