October 18, 2005
Unregistered Voters du Jour
Two more voters who were identified and documented as "not registered" before their provisional ballots were counted (photos here and here). Same profile as the ones I posted the other day -- assigned to precinct 1823, but no record of these voters or their ballots in the database.
Then there is this voter from Pacific. He shows up in the June 2005 voter database as having registered on 10/5/2004. It was just past the deadline to be eligible to vote last November. But his ballot was counted precinct 1823 and without a record in the database.
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at October 18, 2005
07:01 PM | Email This
1. Gee, which one of these ballots cancelled out my vote last November? Which one cancelled out my wife's vote?
Thanks King County!
2. Outrageous And willful wrongdoing down at the KC Elections office. There is no way to explain it away as a mistake. They knew the voter wasn't in the poll book or even registered. But they counted it anyway. Yet another piece of the the more-votes-than-registered-voters mystery. KCE certainly broke election law by counting these and all those other similar ones. Totally unacceptable!
3. Isn't it past time for a letter writing campaign to get the Attorney General to start going after the King County folks for election fraud?
4. ..and how can anyone not say that Dean Logan and Huennekens bent over backwards and inside out to count as many illegal ballots as possible? It couldn't be more obvious, from everything we've seen here.
5. The issue between the June election and the date he registered I wont try to understand. As for 10/5/04 being too late to register I think you err.
Granted you must have registration in 30 days prior to the election but I believe you were allowed to walk in to the auditors office 15 days from the election and register in person.
I will look it up but I think that is the case
6. Count Indication?
Is there an indication in the photos that these PBs were counted? Or is it something else?
7. Ya know folks; you really do not need to be a registered voter to vote in KEC elections.
Does that bother the average person out there?
Without a requirement that voters be registered, my 10-year-old can think of about 10 ways to get about 50,000 extra votes counted for the “right team”.
Thanks to all who deserve kudos here: King 5, Seattle Times, PI, KOMO, KIRO, TNT and most especially you Norm and SAM.
8. Nothing new here - nothing to see -- move along now --
9. I still contend that the 'dates' could well be backdated.
Alter the date from '11/05/2004' as a registration date to '10/04/2004' -> this vote can be counted. They don't appear to archive the original 'voter registration form' once it is transfered into the computer - they just rely on whatever the box says.
The other choice is that the method of generating poll books doesn't actually use the data in the voter database. Which I can believe - but is insane. The whole point of using a spreadsheet or database is to avoid this sort of asininity.
10. Google phone number lookup:
Bayley Provisional: Errin Clark - (206) 525-3079 - 1215 N 90th St, Seattle, WA 98103
Do phone numbers get reassigned that fast in Seattle?
11. ..and there it is again: that famous precinct 1823 dumping ground. Just put the non-registereds there, Dean, and all will be good. groan....Can we PLEASE run an honest election here????????
12. ewaggin,
Good question. It is not obvious from the photos. But envelopes from counted and uncounted ballots are stored separately. Open up a box of counted provisionals, and you have an entire box full of envelopes which have been slit open, and contain nothing. That's not technically a guarantee that the ballot inside was counted (especially if it was for Dino), but that is the official presumption.
13. Someone on staff at King County elections with the initials DJS sent these to precinct 1823 after they were all obviously marked "not-registered"...These initials were on several of the previously listed non-registered provisional ballots also forwarded to 1823...
Hmmm....I wonder what Ron Sims nephew's middle name is?....Donald _____ Sims...?
snicker.....OK Just kidding....But who ever these inititals belong to - is going to have some 'splaining to do.....Hopefully to the Federal Government.
14. Deborah:
If I think like a devil's advocate, I can easily think of why the mysterious "DJS" assigned/sent those ballots to 1823. Follow my logic here:
I (DJS) get the ballot. I find that the voter is not registered. In my over-eagerness to count every vote, I remember that many homeless people have trouble with addresses, and registering, and things like that. So, I guess that not-registered = possible homeless person, and voila! It's an 1823 ballot because so many seem to have registered down there!
Is it fraud? Hard to say for sure.
Is it incompetence, or passing the buck? I think so.
15. Stephan: Is it your intention to forward this growing mountain of evidence to Mr. McKay (The U.S. Att.) with a request to investigate the [sic]apparent fraud that occurred in that precinct? This is an abomination. And the ole stink-o-meter is off the scale. If he won't act on this much evidence, then it's time to ask Washington D.C. for new representation.
16. Amen Jamie!!