Regardless of who wins, we can't believe most of the vote counts provided to the GAB for the Wisconsin Supreme Court election, because there are so many unresolved and unexplained issues. There's no certainty in any of the counts from vote counting machines, because we know they rarely count votes correctly and are easily manipulated. Once one begins to also consider the issues with insecure ballot bags, one realizes just how unclear the results of the recount are.
The Kloppenburg campaign has the burden of showing that something improper occurred, but with very little information, and officials refusing to provide further information*, that will be very difficult to show. Unfortunately, there isn't much proof that something improper didn't occur. So, unless a thorough investigation is conducted, we won't know what to believe.
I wrote more on this here, including how Minnesota properly conducted a statewide recount in 2008.
However, I want to be sure this point is heard loud and clear: Unless we get more clarity, there's no reason to believe the results of this election and its recount.
If the recount ends (May 26th) without the start of a proper investigation, I will rightly denounce the validity of the winner's victory every chance I can. I vow to do this whether the winner is Prosser or Kloppenburg, because I just want to know the truth, and I will have no qualms congratulating the winner once the true winner is determined.
*This has gotten so bad that it's really starting to beg the questions: Why aren't we getting clarity from the officials responsible for doing so? What possible motives could someone have for withholding such information?
Publius:
ReplyDeleteI'm stunned by the logic here--especially on a site that be a place for open, honest, fact-based debate.
You say that you cannot believe the GAB because there are so many "unresolved and unexplained issues." Really, like what? There were some problems with reporting the votes from waulesha, but no reported problems with tallying them. The GAB investigated Waukesha already and carefully conducted a canvas.
You write: "Unfortunately, there isn't much proof that something improper didn't occur." You might as well claim that there isn't much proof that dragons don't exist. Afterall, despite the fact that there are nor remains, nor photos of dragons, or accounts of them outside of fiction (like Klopper's minions) they might be hiding all over the place.
Where are the facts? Where is the honesty and openess? You've cemented yourself into a position here without either.
You clearly didn't read my other posts linked from this post.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to elections, where we have paper ballots, we can expect to get proof of who truly won. Count the paper in a manner that is open and verifiable!
Mulligan: I'm sorry to have been so quick, and I want to thank you for your comments.
ReplyDeleteThere are so many issues that it's become a pain to keep writing them for each post. If you're curious about the relevant facts and issues, please browse my posts and many other blogs' posts linked from there.
Particularly this post.
ReplyDelete