Prop 8 -- An election integrity perspective -- NoOn8 conceded too soon!

[emlev]

Think for a moment: what if Prop 8 really was defeated, but we never knew because no one looked closely enough at the results?

I've had a very frustrating couple of days here trying to contact people from the No on 8 campaign and get them to listen to information about why it's too soon to give up on defeating Prop 8.

I'm an election integrity advocate working with Velvet Revolution and The BRAD BLOG. You may not know me because I don't hang out in this forum, though I'm Family.

I invite you to read the blog entry I wrote at BRAD BLOG last Wednesday, much of which is still exceedingly relevant:
California's Prop 8: 'Too Close To Call'
At the time I wrote that, I was able to praise the No On 8 campaign for their decision to wait for the votes to be counted before conceding defeat.
Unfortunately, the following day they conceded defeat. Way, way too soon.

According to the Secretary of State's website, over 2.7 million votes remained uncounted as of Friday at 4:43 p.m. (See the Unprocessed Ballot Status page. http://vote.sos.ca.gov/Returns/props/59.htm">Results from the same late Friday hour showed 'yes' ahead by just under half a million votes. How likely that gap is to close as the unprocessed ballots are processed depends on analysis of what ballots are left to process. I don't know if anyone has done that analysis yet. If it's been done, I'd like to see it. But understand this: it cannot be assumed that the uncounted ballots will come in at anywhere near the same percentages for and against 8 as have the counted ballots. The numbers could be significantly different in either direction.

So, at the very least, the No on 8 Campaign should have waited until the votes were all counted. But there are far more useful things to do than wait, including things we can do with or without the blessing or assistance of the official No on 8 leaders.

While the counting of the ballots by corporate-owned, non-transparent, riggable, hackable computers running 'trade secret' software cannot be observed by mere mortals, many of the post-election processes can be. We need to be getting into county elections offices and observing the spot-checks of the optical scan machines, the 100% hand count of votes cast on DRE/touchscreen machines, the process by which it is decided which provisional ballots will be counted, and more. If there is an organization that wants to take on coordinating this, I can provide liaison with the election integrity movement to help people learn how to do it.

While you're thinking about this, there are a few things I want to make sure you know:

Even though California voters have the option of casting our votes on paper, those paper ballots are 'counted' by computers (I repeat: corporate-owned, non-transparent, riggable, hackable computers running 'trade secret' software). So even the tallies of votes counted CANNOT be taken at face value. The tallies are to be spot-checked, but the protocol used to do that check may not be rigorous enough to catch all anomalies in the tabulation of votes. (I say may not because I personally don't know a lot about the protocol being used for this. If someone wants to research that, I can point you to materials.)

Yes on 8 donor/proponent Howard Ahmanson reportedly has historical ties to two of the three largest electronic voting machine vendors: Diebold (now Premier) and ES&S. See Diebold, Electronic Voting and the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy by Bob Fitrakis at CommonDreams.org.

I want to make it clear that I am not saying that the vote on Prop 8 was stolen. What I am saying is that it's too early to know, and that there are actions we must take to ensure that the final vote count is as accurate as it can be, given the absolutely dismal state of our election system.

To recap, what can you do?
If you are connected with the No on 8 campaign, please help me reach key people with this information.
If you are connected with another group that might step up, show this to them. Contact me if the group wants to take action.
If you personally are ready to take action, please send me a PM (private message).

In closing, I repeat:
Think for a moment: what if Prop 8 really was defeated, but we never knew because no one looked closely enough at the results?

[msongs]

1. concession means nothing, only vote counts matter nt

[emlev]

2. Agreed. Except that concession means campaign not stepping up! n/t

[AntiFascist]

3. K&R...

to be fair, the noonprop8.com people are also affiliated with Equality California, and various attorneys have been hard at work day and night since the election with filings and amendments to the filings. It could be that they wanted to draw attention to the legal efforts in case that Prop 8 should stand.

The big danger that I see is that various media idiots are claiming that Prop 8 has won without understanding all of the hurdles that remain for the Yes on 8 people. This would create a general public consensus that gay marriage is eliminated in California which would then embolden the Religious Right and demoralize the No on 8 effort. First and foremost, the mass media needs to be educated!

Yes on 8 still has 3 major hurdles to cross:

They have to maintain their majority when the remaining millions of votes are counted.

They have to defeat the writ of mandate and request for immediate stay or injunctive relief in order for Prop 8 to continue to be in effect during the short term.

In the long term, they have to win the case deciding whether Prop 8 is an amendment or a revision to the state constitution. There are some excellent arguments for why Prop 8 is a revision, in which case it would be invalidated.

[demodonkey]

4. To the Greatest with this post-K&R! Because NO WE CAN'T allow even a hint of a stolen election to...

...steal people's rights.

[emlev]

5. I don't know that there's a hint of a stolen election at this point...

I do know that vigilance is called for where there still is something to observe. And post-election processes are one of those places. Thanks for the K&R.

[Land Shark]

6. K&R important to recognize the election is NOT over

until results are certified and the statute of limitations runs on an election contest, and even then, the truth still matters. Here's to finding out the truth! :)

[nichomachus]

7. At the risk of being repetitious

Once you have a certain percentage of voting returns from across the state, the percentages rarely change as later votes are counted. That's just a fact. I'm guessing the late votes may actually push it more toward the Yes side. To overcome the current total, the uncounted votes would have to be 60-40 No -- and I don't see that happening.

Is it possible there will be some "miracle?" Sure, but don't bet the farm on it.

The vote total will most likely turn out to be what it is now. Meanwhile, the No on 8 people have already filed a suit before the Supreme Court to overturn the measure. That would end the thing as a ballot question once and for all.

[Peace Patriot]

11. Well, I don't know that the stats are on early voting (which seems to be the last counted),

but I would expect that this year the most enthusiastic people were the Obama voters--more likely to vote No on 8--who voted early. Those are the very votes being counted ("counting" being a euphemism, in my view) now. I think there is a good chance that No on 8 does better in this voting group.

One other thing: It is no longer true that absentee ballot voting (one form of early voting) is the purview of Republicans. Many progressives now choose AB voting to avoid voting on the nefarious machines. Their votes generally just get scanned into the riggable electronics anyway, but they often don't realize this. And some do it as a protest against the machines.

Well, two more things: Puke counties in California tend to have VERY BAD registrars of voters, who do not protect Democratic voters. I would expect there to be far more No on 8 votes on provisional ballots in these counties. These are votes that bad Reg of Voters will easily discard.

Upshot: There is some reason to believe that the late-counted votes (early voting; provisional ballots) might be better for No on 8. The No on 8 campaign should therefore fight for every vote.

[nichomachus]

12. It remains to be seen

A friend of mine went to vote early in LA county. He said the place was jammed -- huge line. He was one of two white people there. From that, knowing what we do of the demographic breakdown of the vote, we can project that the voters he encountered that day (we don't know about other times) voted heavily in favor of Prop H8. That's a not a lead-pipe certainty, but if I had to bet, that's what I would bet, since we know non-whites voted 65 or 75 percent in favor.

Everyone's assuming that the early voters and provisional ballots were all young, urban, pro-Obama, anti-Prop H8 voters. Without any clear evidence of that, I don't think that's a valid assumption. In my county, there are 300K uncounted ballots or so. My county, as a whole, went 65-35 in favor of H8.

If the uncounted votes overturned the current returns, I would be very happy -- overjoyed, in fact, since it means my marriage is once again legal -- but I would be very very surprised.

I've been following elections, pretty closely, since 1964. I've seen a lot of ballot questions. I've never seen later returns --post election night counting -- reverse a result that was three or four points apart. I'm not saying it wouldn't happen -- and, if it did, that would be a huge story.

Now, here's something to think about.

Prop H8 is poorly designed. It was drawn up before the court ruling that said same-sex marriage was a basic part of the constitution. They way Prop H8 reads, there's a very good chance the court will overturn it, and we may be done with this method. They have another avenue and don't think they won't try it, but at least they may not go the ballot question route again.

However, if we squeak out a win on Prop H8, they will know what they have to do, and we will see another ballot question, maybe next election, cleverly designed to get around the court ruling. So, we could be worse off than before. Remember, we're talking about very determined organizations with extremely deep pockets. The Mormons can shake down their cult members for hundreds of millions of dollars, if they need to.

So, it's kind of an crap shoot.

[emlev]

14. You may have answered something I've been wondering about

Whether the No On 8 campaign sees 'yes' winning as a benefit in some way. Because they sure aren't acting like they care at this point that all the votes get counted, and that has been very puzzling to me.

If you (anyone reading this) are connected with the No On 8 campaign and are a leader or know of a leader who DOES care that all the votes get counted -- and counted accurately -- please PM me.

[nichomachus]

15. No, it's just that I think they are realists

Political dreamers wish for improbable outcomes. Political realists know where the votes are. My own feeling is that no matter how many uncounted votes there are - -and I think they should all be counted -- the end result isn't going to change at all.

There is a cross section of votes from around the state. Later results will track the earlier results. Political realists know that. The votes will be counted. Except in a few races with a paper thin margin, don't look for any changes -- especially on ballot questions. Remember, a good pollster can predict the outcome of an election within a few decimal points by calling 1,200 people.

When I first started covering elections as a journalist in the '60s, I worked for a guy who could call an election -- a local election -- by mid-afternoon, based on how many people had voted at which precincts at a certain time of day. He was uncanny in his accuracy.

So, it's not that the No on 8 people don't want to count the votes. I don't think that's a fair assessment. Of course, they do. They're just smart enough to know it's not really going to make any difference, and are moving ahead with their next step.

Sitting on your hands while the late votes are counted loses time.

[emlev]

16. Your assessment ignores issues of election integrity.

I'm not advocate that anyone sit on their hands. I'm advocating that some of the masses of volunteers who worked on No on 8 observe the post-election processes in Registrars of Voters offices around the state. Through this sort of monitoring, huge irregularities can sometimes be discovered, irregularities of sorts that *could* significantly change the official vote count.

The situation with early voting this year is very different from what it has been in the past. I don't think you can extrapolate directly from your previous experience to conclude how this year's early votes and election day votes will compare.

I'm pleased that there have already been lawsuits filed. And I don't think that strategy eliminates either the option or the need for observing post-election processes.

[emlev]

13. Thank you for that. n/t

[dickthegrouch]

8. I don't believe Sec of State can certify until

She knows whether to use 50%+1 or 2/3 majority.
I feel it is incumbent on her to approach Supreme Court to ask.
In the meantime GET MARRIED!

[GuvWurld]

9. K&R

[silverojo]

10. K&R as you requested! - n/t

[tbyg52]

17. I think everyone should just stop conceding on *anything* until all the votes are counted. nt

[David__77]

18. "Conceding" was an important catalyst to action.

We needed mobilization that came from the "shock" of electoral loss.

[emlev]

19. I can see your point...

Now that that mobilization has occurred, it would be really helpful if some of those mobilized would step forward to monitor post-election processes. You talk like you're part of the campaign. If you are, I'd really like to talk with you about this.

[David__77]

20. No, not a part of campaign.

But it seems like it's clear that they were ready to move with Plan B. That's smart strategy, because the mass mobilization component is just as key as the judicial one.

[BrklynLiberal]

21. K&R

[terrya]

22. Last time I checked, No on 8 still hasn't conceded,

:shrug: