Re: statistical study after next Tues election

From: Alan Dechert <alan_at_openvotingconsortium_dot_org>
Date: Wed Nov 03 2004 - 13:01:40 CST

FWIW, I was quoted a few weeks ago like so:

     "Dechert thinks things will go relatively well with
     the current level of scrutiny. 'We hope that we
     don't get into a disputed election decided by the
     Supreme Court,' he says. 'But we hope we would
     still find enough problems so that the whole thing
     isn't swept under the carpet.'"


I don't think it's in our interest to try to overturn the result. However,
it *is* in our interest to point out whatever problems that did occur.

Alan Dechert

> Please get real. This is not a "fraudulent" result. If there is any
> issue, it is not with the voting systems, but rather with the
> registration systems. Do you really think there was 3.5 million votes
> incorrectly recorded? Please understand that the results that we have
> seen are due to the people speaking. The results are very close to the
> general polls (not "exit" polls, but the actual polls) that came out
> Monday night and Tuesday morning (see
> Regards,
> Joel
> Patricia Gracian wrote:
> >Are you working with ?
> >If not, you should be.
> >Someone has to contest this election and all of its fraudulent results.
> >We cannot afford another 4 years.
> >We cannot let the thugs steal this election. They stole the last one.
> >
> >
> >
> >
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Tue Nov 30 23:17:05 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Nov 30 2004 - 23:17:43 CST