Statisticians as evidence: Gore's of 2000 was torn to pieces...

[EMunster]

This is from member "read the law" posted to another thread, but I think deserving it's own thread:

I don't want to take a bunch of crap for sharing an informed opinion and I don't have a gazillion posts but unlike others, I've actually handled election contests recently. (I'm not admitted in Ohio though).

The extrapolation and assumptions and general BS that's been flying around the Internet would be a pathetic parody of a satire of a joke if the stakes weren't so high.

That being said, We have come up with an amazing array of actual real life hard evidence (e.g. machines that reported more votes that registered voters) such that if the margin were 527 like Florida it would be really exciting and interesting to watch what happened next. It would be something for the history books and DU would have to be appropriately mentioned as the central location for making history.

Beware of anyone who says that an election contest would have Kerry be declared the winner. That's not how election contests work. The remedy in an election contest is a new election (some people call this a revote) not to have another candidate declared the victor.

Beware of anyone who posts an affidavit that contains the words "in my professional opinion." Real professionals lay a foundation for their opinion and then state their opinion not their professional opinion. I always laugh at (and hold up for public humiliation) experts who want to state their "professional" opinion rather than proving that they are professionals and merely stating their opinion. The need to state that it is a "professional opinion" means "unarmed target" in my world.

Beware of any affidavit that bases ANYTHING on an assumption. An affidavit by its very nature is a recitation of facts based on personal first hand knowledge, not assumptions.

Beware of anyone who says that an affidavit is evidence at trial (unless it's used for impeachment of a witness). Even a first year law student knows that an affidavit can not be cross examined and therefore can only be used in motions and not at trial.

Statistical analysis can be used at trial and is frequently used in trials. In fact, in Florida, the bulk of Gore's case was based on statistical analysis but if you recall our expert ( a professor from Yale I seem to remember) was ripped to shreds on the stand. It was embarassing to just stand there and watch the beating that took place.

Beware of someone who doesn't know the difference between a spoiled ballot and an undervote or overvote.

Beware of anyone who doesn't know that in order to win a contest, you have to prove more illegal votes or unlawful ballots than at least the margin.

Beware of anyone who doesn't know the difference between voter fraud and voter suppression.

Beware of anyone who says "I expect this or that number of votes to break for Kerry" in any part of an election contest proceeding. Real Election lawyers know that it doesn't matter who the people would have voted for, the standard is an unlawful ballot or illegal vote and you can use your supporters or the other guys supporters to meet this standard. Also, people who state that are usually wrong in their expectation for some other reason as well.

Beware of anyone who talks about something being obviously frad when that something doesn't meet the statutory requirements of fraud (whcih is quite specific i.e. a representation of fact known at this time to be false for the purpose of inducing someone to reasonably change a position on the basis of such knowing misrepresentation of fact and which in fact does cause the person to change a position)

It's obviously fun and an interesting pasttime for people who watch lawyers on TV to want to play lawyer based on what they've seen on television but for real lawyers who have actually handled election contests it's kind of painful to watch.


There. Thanks for letting me vent. I know I'll get flamed for this, but I just had to get that off my chest.

And also remember that I've indicated that DU posters really have uncovered real life evidence of irregularities that would be admissible in a contest.


original thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=129846#132255

[ClintCooper2003]

1. Thanks for that. It's good to have a hard dose of reality to keep us...

all sharpened up for the huge task we have ahead of us.

[EMunster]

2. Some key points I'd like to make

another post from http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=129846#132255
...that deserves to be here:

One thing that is different in 2004 from 2000 is that there were 25,000+ boots on the ground and observing actual instances of various activities, including machine malfunctions. There are testimonies and there are written reports and there are logged complaints up the wazoo and there are even corroborating newspaper accounts.

Also, we have discovered specific patterns and these patterns have been born out by statistical analysis and charts and graphs that we did not have time to produce in Florida, let alone be able to introduce them into a legal contest.

There is also videotape of actual voter suppression that is documented evidence of illegal activities in violation of civil rights laws. There is the conflict of interest inherent in having a Secretary of State who is a key campaign official for Bush in addition to a CEO of the principal voting machine company who not only operates in Canton, Ohio but who also has donated extensively to Bush and promised to deliver the election to him. Not to mention that the Secretary of State has already violated laws and is acting in an extremely obstructionist way, contrary to his prescribed role.

And there are actual printouts of vote tallies that do not square with the facts, and actual documented and witnessed events of machine malfunction, as well as multiple violations of elections laws in Ohio. There is also evidence from other states that replicate the "irregularities" seen in Ohio, indicating clearly that these were not isolated incidents and that there was a pattern that points quite strongly in the direction of an organized vote-rigging effort.

In short, we have a lot more to go on that we did in Florida in 2000. This time, we were ready. And Arnebeck is quite experienced and conversant in Ohio election law, having already handled related cases in Ohio in the past, not to mention the obvious skill, knowledge and passion of the rest of the lawyers involved such as Susan Trait.

But thanks for stopping by and pooping all over us.

[papau]

4. Thanks for posting the very important info re the status of the evidence

gathering and the law.

Is the road ahead recounts to gather more evidence, then Bush as President - then exposure of the election theft?

If so, the main stream GOP biased media will sell the story as the GOP "wanting" the win more and doing doing a better job at the "usual" illegal activities.

[pbartch]

14. not ONLY the GOP biased media.......but the WORLD media would be reporting

on this story. It would make the Ukraine vote miniscule in comparison when discussing VOTE FRAUD.

[Hekate]

3. That's a real breath of fresh air

Thanks for providing this catalog of useful distinctions. I'm going to file it for future reference.

Now if only some of our more anguished friends would print it out and tack it to the wall by their computers! ;-)

Hekate

[farmbo]

5. And the GOPers are systematically hiding or destroying the raw data

They've put the kibosh on the release of Mitofsky's exit poll data. (Stay tuned...if Mitkofsky comes under more pressure to release it, he will solemnly announce that "it's been inadvertently lost...Ooops")

Shelby County Ohio has already destroyed their Nov 2nd Tabulations, in open violation of Ohio's record retention law.

Our ability to make a statistical case for an Ohio recount is being systematically-- and illegally-- destroyed.

[TruthIsAll]

6. BEWARE OF SOMEONE WHO DOES NOT REALIZE OVERVOTES ARE SPOILED BALLOTS.

THEY ARE DOUBLE AND TRIPLE-PUNCHED AFTER THE FACT TO SPOIL THEM.
THERE WERE 110,000 IN FL 2000.
THAT'S FRAUD.

UNDERVOTES ARE ALSO SPOILED. THIS IS SUBTLE.
THE REPUGS KNOW THE PUNCHED CARD MACHINES WILL PRODUCE UNDERVOTES.
SO THEY NEGLECT THE NECESSARY MAINTENANCE.
THERE WERE 70,000 IN FL 2000.
THAT'S FRAUD.

[papau]

9. Undervotes are easy to create - Florida had not cleaned punches in

10 years - so many "undervotes" occurred.

Indeed in one repass in 2000, the Florida election worker complained that repass made chads fall on the floor - made a mess!

but only in the minority areas.

[papau]

10. Undervotes are easy to create - Florida had not cleaned punches in

10 years - so many "undervotes" occurred.

Indeed in one repass in 2000, the Florida election worker complained that repass made chads fall on the floor - made a mess!

but only in the minority areas.

[reality_bites]

12. What's your proof ? n/t

[TruthIsAll]

17. Katherine Harris with needles.

If they can switch votes on the touch screens from Kerry to Bush, surely they are capable of double-punching cards in the dead of night after the fact.

If they can cause a Dade county riot to stop the count, surely they are capable of double-punching cards in the dead of night after the fact.

If they can disallow voter registration forms because of the paper weight, surely they are capable of double-punching cards in the dead of night after the fact.

If the SCOTUS Repugs can stop the recount just as Gore is about to take the lead, surely they are capable of double-punching cards in the dead of night after the fact.

Want more of this? I could go on, but it's getting late.

See you on the front lines.

[read the law first]

21. They are capable. And don't call me Shirley. just kidding.

[read the law first]

13. If there's one and only one race on the ballot, that is correct.

If there's more than one race on the ballot, that is not correct. I don't know of any ballots on November 2 that had one and only one race on them.

But, hey, everyone is free to think what they want and how they want (until the neocons abolish that too).

[Viva_La_Revolution]

19. Truth!

We love ya for all those facts you keep spewing!:D

[forintegrity]

7. does anyone know or remember

the number of votes they claimed gave * his so-called victory in FLA just after the election (before any media recounts). Just curious...

[papau]

11. 512 or so - but that was with one area in the panhandle that rejected the

recount vote (the 2nd pass result) and filed and was accepted with the first pass vote.

But does our media care?

In 2000 - or in 2004?

[geo]

8. Great Post!

I look forward to reading more. :) -G

[read the law first]

15. The difference between voter fraud and voter suppression

Voter fraud is something done BY the voter or someone purporting to act on behalf of a voter; voter suppression is something done TO the voter.

[Snivi Yllom]

16. great post

[Samantha]

18. Also be aware of any candidate who runs an incredibly dirty campaign

(and has a public record of having done so for thirty years) who suggests his OPPONENT benefited from election irregularities.

[read the law first]

20. That's a fact. n/t