Sam Reed with mail
Roughly ten minutes after polls “closed” Tuesday evening, the screens reporting election results directly from the Secretary of State’s office froze. They stayed that way for a long time, some say three hours. With a small fraction of existing returns, mostly from Western Washington and many thousands of ballots still in the mail, it is interesting that the results at that point from the tiny sample were virtually the same as the “final” election results big media began reporting hours later.
Exacerbating the concern was an early report from The Spokesman Review blaming the “crash” on “An overwhelming number of contested races for precinct committee officers.” They said the gods of Microsoft were called upon (and sacrifices, no doubt offered) to make the blue screens go away.
Disturbingly, sources close to the Reagan Wing, based on Public Disclosure Documentation (we may shortly publish) tell us the Secretary of State’s office was not doing precint committee officer tabulation to begin with.
I queried another source with some technical computer background who said it was highly unlikely that result tabulation from only 39 counties of results in a grand total for ALL counties of only 6,600 precincts could possibly contain enough data to cause a crash on any system built in the last 20 years. If you are reading www.TheReaganWing.com online, your own computer contains a LOT more data right now.
What we know is entirely too preliminary to draw conclusions about the current process or election. We will attempt to discover what the Secretary of State is claiming and attempt to evaluate if his explanation is plausible, but it begs to repeat conclusions already drawn by clean election groups from one end of the nation to the other:
1. Mail-in elections are unverifiable. They require that we have to trust, but cannot verify, the actions of government officials. Government corruption in control of elections is permanent corruption. If we could consistently trust government officials we wouln’t need to HAVE elections.
2. Computer tabulation is unverifiable. It reduces to a very small number the total people necessary to falsify elections.
Following the “hanging chad” controversies of the 2000 Presidential election, following the demonstrable, but judicially irreparable, fraudulent outcome of the 2004 Washington State Gubernatorial election, WE LEARNED WE MUST CLEAN UP ELECTIONS!
- WE MUST VOTE AT POLLING PLACES
- PARTY REPRESENTATIVES OF EACH PARTY MUST BE ABLE TO independantly VERIFY BALLOTS AT THE POLLING PLACES THE NIGHT OF THE ELECTION
- WE MUST ELIMINATE COMPUTER PROGRAMMING FROM THE COUNTING PROCESS
Munro and Reed, both "Mainstream Republicans of Washington," one a former chair, one a Diebold Computer Elections systems millionaire, both, back-to-back Washington Secrtaries of State
We once had a system in Washington State that met the above criteria. It was HIGHLY RESISTANT to fraud. It was replaced (at the behest of the Evans/Gorton/Mainstream Republicans of Washington wing of the Republican Party) with a “modern” system the State Supreme Court ruled “highly susceptible to fraud.”
The current system was designed making undetectable fraud relatively simple.
The current system is very expensive.
And revealingly, the current system is MUCH, MUCH SLOWER than the good system, the mechanical voting machines.
cited:
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/aug/17/state-election-computers-overwhelmed/
related:
Abortion Friendly Republican Candidates on Primary Ballot
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/olympia/2007/may/20/gop-moderates-convene-in-wenatchee/
1)Paper ballots,
2) hand counted at close of day, 8PM,
3) at the precinct,
4) required to be done in the presence of bystanders.
That has been the law in other states which was the most accurate for liberty, the most deadly to tyranny!
We need to enact this by referendum, over the protestations of either party!
The count is verified by witnesses of both parties, before being sent to the county offices and posted. Just like having a count, a re-count, and another re-count, for the price of one election. All over and done, wrapped up in a neat accurate bow, ready to be announced by morning.
Any who protest that it is too much work, should find their protestations answered only by silence. It would be a shameful thought let alone comment. It is entirely rhetorical!
Such complaints beg only the answer of slavery, for they are not of those who stand on the walls and are vigilant. They are of those who see no evil, hear no evil, and in the end become serfs, with cool toys.
Such are those who would lick the chains which will rest heavy upon them.
Such an attitude has been long ago addressed to perfection by the founders… on many occasions.
The election finished by 9 or 11 PM, or 1 AM, is of no concern, for, the election finished… liberty and statesmen will rise up, and tyrants will fall!
So be it when freemen shall fight…!
JSBach, who would tackle this referendum? Any ideas? I wonder if Clint’s campaign would do this? He has an army of supporters. ???
I don’t think a referendum will do the trick unless we can apply effective pressure to enough state legislators.
Referendum Bill is the term used in the State of Washington to refer to a legislatively-referred state statute. These are statutes that the Washington State Legislature votes to put on the ballot, where the state’s voters can accept or reject it.
From the Secretary of State’s website:
“There are two types of referenda:
* Referendum Measures are laws recently passed by the Legislature that are placed on the ballot because of petitions signed by voters. [petitions must be filed within 90 days of the legislation being passed]
* Referendum Bills are proposed laws referred to the voters by the Legislature.”
[http://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/referenda_2009.aspx]