BradBlog covers RTA ballot counting

by David Safier
If you haven't gotten enough info already about the upcoming counting of the RTA ballots, or you want to hear the story from an Election Integrity perspective, Brad Friedman of BradBlog just posted an exhaustive discussion of recent events, from Goddard's taking the ballots to Phoenix to the politics of choosing observers, and everything in between.

Friedman, whose well known and nationally respected BradBlog is Election Integrity Central, has been covering the Pima County election integrity efforts from the beginning (My summaries of court proceedings a little more than a year ago were my first posts on BfA and were carried on BradBlog as well). He also believes that the RTA ballot count will reveal some kind of hanky panky. [See CORRECTION below.] He begins the post by mentioning the Franken/Coleman ballot fights in Minnesota and the ridiculously close results in last Tuesday's NY-20 U.S. Rep election, then says,

A hand count of thousands of paper ballots that could trump all of the above, at least in regards to national importance, will quietly occur next week in a highly-secured Maricopa County, AZ, facility, as part of a years-long criminal investigation.

As a friend and supporter of the election integrity battles, but an agnostic on the question of fraud in the RTA election, I hope the E.I. folks are preparing statements in the event the ballot count affirms the earlier election results. Not "someone got in there and rigged the ballots." But something that talks about the major improvements Pima County has made in the way it conducts and counts its elections, due to the tireless efforts of the E.I. folks. The rest of the state and the country have lots to learn from the reforms we've made right here, regardless of the results of the ballot counting.

And if the Goddard investigation reveals fraud, we'll be in for quite a ride.

CORRECTION: Note to self: be careful when you make an unwarranted assumption about a post by Brad Friedman. He sent me an email telling me I was wrong to say he believes there was "some kind of hanky panky" in the RTA election.

He's right. He said nothing of the kind in his post.

I'll let him talk for himself. Here's part of what he wrote in his email.

My personal position largely would seem to match your stated "agnostic" position on the matter. I have no idea whether there was "hanky panky" or not, as I've not personally seen either the databases nor the ballots. I strongly support the folks in Pima County (and everywhere, for that matter) having the right to find out if their elections were accurately counted, and applaud the efforts of the activists in Pima big time for their tireless efforts towards that end. I also roundly condemn those who have stopped them — and/or attempted to stop them — from finding transparency in their elections, so they can know whether there has been "hanky panky" or not in any election. Democracy demands no less.

Humblest, sincerest apologies, Brad. I'll be more careful next time, I promise.

Comments are closed.