You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #29: You're referring to me? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
BradBlog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-04-11 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #19
29. You're referring to me?
Don't know if you're referring to me, in your remark about "reporting inaccurate info". If so, I'd be happy to respond to any specific points you feel I've gotten wrong (and issue a correction where it's determine that I have, in fact, gotten something wrong.)

First, let me say that your reports on your observations at the "recount", as posted here at DU have been EXCEEDINGLY helpful and valuable. I can't thank you enough for BOTH!

Please realize, however, that other observers, both on the ground and afar, have a different story to tell. Some of those folks, like myself, are long time observers/investigators of such post-election counts, and know very much what the red flags are, AS WELL AS what happens when nothing other than "noting them for the record" occurs. In short, its next to impossible to see ANY action take place AFTER the proceedings are over and the election officially certified, candidate seated etc.

I could offer you cites to MANY different examples of this. Ohio 2004 (where fraud was discovered and election officials were even sentenced to jail for the maximum penalty for gaming the recount) saw no changes to anything because the full recount was not allowed and no official action was taken by the candidates at the time to keep the election from being certified on schedule, evidence of fraud and all. Or you could talk to the folks in Pima County, AZ (Tucson) who have been fighting for accountability for a 2006 election with paper ballots, evidence of tampering, affidavits of fraud from officials and 5 years later (and hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal bills later) they are still fighting for accountability even as they realize it's too late to change the results of the election EVEN IF it's conclusively shown that election was flipped via electronic fraud by insider election officials.

I believe what I'm trying to say here, is that, as eowyn_of_rohan has pointed out, I am not bashing you or the observers, or even the county canvassers. They are all proceeding as instructed. The main problems seem to come from a lack of oversight and strict procedures and accurate transparent reports from the state G.A.B., as well as a lack of action being taken by candidates (Kloppenburg's team most notably in this case) IMMEDIATELY as problems are discovered. I guarantee if Prosser was behind in the canvassed count and problems of the sort showing up in Waukesha and elsewhere were being discovered, the count would have stopped dead in its track long ago, they'd all be in court now, and the issues would be ALL OVER Fox "News" in extraordinary detail.

Your observation work and explanations here have been *terrific*. However, I don't know this for a fact, but it *may* be the first time you've participated in such a post-election count as an observer. If so, you may not be aware of what a lot of what you're seeing may mean and what needs to be done about it to assure action is taken. If I'm wrong and your an Election Integrity veteran, then accept my apologies.

Also, I assure you that my report is based on both the reports of A LOT of folks on the ground and afar, and I have watched HOURS of the streaming video from the Waukesha County counting room. All long BEFORE I filed my report (that was just one of the reasons it took me nearly a full week before being able to report on the "recount" at all.) I wish there was streaming video from all 72 counting rooms! And that citizens were allowed to video tape as well! No clue why the campaigns agreed to NOT allow video taping!

Nonetheless, as noted, I hope you'll feel free to let me know where I've gotten anything factual wrong, as I'm always happy to correct as appropriate. As well, you are welcome to post your own observations -- as different than my own, obviously -- in comments at The BRAD BLOG, so others can see an alternative view of the count than the one I presented based on my reporting.

So, thanks again for all. PARTICULARLY for observing and sharing your observations, AS WELL AS holding my feet to the fire as you feel appropriate!

Best,
Brad

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC