Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
|
Data
trend with
a margin of error +/- 7%, based upon the numbers listed, and
zero attachments showing the actual data.
That's the whole point, Anti: lots of allegations, zero actual evidence presented ... if Walkers supporters actually come up with some verifiable numbers, it takes away their ability to allege "massive fraud". So they don't present any numbers.
Nobody ever maintained all the signatures would be valid (they never are in recalls, the normal disallow rate is 18%, or nearly 1 out of 5), that's why so many sigs were submitted when only half-a-million were needed, and they were pre-vetted before submission to get the rate down to 1-5%.
But the calls that many of those signatures are fraudulent is simply partisan bullshiat, so far unsupported by any actual evidence. So until they come up with actual evidence, they probably should simply stop making the allegations as if it were fact.
Quote:
|
State Democratic Party Chairman Mike Tate said it's absurd that Republicans have been complaining that the Walker recall petitions were laced with fraud but didn't challenge a single signature.
|
That's right. Not even one signature was challenged, even with Walker getting a 20-day extension, and allegations that up to 20% of signatures were "faked". Considering that Walker could have gone to court for an additional time extension, based upon the error rate they found, why didn't Walker do that?
His excuse is, "oh,well, there are at least a half-million good sigs anyway". Yeah - but that doesn't mean you get to continue to allege "massive fraud" without any evidence regarding the others.
The GAB has three weeks to review them. We'll see if the GAB can throw out some of those signatures, and at least provide us with an independent error rate.