CASE Ohio found some interesting data on the Hackett race

[Carolab]

Phil Fry from CASE Ohio came up with this interesting info from the District 2 race in Ohio. It appears those final 23 precincts, which ere delayed hold the key.
(mod mom)


I plotted the returns that came in just to see if they told me anything.


Hackett is very strong, leading till the 9:14 report and then only 870 votes behind at 10:01. (These are the times I saw the votes posted on the TV web sites.)

Then we have to wait 53 minutes for the last 23 precincts to report and they give Hackett only 40% of the vote.

>From reading other posts, these 23 precincts might have been in Clermont county, but they have something like 78 total, so it is not all of them. These are some very special precincts indeed.

Anyone have information about where the last 23 precincts were?

Phil

[adolfo]

1. Clermont was the last one to count

Screenshots:

CLERMONT

				

Time			Schmidt		Hackett		Precincts Reporting

9:28:08 AM		0		0		0/191
8:24:09 PM		1158		750		0/191
9:30:23 PM		7869		6099		100/191
10:49:17 PM		17320		12439		191/191

note: write-in votes not listed (0.20% of vote total)

[Goldeneye]

2. Rosebud57 might know.

Or she might be able to find out when she stops by Hackett's law office tommorow. Maybe PM her?

[Carolab]

4. Already did.

Let's see if she can find out.

[Land Shark]

3. Please post or PM me with any Hackett data/analysis, I'm on Thom Hartmann

national show Thursday at 2 p.m. EST, 11 a.m. PST (edited to specify correct time zone)

[autorank]

5. How many of the precincts were effected by the "Humidity" problem?

There are 191 precincts in Clermont County. They had to hand count how many of them??? I'd love the answer. THANKS

[FreedomAngel82]

6. What's up with that humidity nonsense?

I think that's just a bunch of nonsense. :shrug: I hope Hackett does look into that and I'm glad Dean is.

[mod mom]

7. It's the final 91 precincts, which were from Clermont county, not 23

that info was revised. Clermont has 191 precincts. they must have submitted the first 100, first. I received a hard copy precinct level results faxed to me from a Clermont BOE employee. Adolfo has a spreadsheet in the same order. Although nothing sticks out like a sore thumb, I think we need to review the poll books.

I find it supicious that Schmidt "won" with about ~ 4%, that there were delays in the final posting of votes, and that machine broke down.

[meganmonkey]

8. Do you know what brand the scanning machines were?

Just curious...

Thanks! (And general thanks to CASE for being on top of this!!!)

[mod mom]

9. J30 has put together an excellent List of OhioCounties by Vendor list

Clermont has ES & S Optiscan (they are one of the counties suing to keep ES&S)

[shance]

10. Who exactly are the officials suing to keep ES&S?

n/t

[liam_laddie]

11. Why keep opscans?

There are several counties in Ohio suing SOS Blackwell et al,
because they don't want specific brand DRE's shoved down their throat. There is a partial compromise that opscans will be allowed, but that too is not being accepted by all. SFAIK, it's still an issue to be resolved. For instance, Hamilton County BoE prefers, if there "have" to be new HAVA-compliant systems, the Hart Intercivic "eSlate" machine. But these are corruptible; in Harris County TX (Houston) in 11/2004, on straight Democratic ticket votes, the presidential votes were switched to Bush the first two times a voter checked his/her choice before punching the
"complete" button. Only the third try resulted in a Kerry presidential vote. Fraudulent programming? You decide.

From what I've learned about BoE's and their preferences, a lot has to do with the expense of running an election. The main, and almost only, problem with punch-cards (used here in Hamilton County, Ohio - next to Clermont) is the over/undervote error, from voter either punching twice for the same entry (over) or no punch (under). That said, punch card blanks cost about 1/2 cent each; the rest of the system - tabulators, main compiler CPU, are about the same for punch-card and opscan systems.

Opscan ballots run from $0.20-0.75 EACH! So you have a large
expense differential in the consumables. I think Hamilton County
- punch-card, simple Votomatic '"machines" (just a stand with
a holder-guide for the ballot booklet, the card and the stylus to punch the chad out) - has about 5000 of these, or about 100 voters per machine.

But - full-bore DRE's (touch-screens, etc) run the overall cost of an election up to 3-4X the cost of punch-card and +/-2X the cost of an opscan system. Seems to have a lot to do with the maintenance and upgrade contracts which the vendors
(Diebold, ES&S, Hart Intercivic, etc. - they all make several types
of election systems...) require! Plus there is less "throughput" -
voters serviced per hour - with DRE's, so you need more of them, at $2500-4000 each - to handle the turnout. Crazy!

The real problem across all systems is the electronics, the digital signal, which is what your choice is converted to, being
unauditable. The electronics and associated code and programming are the ISSUE! Get that straight! PLEASE! Until
the code and programming are bulletproof honest, it is IMPOSSIBLE to have confidence in our election systems.
Please realize that the HAVA (a four billion dollar carrot-bribe to
assure rethug control of elections) is the great danger.
Paper ballots, hand marked, counted at the precinct and again at the BoE - JUST LIKE CANADA, GERMANY and LOTS of other
advanced nations do - are the ONLY way to be assured that the
results are an accurate and honest record of the voters' intent.
My more-than-two-cents worth...

[riqster]

12. Currently, the entire voting process is in a black box

And these uncertified crap boxes only make it worse.

[shance]

13. That is the best way I have heard to sum it all up.

"The entire voting process is in a black box"

Mind you a black box maintained by Republican interests.