From: Reed, Sam [Sec. of State]
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 200511:03 AM
To: Logan, Dean
Cc: [County Auditors]
Subject: King County Election Goes Well
Dean —
Congratulations on a very smooth election. Based on the calls I received alone, I know you were in a pressure cooker being scrutinized, analyzed and second-guessed throughout the election. It’s very impressive how well you and your crew executed it.
With a few minor glitches here and there around the state, the election went well everywhere. What a relief! It reafirms what exceptional leadership we have in the County Auditors’ offices throughout the state.
Onward and upward!
— Sam
Mr. Cynical
Help us out here!
A republican congratulating Logan? Please share with us the necessary wrongdoings what would lead to such a conclusion….
Hurry…we need to know!
Personally, I’m glad that everything seemed to go well. But just cos’ I’m a Dem doesn’t mean I wasn’t irritated by last fall. We still need to make sure that all the problems are being addressed. Let’s continue to fix the system. If folks wanna jump up and down and holler, let ’em have it. But it’s important to say: this is a good step in the right direction. Even the folks at uSP seem to be grudgingly approving of the management of the election.
How the fuck does he know if felons voted?
How the fuck does he know if dead people voted?
How the fuck does he know if non citizens voted?
How the fuck does he know non citizens voted?
How the fuck does he know that extra ballots were destroyed?
How the fuck does he know if the reconciliation reports are right?
Seems a little early to declare victory yet.
Mark the yellowback:
So far, the only felonious act and double vote we know of is the minnow’s. If you have more information, please post it. Otherwise, try to keep your paranoid fantasies under control.
JDB – It’s too early to declare victory. Until registration rolls are purged and redone, the whole process is suspect.
Until we know that the ghost of Nicole Way and her fraudulent reports are gone, the whole process is suspect.
JDB @ 4
‘If you have more information, please post it.’
Ah, that’s the problem. How does one get any of that information? If felons vote we have learned that there is no way to know who they voted for, therefore the votes count. Same with any of the other illegal vote categories. The secret ballot, combined with lax registration and ballot-to-voter reconcilliation means that all these categories need to be policed well before the election. Much of the information needed is not accessible by mere citizens, or it is costly to do so. And it is easy to vote without actually providing ID, so many ballots can be voted by one person. The recent reforms enacted only address a small part of these problems.
Well MtRN, it’s tough to prove that bullshit DIDN’T happen. We haven’t seen any baloney, but just because we ain’t seen it doesn’t mean that it happened. Besides, errors happen, and it would be nice if there were fewer of them this time. Also, I bet King County will be less fucked up than 30 other counties in this state.
I’ll be looking for PI to get list of voters and list of ballots and put them into Oracle to do left and right joins to see how many voterless ballots and ballotless voters there are.
I’m holding my breath…
You guys are nutjobs. Sam Reed liking Dean Logan is old news. Bet you guys loved Arthur Anderson as auditor to Enron; these guys are old colleagues.
This is the worst of good old boy networking. yeesh.
SCOOP — Goldy, please…take back the comment box!
THIS election went well????
That just PROVES the election for Governor was FIXED!!!
What does onward and upward mean to these doofuses..?
MTR: Maybe you should call the P-I and suggest that you’ll perform the Oracle SQL DB relational table joins scripting for them. I seriously doubt they have the expertise at that newspaper. Just peruse the editorial page.
Puddy – Yeah, I’ll send an e-mail to nicolebrodeur and ask her how her SQL skills are. Bet she’s chomping at the bit to do some investigative reporting.
Mork @ 10
What are you babbling about?
By the way… change your damn name.
The real “Mark” (me) is a centrist Republican. Any goofball Lefty rantings under the fraudulent “Mark” name are actually the rantings of “Mark the Left Nut” (or whatever appropriate nick s/he chooses).
Joni Balter I’m sure could figure out how to right a sequel…
ooops “write” a sequel though there may be a funny pun in the “right”
Righton, nice pun. It will be a sequel to the many voterless ballots and ballotless voters!!!
Puddy, thanks, almost forgot about the NO voters we could get to vote..
Hey libs; math test
How may voterless ballots does it take to make up the shortfalls, that is, the Edmonds thing where she’s behind….if its a 900 vote diff, does it mean you only need 450 voterless ballots, plus another 450 ballotless voters?
Sorry if its a tough one
Righton and Puddy – They’re still googling “left join” and “right join” trying to figure out wtf we’re talking about.
And I’ve yet to receive any answers to post 3. Maybe they know I’m right, that not a gd thing has changed that matters.
Righton @ 20,
You would first have to define what you mean by voterless ballot. I mean, regardless of millions spent, nobody has been able to demonstrate the phenomenon–I mean, other than those who believe in the tooth fairy, big foot, and WMD in Iraq ….
Mark @ 15
Either get used to it or change YOUR damn name. Or just wait til Goldy switches to Scoop and then it won’t be an issue anymore. What are you gonna do with all that free time when you can’t post on HA anymore?
dj @ 22
‘I mean, regardless of millions spent, nobody has been able to demonstrate the phenomenon…’
That is the problem. There is no way to tell how many votes are legal when there are thousands of ballots with no voters, and in other places more voters than ballots. Although there were many of these that were declared “illegal” votes in 2004, there is no way to tell how those ballots were voted.
dj @ 22 – You have to understand set theory. You obviously don’t. That’s why you don’t see a problem. It’s beyond the ability of your little mind to comprehend. In your world, if you don’t understand something, then it doesn’t exist. Those of us with better educations understand the math and can see the problem perfectly.
Mark the Redneck @ 25
I don’t understand set theory? Shit, and I have been teaching it at a university for years. Must I now fall on a sword?
I think the real problem is that somebody (probably Sharkansky) made up a catchy phrase for something s/he dreamed up. Unfortunately for your side, nobody has ever been able to get it beyond “dream” (yet millions spent!)—You know, like cold fusion, homeopathy, ESP, and WMD in Iraq.
dj – what phrase? Left and right joins? You don’t know shit about set theory then. Are you tenured? You should resign immediately.
Until you understand database operations, you are unqualified to talk about election reform. All of you…
NoWonder @ 24,
“There is no way to tell how many votes are legal when there are thousands of ballots with no voters”
But, there are not thousands of ballots with no voters…that is the made-up shit.
“and in other places more voters than ballots.”
Of course, this second problem occured in many counties. Shit happens when you have millions of ballots to count quickly. The fact is, the state, overall, had a quite low error rate. You asshole are just sore because your boy lost.
“Although there were many of these that were declared “illegal” votes in 2004, there is no way to tell how those ballots were voted.”
Those are illegal votes, not voterless ballots. (And, of course, the illegal D votes were matched by approximately the same number of illegal R votes. The expert witness statistician suggested a one in 10,000 chance of Rossi winning.)
MTR, dontcha just luv computers? A couple of correctly configured primary and secondary key indexed tables could solve our many voterless ballots and ballotless voters problems. Heck we could sell it to the KCEC
DJ get real. It is King County terminology, not Stefan Sharkansky. I also noticed you correctly spelled his name. Now we know whom dj is. He is one of those “professors” who probably ridicules anyone who disagrees with his pet theorems. Did you read this dj?
DJ – fercrissakes when you do a left join and a right join you get two reports. One is voterless ballots and the other is ballotless voters. So don’t lie to everybody and say the two lists don’t exist.
This is the problem with the schools having fucking idiots like you teaching. You’re the poster child for arrogance masquerading as intelligence.
MTR: To the members of the animal hind parts gang, Access is a database. How about a 30Gigs of multidimensional tables with referential key integrity? The members of animal hind parts are all foreign keys with many NULL definitions!
MTR @ 27,
“what phrase?”
“Voterless ballot,” you moron.
“You don’t know shit about set theory then.”
Really? And this coming from somebody who believes made-up shit? :-)
“Are you tenured?”
I am. Are you?
“You should resign immediately.”
Ummm. . . I’ll take that under advisement. Do I need to pay you a consulting fee for that advice?
“Until you understand database operations, you are unqualified to talk about election reform. All of you…”
“Election Reform” is a multifaceted undertaking, very little of which has anything to do with databases. But the topic wasn’t really election reform, was it? It was about your anger management problem and your fantisy about voterless ballots.
Puddy – I can’t wait until Lucy and DonDon call us “fascist neo cons” for being educated, and speaking so far over their heads. Fucking idiots…
That’s why they hate us. Our knowledge and resultant success stands in such stark contrast to their stupidty and failure.
DJ – No, I’m not tenured. In my profession, we have to prove our worth every gd day. We have to keep up with complex technologies, show up every gd day and work our asses off. No free rides. No guarantees. It’s good though… kinda keeps me hungry and helps me keep my edge.
MTR @ 30
“fercrissakes when you do a left join and a right join you get two reports. One is voterless ballots and the other is ballotless voters. So don’t lie to everybody and say the two lists don’t exist.”
Sorry, dolt, that only works if each list is without error. One of the lists, in particular, is more error prone (this all came out during the election contest and I discussed it extensively on this blog–weren’t you paying attention?).
Sheeesh, anyone who doesn’t understand measurement theory has no business commenting on election results. :-)
MTR @ 34
“No, I’m not tenured. In my profession, we have to prove our worth every gd day. We have to keep up with complex technologies, show up every gd day and work our asses off. No free rides. No guarantees. It’s good though… kinda keeps me hungry and helps me keep my edge. “
That’s because so many of your type are lazy, not self motivated, or just plain stoopid.
MTR @ 33
“That’s why they hate us. Our knowledge and resultant success stands in such stark contrast to their stupidty and failure.”
We don’t really hate you. I think “pity” is more like it.
DJ Let me try then. Here is an education for you. It’s free. Tomorrow you can use it in class:
To enforce data integrity one validates the quality of the data in the database with referential key integrity. Data integrity simply stated refers to the validity of the data. Was yesterday’s vote count correct? That’s our voting question dj.
For example, if an voterless ballot is entered with an VB_ID value of 123, the database should not allow another voterless ballot to have a same ID value. If you have an ballotless voter column intended to have values ranging from 1 to 5, the database should not accept a value of 6, nnless an animal hind parts person designed it. If the table has a dipstick column that stores the IQ number for the LEFTIST PINHEAD animal hind parts members, the database should allow only values that are valid for the IQ numbers in the this blog. Probably values uhhh < 100 I'd say!!! Does that explain it to dj MTR?
the part removed by the blog at the end “is less than 100”.
Shit, it just hit me. You’re a “professor” at Evergreen aren’t you. Take another hit pal.
There are different levels of stupid. You’re the worst. Not only don’t you know the answer, you don’t even understand the question. That’s why you finally resorted to personal attack. You’re an idiot.
So tell me mister university perfessor maf genius…you have two tables. Table one is list of voters. Table two is list of ballots. Do left join and view report. Do right join and view report. One report is ballotless voters… I think we agree on that. So if the other one is not voterless ballots (because you claim there is no such thing), what the fuck is it?
MTR: I deal with technologies that can move that 30GB database in about 60 seconds from point A to B. Soon it will approximately 30 seconds. I have to deal with people who can’t view these spatial relationships unless I draw them out. I wonder if they are dj’s graduates?
DJs “grads” at Evergreen can’t do much. DJ certainly made it clear that SQL operations aren’t what they know or do. When the prof is this stoopid, can you imagine the “graduates”?
Puddy – Seems odd that the rest of the moonbats aren’t taking part tonight. I guess this is beyond them. They know when to STFU I guess…
MTR: Nah, every now and then dj has a brain fart and he actually belches out sumtin funny and cogent. But he claims he doesn’t read my written work and wants me censored.
Remember when Chris Tucker meets Jackie Chan in Rush Hour and says “Do you understand the words coming out of my mouth”? DJ do you understand the words we wrote tonight? Take two googles and call us in the morning!!!
DJ: When’s the sequel?
DJ is definately not from UW Tacoma. The only people I would call Set Theorists there are Rosenfeld and Horak. They are both quite conservative and Horak isn’t tenured.
MTR @ 40
Lets see, you said:
“That’s why you finally resorted to personal attack.”
…right AFTER you dished out…
“There are different levels of stupid. You’re the worst. “
Riiiiich, dude. What do you do for an encore?
Regarding your other (largely irrelevant) question: anyone with a fifth grade education understands perfectly well what you are talking about. Of course, the simplest description is that there is a discrepancy between two lists. Nobody has claimed otherwise. The fact is, however, that there are ERRORS in each list that guarantees discrepancies will arise. Yet, those discrepancies do not indicate that there were ballots for which no voter existed (the implication of the term you use–or “ballot stuffing” as has been claimed).
If you read Judge Bridges ruling at the SoS site, he clearly discusses the explanation for many of the discrepancies—explanations that were agreed upon by both the Democrat and the Republican legal teams.
Some remaining discrepancies were not SPECIFICALLY explained. Nevertheless, we know from testimony that a King County employee accidentally blew away some of the absentee voter credits. Furthermore, we know that voter crediting has a higher error rate than ballot counting. One process is an open and publicly scrutinized and the other one is an administrative process, done behind closed doors, using temporary staff—and more error prone. You, for some reason, choose to accept the administrative voter crediting as the “clean” list and then cry “fraud” and “ballot stuffing” without any evidence beyond a discrepancy and furthermore reject explanations that even the GOP legal team accepted.
What it boils down to is that you are a sore loser who refuses to accept that the system was investigated by an impartial judge, a small army of lawyers on many sides, and a number of expert witnesses, and not a trace of election fraud was found.
Get help.
MTR @ 40
My response is in purgatory. Should show up around 45 when it is freed.
Michael @ 46,
It is no secret where I work. I’ve discussed it on this blog before. Happy searching :-)
MTR: Check out the Google in the news New Orleans link!!! Yeah, that’s their city!!!
What is your Erdos number?
MTR; goldy ought to pay you just to make this entertaining. I mean heck, you are his yeast, his straw that stirs, his Novak..
I remember DJ you saying your field cross-dabbled in economics in the May 2005 timeframe
I give up. Like I said, nobody should be involved in or even comment on elections unless they have a through understanding of set theory and database operations. (There are many other qualifications also.) DJ proves my point.
Anybody who thinks the election system is “fixed” is simply too stupid to understand the problem. DJ is the posterchild.
Righton: What is Goldy – Mark Shields?
MTR: Depends on what the definition of “FIXED” is!
Mark The Redneck @ 54
“Anybody who thinks the election system is “fixed” is simply too stupid to understand the problem.”
On the other hand, anyone who thinks there can be a perfect election with 3 million votes (or even 1 million votes) is living in fairy-tale land. Does Washington or King county have 0 errors? No. But, the error rate is a bit better than the rates found in similar sized elections that have undergone the same degree of scrutiny.
I’ve heard of sore losers before, but you guys take the cake!
DJ@47: I addressed “your so called errors” above when I discussed data integrity in #38. Oh that’s right you skipped over that. You should read more, and you wouldn’t look so stoopid when you respond!!!
DJ: Take some time and study CJ Date’s relational DB series. It’s older materials but he makes it so plain, the moonbats can understand MTR’s commentary.
dj @ 28
‘Those are illegal votes, not voterless ballots.’
That is why they were judged to be illegal. Look it up.
‘And, of course, the illegal D votes were matched by approximately the same number of illegal R votes.’
No one knows how those voterless ballots were voted because we have secret ballots. In this case there is no way to even contact the voters to get them to lie about who they voted for. The perfect crime – no voter with witch to question or even possibly charge with a crime, AND the votes counted!
There is no way to tell how many were dems or repubs. Either Gregoire had more legal votes or Rossi had more legal votes. We can never know.
60 –
Oops. Should be “…no voter with which to question…”
Prof DJ;
Still wondering the optimal ratio of voterless ballots to ballotless voters, that is, if you wanted to win by 1%. Surely there’s an equation a gifted Evergreen prof could write.
Righton, MTR, Nowonder: The real issue is how many provisionals are needed to overcome the absentees received. But that being said, how do you prove one or the other without a valid ID. Hence the “special precinct” 1823 with its special ballots. I remember a very smart person saying on his blog (Not SP): “Seattle’s Precinct 1823 counted 343 ballots, which is 71 more ballots than the 272 voters who cast them. This is the single largest discrepancy between ballots and voters in all of King County. Nearly all of the discrepancy is due to “provisional ballots”.” Hmmm…? So MTR that other “controversial” join may be that “speshul” case!!!
Then again DJ, to comprehend the argument made, you would have to read comment #63.
Professor dj; would linear programming help the KCRE boys? You might volunteer to optimize their “system”. its rather unprofessional to have to rely on Huenekens to come up with ballots at the last minute…
At least Sam Reed understood part of the problem and said bring your ID in his public service announcements. That pissed off their side because it didn’t get out of their controlled committees because bringing your ID removes almost all of the voterless/ballotless problem. Deep down they know the voterless/ballotless issue is real (didn’t your side call it a “fishing expedition”) and don’t want the public comprehending their last line of electioneering defense.
The only thing Dean Logan could possibly do well is to resign, move away, or better yet throw himself into the bay.
dj @ 35
Nice take apart of these right-wing know-it-all dolts. MTR’s and Puddy Freep’s argument: right-wing garbage in -> perform left and right joins -> right-wing garbage out.
Mark1 @ 67
After reading some of your commentary over the weeks including call ing the Governor some rather colorful names I’d suggest you’d take your own advice especially the last part.
Who needs you?
Nowonder@60
“No one knows how those voterless ballots were voted because we have secret ballots. In this case there is no way to even contact the voters to get them to lie about who they voted for. The perfect crime – no voter with witch to question or even possibly charge with a crime, AND the votes counted!
There is no way to tell how many were dems or repubs. Either Gregoire had more legal votes or Rossi had more legal votes. We can never know.”
Let me guess, NoWonder, you didn’t even reside in this state during the election content? You do not seem to understand the subtilties of the contest or the ruling. Here is another guess: you learned everything you know about the election contest from (u)SP?
The “voterless ballots” were not illegal votes. Bridges, early on in the election contest, ruled that the administrative voter crediting process was not a legally binding counting or reconciliation method. He did not change his mind during his ruling.
The voter crediting process was not designed to arrive at the same number as the actual ballot count (which IS official, binding, publically observed, much higher accuracy, etc.). Why? First, because the voter crediting process is a low-stakes, sloppy system, done by temporary workers. Secondly, there are some voters that will simply not reconcile. For instance, of the 875 absentee discrepancies, 251 were known to result from federal write-ins and 69 resulted from confidential voters (FBI WPR, domestic abuse victims), another 292 were absentee balots rejected after validation and hence with the wrong challenge codes (see page 197 of Fells testimony). These were discrepancies that all parties agreed on.
By “illegal votes”, I am refering to Bridges’ ruling, not your “UFO and Big Foot” made-up definition of illegal votes. Bridges ruled that there were 1,678 such illegal (or invalid) votes including:
1401 felons
19 votes cast on behalf of dead people
6 double votes
96 invalid provisionals in King County
79 invalid provisionals in Pierce County
77 provisionals in Pierce County lacking regisration
Indeed, we don’t know how these voters voted (actually, we know by clear and convincing evidence how 4 felons voted), nevertheless, the GOP proposed a statistical method (proportional reduction), that used the voting frequencies within a precinct to statistically remove voters.
As it happens, Judge Bridges rejected using this method because there is alway some uncertainty in doing statistical adjustments of this kind. The uncertainty, found using the GOP methods, with the total invalid voter data set, was that Rossi had a 1 in 10,000 chance of winning the election (Handcock’s testimony). The Judge stated that (pg 9, oral decision), “[i]ndeed, the Court is more inclined to conclude that if this type of testimony is properly admissible, then Ms. Gregoire woud have prevailed under a theory of proportional deduction based on the testimony of Drs. Adolph and Handcock.”
Your boy lost. Grow up. Get over it. And, for crying out loud, do a little research on the facts before spewing your bullshit around here.
NoWonder @ 60
My comment is being held. Look for it to pop up as 70.
So Sims appointed little BUTTBUDDY Logan is going to be in charge of counting the November ballots.
If Sims loses, Logan loses his job.
If Sims wins, Logan retains his job.
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm?
I wonder what Logan will do??
As for Sam Reed, what type of independent audit of KINGCO Erections did his office do and what is a “smooth” erection???
Obviously Reed is merely referring to the surfacey appearance and would never dream of independently going in and making certain that ALL required procedures were followed.
I wonder if Logan will be able to reconcile Votes and Voters this time???
New reconciliations are required.
It will be interesting to see how Logan does.
THAT is the real test.
And if he does it this time, the question will be why didn’t he do it last November???
(Fat Albert voice) Hey hey hey Clueless, what? DJ’s argument still has major issues. This isn’t right wing stuff. This is standard DB stuff.
You are truly clueless!! U don’t know DB theory and it’s sequel? Awww! I think MTR dissected the great Evergreen Professor in #40 and you are having heart palpitations? Looks like the Flying Monkeys from Wizard of Oz (animal hind parts) have no leader!!!! I love it. Fall back on your name calling again clueless. This isn’t Free Republic stuff you mooron!
Clueless: Follow the yellow brick road! I address data validation and data integrity to your IQ in #38.
@ 71
As usual the right wing dolt’s crap applies perfectly to the author. Classic projection.
As usual Clueless: You are stuck on stupid!
Goldy is Stuck on Stupid
Righton @ 77
“Goldy is Stuck on Stupid”
Are you crazy? Goldy isn’t a die-hard Bush supporter!
dj @ 70
I was wrong about the referenced voterless ballots being ruled illegal. Sorry.
There is still the major problem with voterless ballots. The crediting process is not designed to match everything up? Fine, but design one that is. If every ballot is not tied to a specific voter then there is no way to catch a fraudulent stack of “extra” ballots. If the crediting does not do it there is no way under the current system.
The second problem is that votes “ruled” illegal still count. Timing is everything and if one submits an illegal ballot it is too late to exclude it.
‘Your boy lost.’
Thanks for the update. He did lose, yet no one knows whether he had more legal votes than the “winner”. If that kind of outcome is fine with you then you will not object if ever the courts must decide the winner in the future and your side loses.
NoWonder @ 79
“There is still the major problem with voterless ballots. The crediting process is not designed to match everything up? Fine, but design one that is. If every ballot is not tied to a specific voter then there is no way to catch a fraudulent stack of “extra” ballots. If the crediting does not do it there is no way under the current system.”
This is, of course, the very reason why the voting/ballot-counting process is conducted in the open, using serial-numbered ballots, etc. Even so, I have no objection to a better system of reconciliation. What I object to is using an inherently less accurate (and closed-to-the-public) voter crediting system, as is, as a reconciliation method. During the election contest, people screaming about the the voter crediting discrepancies were ill-informed or willfully ignorant about the relative accuracies of each method.
“The second problem is that votes “ruled” illegal still count. Timing is everything and if one submits an illegal ballot it is too late to exclude it.”
To a great extent, that is a flaw inherent in having a secret ballot. That is why elections are, by law, conducted in the open. We could have a system with nearly 100% accuracy, but it would require giving up the secret ballot. Doing so, would allow us to institute numerous checks into the system.
“Thanks for the update. He did lose, yet no one knows whether he had more legal votes than the “winner”. If that kind of outcome is fine with you then you will not object if ever the courts must decide the winner in the future and your side loses. “
Well, we know from the statistical work during the election contest that, if we probabilistically remove the illegal/invalid votes according to precinct percentages, Rossi had a probability of 0.0001 of having the most legal votes and Gregoire had a probability of 0.9999 of having the most legal votes. So, yes, we pretty much do know who got the most legal votes (regardless of Rossi’s statement). I can live with that tiny degree of uncertainty.