So what do we have here?… The error supposedly is in Paradee’s absentee voting totals…. Supposedly a “republican operative” noticed an anomaly….. Looking fresh here is what we see…in the original totals…
In the first and second, Paradee’s absentee totals are double those of special interest’s candidate Thornburg.
In the third, the fourth, and the sixth, the absentee totals are rather even, (reflecting the district race as a whole which was within 31 votes)… In the fifth and seventh, Thornburgs absentee totals are two to one over those of the people’s candidate, Paradee…
One would, based on the totals, expect some districts to be more Republican and some to be more Democratic… Since these totals balance out and since the numbers match the closeness of the race, one would not appear to believe an anomaly had occurred.
So how do these absentee’s stack up with other races in that district? Let’s take a normal row house seat that has no political significance and see how those absentees stacked up based on party? Eeny, meeny, miny, moe…. I’ll choose…..Kent County Register of Wills…..
Here is how they stack up:
===========Representative District ================ Register of Wills========
District 1……………….62/32 ………………………………………………65/8
District 2……………….82/44 ………………………………………………94/6
District 3……………….27/32 ………………………………………………33/12
District 4……………….10/7 ………………………………………………… 9/9
District 5……………….13/24 ………………………………………………19/18
District 6……………….28/26………………………………………………..26/28
District 7……………….35/50………………………………………………..39/47
Now if we look at districts one and two… we see an anomaly of a different sort… IT APPEARS THAT PAM THORNBURG’S TOTALS WERE INFLATED BY 28 VOTES IN #1, AND BY 38 VOTES IN # 2.
NOTICE VERY LITTLE INFLATION IN ANY OF THE DEMOCRATIC TOTALS BETWEEN THE TWO RACES…
Something stinks….
This attempt to snatch an election away from the choice of the people needs to be investigated very closely indeed. If the evidence is there, fine, so be it… but apparently… it’s not…(see above)
After all,…. we all know who we are dealing with here…. and it’s not the party of “WE, The People.”
7 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 7, 2008 at 11:11 pm
rsmitty
Well, on a counter argument point…look at the absentee rate for Holy Girl vs Biden in those two ED’s…
UNITED STATES SENATOR
District Total BIDEN J O’DONNELL
DEMOCRATIC REPUBLICAN
M/C ABS TOTAL M/C ABS TOTAL
01-29 3203 1878 39 1917 1226 60 1286
02-29 2867 1742 58 1800 993 74 1067
03-29 1292 571 27 598 657 37 694
04-29 359 206 13 219 134 6 140
05-29 1090 479 19 498 574 18 592
06-29 1226 471 27 498 702 26 728
07-29 1201 519 55 574 591 36 627
RD Tot 11238 5866 238 6104 4877 257 5134
November 7, 2008 at 11:12 pm
rsmitty
Ungh…I tried to format that for you…sorry for the mess
November 7, 2008 at 11:35 pm
rsmitty
Actually, you may have brought up something unintentionally here. If you go through the absentee overall totals for the 29th, most races are totalling from 495 up to the low 500’s for absentees. Paradee-Thornburg’s race drops to 472 and the Clerk-of-the-Peace goes way down to 413. Maybe that race needs to be re-checked as well. Sure, it could have been skipped by a few (hence the varying overall totals by low numbers here and there), but a variance of almost 30 and then another one between 80 and 90? It seems that the entire 29th may need a full review.
November 8, 2008 at 1:35 am
Nancy Willing
ouch, this stuff makes my head hurt.
November 9, 2008 at 5:10 am
Nancy Willing
There is just something so wrong about this post title.
Pammy’s snatch.
December 18, 2008 at 10:02 pm
glen howell
I don’t get it. What is your point? So even if Thornburg did “steal” the election as (I guess) you are implying, is that going to change anything? Honestly, what exactly is your point?
She (Pam) was as surprised as anyone. What are you accusing her of now?
December 19, 2008 at 10:30 am
kavips
Glen.
Read.