Benny Napoleon Won???

[Honky Tonk]

Yeah, except that's not what happened. What happened is that some of the temporary poll workers that the city hires apparently wrote down the write-in vote totals in numerals on the count sheets in their poll books, without showing the count in hash marks.

The City Clerk approved the vote totals. But then the County Clerk threw out all the write-in votes that were totaled in numerals but not counted with hash marks in the poll books and submitted new vote totals. The County Board of Canvassers basically refused to certify the vote totals altogether, and threw the whole mess into Lansing's lap.

That sounds even stupiderer....

[Zacha341]

I am certain that aspect is a percentage of the Duggan votes, but not all....

...or else McNamara Machine Duggan was able to get to the crooked preachers, whose flocks will do as they're told at the voting booth.

That's all you need to win in Detroit: Win over the crooked preachers. Kwame did it; so did Duggan, spawned from the same slimy political machine as Kwame.

[rex]

Im not surprised by much anymore. Is it somehow more complicated than adding votes? This is 2nd grade math btw. Whoever messed this up is either corrupted or incompetent but 1 way or the other they should be replaced with people that can add and follow simple instructions.

[SWMAP]

Not too many Detroit citizens are adequately educated if you beleive the research. The pool of competance must be pretty small.

[nativegirl]

Im not surprised by much anymore. Is it somehow more complicated than adding votes? This is 2nd grade math btw. Whoever messed this up is either corrupted or incompetent but 1 way or the other they should be replaced with people that can add and follow simple instructions.

This is why I quit! I had suggested continous aptitude testing especially for the supervisors [[Chairpersons, Sr. Chair, Superpollworkers) because it is their jobs, among other things, to make sure that the write-ins are tallied properly. I was working in a precinct in which the Sr. Chair refused to do ANY work. She came there for one thing only: to collect a check. It took 2 years to get rid of her! By then my hubby told me to quit becaue the commute and hours coupled by other things took a toll on me.

[Honky Tonk]

One thing about this forum, you get some REAL insite into the inner workings of a LOT of things. Much better then Faux 2.

[rex]

I petition to reinstate nativegirl
entire situation is hysterical

[downtownguy]

And here is perhaps a little reason for County Clerk Garrett to feel some animus towards the Duggan family:
http://www.freep.com/article/2012080...-against-clerk

And then there's this, from Laura Berman's column in the News today.

Conspiracy theorists point to Wayne County Clerk Cathy Garrett’s relationship with AFSCME chief Al Garrett, a Benny Napoleon stalwart. They are sister and brother.

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...#ixzz2cigEXefG

[Locke09]

And then there's this, from Laura Berman's column in the News today.

Right. Deflect attention away from the incompetent City Clerk who did not ensure proper training of her inspectors and onto the County Clerk who cannot order the Board of Canvassers to do anything.

An attorney from the County Clerk's office did inform the Canvassers that they did not have the authority to recount the votes. The City Clerk said they did. First, the recount wouldn't be necessary if the discrepancy and inability to audit what was done hadn't existed in the first place.

Second, Cathy Garrett cited the state law that prohibits the Canvassers from recounting. The ballots cannot be touched unless some of them were missed [[not counted in the first place). In that case, the Canvassers would have the City come in and count what was missed. Since this was not the situation, per a reasonable interpretation of the law, the Canvassers did the only thing they could do, other than certify the lower numbers.

The rule is MCL168.823.2

Why is it that the City Clerk never seems to know the law? Why is it that so many others seem to think the law and rules don't matter in this election? Why do we have to keep making so many exceptions because of failures on the City Clerk's part? What is served by continuing to prop Janice Winfrey up?

Not talking about you downtownguy, but the media, the state and others.

[4V4DMD]

The real problem lies with the county board of canvassers to not certify this election because of missing hashtags isn't proper.

Having said that Winfrey has made many errors.

[Locke09]

The real problem lies with the county board of canvassers to not certify this election because of missing hashtags isn't proper.

Having said that Winfrey has made many errors.

They cannot certify what they cannot validate. They cannot validate work the inspectors did not do. They are not the "real problem." Even the State admits that they ultimately did the right thing.

They are hash marks "|" not hashtags "#"

[motz]

The real problem lies with the county board of canvassers to not certify this election because of missing hashtags isn't proper.

Having said that Winfrey has made many errors.

The whole lot of them are incompetent. This isn't just a "Janice is stupid" thing, this is a "the entire system is near-nonfunctional". Kick 'em all out, put in some people that know what they are doing, on every level. The entire hash mark things needs to be resolved as well, they are both numbers after all.

[4V4DMD]

They cannot certify what they cannot validate. They cannot validate work the inspectors did not do. They are not the "real problem." Even the State admits that they ultimately did the right thing.

They are hash marks "|" not hashtags "#"

Wait, clearly the hash marks [[excuse me) were not put in there but the numerical numbers were. There seems to be a clear understanding of the simplicity of the problem so why not accept the tallies? The numbers were there. Seems like a common sense thing.

If procedure should take over all else, then the media release was absolutely bungled. They didn't put their communications person on it or they f'ed up explaining it to the media.

Please share the link where the state says the canvassers did the correct thing.

[Locke09]

Wait, clearly the hash marks [[excuse me) were not put in there but the numerical numbers were. There seems to be a clear understanding of the simplicity of the problem so why not accept the tallies? The numbers were there. Seems like a common sense thing.

If procedure should take over all else, then the media release was absolutely bungled. They didn't put their communications person on it or they f'ed up explaining it to the media.

Please share the link where the state says the canvassers did the correct thing.

Actually, you can't "tally" without using some kind of mark, because that is what tally implies. You can count by creating a stack of something and just counting off. You can count by trying to keep track in your head. In each case you would just put down your total [[Roman numeral, Arabic, doesn't matter). But tally implies a one-to-one mark of some kind for each item. Then the tally marks are "counted", and the total of the tally marks, with each representing a ballot is recorded.

Now if there are no tally marks, how do the canvassers validate the count? You might as well tell them to just approve whatever numbers the city clerk sends over. Can't just add the tally marks after the fact, that amounts to the same thing and makes the whole canvass process irrelevant.

I'm concerned about the ability of most leaders in this state, not just Detroit, to interpret law. The State Elections Director and the city clerk say the canvassers could have examined the ballots, but MCL168.823.2 says they can only examine ballots that were never counted - were missed [[actually they wouldn't do it, they would call the city in to do it). Other than that, it says the ballots cannot be removed from the box.

P.S. In the interest of accuracy, can't find that quote from the state and don't feel like re-reading all the articles to see if I can or if I misinterpreted.

[Meddle]

Actually, you can't "tally" without using some kind of mark, because that is what tally implies. You can count by creating a stack of something and just counting off. You can count by trying to keep track in your head. In each case you would just put down your total [[Roman numeral, Arabic, doesn't matter). But tally implies a one-to-one mark of some kind for each item. Then the tally marks are "counted", and the total of the tally marks, with each representing a ballot is recorded.

Now if there are no tally marks, how do the canvassers validate the count? You might as well tell them to just approve whatever numbers the city clerk sends over. Can't just add the tally marks after the fact, that amounts to the same thing and makes the whole canvass process irrelevant.

How many times have Math teachers told their kids "Show Your Work!" ?

[Zacha341]

How they look: hash mark graffiti! Five, five........

[Locke09]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE

So now this might be decided by the courts.

I'm having a difficult time understanding why so many officials in Michigan cannot be bothered to read and properly interpret the law. Both the Detroit News and the Free Press have joined the State and the City Clerk in trying to roast Cathy Garrett. But she seems to be the only one among them who bothers reading the law - Public Act 116 of 1954 which governs elections. Unless there is some newer law that I haven't found yet:

1. The State Canvassers have nothing to do with canvassing for local elections. They definitely have no authority to open ballot boxes.

2. No one can do a "recount" of ballots already counted unless requested by a candidate, after certification has already taken place.

3. County canvassers can only count ballots that were "missed" by the city election inspectors. They can count them or have the City count them. But, they cannot touch ballots already counted and neither can the city - unless there is a request for a recount.

The State can claim this is not a recount all they want. If you count something that was already counted, it is a recount. Unless they want to claim that the City skipped 18000 ballots.

They should have done as the County Clerk advised. Certify the votes that could be certified, then let the candidates ask for a recount. They actually made this harder than it needed to be - provided the judge comes to the same conclusion I have.

[getmoore]

Ha Ha!

http://www.freep.com/article/2013083...-of-Canvassers

[Kimmiann]

If the city workers are the only ones allowed to touch the ballots, why not have them recount them now? I would imagine they've all figured out by now how it should have been done. The rest of the country has now gotten an inservice on it. This whole thing is ridiculous and I'd LOVE to see some common sense prevail for a change!
sigh...

[corktownyuppie]

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...text|FRONTPAGE

3. County canvassers can only count ballots that were "missed" by the city election inspectors. They can count them or have the City count them. But, they cannot touch ballots already counted and neither can the city - unless there is a request for a recount.

The State can claim this is not a recount all they want. If you count something that was already counted, it is a recount. Unless they want to claim that the City skipped 18000 ballots.

They should have done as the County Clerk advised. Certify the votes that could be certified, then let the candidates ask for a recount. They actually made this harder than it needed to be - provided the judge comes to the same conclusion I have.

The State cited Act 116 of 1954 in it's argument:

[[2) If the board of county canvassers fails to certify the results of any election for any officer or proposition within the 14 days as provided, the board of county canvassers shall immediately deliver to the secretary of the board of state canvassers all records and other information pertaining to the election. The board of state canvassers shall meet immediately and make the necessary determinations and certify the results within the 10 days immediately following the receipt of the records from the board of county canvassers. The cost of the canvass shall be borne by the county involved.

So there are tons of legal arguments here, and we can argue back and forth about what is or isn't a "necessary determination"...but here are my conclusions:

[[1) The vote is sacrosanct, and we arguing here about votes which are at risk of being invalidated not because of voter error, but because of canvassing error. Given a choice between a broad or narrow interpretation, I will err toward the broader.

[[2) From a political point of view, both candidates have publicly stated that wish for every vote to count. I will infer from that statement that they wish for every vote to count as soon as possible, not after several recounts, appeals, full due process, and a supreme court ruling.

[[3) The court essentially ruled that whether or not the counting was appropriate, the challenge is moot because we cannot undo it, and it is impossible to "fashion a remedy" to repair something that cannot be repaired. I'd argue that whether it can or cannot be repaired, I think the public good cannot be served by refusing to count votes that are undisputed just because of administrative error.

[[4) From a common sense point of view, I cannot see any argument in favor of certifying an election while ignoring information that is so substantial that it would both disenfranchise a large proportion of voters and also change the election results. If there is some good that can come from doing so, I'm open to hearing it.

Further, affiant sayeth not.
CTY