Comments on: OH-15: Stivers widens lead

By: Kevin_Holtsberry’s blog » OH-15: Stivers widens lead :: at Voter Fraud On Best Political Blogs

Mon, 15 Dec 2008 19:04:50 +0000

[...] Kevin_Holtsberry’s blog » OH-15: Stivers widens lead :: No fraud there. From the quote however: “The ballots were placed in envelopes without all the required signatures or markings showing which form of identification the voter used. ” That doesn’t sound like the voter even did anything … [...]

By: Yil

Yil — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 16:22:06 +0000

So if a voter does nothing wrong, but an election official does your vote shouldn't count? How is that not going to invite partisan election officials in the future from "forgetting" to do something to invalidate votes if that behavior is rewarded?

As an example, on election day a nice older, but totally clueless, lady told me I wasn't registered. I said, check again I just voted in the primary. She failed to find me a second time and suggested I vote provisionally, but upon hearing the word primary a poll watcher or something started looking through their list and found me. That brought over some supervisor who flipped through and found my name without a problem and all was good. But suppose that hadn't happened and the lady, who can't even look my name up correctly, failed to check a box or sign her name to my provisional ballot to indicate she saw my ID. Would you agree that my vote shouldn't count because of something that nice, but confused, lady didn't do?

By: charliehall

charliehall — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:46:08 +0000

And large counties tend to be urban and suburban counties, which tend to vote Democratic. (Most surburban counties used to vote Republican and that is why we are facing a Democratic President and Congress.)

By: Kevin_Holtsberry

Kevin_Holtsberry — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:29:56 +0000

I am not 100% sure who is at fault. The problem is that Democrats are presenting a position that argues that any and all votes should be counted regardless if they followed the law or not and even if it means increased opportunities for fraud.

I am of the opinion that rules and laws are put in place for a reason and they should be followed. The Dems position is the rules should be ignored if it means more votes. Convenient how these votes always turn out to be Democrats.

The law required id and if the ballots lack clear identification then they shouldn't count.

By: My2Cents

My2Cents — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 13:06:23 +0000

The race remains undecided. Stivers clings to his narrow lead with all votes from Republican-leaning Madison and Union counties now accounted for, but Democratic-leaning Franklin County still has thousands of provisional ballots that have yet to be added to the total. Kilroy's aides predict that once that happens, the lead will move into her column.

So, why is it that while Madison and Union Counties did their jobs, that Franklin County is still fussing around with provisional ballots? This is a situation open to fraud, IMO. Dems can look at the results with all the Republican areas in, and will know how many votes they need to overcome the Republican candidate's advantage. So, why is it always the Democrat counties that get to lag behind everyone else?

By: Yil

Yil — Wed, 26 Nov 2008 12:44:03 +0000

I'm a bit confused. Are these ballots from valid voters who were required to vote provisionally for some reason and because they only signed their name or printed it at the top, but not both, are having their votes rejected? Seems really silly to me if they were registered voters, why wouldn't their vote being counted be the goal? No fraud there.

From the quote however: "The ballots were placed in envelopes without all the required signatures or markings showing which form of identification the voter used. " That doesn't sound like the voter even did anything wrong. For instance, if on election day you were forced to vote provisionally and the worker at the poll didn't check the box that indicates you showed them your driver's license as your ID then your vote doesn't count? You made no mistake, they did, and your vote doesn't count? That's crazy!

Perhaps it's a mixture of both cases lumped together, but that quote seems to indicate the voter did nothing wrong and yet their vote won't count.