Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, August 5, 2009
Homo R-71: More Invalid Signatures
Posted by Dominic Holden on Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 6:02 PM
At the current rate election workers are disqualifying petition signatures for anti-gay Referendum 71, the measure will fail to qualify for the ballot. In their fourth day of counting, officials counted 6,140 petition signatures, finding that, of those, only 5,268 were valid. That calculates to an error rate of 14.2 percent.
Referendum backers turned in 137,689 signatures on July 25, and they need 120,577 valid signatures to qualify for the ballot. The referendum needs an error rate of less than 12.4 percent to make it to the general election.
Thus far, 23,457 names have been checked, 20,335 accepted and 3,122 rejected—which is total error rate of 13.31 percent.
“That is about one percent under water,” says secretary of state’s office spokesman David Ammons. Most of the invalid signatures were disqualified because the signer's name did not appear on state voter rolls.
1
If this same percentage of rejected signatures were to continue through the rest of the count, the Referendum would fail by 1214 signatures. Yesterday's percentage would have had it fail by 778 signatures.
2
It's kind of an emotional roller-coaster hoping for the failure of something that, if successful, I must then vote to approve.
3
Check out the video at the bottom of this:
http://protectmarriagewa.com/
Looks like the Church Lady, right?
http://protectmarriagewa.com/
Looks like the Church Lady, right?
4
@3 - OMG those are elected officials!?!? shills.
Also, look at the numbers they put up:
""""Sponsors, a campaign group called Protect Marriage Washington, submitted 137,689 signatures. That is roughly 14 percent more than the bare minimum, 120,577, required to secure a place on the November ballot.
This is clearly good news for our side. We do, however, have a long ways to go with the count and we will need to maintain an error rate below 14% to prevail. Please keep this matter in your prayers over the weekend"'''''
They couldn't even get the math right! hahahahaha
Also, look at the numbers they put up:
""""Sponsors, a campaign group called Protect Marriage Washington, submitted 137,689 signatures. That is roughly 14 percent more than the bare minimum, 120,577, required to secure a place on the November ballot.
This is clearly good news for our side. We do, however, have a long ways to go with the count and we will need to maintain an error rate below 14% to prevail. Please keep this matter in your prayers over the weekend"'''''
They couldn't even get the math right! hahahahaha
6
I keep thinking these R71 posts are about the new Michael Minna restaurant:
http://www.michaelmina.net/rn74/
http://www.michaelmina.net/rn74/
7
That's it, keep telling the operatives which you have strategically placed, to keep on doing the dirty math that they seem to be doing day by day to disenfranchise as many people as they can.
Drip, Drip, Drip... Throwing out as many votes as they can, slowly and meticulously so as to not raise too many suspicions.
With such criminal methods of course you'll disqualify most of the signers.
Pat yourselves on the back cause any difference that previously existed between you and regimes like the one in Iran has been greatly diminish.
Drip, Drip, Drip... Throwing out as many votes as they can, slowly and meticulously so as to not raise too many suspicions.
With such criminal methods of course you'll disqualify most of the signers.
Pat yourselves on the back cause any difference that previously existed between you and regimes like the one in Iran has been greatly diminish.
9
Actually, LC's post should be read by Shatner as beat poetry. I think it would work as well as the Palin-isms.
11
That's it,
keep telling
the operatives
which
you have
strategically placed, to
keep on doing the dirty
math that
they seem to be doing day by day
to disenfranchise
as
many people
as
they can.
>bongo solo<
Drip, Drip, Drip...
Throwing out
as many votes as they can,
slowly and meticulously
so
as to not raise too
many
..suspicions.
With
such
criminal
methods
of course
you'll disqualify
most
of the signers.
>skin flute solo<
Pat yourselves
on the back cause
any difference that
previously existed between
you and regimes like
the one
in Iran
has been
greatly.....
....diminish.
SNAP*SNAP*SNAP
I guess it does work, but god it was painful.
keep telling
the operatives
which
you have
strategically placed, to
keep on doing the dirty
math that
they seem to be doing day by day
to disenfranchise
as
many people
as
they can.
>bongo solo<
Drip, Drip, Drip...
Throwing out
as many votes as they can,
slowly and meticulously
so
as to not raise too
many
..suspicions.
With
such
criminal
methods
of course
you'll disqualify
most
of the signers.
>skin flute solo<
Pat yourselves
on the back cause
any difference that
previously existed between
you and regimes like
the one
in Iran
has been
greatly.....
....diminish.
SNAP*SNAP*SNAP
I guess it does work, but god it was painful.
14
as I said last night...
It's all part of the homosexual agenda to infect your kids with teh gay. We want to get into schools and church youth groups to teach proper oral sex techniques and rimming. We want your kids LOVESCHILD!! Nothing will stop us.
By the way, why do conservatives want to get rid of all gay people? It's not as if we were born via gay sex. Obviously the vast majority of LGBT's parents are straight or had straight sex. So even if you managed you get your way and eliminate all current homosexuals, new ones would be produced by straight people. The only way you can put an end to the "homosexual indentity" is to stop breeding! You fucking heterosexuals are the "problem".
It's all part of the homosexual agenda to infect your kids with teh gay. We want to get into schools and church youth groups to teach proper oral sex techniques and rimming. We want your kids LOVESCHILD!! Nothing will stop us.
By the way, why do conservatives want to get rid of all gay people? It's not as if we were born via gay sex. Obviously the vast majority of LGBT's parents are straight or had straight sex. So even if you managed you get your way and eliminate all current homosexuals, new ones would be produced by straight people. The only way you can put an end to the "homosexual indentity" is to stop breeding! You fucking heterosexuals are the "problem".
16
Protect Marriage Washington
Talking Points:
http://tinyurl.com/lq8qdf
"Homosexuals have a right to form meaningful relationships. They do not have a right to redefine marriage for all of us. Marriage is not a special interest!"
Reasonable...I'd say!
Talking Points:
http://tinyurl.com/lq8qdf
"Homosexuals have a right to form meaningful relationships. They do not have a right to redefine marriage for all of us. Marriage is not a special interest!"
Reasonable...I'd say!
17
How many signatures do they check? All of them?
In CA they use a % somewhere in the 25% range. Just curious if someone has the answer.
In CA they use a % somewhere in the 25% range. Just curious if someone has the answer.
19
@17 they will check all of them because so few above the minimum were submitted. if lots of signatures had been submitted, they probably would have sampled rather than check each one.
20
Dominic, do you have the August 5 numbers for Dupes, Missing, Not Found and No Match? They didn't post those for some reason.
Reminder: although prospects are looking dim for the referendum, we're not home free yet. Contact WAFST.org - Washington Families Standing Together - to see how you can help prepare for the ballot. Or heck, just send them a contribution. They've done an amazing job preparing for all contingencies.
Reminder: although prospects are looking dim for the referendum, we're not home free yet. Contact WAFST.org - Washington Families Standing Together - to see how you can help prepare for the ballot. Or heck, just send them a contribution. They've done an amazing job preparing for all contingencies.
21
Do they actually check each and every signature? or do they just take a sampling of the submitted total and check them?
22
Hey Rene D...
We're not asking to "redefine marriage for all of us." We're asking the state to extend the same legal rights and responsibilities to same gender couples.
Your church defines marriage as between a man and a woman? Great! I won't go to your church for a blessing. You get to keep defining marriage your way, but can't impose your bias on me.
People like you argued against redefining marriage to allow interracial marriage. You are on the losing side of history...and morality.
The state has no business picking favorites when it comes to relationships.
We're not asking to "redefine marriage for all of us." We're asking the state to extend the same legal rights and responsibilities to same gender couples.
Your church defines marriage as between a man and a woman? Great! I won't go to your church for a blessing. You get to keep defining marriage your way, but can't impose your bias on me.
People like you argued against redefining marriage to allow interracial marriage. You are on the losing side of history...and morality.
The state has no business picking favorites when it comes to relationships.
24
George Bakan is petitioning the Secretary of State to accept all non-duplicate signatures in the comments on the SoS blog.
And then, SGN can have a big story to chase! And heartbreak! And sorrow! And pictures of crying lesbian couples!
And then, SGN can have a big story to chase! And heartbreak! And sorrow! And pictures of crying lesbian couples!
26
Heterosexuals, screaming their heads off about morality while condoning the abuse, degradation, dehumanization, murder, rape and vile mistreatment of THEIR VERY OWN GAY & LESBIAN CHILDREN and further encouraging our Government to participate in such gross abuse.
Morality indeed, Heterosexuals.
Morality indeed.
Morality indeed, Heterosexuals.
Morality indeed.
28
@7 "With such criminal methods of course you'll disqualify most of the signers."
Which is it, LC, that you have a problem with: the right of the people to make laws or the obligation of the government to follow those laws? If they threw out the standard 14%, you'd be upset because it wouldn't pass. And now you're upset because they're following the rules and checking each signature? If you can't vote, you can't sign a petition. You want us to believe that you're a stickler for the rules, and yet you'd have the rules thrown out when they suit you? I'm afraid life doesn't really work that way - even if that's how you live your faith.
PS – REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY.
Which is it, LC, that you have a problem with: the right of the people to make laws or the obligation of the government to follow those laws? If they threw out the standard 14%, you'd be upset because it wouldn't pass. And now you're upset because they're following the rules and checking each signature? If you can't vote, you can't sign a petition. You want us to believe that you're a stickler for the rules, and yet you'd have the rules thrown out when they suit you? I'm afraid life doesn't really work that way - even if that's how you live your faith.
PS – REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY.
30
Lurleen @ 20) Ammons says that of the 872 rejected signatures on August 5, "23 were duplicate signatures, 71 had no match between the petition signature and the signature on file with the state voter registration database, 758 did not show up on the database as registered voters, and 20 people were at least temporarily not counted because the database didn't include a signature that could be used for checking. All or most of the latter category could be eventually shifted over to the 'accepted' stack when their home counties report back with a legible signature."
31
Let me see, invalid signature?
1) Non-voters? Well that's pretty easy to comprehend.
2) Duplicates? That’s even easier.
3) No valid signature on file? Well that will likely be cleared up by the county and many will later be found valid but still that represents only .3%
4) Maybe you have a problem when signatures don’t match which represent just under 1% so here is the procedure:
In the case of a petition some times people will sign for their spouse and family members but that is illegal and one woman was actually prosecuted for voting by mail for her son.
1) Non-voters? Well that's pretty easy to comprehend.
2) Duplicates? That’s even easier.
3) No valid signature on file? Well that will likely be cleared up by the county and many will later be found valid but still that represents only .3%
4) Maybe you have a problem when signatures don’t match which represent just under 1% so here is the procedure:
When the signer’s voter registration record is found a digital image of the signature on the voter’s registration card is displayed on the screen. The staff person compares the image from the voter registration file to the signature on the petition. If it matches, the signature is accepted.
If the staff person determines the signature does not match, the signature is sent to a senior signature verification staff member for a final determination.
We will go through this process for every single signature submitted for Ref. 71...non-matching signature, our process is final as far as we are concerned once such a determination is made. there are observers from both camps watching the operation.
In the case of a petition some times people will sign for their spouse and family members but that is illegal and one woman was actually prosecuted for voting by mail for her son.
32
Yes that's right Loveschild once we push the gay agenda through we are coming for your fatherless, bbq chip, purple Kool-Aid kids. Maybe once they are converted to teh ghey they may become less likely to become a black on black crime statistic.
33
@7:
Dear, please pull the Buddy Jesus Vibrator out of your cooch before you post here. It's making it harder for the rest of us to understand your post.
Dear, please pull the Buddy Jesus Vibrator out of your cooch before you post here. It's making it harder for the rest of us to understand your post.
34
#24 - Hardly. You have created your own version of things.
I asked a question as have others about the topic of signature match and what a signer might do if they feel they have been unfairly excluded.
No hysteria, I think there is a need for clear information about every possible ramification of this process, to the nits eyebrow as they say.
I asked via the Secretary of State blog so the answer would be public.
If the other side is short by a few hundred, rest assured, they will be using any resource to challenge the process. Clear early answers seem to me to be to our long term advantage.
By the way, Domenic Holden, Stranger writer, addressed part of the question. He mentions above that as part of the final process, counties will be double checking local records about signature match issues. So the topic is on many good minds.
George Bakan
I asked a question as have others about the topic of signature match and what a signer might do if they feel they have been unfairly excluded.
No hysteria, I think there is a need for clear information about every possible ramification of this process, to the nits eyebrow as they say.
I asked via the Secretary of State blog so the answer would be public.
If the other side is short by a few hundred, rest assured, they will be using any resource to challenge the process. Clear early answers seem to me to be to our long term advantage.
By the way, Domenic Holden, Stranger writer, addressed part of the question. He mentions above that as part of the final process, counties will be double checking local records about signature match issues. So the topic is on many good minds.
George Bakan
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Hating People Doesn't Make Them Thinner by Jen Graves
-
Los Angeles Gay Bar Bans Bachelorette Parties Until Marriage Equality Is Attained by David Schmader
-
Fill in the Blank by Grant Brissey
-
This Reminds Me of the Great Calculator Scare of the Late '70s/Early '80s by David Schmader
-
Idiot Tries to Defend Bigoted Anti-Gay-Marriage Preacher on Anderson Cooper by Paul Constant
-
Six Moms with Too Much Time on Their Hands and a Shitty Website Decide to Fight Gay Superheroes by Paul Constant
-
Why Mayor McGinn's Wife Canceled Her Family's Seattle Times Subscription by Eli Sanders
-
What the Hell Is Wrong With Seattle's Pride Parade? by Dominic Holden
-
The Saturday Morning News by Unpaid Intern
-
NYC Man Ticketed for Not Riding in the Bike Lane by Jonathan Golob
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (35) RSS