Recall Election Fraud in Wisconsin? You Betcha!

[Freeper]

citizen blues (51 posts)

 
Recall Election Fraud in Wisconsin? You Betcha!

www.addictinginfo.org/2012/06/07/recall-election-fraud-in-wisconsin-you-betcha/

June 7, 2012
By Middle Aged Woman Talking

When I heard the election had been called for Walker, I posted on my fb page, “something’s hinky here.” I felt that way then and I know it for sure now. The early exit polls predicted the race between Walker and Barrett to be a virtual tie. A second round of exit polling data gave Walker a small lead over Barrett but was still “too close to call.” MSNBC and Fox called the election for Walker an hour after the polls closed with no more than 21% of the 100% of unverified computer results in, and people in three counties still voting. Let’s see, within one hour the election went from too close to call, to Walker winning by 7%, with only 21% of the votes counted and three counties still voting. In other words that 21% was the equivalent of 57% of the total vote. This is mathematically impossible; clearly the unadjusted exit polls in Wisconsin do not match the reported results, the adjusted results, of the popular vote.

Media, unlike the common man or woman, has access to the unadjusted polling data. Richard Charnin asks, “Why did the media not provide the unadjusted exit poll data (the “crosstabs”). Was it because they knew they would have to adjust the poll to match bogus recorded vote and did not want the public to view the impossible adjustments?”

Exit polls are based on what is called unadjusted exit polling data; as per Charnin, “in every election data; as per Charnin, “in every election pollsters force state and national exit polls to match the recorded vote.” In other words, mathematically impossible or not, the machine is always right. In Wisconsin, the state’s leading vendors of voting machines, election supplies, and distributors of Dominion Voting Systems is Command Central. Dominion is a veritable cartel of Republican backed voting technology and owns Diebold/Premier Election voting Systems, which it bought from Election Systems and Software (ES&S), and the British based Sequoia. Diebold/Premier, famous for the mess that was the 2004 Presidential election, and ES&S are owned and operated by a handful of Republican, super-rich, Christian Reconstructionists and control 80% of the vote counts in the United States.

The fact that 80% of the votes counted in this country are in the hands of Republican backed voting technology is probably the reason why whenever there’s a glitch in the voting machine it always skews red.

Now back to Wisconsin: “By law voting machines must be publicly tested prior to every election. A Programmable Read Only Memory (P.R.O.M.) is used to reprogram the machines with the details of the current election. Clerks receive two PROM packs from Command Central: A PRE-LAT which is used a week or so before the election for the public test, and an “Official” pack used on Election Day.”

Sue Wahl-Storbeck, one of the two people operating Command Central, the other being her step-son Aaron Storbeck, is the person responsible for programming 3,000 voting machines in 46 districts in the State of Wisconsin. Wahl-Storbeck’s resume includes a stint at ACS Enterprises, a data processing company out of Texas. I’m not sure what she did at the data processing company but I do know that she was fired for refusing to take the company’s annual ethics exam and when her unemployment was denied, because she refused to take the company’s annual ethics exam, she took it to court and lost. Given the fact that “whoever programs the PROM packs has the ability to inject all the machines with a virus that will flip votes on Election Day.” I’d like to know that the person programming the machine was both ethical and incorruptible especially since, “with two different PROM packs in play, it’s easy to see how public tests could be flawless and the machines could still flip votes Election Day.”

Wisconsin election integrity investigator John Washburn has some history with Command Central. In July of 2011 he asked “to examine the PROM packs from the July 15, 2011 recall election in wards 1-4 in Fox Point. When they responded that it would cost him $450, Washburn filed a complaint alleging that Command Central LLC wasn’t cooperative in responding to the open records request.” Last September, 2011, Washburn discovered that Command Central had offered to replace the Optech scanner for two DRE screen models. It has been proven over and over again how easy it is to hack both the DRE and the Optech, but at least with the Optech you have a paper trail, the ballot is fed into the machine, you have a receipt that you voted, and in case of a recount the election official can physically monitor the number of ballots to see it they match the machine total. The DRE is a touch screen, votes are recorded directly onto a memory cartridge, meaning there is no receipt or paper trail to confirm that your vote was counted; all the election official gets at the end of the day is a paper tape that shows the votes and vote totals. Without a verifiable paper trail, the votes can be easily flipped. Once again, “with two different PROM packs in play, it’s easy to see how public tests could be flawless and the machines could still flip votes Election Day.” I can find absolutely no evidence at all that the PROM packs for the Walker re-call election were checked by anyone other than Sue Wald-Storbeck.

According to John Washburn, Command Central’s DRE offer violated “the statutes issued by the GAB (Government Accountability Board) for the state approved system as described on the Government Accountability Board’s website that requires the inclusion of an Optech Insight Scanner. On January 13, 2010 emailed the GAB about this situation. When he did not receive an answer, he submitted an Open Records request to the GAB with no reply. On Mar. 2, he submitted another, again, no response. On May 4th he turned the case over to Dane County Attorney, and on May 14th he kicked it up to the Department of Justice." I was pretty shocked that GAB didn’t respond to Washburn’s request immediately, given the subject had to do with the integrity of the Democratic process, that is until I discovered Judge Michael Brennan, one of the six judges on the board, was just tapped to chair Governor Scott Walker’s Judicial Selection Advisory Committee.

Thanks to Wisconsin Citizen Media Co-op and other groups, Wisconsin was informed of the twisted machinations of probable voter fraud threading through the re-call voting process and wrote down a simple list of ways to ensure your vote counted. Wisconsin voted mostly on paper ballots, what they had no control over however was how the votes were counted. The votes were counted by the same computer-optical scan systems famous for throwing out thousands of valid votes in New York City, failing to count the same ballots the same way in Oakland County, Michigan, and when hacked of entirely flipping the results of a mock election in Leon County, Florida. These failures, failures that can clearly determine elections, were discovered during state mandated, manual, post-election, spot checks. Wisconsin though does not manually post check ballots without a recount request and an order from a judge, unless it’s a presidential election, so there is no way to know if the results reported by the computers reflect what the actual ballots say. Clearly there’s a question here as the unadjusted exit polls do not match the reported results, the adjusted results, of the popular vote, results, which were in Sue Wahl-Storbeck’s hands and the machines she programmed.

John Simon writes, “We’ve seen this before , election after election, the familiar “Red Shift.” And it’s the exit polls that are always “off” because the Votecounts must always be “on.” Except the Votecounts are always secret and in full control of outfits with strong right-wing affiliations like Dominion Voting and Command Central. Votes counted by partisans in complete secret – is this sane?”

No it’s not sane, it’s fraud and it’s coming to a national election near you.

Live loud, love fierce and suffer no fools. Katherine Manaan (MAWT)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/125144291

Blue Owl (6,545 posts)
1. Besides Dubya, is there anyone more likely to cheat than the Walker administration?

I sure as ****ing hell don't believe for one second that Scott Walker is a legitimate winner -- he's a *******ed CHEATING FRAUD.

BamaFanLee (51 posts)
2. We need to put boots on the ground and show proof

Once proof of voter fraud is shown, Walker needs to be led away in handcuffs.

 

Poor DUmmies actually think that Diebold doesn't cover its tracks so well that no one will ever find out.

 

pa28 (3,110 posts)
3. How can the exit polls always seem to be off by 5% or more?

In Germany they've never missed the correct result by less than one half of one percent and we used to enjoy similar accuracy here.

Pollsters here claim that our exit polls are designed more for voter insight than to detect fraud but it does not change the fact they were once reliable to within one percent.

Maybe it's time to monitor for fraud in our own election using exit polls much as we've seen in Serbia or the Ukraine.

Poor DUmmies still think that just because they cheat as much as they can that everyone else must do the same.

[delilahmused]

Hey DUmmies, even you guys couldn't cheat with that big of a margin. Oh and exit polls ARE NOT votes. Get that through your heads. Dems are ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS over sampled. Many people don't even answer. It nobody's business. But go ahead and believe what you want. No way you could scheme your way to producing enough votes to win.             

Cindie

[miskie]

AWESOME ! I knew TIA would come though for us ! (Richard Charnin)    

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Walker started the night 20 points ahead and ended the night with only 7 points.

That's proof you people stole 13 points!

 

[DefiantSix]

When the DUmbshits can e'splain how in the hell there was vote tallies equaling 119% of their full voter registry in Madison, WI and not sound completely full of shit simultaneously, I might be willing to discuss vote fraud in Wisconsin with them.

[delilahmused]

I love how one person is all the proof they need. Not poll watchers. Not a bevy of lawyers (mostly theirs). Not Holder's injustice department. The only thing missing was the UN and they're too busy shaking their fingers at the Syrian government and contemplating whether to send them a very stern letter.

Cindie

[miskie]

And once again - TIA uses not a Monte Carlo simulation to prove his point, but the Martingale betting strategy.

Implausible 2008 returning voters and 2012 vote shares

Obama had a 56.2% recorded share in Wisconsin and 63.3% in the unadjusted exit poll (2.4% margin of error). Assuming Obama had a 60% True Vote share, then to match the recall vote, Walker needed the following:
 1) 81% of McCain and 71% of Obama voters turned out.
 2) He needed to win 25% of Obama and 95% of McCain voters.
 3) He needed 46% of new voters who did not vote in 2010. The 2012 exit poll indicates he had 45% and that new voters comprised 13% of the total vote.

In order to win by his recorded vote, Walker needed a 10% advantage in returning 2008 voters and a 20% advantage in net defections. That is highly implausible.

To explain my comparison to Martingale betting : Most people know it by the phrase 'Always bet on black' - what the gambler does is place a bet on black in roulette. If they lose, they bet double on black, if they lose again they double that bet, etc etc etc. until they win, then they start again. People believe that 'Red can only come up so many times, then it has to be black' and they ask questions like 'what are the odds of it coming up red fourteen times in a row ? a billion to one ?' - Here is the thing -The Martingale system is a fallacy. As every spin of the roulette wheel is unique, the odds of the ball landing on black are exactly the same every time. (just slightly less than 50/50 - don't forget that '0' is a green space.)

In the case of a voter, the odds of them voting this way or that are also unique to that voter, yet TIA insists on using a Martingale strategy to predict a voting pattern which is wrong, wrong, wrong. He swears that voters are less like a roulette wheel, and more like a deck of cards. (Monte Carlo simulation) With a deck of cards, there is a defined box of probability. If I shuffle a deck, the odds of me pulling out an ace of spaces is 1 in 52, if I fail the odds of me pulling out the ace becomes 1 in 51, The odds of the next card picked being correct increases with every incorrect pick beforehand. Look at TIA's 'proof' above - he is making the assumption that past 'decks' of votes contain the same 'cards' that current decks contain. In short - Charnin is card counting. Wrongo. Each deck consists of one voter. The odds of them voting this way or that is determined in part by the choices on the ballot before them. Anyway, the proof of Charnin's fallacy is found in the casinos themselves. Casinos don't ban Martingale betters, because they almost always leave empty handed. Card counters however are lucky to leave alive.


(edit : fixed spelling of Charnin's name )

[JohnnyReb]

What should I do with these boxes of ballots that I found in the trunk of my car?

They might be for Al Franken and/or what's her name or for Walker, I don't know.

[GOBUCKS]

I think TruthIsAll has become such a risk for Diebold that he's being considered for Wellstoning.

Trouble is, he's never been on an aircraft.

Maybe the Koch brothers can send him a ticket to Monte Carlo.

[Ballygrl]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't exit polls basically done after the person voted and the person can choose to tell who they voted for? or choose not to tell who they voted for? or lie about who they voted for?

[Chris_]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't exit polls basically done after the person voted and the person can choose to tell who they voted for? or choose not to tell who they voted for? or lie about who they voted for?

That's exactly what they are.  They're 100% voluntary.

[miskie]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't exit polls basically done after the person voted and the person can choose to tell who they voted for? or choose not to tell who they voted for? or lie about who they voted for?

Yes, yes, and yes.

There is no accountability or rationale as to how exit polling is conducted in the USA. Now, if there was a system where - for example, every 10th person was required to answer an exit poll via secret ballot, the odds are quite a bit better that the polls would match up. But at this point they are purely subjective.

[Ballygrl]

Hey DUmmies, even you guys couldn't cheat with that big of a margin. Oh and exit polls ARE NOT votes. Get that through your heads. Dems are ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS over sampled. Many people don't even answer. It nobody's business. But go ahead and believe what you want. No way you could scheme your way to producing enough votes to win.             

Cindie

Thank You! that's what I thought.

That's exactly what they are.  They're 100% voluntary.

Thank You!

Yes, yes, and yes.

There is no accountability or rationale as to how exit polling is conducted in the USA. Now, if there was a system where - for example, every 10th person was required to answer an exit poll via secret ballot, the odds are quite a bit better that the polls would match up. But at this point they are purely subjective.

Thank You!

[Chris_]

Don't squeeze the Charnin.

[miskie]

Thank You!

No problem -

One of the things one needs to consider are the exit pollsters themselves. Id say better than 80% of them are Poli-Sci majors earning some extra credit, or unemployed kids making minimum wage for the weekend. Maybe once a month (those that aren't laid off immediately after the election ends) exit pollsters get to do things like poll people who just saw an early premiere of a big budget movie to get their opinions, or hang out outside a new restaurant to see what diners thought of their meal.

In other words, it isn't the kind of job that people with real lives do, because one can't live on the income it generates.

[formerlurker]

Uh, before the first ballot goes into the machine the machine is tested for accuracy - with observers from both parties watching.   

[Ballygrl]

No problem -

One of the things one needs to consider are the exit pollsters themselves. Id say better than 80% of them are Poli-Sci majors earning some extra credit, or unemployed kids making minimum wage for the weekend. Maybe once a month (those that aren't laid off immediately after the election ends) exit pollsters get to do things like poll people who just saw an early premiere of a big budget movie to get their opinions, or hang out outside a new restaurant to see what diners thought of their meal.

In other words, it isn't the kind of job that people with real lives do, because one can't live on the income it generates.

I haven't been polled in years.

[Chris_]

I haven't been polled in years.

Oh my.

[miskie]

Don't squeeze the Charnin.

I have been 'squeezing' TIA since the days I posted regularly at FR. He follows the adage 'If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, bury them in bull'.

His numbers mean nothing because the premise he bases them on is wrong. (That voters are a single complex organism which can be represented mathematically)

Monte Carlo works for predicting things such as algae blooms because algae doesn't think, it just is.. Not so with people.

[Chris_]

Monte Carlo works for predicting things such as algae blooms because algae doesn't think, it just is.. Not so with people.

I beg to differ...

http://www.democrats.org/

[miskie]

I haven't been polled in years.

[Skul]

It's my fault.
I misplaced a decimal in the coding results.
Walker was only supposed to win by .7, not 7.

My bad.

[miskie]

I beg to differ...

http://www.democrats.org/

Point taken 

[Ballygrl]

Oh my.

I meant after I voted!

[Ballygrl]

Now this is a perfect example of Republicans versus Democrats, Freeper said this:

I don't know where they get the notion that us conservatives are unhappy people. Just compare this site to DU. Here you see lots of humor and laughing, and folks having a good time. On DU I've seen funerals with more smiles than you find at DU, and that even applies when they win. There was no joy in DUmmyland from 2009 through 2011 when they owned the government.

Now I make a comment about not getting polled in years, it turns into a double entendre, now do I

A) whine like a baby and be all offended

B) go all Gloria Steinem

C) because it was funny

What would a Democrat do?