Sound Politics: Oops

April 07, 2005

Oops

As Richard Pope pointed out in the comments on an earlier post (damn, he's got a good eye for detail), I made a small numerical error. The best available data now puts the discrepancy between absentee ballots counted and valid absentee ballots returned at: 873, not the 881 that I erroneously posted in a few recent entries. We regret the error and any confusion it might have caused.

Here's a recap how I got to 873 --

Total absentee ballots counted in the manual recount: 565,014
- Total voters credited as voting absentee: 564,206*
= Ballot - Credit Discrepancy: 808
- Address Confidentiality Program and federal write-in voters: 320
+ Voters credited, but ballots rejected after validation and not counted (identified in Mail Ballot Report): 292
+ Recently discovered ballots of voters credited, ballots not counted: 93
= 873

Look on Christine "Model Election" Gregoire's face when the movers strap her to the handcart and pull her out of the Governor's Mansion: Priceless.

*yes, all absentee voters are credited in the same action as signature validation

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at April 07, 2005 05:36 PM | Email This

Comments

1. How differently things might have turned out if King County's elections office personnel resolved questions about their numbers in hours (or even days) rather than weeks and months.

It's only arithmetic -- unless, of course, you don't like the sums and decide to tinker a little (or a lot), as they apparently did.

Thanks for the prompt correction, Stefan.

Posted by: Micajah on April 7, 2005 06:21 PM

2. When we propose an election reform initiative, let's propose that all of this information must be set up 'live'. There's no reason to _let_ people shuffle numbers around into different columns without sworn statements as to why the number needs to be moved.

Posted by: Al on April 7, 2005 06:35 PM

3. You cant do that, it would be too transparent and obvious and then even the unwashed masses would be able to figure out how they were cheated out of their right to elect their leaders.

Posted by: lesterman on April 7, 2005 06:41 PM

4. The quick correction reassures your credibility. Happy to see the lid get blown completely off of their cover over the past week. It has been gratifying & time to stop dancing around with the left-wing nut kool aid drinking crowd and get down to business.

Taking care of business here is the difference between a legitimate government for the people and a honest to God Banana republic headed quickly for third world status. The later is what the Dems in the State Legislature are trying to make happen - they are insane, self-centered, practicing bureaucratic thuggery and are shaping up to get thrown out of office and the chances of that are increasing with every passing day !

Posted by: KS on April 7, 2005 08:27 PM

5. I wouldn't be to worried about an error in that last tally.....King County certainly hasn't worried about their myriad of errors in the election!

Besides....I have a feeling the descrepancies are actually more in the *thousands*.....

Posted by: Deborah on April 7, 2005 09:33 PM

6. You better watch what you say about Gregoire being moved out of the Governor's Mansion, Sharkie. She might use the tired old radical feminist standby, accusing you of domestic violence. Or, worse, accuse you of being part of the "patriarchy." Or, still worse, she might accuse you of make threats against her and send the state patrol after you.

The only way she can stop the fact that her "election" is being exposed as completely fraudulent is to put you in jail!

Posted by: DeadManVoting (aka Iguana) on April 7, 2005 11:33 PM

7. 'Uh, Yes the memos are bogus, but the FACTS are correct'.

'You claim fraud with incorrect quanities'. You must have your quanities correct, or it will not prove fraud. YEAH, RIGHT!

A liberal will focus on ANYTHING BUT the FACTS.

Posted by: Arky on April 8, 2005 04:51 AM

8. Hmmm.... you made an honest mistake, admitted it when "caught" and explained what happened. What a concept! The Elections Office should try this!

Posted by: Sue on April 8, 2005 05:14 AM

9. Mr. Richard Pope, your a far better reader than I.
When I have the time I read and laugh, read more and do some minor checking on articles. But never do I crunch numbers. My hat is off to you and the rest of the impressive correspondents here. It is most informative. And of course to you Stefan most of all. (you wont see this at HA)

Posted by: Son of Liberty on April 8, 2005 06:58 AM