Comments on: Wisconsin Supreme Court Recount – Day 1

By: steveegg

steveegg — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 21:49:17 +0000

In reply to John Washburn. I believe I covered that at the time. Now, if the municipalities weren't so dependent on an obselete machine (or Sequoia/Dominion and the Election Assistance Commission weren't so slow in approving an updated software package that would allow simultaneous storage of the results from an election and its recount), it wouldn't have been an issue. While you're here, how about some commentary on the "anomalies" (some of which are closer to "irregularities") of election-night procedures being uncovered by the recount.

By: John Washburn

John Washburn — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 21:35:01 +0000

RE: … both campaigns asked for and received a court order for the hand…

A more accurate reporting would be:
Both campaigns objected to the GAB plan to destroy the April 5, 2011 election data, set the election results in memory to zero, and replace the April 5, election programming with programming specific to the recount. The Judge agreed with the objection and denied the GAB motion to destroy the April 5, 2011 data residing on the optech Eagle memory cards. The 4 parties (Judge Reiss, the GAB, the Prosser campaign, and the Kloppenburg campaign) then agreed to hand counting jurisdictions which used Optech Eagles; 31 counties in whole or in part.

The GAB is not getting enough flack for their near-obsessive desire to destroy electronic election records. The SC recount is just latest manifestation of the GAB need to erase.

By: steveegg

steveegg — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:31:54 +0000

In reply to John. Since the case would involve Prosser, even if it reached the Supreme Court before August 1, he would need to recuse himself. Moreover, the Court typically does not have a July session, though that would affect the budget repair bill more so than this. This case would almost certainly be heard on an "emergency" basis because of the August 1 start date of the new term, but would result in a 3-3 deadlock.

By: John

John — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 14:17:46 +0000

In reply to PaulM. The swearing in of the new Supreme Court Justice is not until August so it is extremely unlikely that Kloppenberg can drag on the recount process in the courts for 3 1/2 months. Prosser is currently a Supreme Court Justice so the case would have to be delayed from being in the Supreme Court until after early August, also extremely unlikely.

By: PaulM

PaulM — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 01:17:03 +0000

In reply to steveegg.

Cool. HotAir promoted your link from Green Room to main page, which is where I first found it. What did all this do to your web stats ? Just curious …. I have a few sites.

I wonder if the SC is going to wait for all this to be over before addressing the Sumi case and related filings ? I know Walker filed with them directly in addition to the Sumi appeal that the Appellate level cert’d up to SC.

If so – by law Kloppy can take the recount to court, drag that out, then appeal it, drag that out, then appeal THAT ( to SC, where Prosser would have to recuse ) – a total of 4 more bites at the apple.

Then if she loses, and Sumi loses, the unions have had 4 more months to sneak in contracts – what happens to them ? WHo knows ?

Some of my ‘Wisconsin’ links for you – you probably have them already

http://volokh.com/ – Jonathan Adler blogs on major Prosser v Kloppy events, quite a few Wisconsin threads already

http://www.channel3000.com/politics/index.html
http://www.jsonline.com/
http://www.wisbar.org/
http://www.wispolitics.com/
http://budget.wispolitics.com/
http://www.1-888-no-union.com/aboutunions/tenfactsaboutunions.html
https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/35/I/095/1

By: steveegg

steveegg — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:21:23 +0000

In reply to PaulM. I'll have new posts both here and in the Hot Air Green Room each time I update the spreadsheet (most-likely daily). In fact, assuming I can ignore a splitting headache after standing near a couple of unionistas at a Paul Ryan town hall, the Day 2 post should be up here within the hour and at HA shortly thereafter. I'm just scanning some outstate sources to see if there's any significant news out there.

By: PaulM

PaulM — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 00:09:11 +0000

In reply to steveegg. Yeh, I saw GAB's blog entry about that. If you happen to start a little email notification list 'new SS is up', pls add me to it :-)

By: steveegg

steveegg — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 23:07:25 +0000

In reply to PaulM. Thanks. I thought about doing that, but given I plan on creating new worksheets to reflect the daily GAB runs, and the fact that some counties are feeding GAB partial results from a particular reporting unit, it isn't feasable at this point for me to include that particular feature. Also, I just learned that at least one of the spreadsheets GAB created yesterday had signicant errors.

By: PaulM

PaulM — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 22:48:06 +0000

Re – the spreadsheet – it would be nifty to add a second page that shows only ‘reports that have changed due to recount’, and repeats the line for that reporting entity, in order from ‘most change’ to ‘least change’.

I know this can be done by linking to the first worksheet and doing a compare, using your columns with something like

=IF((ABS(L14)+ABS(M14)+ABS(N14))>0,0,1)

where the True answer would show the line, ‘False’ would not show a line

Just an idea. Great SS, I look forward to following it daily !

By: Tracking the Wisconsin Supreme Court Recount – Day 1 | DAILY WISCONSIN

Tracking the Wisconsin Supreme Court Recount – Day 1 | DAILY WISCONSIN — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:37:57 +0000

[…] Via No Runny Eggs. […]