Navigation
Topics
Log In
Log Out
:
Special Search
New Today
New This Week
Advanced Search
Tree View
Your Account
Edit Profile
Register
Forgot Password
Tools
Help/Instructions
Policies
CLICK STATE TO SEE:
"WATCH LIST"
Marked with: 
"OPEN & HONEST"
Marked with: 
...
|
| 1-29-08: Questions unfolding througho... |
|
| Author |
Message |
    
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 7554
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 9 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 4:16 pm: | 
|
1. David Scanlan - operations guy for the New Hampshire recount. Questions are always referred to Scanlan when you ask about ballot ordering, ballot reconciliation, ballot chain of custody. David Scanlan knew, or should have known, of the fraudulent labels being referred to as "seals." Why did he permit this?
WEBSTER'S DICTIONARY: "Seal": something that secures (as a wax seal on a document); a closure that must be broken to be opened and that thus reveals tampering ; a tight and perfect closure
Why is Scanlan blaming the town clerks for seals that do not adhere properly, when it was his own division that provided the seals?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHL_YMBolRs - Who's responsible for chain of custody breakdown?
Is it true that Scanlan is the one who attempted to halt the Albert Howard recount, trying to call it off for Tuesday and Wednesday this week?
Why is reconciliation (poll book examination, blank ballot counts, ballot order invoices) not being allowed right now? According to Sally Castleman (EDA), town clerks are saying there were required to send poll books to the secretary of state by Jan. 18. The sec. state's office has the documents in hand. Why not allow proper reconciliation of the ballots?
2. Do problems originate from the town clerks or "Hoppy & Butch"?
- Did Nashua Town Clerk Paul Bergeron fail to secure his ballot boxes, giving Ward 9 absentee votes to Hoppy and Butch with the lid open? Or did the lid get opened while in the custody of Hoppy and Butch? Who will take accountability for the chain of custody failure for Ward 9 absentees?
- Did Nashua Town Clerk Paul Bergeron provide a large Ward 5 ballot box to Hoppy and Butch with the top torn open, containing only 333 ballots in the large box -- with a "seal" on the box that did not match anything on the dispatch sheet? Or did something happen to this box while in the custody of Butch and Hoppy?
- Did the Bedford Town Clerk provide an improperly sealed box, sticking ballots in a medical supply box? If so, why, and if not, how did ballots appear for the recount housed in such a container?
3. Why did Secretary of State Bill Gardner fail to take any steps to mitigate the risks with Diebold 1.94w optical scan system used in New Hampshire? Why did he permit a sole source vendor, LHS Associates, to program all the memory cards, knowing that one of the key people for this vendor is a convicted narcotics trafficker? Why did Gardner agree to let ballots be stored outside the vault on the evening of Jan. 17, 2008?
When Election Defense Alliance's Sally Castleman visited town clerks on January 23, she was told by a town clerk that Sec. State Bill Gardner had issued a directive advising them not to allow citizens to photograph the ballots boxes before pickup. Does this directive exist in writing?
4. Why did Karen Ladd, of the sec. state's office, sign for a shipment of ballots from Manchester Ward 11 by herself, while the rest of the shipment was signed for publicly, in front of the building, by David Scanlan and Brian Burford? Why were one-half of Ward 11 ballots delivered six hours after all the other Manchester ballots? Why weren't they received publicly following the same protocols as the other ballots in the same shipment?
Looking for answers, looking for accountability, and looking for people to pitch in getting and sharing e-mailed or faxed written answers from New Hampshire public officials. Just jump right in. Don't call, write, get the answer committed in writing, help us get to the bottom of this. You can see details for yourself in the videos linked below.
LAST QUESTION:
Aren't we all getting sick of lack of consequences for clear breaches in duty to protect and secure the rights of the citizenry?
Videos posted at YouTube on New Hampshire so far:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHL_YMBolRs
Who's responsible for chain of custody breakdown?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKQEQ7qHvgM
No ballot vault tonight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiiaBqwqkXs
Silvestro the cat |
James Silver
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Truthfinally
Post Number: 1
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 4 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 7:19 pm: |
|
I support your efforts wholeheartedly, but wonder why you mislead your group and those on YouTube by claiming that the Archives building was deserted and unlocked when you ladies slipped/broke in and then were promptly removed by employees. There was no need to gild the lily. You got in wasn't that the goal? There were up to 10 people still in the building. We watched you pull up in the white saturn and the black Mazda. You certainly do not gain anything with NH citizens when we see you being very untruthful to your audience. This post will probably not see the light of day, but you should really be ashamed. |
Michael Polsinelli
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jankdc
Post Number: 20
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 7:34 pm: |
|
Keep posting Bev, you're awesome!
P.s. if you look at the embed link on the youtube site, you can have the video play right on the website.
(Message edited by jankdc on January 28, 2008) |
Jon Evans
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jevans9
Post Number: 2
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 7:37 pm: |
|
I agree with Micheal, you're a true American hero Bev! Keep up the great work! |
Michael Polsinelli
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jankdc
Post Number: 21
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 7:40 pm: |
|
I tried embedding the video on the forum. Anyone know why it can't be done?
Thanks!
(Message edited by jankdc on January 28, 2008) |
Jon Evans
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jevans9
Post Number: 3
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 7:43 pm: |
|
LOL Doesnt work Michael, been there done that  |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 7555
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 8:30 pm: |
|
Our software doesn't embed the videos. We'll live with it. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 7556
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 8:35 pm: |
|
James Silver: If you watched, then you know that four women walked right in the UNLOCKED front door into the UNLOCKED counting room, and that the lights were on in both the foyer and the counting room. No one was present. The building was left open for Butch and Hoppy, wasn't it?
We did not "slip in" nor did we "break in". There was, however, not a soul in sight. We were in the room for some minutes, talking loudly, and still, no one showed up.
I have not been untruthful, but if you are being truthful, who was the threatening gold sedan that played bumper cars with us to push us out of the lot? Of course, after learning that Butch and Hoppy arrived with the ballots just 15 minutes after we left, I understand a little better why he was so urgently wanting to get us away from the building. |
Robert Fielding
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Rfielding
Post Number: 2
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 9:30 pm: |
|
Mathematical Patterns? it seems like there would be some way to prove that the votes were being manipulated with a program by looking at the relationship of the numbers from candidate to candidate. does that make any sense, or do the hackers just make a completely random program to alter the results?
Also, i wonder how difficult it would be to somehow give all voters a numbered receipt after they voted, that they could then go compare and check on a website to make sure their vote got counted/ went to the right candidate. It seems like that would be pretty easy to implement, & who could possibly argue against doing that? Then, after the fact, candidates could put out a call to the people who voted for them to get together & verify the results if they wanted to. The paper receipt would be in the hand of the voter immediately! Does this make sense at all to you guys that have a grasp of the big picture? If so, would it be the governors of each particular state that would be the most accessible officials with the power to execute the measures it would take to implement an idea like this? Start with the governors who are already sympathetic to the black box cause. I wonder what the logistics would be to hook up little credit card machine-type printers to those electronic voting machines.
Would someone mind replying to this post & telling me what you think? I would like to understand more because I am very concerned & I think we need a solution to election fraud NOW!!!! We need a fair election in 2008, this is ridiculous. |
christine c reid
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 59
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 9:41 pm: |
|
Why is David Scanlan blaming the town clerks for seals that do not adhere properly, when it was his own division that provided the seals?
The object of the exercise is to ensure ballot security, not ensure deniability. If the ballots are not arriving securely, get on the phone and make sure they leave in a way that is undoubtedly secure -- it's a matter of professionalism. If instead towns are blamed for insecure boxes and no effort to provide leadership is forthcoming from the SOS office, it looks like the SOS office is unable to recognize and correct shortcomings in their processes.
It is not the job of the SOS to spread blame; it is the job of the SOS office to ensure safe transport of the ballots. If questions are raised about the seals, and there are valid points brought up/it is demonstrated they do not work, then why not say "THANK YOU -- WE WILL FIX THIS ASAP." That's not what we're seeing.
Instead, I'm uncomfortable about the fact that it sounds like state employees are not focused on securing the counting room and keeping inventoried control of the labels/seals, but will leave the room unattended in order to hide together in a room and watch out the window for observers to arrive. James, that is not an accusation - that's honestly what it sounds like from your use of the word "we" and your report there were 10 cars in the lot.
On another occasion, a state police offier and two SOS archives stock clerks were speeding at 80 mph as observers followed in a separate vehicle and were also over the speed limit in school zones. Funny? Not hardly -- and pretty serious for someone charged with an official state task and with enforcing the law.
People from numerous states and at least 2 other countries are following this situation.
I look forward to your clarification of what it means "we watched from the windows...". I would like to picture NH state employees as dedicated to the best recount possible and the most secure ballot chain of custody. You all are in the spotlight - I would like to be discovering that NH is determined to do what it takes to be the best in the nation, instead of doing what it takes to discredit those who observe areas where improvement is justified. |
Hal Guentert
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Antifraud
Post Number: 27
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, January 28, 2008 - 11:31 pm: |
|
Robert wrote:
"Also, i wonder how difficult it would be to somehow give all voters a numbered receipt after they voted, that they could then go compare and check on a website to make sure their vote got counted/ went to the right candidate. It seems like that would be pretty easy to implement, & who could possibly argue against doing that?"
Welcome to the club. I also assumed that there is a simple solution. It turns out to be more complicated with ballots and voting than buying an "apple or an orange" and getting a receipt.
Here is what I found. One problem is potential "vote buying" when you provide a record of the vote. Another is coersion and the potential loss of anounymous voting. There are probably others who can give you more reasons, and it was suggested to me to use the Advanced Search in the upper left margin to research further.
Many people think that the paper ballot is the only safe option, and I am a convert. If you haven't seen the "Hacking Democracy" DVD, that is a good introduction.
I have not had time to compare, but like the Swiss Voting System paper ballot system. If an efficient paper ballot system is available, then creating the perception that electronic voting machines are a necessary expense and more efficient, safe, or accurate has created a fraud on the taxpayers and the voters, in my opinion. |
Sushil Jones
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Sush
Post Number: 2
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 2:24 am: |
|
Hi Bev, oustanding work. I am watching this from Germany. These elections affect the rest of the World too. "Butch and Hoppy" the town clerks, are they actually on an official payroll? Who authorised their employment, when State Troopers are supposed to be doing the job? |
Alasdair
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Busker
Post Number: 1
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 7:57 am: |
|
The "post-it" type seals are enough to void the entire election in my opinion.
One thing for sure is, when people are getting annoyed when you ask questions you know you are on the right line of enquiry. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 7557
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 8:15 am: |
|
Hi, Alasdair. I agree that the election should be voided. This is very similar to a financial audit where, after learning that procedural safeguards were not in place or followed, the auditor "disclaims" any opinion on the accuracy of the financials.
By the way, Alasdair, we require real first and last names here; Please edit your profile to take care of that.
The money should be refunded to the candidates, and a new election should be ordered. Hah. But this is in a state where nothing can be done without approval of the Ballot Law Commission, which has for the past year been declining to meet (after citizens asked a lot of questions in the previous meeting.) |
john lopez
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Johnjan
Post Number: 2
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 8:30 am: |
|
I can't wait for my veteran's disability check to arrive so that I may donate to your great cause Bev and the rest of you's. You are great American's doing something that needs to be done. I pray that our Great Lord will Bless/Watch over your great job your doing for those of us that want our VOTES COUNTED!
God bless you's. |
christine c reid
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 60
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 10:08 am: |
|
John,
Thank you for joining us who have gathered to witness this event here (and help if we can), but more than that -- I thank you for your service and continued commitment to democracy -- God bless YOU. |
Brant Lamb
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brantl
Post Number: 1815
Registered: 1-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 1:58 pm: |
|
quote:Also, i wonder how difficult it would be to somehow give all voters a numbered receipt after they voted, that they could then go compare and check on a website to make sure their vote got counted/ went to the right candidate. It seems like that would be pretty easy to implement, & who could possibly argue against doing that?
The problem is that if you do this, and two sets of books are kept, how the votes were tallied and how the votes were cast, that unless the entirety of the vote is published you can't tell whether your vote was actually recorded the way you voted it or not, as they can still tell you accurately who you voted for , and still count it however they want to, unless you were the sole person in your precinct/county/state to have voted that way. |
James Silver
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Truthfinally
Post Number: 2
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 5 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 3:11 pm: |
|
Just to clarify as I can see that even if we provided our own pictures and affidavits there is no way anyone here wants to believe that anyone is gilding the lily. You all arrived around 4:25 and at that time everyone is preparing to leave for the night. We do have windows and because of previous performances you were immediately noticed.
Most of the people that saw you and alerted management that you were sneaking around the building have nothing to do with the recount or elections. Sorry to disappoint Christine, but we were not standing around doing nothing at taxpayers expense staring out the window, but fortunately our employer saw fit to give us windows. Imagine that! Our day ends at 4:30 and the doors automatically lock at 4:30 so there goes another claim.
I guess this bothers me most because you are painting everyone in this building, heck in the state with the same brush and that is insulting and certainly not correct. No one in my office tried to keep you from anything, but your first day there you attacked anyone that you came in contact with and if they did not spill "the secret information, " they were being deceptive.
As I stated last night, why go with wild accusations when you accomplished your objective? You got into the room and played with the infamous seals. Should you be prosecuted for possibly doing something with the ballots? We take our roles very seriously and would not even go near that room. In fact, everyone was told to not work late (on our own time, mind you) because "those women" had promised to accost anyone in the building after hours.
Most of the employees in this building as I mentioned previously have nothing to do with the recount yet we are the ones that have no where to park because all of the truth seekers are too lazy to park on the street where they belong. They take up the spaces reserved for employees and customers, slop their food and junk around in the lobby making it nearly impossible for customers to come into the building to do their business, but that's ok because you are saving the world.
Why not put some energy toward fighting REAL ID it is a much more menacing subject at this point?
Because I believe that if you had found anything substantive there would be legal authorities involved, but all I hear about it Butch and Hoppy driving 80 mph. Have you driven on 93? That is cruising speed here in NH and that is the way we like it. I will not be back as I can see this is a lost cause. I think I will start a 501c, I could use a million a year. That is what the tax filing someone from democratic underground posted claims you rake in. Not bad at all. |
christine c reid
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 66
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 3:48 pm: |
|
James. hope you stop back long enough to see that I am NOT disappointed and I very much appreciate your taking the time to make some further explanation. It is hard to get a picture of what is going on with limited details, and you have expanded the picture a bit. If I understand you correctly, then, the doors are locked at 4:30 and they arrived at 4:25 pm, prior to the doors being locked.
I think you have an interesting point about parking and am surprised no one in a position of leadership has made a parking request for all-day visitors to leave parking for shorter term visitors. That would seem to manage the issue. Left unmanaged, hostility toward people in NH for the recount can be fanned and used to advantage as well, I must say.
I appreciate your sensitivity to being broadbrushed, and would imagine any observer reading your comments about "slop their food and junk around in the lobby making it nearly impossible for customers to come into the building to do their business..." might feel that something similar is occurring to them. At the same time, I hope that anyone who recognizes the possibility that their actions are being seen that way will be responsive to your complaint. What happened when you took your complaint to the person able to make requests of recount participants directly? Sounds like you are making a practical suggestion in spite of your upset -- long term and short term parking area assignments during the recount.
After I wrote my post last night, I later was thinking "I should have told James how much I appreciate the work of the unseen people who are doing the best job they can on this recount," and now because you may not be back I am sorry you didn't get that whole message -- if anyone else works with him, please pass on this message. I am sorry also if I sounded as though you were all being broadbrushed - and agree that from a distance there exists the need and constant vigilance always to avoid an us vs. them mentality and remember a recount is about making sure the citizens votes are properly protected and counted.
The need to speak responsibly and factually is important on all sides. I take responsibility for my part in doing so, and hope you will do the same. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 7563
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 4:49 pm: |
|
James has made a number of incorrect statements -- referencing things that never happened, statements we never made, repeating rumors that are easily disproved.
The single most important thing James said is this: They were told NOT TO WORK LATE. By whom?
"In fact, everyone was told to not work late (on our own time, mind you)"
As we know, the ballots were to be delivered. Why not have workers in the building, as extra witnesses? I am very interested in the name of the person advising employees of the archives not to work late.
"James" may be simply believing what he/she is being told, or may be susceptible to rumor, or whatever, but the following statements are incorrect:
- sneaking around the building
- painting everyone in this building, heck in the state with the same brush
- attacked anyone that you came in contact with
- go with wild accusations
- possibly doing something with the ballots
- promised to accost anyone in the building after hours.
- too lazy to park on the street where they belong.
- slop their food and junk around in the lobby
- making a million dollars a year
None of the above are true - although as for parking in the wrong spaces or slopping food around the facility, I can't speak for all the rest of the public. There were a couple of hundred people there. I can say that neither I nor the others with me parked anywhere but on the street while the recount was in progress, and we didn't slop our things around.
A particularly inappropriate facility was selected for ballot intake, storage and the recount. On that count I agree with James.
Also, Butch and Hoppy were doing 90 miles an hour, and it wasn't on I-93, it was on hwy 101. They were tearing by the other traffic on that road, and they also exceeded the speed limit by more than 20 miles an hour in a school zone with the lights flashing when children were present on icy roads. I don't think anyone in New Hampshire "likes it that way."
The people in New Hampshire are really quite wonderful, which is why it is so offensive to see traditions exploited by those who engage in breaking the chain of custody in a presidential election. |
christine c reid
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 68
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, January 29, 2008 - 6:45 pm: |
|
Thanks to Bev Harris for adding facts and her clarifications on this subject. Much appreciated from out here in the online outback, as we try to understand what's happening.
I completely missed the part about working late. Process: how it was couched. |
Brant Lamb
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brantl
Post Number: 1820
Registered: 1-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - 5:04 am: |
|
I think it's important to note what kind of knee-jerk response you get to checking how well an election is run, however, and how personally people have taken what you have to say when they weren't even involved in the election, just worked in the same building. (If they did.) |
robjacobs
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Robjacobs
Post Number: 1
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - 8:48 am: |
|
I've been helping with the recount. I've been pleased with the respect that has been shown from everyone present...to everyone present. Honestly I personally believe the recount doesn't prove or disprove anything since there are valid issues with chain of custody, transportation and storage issues, container issues, security tape and label issues, etc. Some of the boxes the ballots were stored in were ridiculous. If this is the way we treat the process(with so little respect and concern), I don't see how anyone could conceivable accept the "results" of such an insecure "system".
A communist leader once said it didn't matter how the people voted...it only mattered who counted the votes. I still believe this is true, but there is less of a need for the criminal elite to fix the election results today with our Main Stream Media telling the sheeple who to vote for.
(from BBV admin): Welcome, Rob Jacobs, and thank you for your comments. We are a nonpartisan site, and that's why the candidate-based commentary was removed from your post. You make very good points. |
Julie Penny
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Julie_ny
Post Number: 1
Registered: 6-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - 10:13 am: |
|
Bev,
Two Quick questions: (1) Where was the state police car that had been following behind Butch and Hoppy while they were speeding around collecting ballots? Did the state police car only accompany them for the first few days?
(2) Should all our "written" requests be as "Freedom Of Information" requests?
You guys are doing an oustanding job and it's dearly appreciated and being telegraphed. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 7565
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - 11:04 am: |
|
Hi Julie,
State police always accompany. Always just one officer at a time but a few different officers on different days.
Re: public records requests - I have examples of NH records requests in the New Hampshire section of these forums. You can mimic those formats and just change the item asked for.
You also might try just emailing the town clerk with a one-sentence question, if you can find their email. If they email you back, you've got your written response.
Thanks everyone for your attention to these matters! |
christine c reid
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 77
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - 5:33 pm: |
|
On this question of ballot transport and who does it, could anyone familiar with audit procedures comment about chain of custody versus chain of command?
Is it a check and balance to have police in a different ultimate chain of command pick up and deliver ballots, responsible for their safety, or is it more consistent with control of the ballots to keep this in the hands of the office ultimately responsible for ballot integrity/security?
Is the potential for malfeasance more or less likely when people lower on the totem pole e.g must do their boss's bidding -- as opposed to being handled by officers who on the one hand report to someone else (and don't have "I'm only doing what he told me to do" issues) but on the other hand... report to someone else who may/may not be ultimately accountable for ballot security in some way.
Note that this is a hypothetical question -- the NH statutes say that the police will handle ballot transport in recounts, and it doesn't specify a number of officers.
Also in the area of an audit, if the police are responsible either to trail employees or to actually handle/transport the ballots, is it consistent with auditing principles (or good procedures) that only one officer be there? Does the use of a single officer, certainly more economical, have any downside compared to two officers who witness each other's actions?
(Again, hypothetical because in some cases from my reading of the NH statutes. soometimes they stipulate that one particular official sign for something and do not require witnessing).
Where I'm coming from is "what does a sound procedure look like and why?" and infusion of ideas/practices from other states, countries, or professional realms is welcome.
I don't want to hijack the thread; just add some perspective to what we see is the practice in NH and how the statutes are written in NH. |
Marian Beddill
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Uu7thprinciple
Post Number: 128
Registered: 8-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - 6:04 pm: |
|
On the question of the best teams to do ballot transport, my gut feeling says a team of two from opposing camps (usually two major parties).
Whenever you have "regular staff" doing this, especially if only one staffer is the "courier", there can be an open door for top-down misdirection, whether this is the elections staff or the local police.
But two folks who disagree politically, riding together, will watch (and would report) each other, thus you have a good setup for having things go right.
There may be other ways, too, but everybody can grok the way this way works.
Marian
http://NoLeakyBuckets.org
|
James D Moody
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Jdmoody
Post Number: 3
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - 9:09 pm: |
|
I still say Bev has made accusations that in later discussions she has asmitted were exagerated, but she wasn't ging to take them back. I feel she is sxagerating just to "prove her point of view:. We have done recounts for years here and there has never been any question from NH people, so get your nose out of here |
Susan Lynn Patton
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Susan_lynn
Post Number: 3
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 - 9:17 pm: |
|
Butch and Hoppy's driving performance seems an obvious attempt to lose followers.
Whoever is the responsible state police superintendent can assign whoever they chose to follow that day. I.E.-- If there is corruption at the higher level, they just assign the officers to duty who have become "trusted" to keep secrets.
Losing Bev and Susan, and then arriving late (didn't that happen twice?) -- refusing, it seems, to pull up until they had verified being unwatched at the unloading, since Bev and Susan had been ordered to leave...
My reading about the sheer size of mob type political corruption, powered by a possible connection to narcotics-trafficking, raises the hair on the back of my neck...
I am working on a full map of the voting municipalities and the variances in machine vs. hand counts to see if there are any telling patterns. Almost done. Will report results. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 7566
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 6:30 am: |
|
James Moody,
It helps to be specific. If you have a specific example of an accusation and a specific example of an admission that I was exaggerating, please provide it along with a link or source. If I am wrong I will issue a correction. |
Nancy Tobi
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ntobi
Post Number: 168
Registered: 1-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 6 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 6:48 am: |
|
To Mr. Moody and Mr. Silver: I, too, am a NH resident. The response from you and other NH residents that Black Box Voting should "keep their nose out of here" is wholly inappropriate. The NH Primary has national implications. The winner of NH's primary also "wins" multi-millions of dollars in campaign money.
If you believe that people will commit a crime to grab someone's wallot, do you believe someone will commit a crime to gain millions of dollars and the chance to control the USA?
This is what it is. Nothing more, nothing less. The motivation to commit the crime? Millions of campaign dollars. The means to commit the crime? Election tampering. The opportunity to commit the crime? Access to the voting system.
It's not rocket science, boys and girls.
It is completely appropriate for citizens from Anywhere, USA to practice oversight on the NH election system. On top of that, it is particularly embarrassing that we are depending on non-NH citizens to do so.
NH runs exemplary elections in 45% of our polling places, where hand counting on election night is done in full public view. This system, conducted by community members, is the way democracy works. I have been promoting this system in the nation for several years.
Now the nation is asking valid questions. If NH knows how to conduct honest elections, as we see in our hand count towns, then why is it not happening in every polling place in the state? And why is there no transparency in the ballot chain of custody for our recounts?
The NH Department of State has sullied our entire grassroots democracy in its conduct of the recount. These are serious questions raised by the investigative work of Black Box Voting.
I am proud of New Hampshire in many ways. And I resent anyone in the state, from Bill Gardner down, whose actions take away from our grassroots democracy. We know how to run clean elections. It is our duty to do so in every town, every city, every ward, and every election. |
christine c reid
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 83
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 8:05 am: |
|
Nice to see you here, Nancy, after reading your work and posts around the web.
By the way, FWIW, since there is a reporter in the UK named James Silver, I wondered if this were a real or assumed name (after all, someone who works for the state might take it upon themselves not to post under their real name). I found that there is no one named James Silver on the NH state government employee listing, though several employees with the last name Silver appear. Per 411.com, there are several people in NH including one in Concord by that name, so maybe the listing is not updated.
In looking for ideas about combating fraud/creating secure elections administration, I came across an online corporate auditing research report, the report says that one of the most successful ways fraud was uncovered in the cases studied was the use of an anonymous tip line (in some ways more so than certain kinds of auditing). Of course, besides anonymity, the person on the other end of that tip line and what is done with it matters, too. IN these days of I/P addresses, cookies, and caller ID, it is probably far harder to place an anonymous tip (I'd include instructions on how to disable your caller ID!)
Have NH election integrity groups ever considered instituting such a tip line, or figuring out what part of government/judicial system could credibly have such a tip line? It actually was said to be more effective than certain types of auditing in uncovering documented cases of fraud that they studied for the report. Such a tip line would not necessarily have to just be about fraud -- it could be a suggestion line for improvements in the system. Different people see different things up close and repeatedly, giving them expertise in their own part of the election admnistration chain. Probably the best election administration possible doesn't come by sitting on one's laurels and being proud, it comes from having a process in place of continually working on it.
For this to work, though, there has to be trust and integrity. One person's helpful tip can become a dishonest person's catalog of weaknesses in the system that can be exploited.
Kind of like the database a voting machine company keeps on its customers -- tool or exploit? Gotta be very careful with that one. |
robjacobs
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Robjacobs
Post Number: 2
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 8:25 am: |
|
Hi Bev,
I was disappointed that you edited/deleted my references to subverting the election "from the media side" as opposed to the "ballot box/back side".
It is as important...if not MORE important to know who owns and controls the main stream media...
And I think one candidate OWNING 26.7 Billion dollars worth MORE than another candidate...should be publically noted at ALL websites...
And that information is FACTUAL and INFORMATIONAL...and definitely non-partisan...just like if CBS were to "report" it...
Would you then say CBS was partisan because they reported such a thing...
As for the other candidate mentioned...I'll concede on him... |
Brant Lamb
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Brantl
Post Number: 1830
Registered: 1-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 12:50 pm: |
|
quote:But two folks who disagree politically, riding together, will watch (and would report) each other, thus you have a good setup for having things go right.
Just two would work, but only if you're really sure that they are keeping each other on the up and up, and how do you do that? And if they do this job repeatedly, what's to say that they will continue to disagree? Money can change a lot of minds, or at least actions, can't it? Or, if one of them ever saw the other cheating on his/her spouse, do you think their disagreement would be as big a sticking point as it ought to be? |
Daniel Morton
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Whistleremd
Post Number: 1
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? 
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 2:39 pm: |
|
I think the folks who are shadowing the recount process are forgetting a few things in their vigilance to make sure the process is done properly.
1> you are GUESTS in a state government facility. You should behave accordingly. You may have a right to know the votes are being tallied properly. You do NOT have a right to impede the daily work going on in the building where the recount is taking place. Your people have been found in dark hallways before the inner doors to the building are open, hiding in dark corners, you are following state employees around in their work vehicles and creating possible traffic hazards by doing so (I work for the department of safety), and you are impeding the tax-paying citizens of the state from getting convenient access to the records they have a right to by parking in spaces that should be reserved for them. I can tell you that at the DOS, we wouldn't even allow you into the building acting the way I have seen you act.
2> Your supposed vigilance is not being perceived in that light when some of your people behave the way they have, leaving their personal correspondence and newspapers laying around in a place of business, blocking the counter where the citizens are supposed to be going for their vital records. Do you think the DMV would let you leave doughnuts and newspapers on their counter? Or your jackets on the chairs designated for customers' use? Just because an office is used for a purpose not many people are aware of until they have need of it doesn't make their work any less important.
3> The archive room is not just a storage facility. It is a library of historical documentation that houses some of the most important items ever drafted in this state or country. You should treat it and the people who work there with just a bit more respect, especially when they have nothing to do with the recount.
4>Most of the people in NH are completely unaware of where this recount is being done. Most of the people in NH don't care. The recount isn't going to effect the outcome of the primary (especially now that several other states have already voted). It IS important to make sure the count is right, but it isn't necessary to tear down the people who are involved (most of them volunteers) or to participate in a witch hunt that is unlikely to produce any witches. No one involved in the recount is trying to sabotage it. If you ask me, you are stirring up a lot of hate and discontent to no purpose. All you are really doing is hooting and blowing, and making life miserable for hard-working state employees (which is not an oxymoron no matter what clever jokes you might have heard).
Go home or at least go away and bother someone else. Maybe someone who truly wastes state or federal resources or actually does try to work the system to their own advantage. Florida would be a good place to start.
As far as I know, the only "money" distributed in this recount process was the initial fee for the recount. Unless you have proof to the contrary, you should not make even veiled accusations to the contrary. That is dangerous and it makes you sound just a bit stupid. |
robjacobs
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Robjacobs
Post Number: 3
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 3:56 pm: |
|
Dear Daniel Morton,
Sir...and I use that term loosely...
The "government facility" you refer to...and each and every other "government facility" of any type, size, shape, geographical location, etc. are all OWNED by We The People...
And...
"Government employees" at all levels(hired/appointed/elected) are given the privilege of serving We The People...
Serving...
Not "lording over" or "dictating"...that's We The People's RIGHT to rule over our employees who are privileged with the duty of serving We The People!
Do you understand the "progression of power and authority" sir?
All power is inherent in the Sovereign Individual.
Sovereigns, choosing to live in reasonable proximity to each other, form local agreements to live together in peace(you may think of these agreements as a "form" of "government" but it would be better to think of it as a peace partnership.
Other Sovereigns, in other regions(you may think of them as villages/towns/cities/counties/states/nations), also form these agreements and peace partnerships.
Then these Sovereigns, through their various agreements and peace partnerships, set up even more agreements and peace partnerships with Sovereigns from other regions.
This is a good thing because Sovereigns believe in peace and trade with everyone. It never makes good business "sense" to disrespect your customers and potential customers. Not to mention your suppliers and potential suppliers.
I think your employers, the Sovereigns "We The People," should re-evaluate your employment privileges and service to us...
I can also offer service training continued education at any mutually agreeable time and location...fees are negotiable... |
christine c reid
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 87
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 5:12 pm: |
|
Mr. Morton,
The people gathered for the recount have profound respect for the documents archived in your building, and something more: the awareness that dead documents don't protect liberties, people do.
It is not documents, but people, who keep alive the intent of the founders of the country.
Please, parking, donuts, and all other peeves are easily dealt with by making a respectful request.
When you make the jump to assume that citizens involved in observing a recount, only some of whom might have anything to do with this site, are trampling on the rights of those applying for drivers' licenses, I have to shake my head.
I fully respect the people who want drivers' licenses or divorces, don't get me wrong.
But taking a pained attitude because the primary election recount logistics are getting in the way of things less central to democracy than elections seems to me takes for granted the very democracy in which this paperwork can become the overriding focus, and the election logistics an irritation.
While you are focused on storing precious documents, those supposed donuteers are focused on the real life embodiment of what is in the documents.
Can we all just respect one another? |
Nancy Tobi
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ntobi
Post Number: 170
Registered: 1-2006
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 5:57 pm: |
|
What I am seeing is the development of what is known in propaganda speak as "talking points". The emerging meme from Mr. Morton and others is "these out of staters are sticking their nose where it doesn't belong, are being rude, and are littering."
Hogwash.
1) Out of staters have as much at stake as NH-ites in this phony primary process.
2) I personally know many of the people on the BBV investigative teams, and they are far from rude.
3) They also are not litterers.
Next thing we'll be hearing about is how these "uppity women" don't know their place. |
Bev Harris
Board Administrator
Username: Admin
Post Number: 7571
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 6:35 pm: |
|
Daniel Morton, James Silver, and James Moody all appear to be posting from the same IP address, though it is not the archives IP. I assume they are one person, not using real name, but since they seem to be employees of the archives, let's grant them a privacy waiver for the moment. Let me straighten out some factual issues:
What makes you believe it is "our people" found in hallways and dark places? There are hundreds of people wandering around the archives building, which by the way, appears not to have a restroom in the public area. I think it's reasonable to assume that whoever you found in a hallway, if you did, was a member of the public and for all we know, they were just looking for a toilet.
State employees were indeed creating hazards by speeding and breaking traffic laws, but we were simply driving down the road. We didn't create hazards. When they were speeding too fast to catch, we lost them, because we did NOT drive recklessly.
We did not park in spaces reserved for employees. We parked on the road along the side of the facility. Believe me, I know - I forgot my coat and felt every inch of the chilly trek down the hill.
We didn't bring in newspapers or doughnuts and I don't even know where the vital records counter is. You are confusing the 3-4 people working in collaboration with Black Box Voting with the 200 or so people attending this public event.
We did not leave jackets on chairs. I was wishing I had brought a jacket...but didn't. Bear in mind that those who came with me were from places like Florida and Texas, and we were all unused to the New Hampshire climate. Whatever warm clothes we had, we were wearing!
You at one point complained that all the people in New Hampshire were being painted with a single broad brush. Yet here you are, painting a small handful of voting rights leaders with a brush that is actually not us, but other random members of the public. I am sorry for the inconvenience. I can sympathize. The public is a messy entity, but that doesn't mean every individual is. We weren't.
We came to examine procedures and chain of custody. Chain of custody was broken, invalidating the trustworthiness of the recount. This was not fair to the candidates or to the voters of New Hampshire, who have a right to have their votes treated with care.
Regarding the money paid by the candidates, Kucinich paid $2000 for the deposit and about $25000 for the recount, and Albert Howard paid $2000 for the deposit and about $56000 for the recount. So they have certainly paid more than just the deposit.
By the way, I received two profane and aggressive phone calls in a row this morning around 5 am, from someone in New Hampshire making points very much like you. But I'm not going to assume it was you, because I don't want to paint everybody with the same broad brush. |
christine c reid
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 88
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, January 31, 2008 - 9:01 pm: |
|
I have to say, I found Mr Silvermort's comment below interesting, because it echoes a question I have had all along about the recount approach embraced by SOS Gardner:
"The recount isn't going to effect [sic] the outcome of the primary (especially now that several other states have already voted)."
Now THAT's a rather politically aware comment (as opposed to the many in NH who you say "don't know a recount is going on" -- and why might that be?).
So let me ask you, Mr. Silvermort, do you think there is any effort to run out the clock on this recount, so that the impact of any possible problems with the count would become known only after the primaries are over and the primary electoral horses are out long since of the barn?
It's so interesting that you would comment on that.
That's the thing about election recounts -- they're so much like souffles. Once deflated of their ability to impact other elections, they become historical political pancakes, don't they?
The political part of this election in NH was not about delegates, it was about the media narrative and about "momentum". And a recount that lasts past Super Tuesday? Job Well Done???
Now defanged, anything that is found is just quaint trivia that only diehard election integrity people will care about, right?
I have long wondered how the rate of ballot counting on this recount compares to past recounts, and whether the method of recount and length of counting time tallies with NH recounts of the past. Maybe Nancy Tobi will stop by again with some insights, because I know she understands the counting methods and about how long they might take.
The question "Running out the clock?" has been an unanswered one for me since the beginning when the R recount was postponed until the D was finished, rather than run simultaneously.
I don't know the reasoning and haven't seen the logistical situation, but when the ballots are coming in together anyhow, it would remove disconcerting chain of custody questions on the R ballots by counting them as and when they come in.
Oh, and about the anecdotal comments about random unidentified people in the hallway that you have identified without evidence as connected to this site or BBV -- First, a bit of advice -- rather than accepting blindly the rantings of people around you, read the site and know what environment you are speaking into. From what I have observed since recently stopping by here to read about NH -- those who visit this site from various corners of the world ARE kind of hung up about insisting on evidence vs. anecdotes. They stop each other from speculating and push for more facts. So -- when it comes to these anonymous, undocumented dark hall encounters, as you yourself (or someone using your I/P address..)said earlier, if there were any real problem, I'm sure the police/legal authorities would have been notified. |
Susan Lynn Patton
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Susan_lynn
Post Number: 4
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, February 1, 2008 - 9:44 am: |
|
From California to Moody/Silver/Morton:
One: This is not a NH issue. New Hampshire elections profoundly affect perceptions of voters in subsequent elections, hence the vying of states to hold the early primaries. Twice at least, the New Hampshire primary has been accounted for as reviving a dying presidential bid.
Two: A huge concern to voters all over the country is or should be: If NH elections could be tampered with, then couldn't other state election results be tampered with? Let's see, if the NH elections were rigged, then someone is willing to rig to win.
If someone is willing to rig an election, and it is possible to rig an election, is a criminal going to be our next president?
I hope I don't hear any more nonsense about out- of-state people getting their noses out. That's either disingenious or downright unintelligent. |
christine c reid
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 98
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, February 1, 2008 - 10:35 am: |
|
Susan, you've mentioned one worry voters may have (criminal/corrupt candidate). For me at least, one of the difficulties is that there are multiple parties in whose interest it could be to rig an election. Election rigging could guarantee a winner, guarantee some losers, create a spread that would evade detection, justify eliminating candidates from further attention and "get them out of the way", justify increased attention to other candidates, and so on.
What is less easily understood than the face on the candidate in an election is WHO has the ability to powerfully influence that face, and who WANTS the ability to influence it. The candidates themselves may or may not be involved in either aggressive tactics to encourage/discourage voting (some legal, some not) or going over the line to actual election manipulation/fraud.
Here's a brainstormed laundry list of possibilities -- and these are not accusations, and pertain to ANY state, not just NH -- but in thinking about it, it becomes clear how far reaching the list of possibly interested parties could be:
1. The candidate him or herself
2. Either major party, who might/might not care who wins, but who may want to assure that no "unsafe"/controversial candidate does anything other than resoundingly lose - in a politically volatile time, they would want no possibility of a genuine change candidate moving the political momentum to the hard left or right. OR they might fear their party would lose if that candidate gained early approval and won the nomination or was a key contender.
3. The opposition candidate or party, who wants to try to control not only who wins, but who they run against
4. Foreign entities with an interest in foreign policy -- trying to make sure the "race" is between two parties, either of which would support their foreign policy goals.
5. Corporate interests -- see # 4 above. In addition, candidates who don't accept corporate money might begin to see an election results correlation and "being paid to play" (accepting corporate donations in a quid pro quo that the voter can't know).
6. Criminal enterprises who really don't care who wins the election, just care who is willing to pay for some help in causing it to go in the desired direction. In cases like this, there could be multiple clients (Hey, why not include bookies as clients?)
7. State election officials, party machine figures, or even state campaign figures who would love to be appointed to a role in the next administration, and are willing to illegally cavort to try to ensure themselves a place at the table.
8. consultants who are paid millions of dollars and will be paid millions more if their candidate produces a big win.
9. election officials themselves, who either wish to remain in power (and are promised help if they offer help), wish to augment their salaries with perks or additional funds, or are controlled/run by unseen others and their job depends upon (and has for many years?) on doing what they are told.
So, there is no shortage of groups or individuals who, IF they were unscrupulous enough to want to try to swing an election, could be imagined to have motives. Someone may shoot down some of the back of the napkin list with countermotives that would discourage this behavior, and that's fine with me -- I have no attachment to any "truth" of this list.
Realizing that in a handful of minutes I can conjure up a long list of parties with so many hypothetical motives, isn't it surprising (or is it/) when Secretaries of State don't insist on means and opportunity being addressed soberly and thoroughly?
Anyone who wants to look the other way is insisting on a candy coated, fairy tale version of reality. Special interests exist, always will, as sure as oxygen exists (at the moment, anyhow ;). We already know that in visible ways, money is being used to influence legislative outcomes (lobbyists), opinion formation (media outlets and media consolidation). Voter roll purges, either "not well conducted" or "very well conducted" are going on in many states (your opinion will vary depending on your goals).
So -- corrupt/criminal candidate? Yup, I'd like to know that -- And it's a possibility among many others.
Regardless of when this recount finishes, what we DO know is that the NH SOS, who has demonstrated his ability to master nuances of problems and election issues, is (what appears to this outsider) uncharacteristically NOT thorough, NOT comprehensive, and NOT nuanced in his administration of chain of custody and recounts.
I'd sure like to know why. |
Jody Holder
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Holder
Post Number: 40
Registered: 11-2005
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 3 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, February 1, 2008 - 12:37 pm: |
|
Here is an article re the recent election in Kenya. The description of what was going on in the central tallying area, and the attitide and actions of the officials who were supposed to insure the accuracy of the count, certainly bears some resemblance to what is happening in NH regarding the recounts.
I hope that the citizens of the local towns, and the town clerks which I am sure take their positions of trust very seriously, need to step forward and demand accountability. This was the citizens' sole opportunity to exercise their most fundamental right in a representative government. If someone is subverting that right they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
As a citizen of California I am very much affected by what occurs in New Hamphire. This next Tuesday we will have far fewer choices for President because of the so-called results of a couple of small states back east. If those results were tainted or manipulated by intentional acts, it was an act of terrorism.
As a citizen who has experience in trying to pull the veil of secrecy off the election processes in this country, it speaks volumes when so many election officials proactively thwart oversight.
The election is over in New Hampshire and any investigation will not change the outcome to the country. But just as someone having consummated a crime does not make the need for accountability and justice go away, neither does an election being over. To ignore the situation is to condone it, and reward those responsible.
I hope the law enforcement officials of New Hampsire, including local or state grand juries, open investigations into this past election. There is ample probable cause for opening such an investigation. Because this was a federal election it is proper for formal complaints be lodged with the proper federal agencies. If not, such betrayal of the citizens of New Hampshire will continue. Those who flaunt the law will only stop when they know they will be held accountable.
My thanks for those who are trying to expose the irregularities going on. The actions documented so far regarding the subversion of the recount, including the lack of poll book reconciliation, intentional use of removeable tape as a seal, non-existent chain of custody procedures are at best incompetent, at worst criminal.
The Kenya story can be found here:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/25830.html |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 4542
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, February 1, 2008 - 7:03 pm: |
|
Christine, thanks for that outstanding list of parties who could be motivated to manipulate an election. |
Joel Morine
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Erased
Post Number: 81
Registered: 1-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, February 2, 2008 - 7:27 am: |
|
One beauty of this site is witnessing how clear the differences between:
wouldbe provocative button-pushing aimed to miss data, points & pertinence...
...and nit-picking detail-oriented sincere disagreements aimed to clarify or improve data, points & pertinence.
Appreciating the patience and aptness of several above thorough replies to wouldbe distractors ... |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 110
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, February 2, 2008 - 8:17 am: |
|
Catherine, Responsibly, I probably should have also said that anyone who desired to have influence might be able to find a perfectly legal or less difficult way to do it.
My major interest in open and well run election is that it gives people hope and makes them willing to participate. I think that the more people who participate, the better a government can be. It's fine that we don't all agree -- together we find the way.
Here's
http://blog.kenexa.com/blogdetails.aspx?b=93&u=11
the gumball story that is often used in business -- the gist is that if you have a glass jar of gumballs and ask a room of 100 people to guess the number, one of them MAY get it right, but by averaging the guesses of the whole room, you will be very, very close, over and over again.
I think the collective wisdom of democracy works best when as many different people as possible join in the voting. And that's the best reason fo all to demonstrate that elections work -- the more people who join in and participate, the better our results will be. |
Catherine Ansbro
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Catherine_a
Post Number: 4548
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, February 2, 2008 - 10:57 am: |
|
Thanks, Christine.
Critical Mass Decision Making. Interesting to know about this.
I'd heard of Hundredth Monkey, tipping point, etc., and I've used various kinds of ranked-choice/preferendum for decision-making. Nice to know more.
As regards applying this to elections, I believe the most important part of the process is the part that occurs earliest--the candidate selection process (often hidden from view in some areas, in the back rooms of local or national political parties), and the primary election process when it occurs.
This is what determines our eventual range of so-called "options" but all too often our range of choices has been nearly eliminated long before we knew that choices were being made.
Election integrity when it comes to primaries and caucuses and party-level decision-making should be given a far higher priority than it has received. The investigations and discussions here about IA and NH are particularly important in this regard. |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 112
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, February 2, 2008 - 12:05 pm: |
|
Nevada sounded pretty wild, too.
I couldn't agree more about the importance of attention to the early process, and also zeroing in on who gets to call the shots and under what justification, how polls are starting to be treated as votes, how after only a paltry handful of primaries but many polls, people are floating cabinet member names. Polls are not the process; voting is.
A tool that quantified unequal debate time was created by the campaign of a candidate now out of the presidential race: http://chrisdodd.com/blog/nh/nh-debate-talk-clock.
It opened a lot of eyes this primary season. |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 113
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, February 2, 2008 - 12:19 pm: |
|
The context for what is going on in NH is partly formed by the nature and quality of its statutes. I decided that my own common sense was not a good enough barometer for what I thought of the NH happenings, so i found a link that has all states' recount laws linked on one page. I started with Minnesota, and my jaw is dropping. NH's laws are skeletal. I invite anyone who is interested to have a look at THEIR state, and let's discuss. Look under GENERAL for the new thread, so we can keep this one open for items directly related to the current investigation until Bev posts a new thread. Hope to see you there!
Link for lurkers: http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/ebook/part5/procedures_recount07.html |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 126
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, February 4, 2008 - 1:44 pm: |
|
Earlier in this thread I posted a comment wondering why SOS Gardner did not simultaneously conduct the D and R recounts, as the ballots came in at the same time. I observed that primary elections, besides their accuracy, have a "shelf life" of diminishing usefulness for influencing the elections following them. I wondered if delaying recount results can have utility in and of itself.
I'm adding a link to CA election statutes into the record in the interests of getting a full picture of the reasons one might not run the recounts simultaneously. In CA, it is stipulated that ballot counters not divide up for the purpose of counting more than one race at a time.
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=elec&group=15001-16000&fil e=15270-15281
Especially those with practical experience with ballot counting who visit this site: what do you think of such a provision? Good idea or not? |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 1992
Registered: 4-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Monday, February 4, 2008 - 2:15 pm: |
|
"I wondered if delaying recount results can have utility in and of itself."
In some case, surely yes. In others, not as much. That is in the official sense. In the "Oh please, just stop it" sense, all recounts have a limited shelf life. The initial public outcry for recounts and even do-overs frequently peters out very quickly. It morphs into, "You lost. Just accept it."
Surely, recounts in Presidential electors elections have a very limited life. The "safe harbor" provisions happen very quickly. A true comprehensive recount, with audit attributes as they are frequently talked of here (not just "count again"), is nearly impossible in a Presidential election (November).
(Message edited by Formerelecdir on February 4, 2008) |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 154
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Thursday, February 7, 2008 - 9:50 pm: |
|
VIDEO: recount update from 2/5/08, hat tip to the Ridley Report:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fGyY7u9dwwQ
This video provides a look inside the recount, some exchanges about the rate of the recount/lack of continuous flow of ballots, and some questions/answer with SOS Gardner. |
Hal Guentert
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Antifraud
Post Number: 54
Registered: 12-2004
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, February 8, 2008 - 9:19 am: |
|
Is there a projected date for the NH Republican recount to be completed? Why are there votes for the Democrats - are they on the Republican primary ballot, or are they write-ins? (Probably stupid questions, but based on the link below.)
http://www.sos.nh.gov/recountbelkrep.htm |
Mike LaBonte
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Mike_labonte
Post Number: 159
Registered: 12-2005
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, February 8, 2008 - 9:33 am: |
|
Cross party primary votes are write-ins. It is up to the parties what they do with votes for their people on other party's ballots, and votes for people from other parties on their ballots, even though the SoS has to post them. My understanding is that they are ignored. |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 159
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Friday, February 8, 2008 - 3:23 pm: |
|
Albert Howards' latest letter to NH SOS Gardner:
February 8, 2008
TO: William Gardner, Secretary of State, State of New Hampshire
FROM: Albert Howard, candidate for President, NH Primary Election, January 8, 2008
DATE: February 8, 2008
RE: Preservation of records requested under the Right to Know statute
cc: Kelly A. Ayotte, Attorney General, State of New Hampshire
I have filed a series of FOIA (Right to Know) requests and I am intending to file additional such requests. To date I am not in receipt of most of the information previously requested. It is my understanding that FOIA requests submitted in the state of New Hampshire must be answered within 5 days, if the material is available; you have been in serious violation on several counts. I write to inform you that I am contemplating litigation if I do not receive these items soon.
Further, I request the preservation of all materials, that are arguably responsive to any of my Right to Know requests, current or future. Additionally, I hereby serve notice that if necessary I intend to pursue action through the courts if any of the materials I have requested are lost or destroyed.
Said materials are not limited to those specific items requested, but include anything, electronic records and correspondence as well as written, that pertains to / has any connection to the January 8 NH Primary Election or the recount.
I understand that the state has contracted with LHS and others, for assistance regarding the election and the recount. I consider any documents, records, etc., that LHS and other such contractors, possess subject to this Right to Know request because the State has a right to control over these documents.
I urge you to discuss this with counsel, as there are serious legal penalties if you fail to preserve requested records. |
allenfly
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Allenfly
Post Number: 2
Registered: 2-2008
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 1 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 - 12:34 am: |
|
 http://www.vcxd.com |
B Lindsey
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: A_voter
Post Number: 1
Registered: 2-2008
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Tuesday, February 12, 2008 - 5:53 pm: |
|
Posted on Thursday, February 7, 2008 - 9:50 pm:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIDEO: recount update from 2/5/08, hat tip to the Ridley Report:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=fGyY7u9dwwQ
This video provides a look inside the recount, some exchanges about the rate of the recount/lack of continuous flow of ballots, and some questions/answer with SOS Gardner.
-------------------------------------------------
They told the videographer it would take another 15 days to get the total # of ballots printed information.
In the REAL business world it would only take about 15 minutes. Call Accounting and ask for copies of receipts that were used to pay the vendor.
15 days smells fishy!!! |
christine c reid
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Ctwatcher
Post Number: 200
Registered: 12-2007
Best of Black Box?
Votes: 2 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Saturday, February 16, 2008 - 7:36 am: |
|
Albert Howard has filed a petition with the Ballot Law Commission which you can view at this link to his website.
http://alberthoward.org/reco.aspx
At the bottom, Howard states that his requests for documentation that would verify the election, sent as long ago as 1/14/08, have not yet been received.
I have read that the NH sunshine laws require compliance within 5 days. If that is the case, does the term "nonfeasance" apply? |
Bill Bowen
Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Bbowen8
Post Number: 54
Registered: 11-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 20, 2008 - 11:29 am: |
|
Is it just me (usually), or have the networks again started using exit polling to call elections and primaries? I thought that at some time, maybe after '00 or the '04 election, networks stopped using their polling data to call elections, and started waiting for the actual tallies to come in from the precincts. But I've noticed, at least last night with Wisconsin, and last week with Virgina and Maryland, MSNBC was projecting Obama the winner "based on their exit polling" (I'm not sure what polling service MSNBC uses) almost immediately after the polls closed. I know this was done routinely prior to the '00 Florida debacle, but maybe I haven't been paying attention. I thought the distrust in polls was so great the networks had done away with calling elections based on polling. Am I mistaken? Did this process stop at one point, and if so, did it recently pick up again?
My follow up question to that is with respect to New Hampshire. I haven't noticed any network other than NBC calling elections based on exit polls, and only recently. I do recall that from the time the polls closed in New Hampshire, NBC was predicting NH "too close to call", and did so up until late in the night when it was called for Clinton. Does anyone recall NBC, or any network for that matter, expressly stating the NH race was too close to call "based on exit polling"? Again this calling based on exit polling seems like it was just reintroduced within the past couple of weeks. I recall some pre-NH primary polls that showed Clinton behind by double-digit margins, but I don't recall any network exit poll data stated during the broadcasts that night. Does anyone recall hearing or seeing this with respect to New Hampshire? I'm just trying to understand the (recent) history of calling elections based on exit polls. I thought the networks had stopped this at one point. If the networks just started this process up again, does anyone know why?
Thanks,
Bill |
V. Kurt Bellman
Frequent Voting Rights Forum Participant
Username: Formerelecdir
Post Number: 2081
Registered: 4-2006
Best of Black Box? N/A
Votes: 0 (A keeper?) | | Posted on Wednesday, February 20, 2008 - 12:30 pm: |
|
Bill,
It might just be that the exit polls are so overwhelming that there is no reasoanble doubt as to the outcome. Many of these latest states aren't very close. McCain and Obama are stacking up some hefty margins.
That wasn't the case in '00 or '04. '06's almost complete lack of using them at the Congressional level was due to the fact that the sample sizes (number of precincts polled) was so meager. IIRC, they did use them for statewide races like Governor and U.S. Senate, but they used them far more circumspectly. IOW, the standard for calling a race was far higher than before.
==========================================
http://kurtspeak.blogspot.com
(some relevant to subjects here, most not)
|
|
|
