HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Wisconsin Election Offici...

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 12:23 PM

Wisconsin Election Officials CAN'T ADD: 3.5 Million recount now 3.9 million due to adding error

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt-and-politics/election-matters/hillary-clinton-files-motion-in-support-of-hand-recount-in/article_adb7ea51-5e50-5e48-9e2f-9dfb246e25db.html

They buried the lede in this article. Wisconsin officials can not add, and have increased the exorbitant recount fee from $3.5 million to $3.9 million due to their own admitted error in addition. I'll bet they used a calculator and still got it wrong.

The article notes that Clinton has joined the Stein motion and is requesting a statewide hand recount.

Note that the Wisconsin position that each County can choose how they want to recount is an egregious repeat of exactly what the Supreme Court struck down in Bush v Gore and used to terminate the 2000 election during the recount phase in Florida, infamously awarding the state and the presidency to George W. BUSH.

Where is the press on calling this election incompetence out? How can they add up county election returns when they can't add up County financial estimates for recounts?

And calling out the bad faith repeat of Bush v. GORE, which struck down partial recounts as unconstitutional??

56 replies, 6483 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 56 replies Author Time Post
Reply Wisconsin Election Officials CAN'T ADD: 3.5 Million recount now 3.9 million due to adding error (Original post)
Land Shark Nov 2016 OP
Tiggeroshii Nov 2016 #1
Blanks Nov 2016 #10
Land Shark Nov 2016 #13
yodermon Nov 2016 #15
dmr Nov 2016 #27
DFW Dec 2016 #52
TheFrenchRazor Nov 2016 #41
Sunlei Nov 2016 #2
metroins Nov 2016 #26
TheFrenchRazor Nov 2016 #42
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #44
TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #47
SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #50
Land Shark Dec 2016 #54
TheFrenchRazor Dec 2016 #48
SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #51
Sunlei Dec 2016 #53
Trekologer Nov 2016 #3
gratuitous Nov 2016 #5
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #35
druidity33 Nov 2016 #39
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #40
Land Shark Dec 2016 #45
SickOfTheOnePct Dec 2016 #49
Thav Nov 2016 #4
Fast Walker 52 Nov 2016 #9
gollygee Nov 2016 #6
Ellipsis Nov 2016 #7
Land Shark Nov 2016 #14
turbinetree Nov 2016 #8
jodymarie aimee Nov 2016 #25
turbinetree Nov 2016 #29
anamandujano Nov 2016 #37
turbinetree Nov 2016 #38
libtodeath Nov 2016 #11
Land Shark Nov 2016 #16
Ellipsis Nov 2016 #19
libtodeath Nov 2016 #20
Ellipsis Nov 2016 #22
libtodeath Nov 2016 #23
Ellipsis Nov 2016 #24
Land Shark Dec 2016 #46
SickOfTheOnePct Nov 2016 #36
TheFrenchRazor Nov 2016 #43
Spitfire of ATJ Nov 2016 #12
Maraya1969 Nov 2016 #17
Land Shark Nov 2016 #34
Maraya1969 Dec 2016 #55
Land Shark Dec 2016 #56
Coyotl Nov 2016 #18
anamandujano Nov 2016 #21
Bob41213 Nov 2016 #28
anamandujano Nov 2016 #30
Land Shark Nov 2016 #33
Lotusflower70 Nov 2016 #31
Land Shark Nov 2016 #32

Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 12:41 PM

1. Fwiw Bush v Gore was ruled as a case not to have precedence on anything else.

 

If I remember correctly...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tiggeroshii (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 01:43 PM

10. That's the way I remember it too. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blanks (Reply #10)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:08 PM

13. Except that lower courts are bound by ALL supreme Court rulings

Many legal scholars say that language was senseless. If the constitution requires equal dignity and therefore the sense and the same standards statewide it is the constitution requiring uniformity. That vote, BTW, was not a close one on the court

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tiggeroshii (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:11 PM

15. Not to go down the Bush v Gore rabbit hole, but..

How could the SC have ruled that that case can't set a precedent with a straight face?
It's not up to *that* SC, *those* justices, to decide what a future court may or may not use a precedent!
I always thought it was a petulant bit of foot-stamping on the part of the court and legally laughable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yodermon (Reply #15)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 03:21 PM

27. Agree. I think SCOTUS knew their decision was wrong, and

by adding the precedent ruling it protected their partisan fear it would be used again in favor of the Democrats.

But, IF it could favor the Right again, then they'd ignore their precedent ruling; you know, iokiyar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dmr (Reply #27)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 06:25 AM

52. I heard Steve Breyer say something close to that a year or so later

He didn't quite go as far as to say they ALL knew it was wrong, but he said it was wrong, and that it wasn't the first time the Court had made a really bad decision.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tiggeroshii (Reply #1)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 10:57 PM

41. yeah, it was sureal. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 12:45 PM

2. largest county population is 947,735 TOTAL, rest are about 20k-40k TOTAL.less than half are voters.

A county can't hand count 20 to 40 stacks of 1,000 ballots on a large table?

give me a break, I've had temporary jobs where three people hand count/ and recheck a million inventory items in a day!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sunlei (Reply #2)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 03:11 PM

26. 3 people?

1,000,000 3 people = 333,333.33 each person a day 10 hours = 33,333 60 minutes = 555 counts a minute per person 60 seconds = 9.2 counts per second per person with no breaks

If all 3 people worked 20 hours, it would still be 4.6 counts per second with no breaks.

I think you exaggerated a little bit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to metroins (Reply #26)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 11:01 PM

42. i think your math is off by a factor of 10. hand counts are totally doable; what do you think

 

people did before computers?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheFrenchRazor (Reply #42)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 11:07 PM

44. No, it's not

She just put a "," where it should have been a decimal point, i.e., 333,333,333 instead of 333,333.333

So yeah, three people counting 1 million votes in a day isn't going to work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #44)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 02:23 AM

47. wow, how did they ever count votes before computers? guess it's impossible. not. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheFrenchRazor (Reply #47)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 05:46 AM

50. I never said it was impossible

I was just pointing out that your comment to the poster that the math was off was incorrect, so it is indeed impossible for three people to count one million votes in a day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #50)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 12:35 PM

54. We can easily get numbers needed by summonsing process

Most people would much rather count votes on election night than serve in a ten day jury trial. A minor statutory amendment might be needed but not hard to do

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #44)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 02:26 AM

48. okay, 50 people or so; i still don't think that adds up to costing $4M. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheFrenchRazor (Reply #48)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 05:48 AM

51. If it doesn't then she'll get money back n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to metroins (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 08:47 AM

53. yeah,I did 'exaggerate' a little bit, this was back in the days when I'd do almost any job for cash

the first day, was close to 20 hours straight, not much break though I still remember tomato soup, bread & cheap deli pack sandwich's were ambrosia. we could sleep a couple hours on the office floor and back to finish the job by the next afternoon. we ate again too, bread with jelly sandwiches. I was 'promised' $100 cash for the work and I got paid. sometimes at these kind of 'jobs' you don't get paid at the end & there's not much you can do.

back in radio shacks hayday their warehouses had a million + items or more, they still had tandy leather products and cool toys of all types.

Anyway, I can not believe these states can't hand count ballots and hand! review the thousands and thousands of ballots the ancient 'buggie scanning machines' reported as blank!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 12:46 PM

3. Didn't Gore ask for the selective recount?

The difference is Stein asked for a full one and was denied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trekologer (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 01:03 PM

5. The Gore campaign followed Florida election law

At the time, Florida state law said that in a statewide campaign, a candidate could contest vote totals county by county. The Gore campaign did a quick evaluation, and chose three counties where it felt it stood the best chance of overcoming the 537 vote lead the Bush campaign had. There was also a very short deadline for filing county challenges, something like 72 hours after polling closed. When Gore filed his challenges right before the deadline Friday afternoon, the Bush campaign was temporarily caught flat-footed, because it didn't have time to file any county challenges.

Luckily for Bush, the Florida Secretary of State was his statewide campaign manager, and the Florida governor was his brother. Unable to pursue any legal challenges through the courts, the Bush campaign pressed its case in the court of public opinion, and succeeded wildly. Every media outlet parroted their mantra that the votes had been counted, re-counted and counted again, and any legal challenge to the announced totals was dirty pool. Their position was non-stop lies from end to end, but that didn't carry any weight as the case was wrenched from the state courts to the federal courts, and wouldn't you just know it, but the federal Supreme Court was dominated by justices who owed their position to the Republican candidate's father! An astonishing string of coincidences that delivered Florida's electoral votes and the presidency to George W. Bush.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trekologer (Reply #3)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 09:14 PM

35. Stein was not denied a full recount n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #35)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 10:08 PM

39. Only a full HAND recount. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to druidity33 (Reply #39)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 10:14 PM

40. Yep

But she's still getting what she paid for, i.e., a full recount of the state.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SickOfTheOnePct (Reply #40)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 12:52 AM

45. The linked article shows Clinton campaign saying full hand count is required. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Reply #45)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 05:44 AM

49. In their opinion that may be true

But by Wisconsin law, there is no such requirement, unless a judge can be convinced otherwise. In this case, the judge didn't agree, from a legal standpoint.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 12:50 PM

4. I'd add this as evidence that a recount is absolutely needed.

If they can't add up a bill properly, how can we be certain they added up the vote totals properly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thav (Reply #4)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 01:36 PM

9. exactly

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 01:05 PM

6. If they're this bad with math, we obviously can't trust them to count votes. Nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 01:17 PM

7. Wow... the shark.

Howdy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ellipsis (Reply #7)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:09 PM

14. Nice to see ya. ;)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 01:29 PM

8. My big question is why did it cost over 500,000 to do a crony judge of the Koch's

but when it comes to the presidential its 3.5 million and now they, the cronies in the republican crooked wisCONsin election board say it is now 3.9 million.

Time for a lawsuit to find out the why?

Something is rotten in wisCONsin, they just dropped 5,000 votes that were "padded" to the fasicts dumpster, so instead of 22,000 its down to 17,000 what does that tell you

While back on the MSM ranch, they are trying to "normalize" the fraud.

Did anyone see sixty minutes of BS this weekend, prime example, no reporting on what is happening at standing rock, but the public gets to see how some guy that played jeopardy becomes the prime minister, see the problem

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to turbinetree (Reply #8)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 03:02 PM

25. correction

 

total went from 27,000 to 22,000. those 5,000 votes were thrown out last Weds by the WI crooks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jodymarie aimee (Reply #25)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 03:40 PM

29. Thanks for the correction

and the fox's in wisCONsin are still trying to guard the chicken house, but the shenanigans of just running the ballots through the same machines----------------I hate fascists, and that's what they are in wisCONsin, republican crony fascists.

Again why the "price" increase?

Looks like a blatant attempt of a election scam, the price of a recount is NOT adjusted to inflation, that's not how it works, and you cannot just be arbitrary and raise the price for each ballot, they have been printed and they have been scanned or however they do it in wisCONsin--------------------this is a prime example of why oversight needs to be checked by independent examiners, instead of lackies


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to turbinetree (Reply #8)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 09:46 PM

37. Add to that, the 5K came from 3 counties, 3 out of 72!

"Something is rotten in wisCONsin, they just dropped 5,000 votes that were "padded" to the fasicts dumpster, so instead of 22,000 its down to 17,000 what does that tell you"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anamandujano (Reply #37)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 10:02 PM

38. Like the saying goes from Apollo 13: Houston we have a problem in wisCONsin

and now in PA some elected right wing judge thinks that he can just deny a county from a recount, like he's the law and that's it.
Doesn't work that way

All, it takes is three people in the county to say, we want to monitor the recount and we want it to be done by hand, hey gop judge, we want a recount of the votes, something is not right, if its not right, we just want to make sure and the PA constitution says that if people want a recount you can't deny it, that's how it works there judge

And in Michigan, they are screaming also, to bad, if you didn't try to hide the fascism there wouldn't be problem you know like some state actor from another country hacking the system, what are they afraid of, it's that simple, lets have a recount by hand, this is a democracy, they keep forgetting about that little thing, lets see if there are problems




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 01:50 PM

11. It sounds like just a re run through the same possibly hacked machines

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libtodeath (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:12 PM

16. They will hand coutnt in Dane (Madison) and Portage counties

If counties do not hand count, they are paying vendors to.come in and reprogram the machines.

Given the strong human and business desire to avoid embarrassment of a.substantially changed count, can be expected 100% honesty? Even if you could before the election, now is different because of the conflict of interest in defending the announced counts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Reply #16)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:35 PM

19. 56 Counties are doing hand or partial hand recounts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ellipsis (Reply #19)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:41 PM

20. So where is the 3.5 million going?

To the state to graciously allow a count of any kind or to pay for the actual counts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libtodeath (Reply #20)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:43 PM

22. How would I know... go find out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ellipsis (Reply #22)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:44 PM

23. Thanks for the informative discussion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libtodeath (Reply #23)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:48 PM

24. Anytime.

I'm looking for a break down... nothin' yet by me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ellipsis (Reply #24)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 12:56 AM

46. Each county submitted an estimate and the state inaccurately tallied the estimates

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libtodeath (Reply #20)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 09:17 PM

36. To pay for anything that goes for doing the recount

Wages, supplies, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libtodeath (Reply #11)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 11:05 PM

43. our gov't is a rotten-to-the-core joke, that's a fact. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:03 PM

12. Kinda like when they added up the votes.

 

Last edited Wed Nov 30, 2016, 10:08 PM - Edit history (1)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:24 PM

17. Too bad they can't just give us all a number that we can keep private and then put

a list up of what numbers voted for who so you could check after the election to see if your vote actually went to who you wanted.

It could be voluntary. I imagine some people ( perhaps spouses who do not want the other one to who who they voted for) may not want a little piece of paper that might get into the wrong hands.

But it should be available to those of us who fear our vote might not be counted in the way we want it counted.

If there is a discrepancy, people can come forward then.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Reply #17)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 08:42 PM

34. Allows vote selling. It likely won't fly for that reason

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Reply #34)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 09:44 PM

55. How would it allow vote selling? I was thinking you would get the number right before

you went in but they could give you one, based on which voting booth you used as you were walking out the door.

I don't understand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maraya1969 (Reply #55)

Thu Dec 1, 2016, 11:19 PM

56. Whenever you confirm your vote in the proper column the vote buyer can confirm also

Or the vote buyer can take your place and be the only one who checks.

With the current secret ballot (thrown out the window though by absentee and vote by mail systems) there is no way to prove who you voted for so you can't sell your vote or be harassed for it if you don't disclose it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:31 PM

18. Creating grounds for later appeal? In case they don't like how things turn out, technicality ....

 

All counties should count the same way for there to be equity of justice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:42 PM

21. Raised again? Holy crap!

Wisconsin Increases Recount Filing Fee to Outrageous $3.5-million
Friends, I have an important message for you. We need your help to stand up to the powerful forces trying to block our recount campaign for citizen democracy. We received word yesterday that the final estimate for the filing fee for the recount in Wisconsin is $3.5 million an outrageous cost increase from the initial estimate of $1.1 million that was given to us by WI state elections officials based on the last statewide recount.


https://jillstein.nationbuilder.com/recount

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anamandujano (Reply #21)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 03:30 PM

28. They want to make sure they don't undercharge her...

Reasoning being that if they tell her it's gonna be $1M and it's $2M, good luck getting the extra money once the recount is done. But they can easily refund her the extra.

Now you can obviously counter with: Do you really think they'll refund the extra or that they won't pad the fees?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bob41213 (Reply #28)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 03:45 PM

30. I've never been worried about the money. It only bothers me that the path to the recount

keeps meeting obstacles. Now if Stein adjusts her website to reflect the extra money they are charging, there will be endless bashing threads about motives, where the left over is going, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to anamandujano (Reply #30)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 08:40 PM

33. Yes they will blame Stein for moving goalposts.

correct, they will blame Stein for moving the goalposts

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Land Shark (Original post)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 04:02 PM

31. Steaming pile

Absolute bs. If they can't do math, shouldn't be in charge of votes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lotusflower70 (Reply #31)

Wed Nov 30, 2016, 08:38 PM

32. Yup. My guess is they don't resign but they should. No math skills

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread