Ohio Dems take up fight over ballots - file federal law suit

[Jersey Devil]

Don't know if this has been posted yet, did a search for it and don't find it. If it is a dupe, please excuse:

Despite decisions made by the Democratic National Committee and the John Kerry campaign not to persue legal action regarding the nearly 155,000 uncounted provisional ballots, the Ohio Democratic Party has launched a fight in federal court. This is according to a registration restricted article in the Cleveland Plain Dealer:

Cincinnati - Seeming to brush aside John Kerry’s concession speech, the Ohio Democratic Party has launched a federal court fight over nearly 155,000 provisional ballots by contending a proper accounting of those votes might decide who really won.

More - http://rawstory.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=101

[MrUnderhill]

1. The few counties that have released their provisional counts

are not encouraging.

If they are indicative of the whole state, Kerry may only gain 20,000 votes.

Maybe they're re-fighting the "only in the correct precinct" decision? It looks like quite a few rejected provisional ballots are thrown out because people vote in the wrong precinct. A re-hearing on that decision could help?

[bmoney07]

2. still too early to telll

[Jersey Devil]

5. As a general rule you can't re-litigate issues, but

there are always exceptions to every rule. Wish I knew what the issues they were fighting over are but I suspect they have to do with the fact that in many counties the provisionals have a high rate of acceptance while in the Cleveland area the rate is much lower.

[Eloriel]

13. Aren't filings part of the public record, in which case they ought

to be available online? Can you research it?

[truehawk]

27. Well, first they rejected a number of provisionals because the

date of birth was missing, then they changed back, but we don't know what happened to those ballots that were rejected in the mean time.

[colonel odis]

8. if kerry lost, then he lost. but let's at least find out the truth.

like most people, i think the vote was rigged out the ass. and, like a lot of people, i believe kerry won.

but let's find out one way or the other for sure. unless the republicans are too chickenshit for an accurate count.

[JD Lau]

9. Amen, c.o.

[MrUnderhill]

11. See... the funny thing is...

THEY think WE are cheating.

This whole thing would be hilarious if it wasn't so d@mned tragic!

[SittingInTheMiddle]

17. Sometimes it's not so funny...

On 11/2 in Milwaukee, some 20-30 vans that the reps planned to use to round up voters were the victim of tireslashing at the hands of local democrat volunteers, who are also sons of prominent local democrats.

Last I heard, charges hadn't yet been filed, but two of the people arrested and released (for now - charges likely to be coming - after all, they were arrested, not just questioned) include the sons of the former acting mayor and newly elected us congresswoman.

When I say "sons", I don't mean childish prank - these were 25-30 year old men (and there were others involved as well).

http://www.jsonline.com/news/metro/nov04/274391.asp

[colonel odis]

21. that's almost as unfunny as the head of the new hampshire g.o.p.

jamming phone lines at democratic headquarters on election day 2002 so people who needed a ride to the polls couldn't get through.

republicans use high tech. democrats use knives. if this thing gets stickier, republicans might want to keep that in mind.

[SittingInTheMiddle]

22. Yup. Vote tampering sucks no matter who does it. n/t.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

25. Yes, and the Republicans perform far more dirty tricks

and get away with them.

Your as obvious as a 3-day old fish. It's starting to smell around here...

[SittingInTheMiddle]

28. The only thing that's really obvious

is that I'm not hard core left. As a result I believe a few things that disagree with what you believe. That's what makes us individuals.

You seem to think that makes me a hard core right hanging out here "incognito" or something. This, also, I am not.

If I were forced to choose "a side", I would have to side with the Libertarians. Going to take some serious work in this country before anyone but the two major parties has a shot.

I think we all agree here that the most goal is that everyone who's legal to vote should be allowed to exercise that right freely, without intimidation, suppression or dirty tricks...and that nobody should have the opportunity to (whether by accident or subterfuge) vote more than once. Where I live, however, one 2-3 column a week newspaper writer cries foul over the thought of having to show ID.

[Yupster]

30. We need to treat all election crimes more seriously

Locally, we had a guy try to vote twice. He said it was a joke and paid a little fine.

It shouldn't be treated as a joke.

Everyone knows it's illegal to vote twice in the same election.

[SittingInTheMiddle]

31. Is that the guy...

who a pollster thought he recognized, but figured it out when the "voter" was still wearing his "I voted!" sticker from the first time?

I heard about one like that that wasn't a joke, and I couldn't remember if it was local or where I heard it. :P

[colonel odis]

36. voting twice is a felony, isn't it?

[Yupster]

29. They should throw the book at them

That really is an attempt to suppress the vote and it should not be treated as a fraternity prank.

[regnaD kciN]

34. Absolutely!

If we find fraud, demand justice for this election and protections for future elections.

If it turns out that Bush really did win legitimately, accept it and start work on improving our showing in 2006 and 2008 (as well, needless to say, as fighting "rear-guard" actions against the BFEE's planned depradations until then), confident that we can turn the tide.

What would be worse than either, IMHO, is not finding out either way. That would mean carrying the doubt, through all our efforts in years to come, that they don't matter a bit anyway, since everything we do will simply be undone by changing a line of code or two in the machines.

[KAZ]

10. Can you point me to the counties who have released the...

results of their provisional votes? TIA

[MrUnderhill]

15. They got e-mailed to me... it's a registration site.

http://www.springfieldnewssun.com/hp/content/news/stories/2004/11/19/sns1119vote.html

Of the 1,564 provisional ballots cast in this month’s election, only 1,195 provisional ballots, or 76 percent, were counted. That boosted the county to a record turnout: 78.1 percent. The previous record was in 1992, when 77.5 percent of the county’s registered voters went to the polls.

The board typically receives between 500 and 1,000 provisional ballots, said Board Director Linda Rosicka.


Locally, President Bush’s lead over John Kerry declined from 1,620 votes to 1,422 votes. Bush received 34,925 Clark County votes, and Kerry ended up with 33,503.

That works out to about 200 votes gained out of an original 1500 ballots (or roughly 1% of the total).


ohvotesuppression.blogspot.com also compiled some counties and they actually show Bush gaining 1500 or so. Now, that was largely in counties Bush won anyway... but part of the hope was that Kerry would be winning the vast majority of these ballots statewide... not that they would break down roughly the same way the county they were cast in did.

[KAZ]

18. Excellent! Clark county went 64% - 36% Shrub!

We keep this up and it's in the bag!

Edit:That would be 57%-43% Kerry, in a Repuke County! I like it!

[Mike Nelson]

3. THANK YOU and the DU for...

...all the searching and posting of these stories!

[ramblin_dave]

4. Can an election be "overturned" or invalidated if

it can be shown that discrimation took place in the allocation of voting machines? Can a suit be filed for this?

[Jersey Devil]

6. I think you would have to show that the discrim was part of a plot

to intentionally disenfranchise voters. To get that kind of proof you would need a very reliable whistleblower.

[MrUnderhill]

7. No... and YES.

It can't be "overturned"... though the Congress could choose not to seat those electors.


But it WOULD be grounds for impeachment.



The problem is that voting machines are purchased and apportioned at the county level. And all of those counties are run overwhelmingly by Democrats. How would they have achieved this? Were there fewer machines than at the same polling places in 2000? Or was this just the unintended side effect of HUGE turnout?

Did anyone say "we're going to show up in huge numbers... so you better go get some more machines?"

[JD Lau]

12. Would you go into this in more detail, please?

[MrUnderhill]

19. As well as I can.

The Constitution doesn't have a "revote" provission if the certified results turn out to be crooked. The election is decided in the Congress, with each state delegation getting one vote.


However... if you can tie an illegal act (like election theft) to a candidate and/or party, you CAN impeach on that basis. Same problem, of course, that the people who would have to do the impeaching are partisans.

Lastly... you do it the old fashioned way. You report it for two eyars and throw the entire party out of office in the next election.

[Samantha]

26. That is only true if the president had direct knowledge of the theft

Barring proof of that, he could not be impeached except for the Constitutional reasons that a president is put on trial: high crimes and misdemeanors. I can't imagine anyone being able to find direct proof, should it turn out the election was high-jacked, Bush* had personal knowledge of that fact.

The drop dead date for keeping a candidate who won an election through theft from assuming the Oval Office is inauguration day (not the day the electoral college votes). Once the candidate takes the oath, he or she becomes the president and can only be removed through personal misconduct. In other words, speaking hypothetically, of course, should one be able to prove in June 2005 that Karl Rove stole the election for Bush*, that alone would not be grounds for impeachment of Bush.*

[Yupster]

33. The president can be impeached for

selling trade secrets to the Martians if 51 % of the members of the House of Representatives vote to impeach him for it.

If 2/3 of the senate votes to convict, then he's gone.

[no1hedberg]

35. "That is only true if the president had direct knowledge of the theft"

I highly doubt he has direct knowledge of how to tie his own shoes. I'm not sure he could pass a competency test to stand trial.

[KAZ]

16. Oooh, what's that I hear? THE reason?

Why are we, as a nation, not screaming bloody murder about the lines? In Ohio. In Florida for early voting? WTF are we, 3rd world?
I had family reporting to me that they tried 3 times to vote early in FL and were faced with 2 hour lines. That is FN ridiculous.

[MrUnderhill]

20. Several million more of us showed up to vote than

at any time in history...

That's gonna cause some lines.

And early voting was a new thing - I couldn't get in the three days I tried either. The line was longer than I had ever seen in my previous state... so I figured I'd vote on election day. Still had to wait HOURS.


Truthfully? It felt good! We were all standing there in line making a sacrifice to fulfill our civic duty. I would have stood there all night - even knowing Kerry had zero chance here in NC and Bowles was likely to lose too.

[KAZ]

23. "Several million" would just be population growth, if you do the..

..math. The turnout was is in the Dem precincts. The question is, why wasn't the voting infrastructure in place in the Dem wards? Why?

[MrUnderhill]

24. Sorry. That's not even close.

In 2000 (a decent turnout year with no incumbent and the White House really up for grabs) there were a little over 101 Million votes cast.

Adult population growth in the nation is around 1.5 Million per year for a total of 6 million new people. But not all register... and only a fraction of the registered actually vote (but a BETTER fraction this year than in the recent past). Call it about 3 million more voters - for an anticipated "flat" total of around 104 Million.

We had just under 120 Million votes this year.

That is not a fluke. That is not population growth.

If it weren't for the fact we lost... it would be the best news this aging Democracy has seen in a very long time.

Don't undersell that. Even in defeat, Kerry outperformed ANY Democrat in history AND any OTHER Republican.

20 Million extra voters is a lot to handle.

[Yupster]

32. Here in Texas (in my city anyway)

we've had early voting for quite a while. No lines anymore. I can usually vote pretty quick in early voting. It will just take some time for the county people to sort the thing out.

[treading_water]

14. Article from Cleveland Plain Dealer

Cincinnati - Seeming to brush aside John Kerry's concession speech, the Ohio Democratic Party has launched a federal court fight over nearly 155,000 provisional ballots by contending a proper accounting of those votes might decide who really won.

In Ohio, Bush now holds a lead of about 136,000 votes over Kerry.

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/110077402787260.xml