Iowa GOP moving vote-count to '"undisclosed location"

[revelarts]

...<abbr class="published" title="2011-12-27T07:15"></abbr>

Threats to disrupt the Iowa (http://www.politico.com/tag/iowa2012) Republican caucuses next week (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/70867.html) have prompted state GOP officials to move the vote tabulation to an "undisclosed location," POLITICO has learned.

The state party has not yet told the campaigns exactly where the returns will be added up, only that it will be off-site from the Iowa GOP's Des Moines headquarters. The 2008 caucus results were tabulated at the state party offices, which sit just a few blocks from the state capitol.

Activist groups including the Occupy movement (http://www.politico.com/tag/occupywallstreet) have indicated that they'll attempt to interrupt rallies in the closing days before next Tuesday's caucuses.

The AP reported today that Occupy is making plans to even attend some caucuses and vote "no preference," but not disturb the voting process.

But Iowa Republicans are also bracing for other threats, sources say, including hacking.

Iowa GOP Chair Matt Strawn (http://www.politico.com/tag/MattStrawn) wouldn't comment on the plan to move the vote-counting except to say they're increasing security measures.

"The Iowa GOP is taking additional safeguards to ensure the Caucus results are tabulated and reported to the public in an accurate and timely manner," Strawn said. "We are not commenting on specific security procedures."...



http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2011/12/iowa-gop-moving-votecount-to-undisclosed-location-108812.html

SO the voter fruad begins early this year.

they are worried about OWS people? Give me a stinking Break. Send a few regular decent cops and you've got it under control or send ConHog up there and the OWS guys "breaking da Law " won't know what hit em and we get a public vote count as is typical in Iowa i'm told.

Ron Paul is a threat to establishment in a way they haven't seen in a while it seems.

[gabosaurus]

You would have to be pretty desperate for attention if you want to disrupt vote counting in a caucus. And how would it happen with 10,000 media reps looking on?

[jimnyc]

Good for them. If the OWS assholes are threatening to be a disruption, they should take steps to lessen that disruption. I don't see how this constitutes fraud, nor do I see how it is an issue towards just the kook. "Increasing security measures" doesn't mean stealing votes from Ron Paul. You really need to stop drinking the conspiracy juice for breakfast.

I can see it already - as Paul starts swirling around the drain and eventually goes down the tubes - You'll be in here claiming conspiracy, and of course ignoring the fact that RP is not the cup of tea that most want. Too bad for you and his other supporters, but no conspiracy.

[Noir]

I'm not sure how the vote counting is down in America, but over here we have members of the public who can watch the votes being counted and check them ourselves (i've done it once) so no fraud can be claimed (and fewer mistakes made)

[jimnyc]

I'm not sure how the vote counting is down in America, but over here we have members of the public who can watch the votes being counted and check them ourselves (i've done it once) so no fraud can be claimed (and fewer mistakes made)

You could allow Rev to sit in and he would still cry foul.

We have 6,000 security checks in place, security at the polling sites, security and watches at the counting, and every election there are people that cry about fraud after their candidate loses.

[Noir]

You could allow Rev to sit in and he would still cry foul.

We have 6,000 security checks in place, security at the polling sites, security and watches at the counting, and every election there are people that cry about fraud after their candidate loses.

I wouldn't trust security, especially hired state security. I trust my own eyes and they eyes of the volunteers who are giving up there nights because they don't trust the security either.

[jimnyc]

I wouldn't trust security, especially hired state security. I trust my own eyes and they eyes of the volunteers who are giving up there nights because they don't trust the security either.

Independent companies or others are free to do their own counts once the official counts are complete. Same as the infamous GWB victory in 2000. Many cried foul, so they let quite a few independents go over the counting once again, and he still won. But someone has to be designated to do the official tallying, and there is plenty of oversight to ensure there is no fraud - unless of course your candidate loses, then of course their is fraud.

[revelarts]

You could allow Rev to sit in and he would still cry foul.

We have 6,000 security checks in place, security at the polling sites, security and watches at the counting, and every election there are people that cry about fraud after their candidate loses.

Your Full of Vinegar this mornin Jim.

Public Vote count is all i ask Making the list and checking it twice and let the best man win.
"undisclosed location" means "secret" vote count, unverifiable, is seem pretty clear to me. maybe we should let acorn count the votes in secret. Lets see how much Jim will cry foul and fraud there.
Jim you know there's fruad from time to time, you KNOW IT. Don't know why your claiming it's "conspiracy" to state the facts.
Secret vote counts cannot be trusted, period. YOU KNOW THIS.

"6000 security checks" pleeeeease c'mon

[gabosaurus]

Or we could do it like the last supposedly democratic Afghan election. The U.S. sent untold millions of dollars to various factions to run the elections. Much of the cash went to insurgents, who would hand out cash for each vote for their candidate. In some northern areas, they paid people not to vote.
Your tax dollars at work. :salute:

[jimnyc]

Your Full of Vinegar this mornin Jim.

Public Vote count is all i ask Making the list and checking it twice and let the best man win.
"undisclosed localtion means "secret" vote count Unverifiable, maybe we should let acorn count the votes in secret. Lets see how how much Jim will cry foul there and fraud.
Jim you know there's fruad from time to time, you KNOW IT. Don't know why your claiming it's "conspiracy" to state the facts.
Secret vote counts cannot be trusted, period. YOU KNOW THIS.

Do you think if they did the status quo that YOU would be allowed to go in and count yourself? No. They are simply moving the security and checks/balances elsewhere where the shitheads can't cause a disruption. The checks and balances in place to prevent fraud are going to be 100% the same, just without the OWS idiots.

And again, how does this somehow become a conspiracy against Ron Paul as you started to say?

[Abbey Marie]

Or we could do it like the last supposedly democratic Afghan election. The U.S. sent untold millions of dollars to various factions to run the elections. Much of the cash went to insurgents, who would hand out cash for each vote for their candidate. In some northern areas, they paid people not to vote.
Your tax dollars at work. :salute:

Sounds just like what the Dems do with black voters in the cities.

[Abbey Marie]

Do you think if they did the status quo that YOU would be allowed to go in and count yourself? No. They are simply moving the security and checks/balances elsewhere where the shitheads can't cause a disruption. The checks and balances in place to prevent fraud are going to be 100% the same, just without the OWS idiots.

And again, how does this somehow become a conspiracy against Ron Paul as you started to say?

Good point. Different location does not = different procedures.

[gabosaurus]

Sounds just like what the Dems do with black voters in the cities.

Examples? Haven't ever heard of this outside of unfounded rumors.

[Abbey Marie]

Examples? Haven't ever heard of this outside of unfounded rumors.

Every year there are stories about Dems loading blacks onto buses and paying them money and cigarettes to vote.

I'll try to find a link later. I have to run now and go pick out my Christmas present of a new sink and faucet for the kitchen. :cool:

[jimnyc]

Examples? Haven't ever heard of this outside of unfounded rumors.

They just skirt the rules by paying the homeless with cigarettes, pizza and other stupid shit to show up at the polls. No difference IMO.

[jimnyc]

I can find tons of reports on the shenanigans, but why bother, no one ever believes it

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,433681,00.html
http://cnsnews.com/node/26533
http://www.campaignfinance.org/federalhtml/gop_alleges_bribery.html

[jimnyc]

Oh, and lets not forget ACORN, only a deranged animal would believe they weren't up to doing whatever it took to get Dem votes

[jimnyc]

Ron Paul is a threat to establishment in a way they haven't seen in a while it seems.


And again, how does this somehow become a conspiracy against Ron Paul as you started to say?

^bump - very curious to hear the conspiracy behind this one.

[jimnyc]

Just heard on the news that the same organization that hacked into military and corporate websites is threatening to do the same with the voting in Iowa. They took credit for the prior actions themselves and are distributing a video urging their supporters to shut down the process in Iowa. Sounds like good reason to change things up and take precautions to me. Or maybe it's Ron Paul's supporters doing so, so that they could rig the votes once out of sight? Nevermind, conspiracies don't fit me well!

[ConHog]

of course if we just went to computerized ballots with a computer doing the counting and told people who didn't want to use computerized ballots to shut the fuck up and use them or don't vote, we wouldn't have situations like this, because the server down at city hall doesn't give a shit if OWS protesters are trying to intimidate it.

Oh and rev, I don't believe in the military being used to keep Americans from protesting and in fact I retired specifically because I foreseen a day when Obama would do just that... And you can go back and look on USMB from a year or so ago where I started a thread saying exactly that ( or just ask Gunny, I'm sure he remembers it.)

[revelarts]

Story so far...


The Iowa Republican Party has decided to move the central counting of ballots in next Tuesday's caucuses to a secret location because of security concerns, news services (http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2011/12/iowa-gop-explains-moving-vote-tabulation-away-from-108962.html) report.

And what is the security threat?

The Occupy Caucus movement, organized by Occupy Wall Street protesters in the Hawkeye state, has promised to disrupt caucus campaign events during the next week. So far the group says it has no plans to wreak havoc on the caucuses themselves, but the party is playing it safe in any case.

“The Iowa GOP is taking additional safeguards to ensure the caucus results are tabulated and reported to the public in an accurate and timely manner,” Iowa Republican Party Chairman Matt Strawn told CNN (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/12/28/iowa-republicans-to-move-counting-due-to-security-concerns/).

Occupy Iowa protesters met Wednesday to plan a week of protests aimed at campaigns for the caucuses. The protesters voted to “go big” starting Wednesday afternoon, conducting demonstrations outside Mitt Romney’s Des Moines campaign headquarters and a Wells Fargo bank building, according to The Des Moines Register (http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/201539-iowa-caucus-counting-moved-due-to-occupy-caucus-concerns).

The protesters aren’t just targeting Republicans. They may demonstrate outside President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign headquarters, too.

The protesters vow to stay peaceful, calling their movement the “People’s Caucus.” They say they want to shift public focus away from the “1 percent” candidates to the “99 percent” they claim to represent.

As for the ballot tabulation, votes in each of the state’s 1,774 precincts will still be counted on site, and observers from the campaigns will be able to monitor the counting. That precinct data will then be sent to the state party's tabulation center.

In previous years, the central counting was conducted at state party headquarters in Des Moines.





http://www.newsmax.com/US/Occupy-Caucus-WallStreet-Iowa/2011/12/29/id/422514


The Bolded Green area is Perfect no problem . the Bolded Red area is the problem. If I go a week from now and find an article or a Youtube with an Iowa percint poll worker complaining that there precints numbers weren't post correctly Jim will Lose a button. and say the local Iowa newspapers should never to listen to any vote rigging talk unless it's about Acorn or the democrats. and froth about how i'm bias.

These OWS protesters don't seem like a real threat to me, a few extra police and the OWS stay outside while the count goes on inside, what's the problem?

Whenever anyone talks about secret tabulation or counting everyone should be concerned. if that's not the case here then great. May the best person win.

[gabosaurus]

I refuse to take anything posted on Newsmax seriously. It just another extreme right-wing blog. Give me a mainstream reference and I will check it out.

[jimnyc]

So no conspiracy against Ron Paul? Campaign teams and managers will be able to monitor voting? I'm confused then, what does this have to do with Ron Paul being a "threat to the establishment"?

[jimnyc]

The Bolded Green area is Perfect no problem . the Bolded Red area is the problem. If I go a week from now and find an article or a Youtube with an Iowa percint poll worker complaining that there precints numbers weren't post correctly Jim will Lose a button. and say the local Iowa newspapers should never to listen to any vote rigging talk unless it's about Acorn or the democrats. and froth about how i'm bias.

These OWS protesters don't seem like a real threat to me, a few extra police and the OWS stay outside while the count goes on inside, what's the problem?

Whenever anyone talks about secret tabulation or counting everyone should be concerned. if that's not the case here then great. May the best person win.

The voting tallying will be monitored. A report from an official monitoring the voting that reports fraud next week might get a stir, but if there is no story other than a "youtube video", you will get laughed at. Youtube isn't exactly a first stop for legitimate news.

[revelarts]

I refuse to take anything posted on Newsmax seriously. It just another extreme right-wing blog. Give me a mainstream reference and I will check it out.

:rolleyes:

Man, Geez lousie, , Hey just take the meat an leave the bones where ever you go on news wise.
MSNBC is just a biased, as FOX, PBS is left leaning but NPR news has Great stuff that will never get on Fox and FOX BIZ some stuff that's freaking awesome that will never appear on any other MSN networks. Democracy Now is great, Anti-war.com, the Blaze, newsmax, even mean ol Michele malkins site has interesting info from time to time. And Youtube has news from all the mainstream sources and local news as well. Don't get me talking about the "conspriacy" sites, the truth is out there...well ur... at least some facts are out there if you don't mind holding your nose while your looking. And can take off you blue state or red state glasses.

Gab if, you check the links on the newsmax article you'll find the DesMones Register, CNN and the right wing tool POLITICO as a few of it's sources.

[jimnyc]

I refuse to take anything posted on Newsmax seriously. It just another extreme right-wing blog. Give me a mainstream reference and I will check it out.

It's true, and Newsmax isn't as bad as you say (If so, and I've offered this bet before, go there and show me all of their false articles...)

Anyway, here's another link. What Rev posted is true, minus any conspiracy!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2011/dec/29/picket-iowa-gop-works-make-caucus-vote-counting-se/

[jimnyc]

These OWS protesters don't seem like a real threat to me, a few extra police and the OWS stay outside while the count goes on inside, what's the problem?

It's NOT the protesters they are worried about, but rather hackers that are having the GOP beef up security. This is something the FBI has been looking at for quite some time. Read the whole article.

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/11/06/video-calls-for-shutting-down-iowa-caucuses-the-group-anonymous-claims-responsibility/

[revelarts]

It's NOT the protesters they are worried about, but rather hackers that are having the GOP beef up security. This is something the FBI has been looking at for quite some time. Read the whole article.

http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/2011/11/06/video-calls-for-shutting-down-iowa-caucuses-the-group-anonymous-claims-responsibility/

Yes I read the whole article, the hacker group Anonymous has encouraged OWStreeters to peacefully and forcefully protest. there's nothing about hacking the Caucus headquarters mentioned, only Protest. please sight what i missed.

A couple of extra police are all that's needed.

[jimnyc]

Yes I read the whole article, the hacker group Anonymous has encouraged OWStreeters to peacefully and forcefully protest. there's nothing about hacking the Caucus headquarters mentioned, only Protest. please sight what i missed.

A couple of extra police are all that's needed.

Yeah, I suppose people thought only a few extra police would be needed at Zucotti park too!

But I do stand corrected, it's the threat by OWS and not hacking. Nonetheless, it's the responsibility of those in charge to ensure the security of the system, and the validity - both of which they have done. The vote counting will be independently monitored as well as all campaigns are welcome to monitor/watch. This crap about Ron Paul is nothing more than a conspiracy in the making with ZERO PROOF to backup anything.

[pegwinn]

Or we could do it like the last supposedly democratic Afghan election. The U.S. sent untold millions of dollars to various factions to run the elections. Much of the cash went to insurgents, who would hand out cash for each vote for their candidate. In some northern areas, they paid people not to vote.
Your tax dollars at work. :salute:

Really? Source (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?33833-What-makes-a-news-source-legit)? (Ya gotta clik da link to get the joke)


of course if we just went to computerized ballots with a computer doing the counting and told people who didn't want to use computerized ballots to shut the fuck up and use them or don't vote, we wouldn't have situations like this, because the server down at city hall doesn't give a shit if OWS protesters are trying to intimidate it.

Agreed. And for a way to do it (http://the--realist.blogspot.com/2011/04/election-reform.html) (written originally right after the Y2K elections)

[jimnyc]

I'll ask again, and even politely - Hey, Rev, with all of these sources now posted - can you please detail to us how this in any way at all is conspiracy about Ron Paul? Or for that fact, how this is in anyway different to RP than any other candidate?

[Gunny]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2011/12/iowa-gop-moving-votecount-to-undisclosed-location-108812.html

SO the voter fruad begins early this year.

they are worried about OWS people? Give me a stinking Break. Send a few regular decent cops and you've got it under control or send ConHog up there and the OWS guys "breaking da Law " won't know what hit em and we get a public vote count as is typical in Iowa i'm told.

Ron Paul is a threat to establishment in a way they haven't seen in a while it seems.

You mean those OWS people they have showed on film clips on the news? That would be both CNN and Fox. You mean the OWS people who have threatened to disrupt the Iowa caucus?

YOU give ME a break. Try getting out more. And maybe looking for news somewhere besides youtube.

And WHAT voter fraud? Dude, you are fear-monger.

[Abbey Marie]

Oh, and lets not forget ACORN, only a deranged animal would believe they weren't up to doing whatever it took to get Dem votes

Here's one:

http://www.theacru.org/acru/aclu_supports_acorn_voter_fraud/

[jimnyc]

I'll ask again, and even politely - Hey, Rev, with all of these sources now posted - can you please detail to us how this in any way at all is conspiracy about Ron Paul? Or for that fact, how this is in anyway different to RP than any other candidate?

Hello lonely question above. I'll talk to you since no one else wants to. How are you today, feeling ignored since you haven't been answered when you asked several times? :coffee:

[Gunny]

Hello lonely question above. I'll talk to you since no one else wants to. How are you today, feeling ignored since you haven't been answered when you asked several times? :coffee:

I don't get the whole Ron Paul thing where Rev is concerned. We've got three threads going at one time all covering Rev's infatuation with RP.

This is about the socialist, feeling-entitled class disrupting the GOP primaries like the Brown Shirts they are.

[Gunny]

Fact is, if I was a betting man, I'd bet Obama wants to run against Romney. He personifies Wall St. Then Obama gets all the OWS votes to add to the other blithering idiots that vote for him.

[jimnyc]

I don't get the whole Ron Paul thing where Rev is concerned.

He likes to post positive things about RP but then hides or outright quits a thread once anything negative comes up. But HE started this thread and it was HIM who brought up the subject of it having something to do with RP. So I asked a question directly about his words, and I've watched him read the thread several times, but he doesn't want to answer me. I'm VERY curious as to why he thinks the GOP making the move they did in any way has anything to do with RP, or if he has any proof, or where he's getting this idea from. Methinks he made it up in his head, or read someone else post it on a RP kook forum, but I'll await his answer, perhaps forever. :laugh2:

[Gunny]

He likes to post positive things about RP but then hides or outright quits a thread once anything negative comes up. But HE started this thread and it was HIM who brought up the subject of it having something to do with RP. So I asked a question directly about his words, and I've watched him read the thread several times, but he doesn't want to answer me. I'm VERY curious as to why he thinks the GOP making the move they did in any way has anything to do with RP, or if he has any proof, or where he's getting this idea from. Methinks he made it up in his head, or read someone else post it on a RP kook forum, but I'll await his answer, perhaps forever. :laugh2:

For clarification: Is rev for or against RP? I can never tell what he's talking about. Usually not the post he's quoting nor the question he's allegedly answering.

[jimnyc]

For clarification: Is rev for or against RP? I can never tell what he's talking about. Usually not the post he's quoting nor the question he's allegedly answering.

He's engaged to marry Ron Paul I believe, and at the very least he is a supporter of him for President. :laugh2:

[Gunny]

He's engaged to marry Ron Paul I believe, and at the very least he is a supporter of him for President. :laugh2:

Shows how vague Rev is. I thought he was against him.:laugh:

[ConHog]

Shows how vague Rev is. I thought he was against him.:laugh:


I think Jim's right and the nuptials are pending.

[jimnyc]

Do you think if they did the status quo that YOU would be allowed to go in and count yourself? No. They are simply moving the security and checks/balances elsewhere where the shitheads can't cause a disruption. The checks and balances in place to prevent fraud are going to be 100% the same, just without the OWS idiots.

And again, how does this somehow become a conspiracy against Ron Paul as you started to say?


^bump - very curious to hear the conspiracy behind this one.


So no conspiracy against Ron Paul? Campaign teams and managers will be able to monitor voting? I'm confused then, what does this have to do with Ron Paul being a "threat to the establishment"?


I'll ask again, and even politely - Hey, Rev, with all of these sources now posted - can you please detail to us how this in any way at all is conspiracy about Ron Paul? Or for that fact, how this is in anyway different to RP than any other candidate?


Hello lonely question above. I'll talk to you since no one else wants to. How are you today, feeling ignored since you haven't been answered when you asked several times?



i should let this go but ive been accused of running from post so Jim please point the post out i've supposed run from and I'll reply.

Hmmmmmmm....

[revelarts]

AH Ok,
!st I'll ask question just to make sure we understand what we are talking about .
both you and Abby -I believe- posted items about voter fraud by the dems that you believe to be absolute fact.
is that right?
Voter Fraud cheating by people in voting in the U.S. that is.
i just want to be clear that you do acknowledge that it can and has happened? Even with the 6000 safe guards you mentioned before Jim.
I'm not looking for anything but a a yes or a no here.
Then i can answer with out you trying to dismiss my answer out of hand as "conspiracy".
fair enough?

Vote fraud happen in the U.S.?
Yes or No?

[jimnyc]

AH Ok,
!st I'll ask question just to make sure we understand what we are talking about .
both you and Abby -I believe- posted items about voter fraud by the dems that you believe to be absolute fact.
is that right?
Voter Fraud cheating by people in voting in the U.S. that is.
i just want to be clear that you do acknowledge that it can and has happened? Even with the 6000 safe guards you mentioned before Jim.
I'm not looking for anything but a a yes or a no here.
Then i can answer with out you trying dismissing my answer out of hand as "conspiracy".
fair enough?

Vote fraud happen in the U.S.?
Yes or No?

I'll bite - Yes

[revelarts]

Great, so it's not conspiracy to suspect voter fraud when things change

just for reference


http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/co...0_felons2.html (http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/election2000/election2000_felons2.html)

Felon purge sacrificed innocent voters
Election 2000: Fla. Vote
May 27, 2001
By Scott Hiaasen, Gary Kane and Elliot Jaspin
Palm Beach Post Staff Writers

While millions of Floridians spent Nov. 7 casting their votes for president, Clarence Mayville was fighting, and failing, to clear his name.

Mayville went to his precinct in Polk County's Auburndale that Tuesday morning to cast his vote for George W. Bush. Poll workers told him he was on a state list of suspected felons, making him ineligible to vote.

Mayville, 50, a diesel mechanic and Army veteran, said it was a mistake. But a day of haggling with election workers failed to clear up the mess.

"I'm madder than hell," Mayville said. "I called them over there (at the elections office) and I raised hell. ... You can't get an answer from them."

Finally Mayville tore up his voter registration card and stomped out without voting. It wasn't until March that he received a letter from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement telling him what he already knew: He had no criminal record. By then, the damage was done.

In the months since the election, no one has been able to say with any certainty just how many legitimate Florida voters like Mayville were turned away from the polls.

But a Palm Beach Post computer analysis has found at least 1,100 eligible voters wrongly purged from the rolls before last year's election - the collateral damage from an aggressive and ill-conceived state plan to prevent felons from voting.

With Bush winning Florida and the presidency by a scant 537 votes over Democrat Al Gore, these voters - some wrongly identified as felons, and many more wrongly turned away based on felony convictions in other states - could have swayed the election had they been allowed to vote.
And while the state's attempt to police the voter rolls victimized scores of legitimate voters, it still failed to prevent thousands of felons from casting their ballots. In Florida, felons are banned for life from voting unless granted clemency.

State lawmakers decided to weed out felons and other ineligible voters in 1998 after a Miami mayoral election was overturned because votes had been cast by the convicted and the dead. Election officials subsequently hired Database Technologies Inc. of Boca Raton to help with the daunting task of scanning the state's massive database of registered voters for felons and dead people. They paid DBT $3.3 million during the past two years.

The company, now a subsidiary of ChoicePoint of Atlanta, produced a list of 82,389 "probable" and "possible" felons before last year's election. The list identified thousands of legal voters as criminals, forcing them to prove their innocence before they could cast a ballot.

But that was just one of many damaging consequences of the state's anti-felon campaign - an effort born of an unwieldy law, founded on less-than-reliable data and made worse by decisions of elections officials, The Post found. For example:

At least 108 law-abiding people were purged from the voter rolls as suspected criminals, only to be cleared after the election. DBT's computers had matched these people with felons, though in dozens of cases they did not share the same name, birthdate, gender or race. One Naples man was told he couldn't vote because he was linked with a felon still serving time in a Moore Haven prison.

Florida officials cut from the rolls 996 people convicted of crimes in other states, though they should have been allowed to vote. Before the election, state officials said felons could vote only if they had written clemency orders, although most other states automatically restore voting rights to felons when they complete their sentences. This policy conflicted with a 1998 court ruling that said Florida had "no authority" to deny civil rights to those who had them restored in other states. After the election, the state changed its policy.

State officials told DBT to use broad parameters to identify as many likely felons as possible, despite warnings that this would disenfranchise legitimate voters.

County elections supervisors were told not to discount names on the list, even if they didn't match.

Records used to create the felon list were sometimes wrong. A state database of felons wrongly included dozens of people whose crimes were reduced to misdemeanors. Furthermore, clemency records were incomplete.

Skeptical of the list's accuracy, elections supervisors in 20 counties (including Palm Beach) ignored it altogether, thereby allowing thousands of felons to vote.

Since the election, the felon purge has become a public-relations nightmare for the state.

Civil rights groups saw it as a deliberate attempt to disenfranchise black voters: Blacks accounted for 88 percent of those removed from the rolls, though they make up only about 11 percent of Florida's voters.

The list was a major issue in post-election hearings before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and it's being challenged in an NAACP lawsuit.

But a review of state records, internal e-mails of DBT employees and testimony before the civil rights commission and an elections task force showed no evidence that minorities were specifically targeted.

Blacks make up nearly 89 percent of the felons convicted in the state, according to the FDLE, so any purge of felons would include a disproportionate number of blacks.

Records show that DBT told the state it would not use race as a criterion to identify felons. The list itself bears that out: More than 1,000 voters were matched with felons though they were of different races.

DBT officials say they aren't to blame for snaring legal voters.

They simply followed the state's orders, handed down by officials who were too cavalier about the felon purge. James Lee, a spokesman for ChoicePoint, said his company will never again get involved in cleansing voting rolls.

"We are not confident any of the methods used today can guarantee legal voters will not be wrongfully denied the right to vote," Lee told a group of Atlanta-area black lawmakers in March.

Clay Roberts, director of the state Division of Elections, said legislation signed this month by Gov. Jeb Bush should provide more safeguards for legitimate voters.

The state will soon create a new voter database accessible to local supervisors and using more reliable court data to identify suspected felons.

"The benefit of the doubt is going to go to the voter," Roberts said. "If the supervisor cannot be absolutely sure they are felons, they should leave them on" the rolls.

Input always imperfect

Some problems with the felon purge were inevitable. Computer databases are never perfect; they're only as accurate as the people putting information into them.

So state officials were left with two unpalatable options: Use strict guidelines in identifying felons and risk losing some, or use broad guidelines and risk catching non-felons in the net. The state chose the latter.

Even so, the number of voters wrongly disenfranchised by the felon purge appears to be far less than the "thousands" its critics have claimed.

Though DBT developed the list, it was up to the 67 county elections supervisors to use it.

The supervisors wrote warning letters to the suspected felons, giving them one to two months to appeal before they were dropped from the rolls.

Several supervisors said they ignored "possible" matches that were obviously wrong.

Many counties didn't use the list at all.

Ultimately, less than half of the names on the DBT list were purged, state records show.

"There were names on the list that I knew were not felons," said Babs Montpetit, the elections supervisor in Union County. "One was a youth director in our church."

Said Leon County supervisor Ion Sancho: "If you weren't careful, you would disenfranchise people."

People like Matt Frost.

The 33-year-old Tampa businessman and Gore supporter was linked by DBT with a convict named Chadwick Chowanetz. Based on this "match," the Hillsborough County elections office sent Frost a letter saying he couldn't vote unless he could prove the list wrong.

Frost, whose only brush with the law was a misdemeanor reckless driving charge, appealed to the state. When he received notice that his polling precinct had changed, he assumed he had been cleared.

On election day, Frost went to his new precinct only to be told he couldn't vote because he was a felon. "Right in front of a bunch of people," Frost said. "The more I'm going to protest, the more it looks like I've got something to hide."

Embarrassed, Frost walked away - but not before grabbing an "I voted" decal. He couldn't take the shame of going home without the little sticker on his shirt. "God, it was humiliating," he said.
...







BBC investigation Florida Republicans 1000's purge voter rolls illigetimatly. Docs to prove it.
And the sloppiness of the list was intentional. there are docs that show that the state didn't want the list verified as it should have been.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClTxaY8Uy5U&feature=player_embedded#!

CNN investigation of Georgia 1000's of legit voters purge ,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_4kJHphEpE&feature=player_embedded#!

<object height="360" width="640">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jMN_2Fc3Tfo&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" height="360" width="640"></object>



I've got to run here in a minute but i'll be back
but let me just say that with all of open hostility displayed by republicans on from the local to the national level, and HERE AT THIS "conservative" Forum for fellow republican Ron Paul, to the point that republican state officials want to "disregard" the Iowa vote if Ron Paul wins. Pundits want to dismiss Iowa completely and only look at the 2nd and 3rd place winners. When in 2008 everyone thought the Iowa caucus was a bellwether win. And OBAMA, the eventual presidential winner, won there but lost in new Hampshire. Shows that it's important. The Iowa Winners have 50/50 chance of winning the presidency.

So yes when the state republicans make last minute changes to the vote count after Ron Paul seems to be in the lead there, yes I'm suspicious and want every precaution taken because I will not give them the benefit of the doubt of running a fair election. Just as I wouldn't give the Dems the benefit of the doubt. the establishment republicans don't want him to win and some politicians will use ever kind of dirty trick to win. including vote fraud.
If the vote is counted with are decent safe guards, great no problem, but when a last minute move is made, YES I'm EXTREMELY suspicious until it's proven legitimate.

Happy New Year

[jimnyc]

So it's a conspiracy against Ron Paul, even though all parties have the same changes and the same access to the process? And you have zero proof at all to show anything towards Paul in Iowa other then a hunch? Boy am I every so fucking thrilled I asked! :laugh2:

http://www.bloggingbroker.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/tinfoil_hat.jpg

[jimnyc]

On a separate post - Happy New Year to you too! Not sure if I'll make it another 2 hrs though, I'm fading!

[PostmodernProphet]

I'm not sure how the vote counting is down in America, but over here we have members of the public who can watch the votes being counted and check them ourselves (i've done it once) so no fraud can be claimed (and fewer mistakes made)

dude, we're not talking about an election....we're talking about a party caucus....

[PostmodernProphet]

Fact is, if I was a betting man, I'd bet Obama wants to run against Romney. .

strangely, Obama seems to want to run against any Republican......I take it as additional evidence of just how detached from reality he is......

[revelarts]

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4WcysL7VeCw?version=3&feature=player_embedded"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4WcysL7VeCw?version=3&feature=player_embedded" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>

[Gunny]

AH Ok,
!st I'll ask question just to make sure we understand what we are talking about .
both you and Abby -I believe- posted items about voter fraud by the dems that you believe to be absolute fact.
is that right?
Voter Fraud cheating by people in voting in the U.S. that is.
i just want to be clear that you do acknowledge that it can and has happened? Even with the 6000 safe guards you mentioned before Jim.
I'm not looking for anything but a a yes or a no here.
Then i can answer with out you trying to dismiss my answer out of hand as "conspiracy".
fair enough?

Vote fraud happen in the U.S.?
Yes or No?

Loaded, dishonest and misleading question. Still can't get past playing senmantics with your betters, huh?

Voter fraud does not exist to the extent your "the sky is falling" Chicken Little self would have anyone believe.

[Gunny]

Great, so it's not conspiracy to suspect voter fraud when things change

just for reference

BBC investigation Florida Republicans 1000's purge voter rolls illigetimatly. Docs to prove it.
And the sloppiness of the list was intentional. there are docs that show that the state didn't want the list verified as it should have been.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClTxaY8Uy5U&feature=player_embedded#!

CNN investigation of Georgia 1000's of legit voters purge ,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_4kJHphEpE&feature=player_embedded#!

<object height="360" width="640">


<embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jMN_2Fc3Tfo&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always" height="360" width="640"></object>



I've got to run here in a minute but i'll be back
but let me just say that with all of open hostility displayed by republicans on from the local to the national level, and HERE AT THIS "conservative" Forum for fellow republican Ron Paul, to the point that republican state officials want to "disregard" the Iowa vote if Ron Paul wins. Pundits want to dismiss Iowa completely and only look at the 2nd and 3rd place winners. When in 2008 everyone thought the Iowa caucus was a bellwether win. And OBAMA, the eventual presidential winner, won there but lost in new Hampshire. Shows that it's important. The Iowa Winners have 50/50 chance of winning the presidency.

So yes when the state republicans make last minute changes to the vote count after Ron Paul seems to be in the lead there, yes I'm suspicious and want every precaution taken because I will not give them the benefit of the doubt of running a fair election. Just as I wouldn't give the Dems the benefit of the doubt. the establishment republicans don't want him to win and some politicians will use ever kind of dirty trick to win. including vote fraud.
If the vote is counted with are decent safe guards, great no problem, but when a last minute move is made, YES I'm EXTREMELY suspicious until it's proven legitimate.

Happy New Year

:tinfoil:

[ConHog]

Thank God only the mean old conservatives would ever stoop to voter fraud............


Oh wait, the city most known for voter fraud in this country is in fact chicago , a city renowned for their connection to the liberal democratic party.................

[revelarts]

Thank God only the mean old conservatives would ever stoop to voter fraud............


Oh wait, the city most known for voter fraud in this country is in fact chicago , a city renowned for their connection to the liberal democratic party.................

No Argument here, Chicago's got a looong history of voter fraud and corruption. I don't know if Baton Rogue and Louisiana democrats have them beat though.. with dead voters and what not. Both Ds and Rs have their share of political crooks ever here of watergate?

But Voter fraud is a real freaking problem.
Gunny says I'm claiming sky is falling after i post items from the BBC and CBS news. maybe an ostrich with a head in the sand is the bird you most resemble here Gunny.

[avatar4321]

If there was voting fraud going on do you honestly think Paul or Santorum would be doing nearly as well as they are?

[ConHog]

but voter fraud is a real minor problem.


i fify

[revelarts]

If there was voting fraud going on do you honestly think Paul or Santorum would be doing nearly as well as they are?

I've never said that there IS voter fraud in Iowa, but that there is a chance of it there and ANYWHERE. you can't be to careful.
the woman speaking in the youtube is talking about crony local politics in the item I posted above, thats vote fixing but not necessarily fraud. But I've got no evidence that says even that is going on in Iowa. Until then i can only assume and hope that everything is on the up and up. from what i've read most of it is done very much out in the open in a very cool way. Thinking about Santorum today it really makes sense that his numbers are up he's the closest to Iowa's last republican winner Huckabee. Strong evangelical Christian pro-life pro-wars.

[ConHog]

I've never said that there IS voter fraud in Iowa, but that there is a chance of it there and ANYWHERE. you can't be to careful.
the woman speaking in the youtube is talking about crony local politics in the item I posted above, thats vote fixing but not necessarily fraud. But I've got no evidence that says even that is going on in Iowa. Until then i can only assume and hope that everything is on the up and up. from what i've read most of it is done very much out in the open in a very cool way. Thinking about Santorum today it really makes sense that his numbers are up he's the closest to Iowa's last republican winner Huckabee. Strong evangelical Christian pro-life pro-wars.

Wait a minute...............

Are you really saying you are paranoid about voter fraud and think that EVERY precaution should be taken to prevent any possibility of it happening, at the same time that you wish to dismantle the TSA?

[gabosaurus]

It gave me great pleasure to read the almost complete results of the Iowa caucus.

Michele Bachmann ... DEAD!
Rick Perry .... DEAD!
Newt Gingrich .... DEAD!

God Bless America! :salute:

--------
Doesn't voter fraud only exist when your candidate loses? :rolleyes:

[revelarts]

Wait a minute...............

Are you really saying you are paranoid about voter fraud and think that EVERY precaution should be taken to prevent any possibility of it happening, at the same time that you wish to dismantle the TSA?

Are you saying you want the TSA to monitor elections now? Geez lousie Um H377 No! Seems your default position is that the fed Gov't = Security and safety, not mine.
No the people can handle most of the voting extremely well without feds w badges & shabby uniforms counting or overseeing. the locally elected sheriff and police can watch the door and make sure no one bust in the counting area acting crazy but a well armed citizenry could probably handle that as well.

And the TSA is useless at airports what good will they do at voting sites,
or bus stations, cuise ships, Nascar, football games, school lunchrooms, etc. etc..

[Abbey Marie]

I'd say the biggest voter fraud going on in Iowa is dems and indys being allowed to vote in the Republican primary. The source of Grandpa Paul's good returns, I'd wager.

[pegwinn]

I'd say the biggest voter fraud going on in Iowa is dems and indys being allowed to vote in the Republican primary. The source of Grandpa Paul's good returns, I'd wager.

Oh wow. We are so almost in sync. Except I was thinking Santorum.

[Abbey Marie]

Oh wow. We are so almost in sync. Except I was thinking Santorum.

Interesting thought.