Machines aren't the only incompetent vote counters it would seem.

Incorrect results are incorrect results, whether made by machine or not.

They need better training and better processes in Iowa too.

It was a false result that was not reversed in time to alleviate damage to one candidate and false victory to another.

That is not professional IMO.

I don't agree. We are human. Mistakes happen. The issue is whether mistakes can be discovered and whether they get corrected. That's what happened here.

That's also what NPR completely failed to understand in a shoddy report this morning, which struck me as an unpaid commercial for electronic voting machines. You can listen to it at 8 precinct vote totals missing from Iowa caucuses. There's a somewhat better blog entry at http://tinyurl.com/7ssgzh2, which has the added attraction of comments.

I think this whole idea of declaring a "winner" in a primary where the delegates are distributed proportionally, is a farce. There is no "victory" until someone gets the nomination. I would argue that a result with 2 candaditas separated by less than 1% of the vote should be declared a "statistical tie".

It's too bad about those eight missing precincts:

http://caucuses.desmoine...caucus-count-unresolved/

- Tom

TomR said @4:

It's too bad about those eight missing precincts

They're not "missing" at all. The public election night count is available for them, as it was on election night. Only thing missing is the paper "Form 'E'" from each one which is supposed to be turned in by the county within two weeks after the caucus to "certify" the reported results.

However, even if the numbers from those eight precincts are added in to the certified totals, Santorum still wins, as noted in the article above.

Stewart Wechsler @ XX said:

I would argue that a result with 2 candaditas separated by less than 1% of the vote should be declared a "statistical tie".

Why? Shouldn't the candidate with the most verifiable votes counted be declared the winner? Is there a new rule in elections that now you have to win by more than 1% or some such nonsense?

Ricky Santorum ought to be the leading supporter of Democracy's Gold Standard.

Maybe Brad can cop an interview with Ricky about this issue.

Only one way to describe this unless the national and Utah media get some integrity:

Old news.

This definitely proves that hand-marked, hand counted ballots work and that's a BIG story in a time when we have been wasting billions on hackable voting machines.

Brad pointed out:

However, even if the numbers from those eight precincts are added in to the certified totals, Santorum still wins, as noted in the article above.

Shall we do the Ground Hog Day dance and say they have the results correct now?

If so, this means that, in elections, if hand counted paper ballots are used, then counted in public, we still have a problem Houston.

Holy grail mentality sets an ideology on a pedestal then bends, molds, and conforms "the facts" to that ideology no matter what our lying eyes and ears tell us.

The only holy grail in electioneering, it would seem, happens to be honesty and competence, not technique.

This was demonstrated long ago by a Communist election engineer, as we all know:

Voters decide nothing, those who count the votes decide everything.

(Stalin, paraphrased). We have witnessed this to be true over and over again, since "those who count the votes" ends up being those who have "the say."

It is just as true to say that if machines could not be hacked, and were programmed honestly, those machines would count as accurately as an honest person counting paper ballots for an honest election official who had no agenda.

The problem is that both scenarios are fictional, so any ideology that turns either one into the holy grail is likewise fictional.

Which also means the better exercise has always been to fix the broken system with honesty and competence, the rarest of election matériel.

Dredd sedd @ 9:

Holy grail mentality sets an ideology on a pedestal then bends, molds, and conforms "the facts" to that ideology no matter what our lying eyes and ears tell us.

The only holy grail in electioneering, it would seem, happens to be honesty and competence, not technique.

It's disappointing that after all these years here, Dredd, you still don't seem to get it.

Your "holy grail" of "honesty and competence" of, presumably, election officials will never be. Worse, even if you might someday find your "holy grail" where election officials are 100% honest and competent, it does little good unless the citizenry know those officials are 100% honest and competent.

How does any of that occur? By assuring that the citizenry themselves can oversee every aspect of the tabulation, as in Iowa, where the reporting (not counting) errors are a tribute to the system, as opposed to an indictment of it. It's remarkable that you still don't seem to understand that, as many years as you have been here.

the better exercise has always been to fix the broken system with honesty and competence, the rarest of election matériel.

And, again, I'll ask: No matter how "honest" or "competent", how are the voters to know that's the case, unless they can see so themselves with their very own eyeballs?

That worked in Iowa. But you are more than welcome to keep searching for your holy grail, even if, once found (and it can never be), you'll find nothing holy about it.

Brad, As a society hoping to become democratic we can learn from humanity's universal Economic Democracy heritage. Under the present perverted system, No one is openly in charge, only the puppeteers. The USA & Canada are frauds from the beginning as genocidal colonies first against aboriginal peoples here and then against the world. More should be aware that; we vote everytime we spend a dollar. First Nations here and 'indigenous' (Latin = 'self-generating') peoples worldwide were structured upon progressive ownership in the Economic Democracy of their diverse specialized Production Societies and Extended housing. Individual economic empowerment, economies of scale in multihome housing and communities exercising a critical 'power of the people' (Greek meaning of 'democracy') right from the 'tree-roots' indigenous communities worldwide made for a sustainable democracy. https://sites.google.com...omy/8-economic-democracy

Dredd's message seems to be: give up.

We have a dude over on OneUtah who has had dozens of names and sometimes even shows up on the same thread with two and sometimes three names. The message never changes: give up.

Dredd: give up.

Hand marked, hand counted ballots work and Iowa proved it.

I think this post is a VERY big deal.

Here's my take.

Greatly appreciate your take, Larry! Thanks much and, most importantly, for keeping up the fight out there.

Keep making noise!

So the voters won huh? Tell that to the 8 districts whose voices will never officially be heard. I think we should start a petition to recall the votes in Iowa all together. No recount, but a re-vote. It's only the United States Presidential election at stake so I guess it can slide. Right? Those 8 precincts don't REALLY matter do they? As long as it doesn't happen to you then it can be over looked. This is not the country that I studied about in text books. What all those incredible patriots died for is slipping away people. It's time for a peaceful, but forceful revolution. We can do better than Iran. WE the people can WIN. The voters did not win ANYTHING. I don't care who you vote for. It's the act of meaningful voting that matters. Otherwise we are in an oligarchy. This is treason and we deserve what we get if no one will stand with me and let not those warriors die in vain.

Ben hyperventilated @ 15 -

So the voters won huh? Tell that to the 8 districts whose voices will never officially be heard. I think we should start a petition to recall the votes in Iowa all together. No recount, but a re-vote.

Why? Why should the entire state be disenfranchised because several GOP county chairpersons forgot to send their Form E's to certify what had been counted publicly in their precincts on Election Night?

We can not only discern the intent of the voters in those 8 precincts, but we can also verify that the results are correct (or incorrect, if that's the case) since there were others there witnesses the counting and recording what was tallied on Election Night.

As I note in the article above, and in it's UPDATE, with or without the votes from those 8 precincts, Santorum is the winner. So what's your beef, exactly?

It's only the United States Presidential election at stake so I guess it can slide. Right? Those 8 precincts don't REALLY matter do they?

Well, they don't "matter" as to who won or lost. But yes, every vote matters (or should) and the intent of every single voter in Iowa's caucuses can be accounted for. So, again, what's your beef?

This is treason and we deserve what we get if no one will stand with me and let not those warriors die in vain.

I will join you in the fight for every legal voter who wishes to vote being allowed to vote. I will join you in the fight to make sure those votes are counted, counted accurately, and counted transparently so that we know they've been counted and counted accurately.

As to the "treason" you bloviate about here, sorry, I'm failing to see anything like it. You may wish to educate yourself about the real problems of electoral integrity before firing your first (or, I guess now, second) shot.