We need immediate MACHINE RECOUNT of OH punch cards!

[Her Blondness]

Because hanging chads don't register a vote. Every time the cards are physically handled and fed through the card reader machines, hanging chads can fall out and a new vote can be counted. That is what happened in Florida, with every machine count of punch cards more and more votes were tallied. Election officials said that was what was happening when asked where all the new votes were coming from.

I understand most punch card systems in Ohio are in poorer neighborhoods which would be more likely to vote for Kerry.

Time is of the essence -- we need a punch card machine recount immediately after the votes are certified Dec. 3. If we rely on hand recounts it will take forever and we will probably miss the electoral college deadline. And Blackwell will delay the handcounting until it is too late.

[reality_bites]

1. Yes, a recount...

why didn't someone think of that already ?

[Her Blondness]

2. Machine not hand count!!!

[genieroze]

3. I would be cheaper too. eom

[PennyMan]

4. Just A Thought About The Recount

I Think A Recount Is Great But Has Anyone Thought About What
Happened In 2000 When Mr Bush Got The Count Stopped And The
Supreme Court Got Involved Them Being A Majority Of 5
Republicans And 2 Democrats Appointed NOT ELECTED Mr Bush To
Office, Aren't We Taking A Chance Of Them Trying This Again.
Would It Be Better To Try And Get A Revote In The Counties
That Are Having The Problems,Or Better Yet Get The Whole State
To Revote Or Beter Still Get The Whole USA To Revote, It Sure
Looks Like As Many Problems As So Many States Are Having That
A Revote Wouldn't Be Out Of The Question. Just A Thought

[LisaL]

5. Yea, sure, it would be nice to get a revote.

But if you think it's hard to get a recount, how easy do you think it's going to be to get a revote?
:eyes:

[read the law first]

6. Revote not possible in just one jurisdiction

There's no precedent anywhere (state, local or federal caselaw or statute) for a revote in a jurisdiction smaller than the one represented by the officeholder subject to the election. i.e. all revotes involve the entire jurisdiction. If it's a state rep case, you revote the entire district, not just the precincts where the problems occured). They just did this in Georgia with a Court of Appeals race and had to revote the whole state even though the problem was with 500 votes somewhere in the middle of the state. The whole state revoted. We also faced this in one of the Florida cases in 2000 (I think it was Palm Beach) where the judges basically said that there's no revote in an area smaller than the area covered by the office.

Also, for a revote, you have to show that there were more illegal or irregular ballots than the margin plus the undervote.

Recounts are easy compared to succesful contests (but succesful contests are possible).

[MarkusQ]

8. Except for the one they're doing now in NC? (n/t)

[read the law first]

9. The Charlotte Mecklenburg one?

That's the whole jurisdiction unless something's happened. If so, I stand corrected.

[LisaL]

10. They actually lost thousands of votes there in the local race-

But they will not do a revote for president, only that local race.

[read the law first]

14. I stand partially corrected

There is a local Board of Election that voted to allow some voters whose votes can be identified and others who didn't vote on election day to be in on the revote. I would expect one of the candidates will challenge that decision in a suit. It would seem odd that someone who didn't bother to show up on election day now gets to go in and decide the winner after having already seen the results. Don't know how that stands up to an equal protection argument since the rest of the voters had to cast their ballots on election day not knowing who the winner was or how close a race it would be.

[PennyMan]

7. Just Hoping

Was Just Hoping I Guess Hate To See What Happened in 2000
Happen Again In 2004 After Winning In 2000 To

[mackdaddy]

11. I think they just did a 2nd pass thru the machine

I stopped in our local BOE here in Hocking Co in SE Ohio a couple of weeks ago now.
As I understood it they ran the bulk of the cards through the card reader on election night to get the initial totals that were reported.
They then received and verified the absentee and provisionals and prepared them for the final count. They then re-ran everything through the machines, and that was the final count that would be locally certified sent to Blackwell for statewide certification.

It will be interesting to see what the "new" count totals for Ohio will be.

By the way, I did not see any easy way to screw with the voting system here locally in our little county. Older non-Diebold stand alone card reader and totalizer PC with no modem or network connections. Mix of Dems and Repubs in the small 4 person office.

[LisaL]

12. Danaher electronic voting machines in Franklin county

were supposed to be safe too. One of those babies gave Bush almost 4,000 extra votes. Now, this was discovered because there were less voters than votes. But how would you know if one of those things shifted votes from Kerry to Bush?

[KaliTracy]

13. Actually Punch Card Machines are used in almost 3/4

of Ohio according to this article.

http://www.dispatch.com/election/election-local.php?story=dispatch/2004/10/17/20041017-A1-02.html&rfr=nwsl

I live in West Chester (bush rallied here to the tune of 50,000 supporters). high/upper-middle class, mostly caucasian, very republican area.

We used punch card machines -- only thing is -- our precincts had LOTS of them (5-7 in at least 3 polling sites in my little strip of a mile and a half -- 5 polling places on in that strip, the ohter could have had 2 or 5 for all I know) (I've shared my experience here and to several talk-media ooutlets and the Ohio ACLU).

When I mentioned my experience to one of the local democratic headquarters (I wrote several in a 60 mile radius), and wondered why we had such machine disparity -- he told me he didn't think the long lines were a partisan issue, and that punch card machines were less expensive (this was all the same week of the the election).

I believe if other "chads" are missing that aren't supposed to be missing, the machine doesn't count it. I think that's why they go for hand counts. I may be wrong though.

tracy

[proudtobeadem]

15. I think, If the Tabulators have been hacked, they can pass it

through 100 times and you'll still get the same fake count. That's why we need a hand recount.

[m berst]

16. odd thing to call for

There are standardized procedures in place for handling punch cards. The whole "chad" thing, and then saying that the "more the cards are handled the better it is for us" is right out of the RNC talking points from 2000, remember? It was a way for them to discredit the Democrats.

Welcome to all the new DU members. Nice to see new members apparently so up to speed on the election issues and so anxious to jump in.

There is an ongoing coordinated effort here at DU to investigate various aspects of the election and to take action that is led by trustworthy DU members. I am sure that you will want to volunteer and get involved.

3 DU threads are updated daily with the latest election fraud info:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=201&topic_id=1984#

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=201x3223

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=201x4927