Wisconsin County That 'Found' Lost Votes Apparently Has Major Voting Irregularities For Years...
from the well,-look-at-that dept
You may recall a little over a week ago we wrote about the Wisconsin county that magically found 14,000 votes in a recent (highly contested) election, after the very partisan County Clerk -- who had just been questioned for questionable methods of collecting election data -- said that she had "failed to save the results" in her original report. While this followup story is now about a week old, someone just sent it over to us. Apparently that particular county, Waukesha County, has a rather stunning history of voting irregularities, including having an astounding and totally unprecedented 97.63% voter turnout rate in 2004:Apparently in 2004 the polls in Waukesha were teeming with voters as the Waukesha County Clerk's office showed a 97.63% turn out. No, that's not a typo. 97.63%And it's not just voter turnout that's suspiciously high. Voter registrations are unprecedented as well:
http://www.waukeshacounty.gov/...
Of the 236,642 registered voters in Waukesha on Nov 2, 2004 apparently 231,031 of them came out in a hint of rain and drizzle and did their civic duty.
Just to put this in perspective, Australia has compulsory (mandatory) voting and their turnout is 95%.
In the 8 months leading into the 2004 Presidential Election there was a marginal 1.3% increase in the rolls netting about 3000 additional new voters. However in the 3 months after the election, which showed an anomalous 97.63% turn out, suddenly the rolls surged to the tune of almost 50,000 new voters and upped the rolls 20%. I suppose that's one way to even out a suspiciously high turn out.99.5% of eligible voters registered? Wow.
Furthermore, remember that first number I told you to hang on to? The 283,820 eligible voters in the county of Waukesha in July of 2004? This new surge in the voter rolls has now pushed total voter registration in Waukesha County to 99.5% of elegible voters being registered to vote by February of 2005.
But, let's not stop there. The blogger who did this research also dug up the official election results data from the 2006 election in Waukesha County, and noticed that some of the elections appeared to have more votes than ballots were cast by a fairly large number:
In the race for Governor/Lieutenant Governor there were a total of 176,112 votes cast. For Attorney General there were a total of 174,047 votes cast. And for Secretary of State there were a total 170,440 votes cast.To say the least, these numbers are pretty troubling if you believe in the integrity of democratic elections.
So, look at the 3rd line of the top of that report...Total Ballots Cast: 156,804. So based on those numbers 20,000 extra votes were cast in the election that weren't actually accounted for in the ballots cast.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: irregularities, voting, wisconsin
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Meh
Amateurs.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Meh
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anyone know what kind of voting machines they use?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Voter marks a ballot and then puts it into an optical scan machine. So in theory, all the ballots should be still available for recounting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I promise you that these numbers are bullshit. Waukesha is no more or less educated, motivated or politically minded than any other county in Wisconsin. Basically....they kinda sorta care but not really. You've got a few right wing nutbars and left wing dumbasses to go along with what is mostly a community of blue-collar folks and farmers. Hell, I remember the people that worked there telling me the Center Court Sports complex where the tourney was held is one of the largest buldings in Waukesha.
Rural towns like that do NOT get near 100% voter turnout....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Even then, only about 60% at most of the registered voters vote at any one time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: REcount
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seeing this new information, I think she is either incredibly stupid or incredibly corrupt. It is bad enough we have companies pouring money in to get political payback afterwards, but to find what looks like, sounds like, walks like corruption this rampant is disturbing.
I do think the people need to step up, winning side or loosing side, and demand better. This type of scandal should be the wakeup call and we should find all of the problems in this office and use them as the what not to do guidelines.
Has our political system rotted from the top down to the lowest levels now?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sure makes those millions of dollars spent so that Wolf Blitzer can appear to be floating in space amongst holographic election results look like a good investment. Really, none of the "professional" journalists ever noticed?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think this source is somewhat wrong
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/vote-counting-error-in-wisconsin-points-to-i ncompetence-not-conspiracy/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I think this source is somewhat wrong
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I think this source is somewhat wrong
There's one problem. That post assumed that 2010 numbers were not fraudulent as well. If the 2011 election results were consistent with 2010, but 2010 was tampered with, hmmm, then it sure makes sense that 2011 was tampered with as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The real problem isn't the fraud...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The real problem isn't the fraud...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The real problem isn't the fraud...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rest in pieces
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'm not accusing either party of cheating, but after finding out such numbers, you can't help but investigate further and find out if there was any obvious signs of corruption...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
DEMOCRATIC (DEM) 30,322 votes (26.86%)
REPUBLICAN (REP) 82,311 votes (72.92%)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_election_results_by_state
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
voted democrat for POTUS
But, hey, this just shows that we need ID Cards to be able to vote. Because "everyone" knows that it's the "poor" & the "colored" that engage in VOTER FRAUD & not respectable white people (read "Republicans").
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: voted democrat for POTUS
But I mean, if you could go and look at the vote record, you could verify that:
1) Your vote was counted
2) Dead or 'fake' people didn't vote
3) Nobody voted twice
In other words, something this this would never happen. But hey, privacy trumps everything apparently. That and freedom, whatever it means.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: voted democrat for POTUS
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Obvious sign of corruption?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
*Not intended to be a factual statement. Or is it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
Which was the whole point, and why the Brooks Brothers riot worked.
Bush was elected fair and square, 5-4, with an assist from Kathline Harris.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
Also, lets not forget the extreme liberal organization called ACORN that is setup entirely for voter fraud by the Democrats.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
P-shaw, I sez!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
The...faked...severely edited...undercover video sting.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
It may be time to do a little more reading about the Bush/Cheney election. Follow-up counting and analysis in Ohio has basically shown that the entire state election was a fraud and Bush did not actually win Ohio.
Also, I know who much Republicans hate ACORN but please keep in mind, even if all they did was commit fraud, it would still be voter registration fraud, which wouldn't actually change the outcome of elections.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
And I love how getting poor, inner-city, and other American Citizens involved with voting for their own benefit is considered voter fraud, because they primarily don't vote for the Republican Party; but things like this, well everyone should just sit down, shut up, its in the past we just all need to move on and accept the a&& screwing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
I don't understand why you point out that "the ballot was created by Democrats". It sounds like you're trying to suggest that Bush would have won by more had the evil Democrats not messed with the ballot.
But, if you actually look at the butterfly ballot, it's pretty obvious that a lot of people are accidentally going to select Buchanan instead of Gore. About 6000 people, actually.
By the way, I stand by my statement that SCOTUS elected Bush. They stepped in and ended the recount instead of letting it finish.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
I believe that Bush won that election and there was no foul play by either party.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
It was only the second time in history that they voted on a Congressional objection to an entire State's electoral delegation in U.S. history. Of course it got no traction because no one wants to acknowledge that the election process can be that corrupt.
Not the most unbiased source but you can find dozens of others:
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/12/17/harvey_wasserman_on_new_ohio_voting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Obvious sign of corruption?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"Part of what Nate does as an election forecaster is to look at the past performance of the districts he analyzes. If vote fraud has been occurring in those districts on a regular basis then his method will blindly include that vote fraud in his prediction of the election outcome. In short, the vote fraud is a regular element of that district’s results and thus Nate factors it into his projection, as part of his regression. Nate doesn’t even have to be aware of the vote fraud for his method to work.
But if vote fraud is a regular feature of a district’s voting pattern, then presuming that vote fraud can be detected by an abnormal result is a flawed premise."
A state or federal examination of what has been going on in Waukesha county is a no brainer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Fifty bucks there's not going to be any serious investigation. I'm starting to confuse the US with Nigeria...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Neither the Dems nor the Pubs want us to know for sure that we do not count.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
I am riting to you as a PRESIDENT of the US. I would like to asks your HELP in moving some funds out of the country.
I have $50MILLION to transfer. If you are able to help by providing my with your bank details I will pay you $2MILLION DOLLARS
Thankyou
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Solution is simple...
The person responsible (electoral officer) should also be tried for treason. Either they were complicit, or so grossly incompetent that they need to be punished for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Solution is simple...
Gov. Scott Walker Reportedly Planning Financial Martial Law In Wisconsin - Rick Ungar - The Policy Page - Forbes: "Walker’s plan would resemble-if not directly mirror- the legislation signed into law by Gov. Snyder of Michigan which gives Snyder extraordinary powers to take over municipalities when he determines them to be in financial trouble, further permitting him to actually fire locally elected public officials when he deems it desirable."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Solution is simple...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Need change? vote a few times
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Free Beer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Beer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Beer?
You can roll for your vote.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Free Beer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Free Beer?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Free Beer?
You can roll for your vote.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not just that
And they're equally troubling if you don't believe in the integrity of democratic elections. You get amateurs being obvious about it, and pretty soon people will start looking at all the numbers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vocabulary -- Election vs. Voter fraud
Voter fraud involves illegal voters and illegal votes, and conservatives always have their knickers in a twist about it (Voter ID, etc.). Rarely proven beyond onesy-twosy occurrences. N.B. "Mickey Mouse" never voted, even if registered by ACORN, and Coleman never even TRIED to push voter fraud as an issue in MN.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Uhhh mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Uhhh mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Uhhh mike
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/waukesha-clerk-announces-votes-for-prosser-im- thankful-that-this-error-was-caught-early.php
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
By the median voter theorem, the two parties will adjust themselves so that most elections tend towards a 50-50 split. A nationwide popular vote makes a few thousand votes *anywhere* potentially result-changing. Both parties have regions where their partisans dominate; both parties have some ethically-challenged-if-its-for-the-cause rank-and-file, especially at the local levels where there's less focused media attention.
So, sneaking in a small number of votes to run up the victory totals in the most partisan, least-mentally-balanced strongholds could more easily swing the whole election. It means that instead of having to watch a few swing states very closely – states that by definition have healthy organizations on both sides – every single partisan outpost needs to be suspect.
In a close election, everyplace becomes Florida/Palm Beach County (or Waukesha County), simultaneously.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's just conservative logic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ME smells a fish...
Better check that counties voters against the obituaries.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That data showed that NY residents were voting in both New York and Florida.
Think anyone cared about it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vote Fraud and Election Stealing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Vote in Waukesha County
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Only a fool believes...
There is no such thing as an actual Democracy. That's just window dressing over a world that's run by the people with money...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
-Herr Starr, Preacher
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The math looks fine to me
Apr 8, 2011 ... The new totals showed Prosser with 92263 votes in Waukesha County, while
Kloppenburg had 32758. County totals previously showed Prosser with ...
host.madison.com/.../article_6386782e-614f-11e0-97e5-001cc4c002e0.html - Cached - Similar.
Only ~125,xxx votes cast in Waukesha county. Roughly 50%. turnout.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The county clerk demonstrated just how easy it is to defraud the voters by failing to 'log' or 'save' or whatever on her laptop. There should not be that level of easy to manipulate human interaction in the hands of 1 person.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]