Blackwell's Response to Green Party on Recount (11/19/04)

The Secretary of State's canvassing of the results from the various counties and his declaration of the results is the initial "count". Plainly, there can be no recount until there has been an initial count. One cannot "immediately initiate" a recount, until the initial count is completed. The Secretary of State will declare the results as soon as he is able to do so.

However, before the Secretary of State can lawfully declare the results of the presidential election, Ohio law requires each county board of elections to (1) canvass the results (2) sign and
post a declaration of the results, (3) certify abstracts of the results and (4) send the certified abstracts to the Secretary of State.
http://www.votecobb.net/pdf/ohiososresponse111904.pdf

and GOP electors "cast" their votes. (I put "cast" in quotes because the college rarely meets.)

The end game now will be to run out the clock for the electoral college just as they did in 2000. You may recall in 2000 the GOP created an artificial deadline for the finalizing of the FL results due to the electoral college having to "meet". They are doing the same thing now in OH. They haven't used this argument yet, but rest assured it's securely in their back pocket and they will pull it out and use it shortly.

HIS JOB?

Does Ohio State have rules in place in the Constitution regarding validating the election?

the electoral college will have already met and it will then be a done deal regardless.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=2690131

The game is "run out the clock" - and it was established in 2000 with the infamous Supreme Court ruling.

before then. Cobb\Badnarik seem fully aware of that though.

<snip from original post>
before the Secretary of State can lawfully declare the results of the presidential election, Ohio law requires each county board of elections to (1) canvass the results (2) sign and
post a declaration of the results, (3) certify abstracts of the results and (4) send the certified abstracts to the Secretary of State.

So OH law is the problem, which may explain why Blackwell has been so confident. Is there a way to push the county boards to move more quickly? Any idea when they will have the work completed?

surrounding the Ohio effort, not that I know the answer mind you, just that it's an answer that needs to be sought the boards must be pressurised somehow, time is of the essence.

"Run out the clock" only works if you buy the bizzar theory that there is a two month statute of limitations on fraud. Watergate took over two years to nail down, but it only got as far as it did because people realized that you can't "run out the clock" and escape all consequences, no matter how much you try to spin it that way.

If there were honest "counting errors" then the argument might hold water, but if there were systematic errors or fraud it's a whole different matter.

The sense of urgency is a red herring; the goal is to find out if there was fraud, and if so find out who is behind it, and then nail them hard. For that, what matters is not the clock, but the truth.

-- MarkusQ

P.S. In some regards, it may get easier after everyone realizes that it isn't about trying to change the outcome of any given election, but about trying to protect the integrity of the process. A lot of people thought Watergate would die after Nixon was sworn in, but they were wrong.

anomalies in the machines would not necessarily have to be due to fraud, I personally think fraud is relatively likely but I think it's far from a certainty, a recount would discover such errors if they existed. Second at the moment there is still a small chance of actually changing the result in this election. If that doesn't work out then there'll be all the time in the world, but in the meantime a sense of urgency can only be a good thing.

which is why some black voters had to wait 7 hours to vote.

There were fewer voting-machines-per-citizen in black neighborhoods than in white neighborhoods.

But whether there was provable fraud is something else. I'm not expecting proof of fraud in Ohio to be found.

Aren't republican election officials duty bound to provide equal access to polls.

If Blackwell says he conducted a fair election according to the rules and it is proved that he did not, isn't that fraud?

I hate hearing....

"awe shucks, its only suppressing black people's vote, that happens all the time, what we need is proof of fraud."

Come on, I don't think I've ever heard that argument coming from a black person.

The game for the Rupubs is run out the clock - the game for Dems is to keep working until we have fixed the electoral system. The first task is to bring the evil-doers to justice (did I write that?) and then we will worry about who should be in office.

YES -- IT IS about running out the clock...It's about finding some evidence BEFORE that clock runs out -- if you think you have unlimited time to figure this out... you're wrong.

I don't care what you say -- We CAN NOT let Bush be sworn in -- it's that simple.

You think you're going to change the integrity of the voting process with ALL THREE of the branches of government controlled by Republicans... you better think again...

You think you can willy nilly up and find something that proves this election was rigged two years from now -- and have the upper hand on removing Bush from office -- you better think again...

If you think you can even begin to compare this to Watergate -- you're dead wrong -- and you better think again...

I know what people are saying --
'we're just trying to secure the integrity of the voting process -- not trying to overturn the election... blah blah blah...'

Well I'm saying right now what everyone who has a logical bone in their body... everyone that knows this election was fixed from the start thinks ... that we don't have unlimited time to change this...and the time we do have we can't afford to waste...IIII want this election overturned --

Get a copy of the song "Please Come To Chicago."

Listen to it. Listen to the beat. Realize that that simple little song, with no naught words, no violent content, was banned from the airwaves. Why? Because the powers-that-be were scared. Very scared.

So scared that they tried every dirty trick in the book, and they still lost. The urgency meme is just another form of the "Bush won, deal with it" trick. It will lead right into the "The election has been certified, deal with it" trick and the "Bush has been sworn in, deal with it" trick, and so on. This (they hope) will sap our will each time the arbitrary deadline of the day passes without a hiccup.

It's obviously a trap. If we can't contest an election until it happens, and we can't contest it after it's been certified, or after the person has been sworn in, or whatever, we're constantly playing catch up. In short, we lose.

But it only works if people accept it. Ignore it. Keep your eye on the ball. Was there fraud? Find it. Prove it. Put some people behind bars. Repeat as needed. Once a critical mass is reached, the whole thing will flip so fast it will make your head spin. Early on, someone (I forget his name) was put in jail for claiming (correctly) that Enron was a house of cards in an internet message board (the charge was stock manipulation) but once enough people were saying it it went from heresy to widely reported public knowledge in under a week. The untouchables came down in the blink of an eye.

Let's keep our eye on the ball. Was there fraud? I happen to suspect that there was. But the first step is to prove it. And as long as there is a chance of proving it, we need to keep after it, even if it takes five years, or ten,...

And when the jerks who did it finally get out of prison, and get their voting rights restored, we need to make sure they are allowed to cast a ballot for whomever they chose.

Exactly one ballot each. Just like everybody else.

-- MarkusQ

P.S. "We can change the world" was the line that made them wet their pants. Because they knew that the kids meant it.

Of course in watergate days, we had an investigative press with backbone! Now, we have to be that press. Keep the pressure on!
JoMama.

nt

rewrote the OH election law after 2000. This is all the more reason for some federal standards, so these kind of shenanigans can't interfere with the democratic process.

nt

in response to the federal regs that were passed after the 2000 debacle. I cannot be absolutely sure of this, as I don't have a link to OH election law. I do know that part of the law required the long waiting period to even *begin* counting the provisional ballots. Many of us in other parts of the country only found out about that provision of OH law on November 2 (or, I guess, more accurately, Nov. 3). I wouldn't be surprised to find that the legislative body who passed all this was republican, although that's just a guess. If I've got any of this wrong, please correct me. There has been so much information floating around that I want to make sure that I'm clear on my understanding of what is going on.

thereby delaying when a recount can start is his interpretation of laws which have existed for a long time.

period between the actual vote and the beginning of the counting of provisionals would have to be new too. That slowed things down a bit. I'm not, as I said, familiar with the other parts of the law and which may have been new additions. I just figured since the provisional part clearly is new, it is not unreasonable to think some other parts may be new too. It may be that the Republican party in OH had a plan that the dems just missed. Hope it isn't too late now.

And now that a lawsuit has been filed in Ohio, why not? If he refuses, sue the bastard for contempt and obstruction.

He wouldnt be trying to run out the clock.

There must be a way to expose his criminal actions?!!?

If everything was legit, why would he be doing everything he can to run out the clock?

everything was done correctly.

:(

Although Katherine Harris made this argument, she also came out of it with no credibility whatsoever.

Blackwell has political aspirations. Calling out such things in the media is not good for those aspirations.

they are already in the process of counting the provisionals. Is there anything to legally preclude Ohio from initiating a recount of those ballots already cast and counted, which apparently would be all but the provisional ballots? Regardless if the final vote has been tallied? Sounds like a legal decision from a court is required.