Stolen election in Alaska? Five reasons why that accusation is premature.

by: Celtic Diva

Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 14:30

(Celtic Diva's Blue Oasis is one of Alaska's leading blogs.  I'm HIGHLY suspicious of election shenanigans, but that only makes it more important to not go off half-cocked. This is a good, sober local perspective on what's happening up there. - promoted by Paul Rosenberg)

Many people are shocked that convicted felon Ted Stevens could possibly be ahead of Anchorage Mayor Mark Begich in the fight for his US Senate seat, or that under-investigation Congressman Don Young has probably held on to his seat against Ethan Berkowitz.  This seems especially dubious as polls that were correct in every other state were seemingly way off in Alaska.  An article in the Anchorage Daily News titled "The Pollsters missed the mark" discusses this:

"The real question is where were the all the Democrats?" Dittman said, noting the voter turnout was supposed to be in record proportions. Instead, only an estimated 57 percent of registered voters had a say - a far drop from the 66 percent turnout in the 2004 presidential election, according to state elections division figures.

The issue of the incorrect polls has triggered some concern both here and in other parts of the country, especially on the "interwebs" where folks have raised the specter of a "rigged election."  It's understandable that we're all having flashbacks to Alaska 2004, where the Division of Elections reported some precincts had over 100% turnout.  (Voting "early and often" is not just a tongue-in-cheek saying in Chicago!)  

However, we should all subscribe to the "Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy" mantra of "Don't Panic!"  I can think of at least four five reasons why:

Celtic Diva :: Stolen election in Alaska? Five reasons why that accusation is premature.
1) Per the Division of Elections, there are three different types of ballots that still must be counted:  1/2 of the early voting ballots (9,500), the absentee ballots (48,000) and the "questioned" ballots (16,000). ("Questioned" ballots come from registered voters who go to a different precinct and are allowed to vote the Congressional and Presidential elections or un-registered voters who go to a precinct and are allowed to register and vote in the presidential election only.  All of these votes are checked by hand to determine the voters status.)  

That's 73,500 ballots which equal about 15% of all registered voters in the state of Alaska.  That's a lot of votes yet to be counted.

2) While Ted Stevens is making the claim that absentee votes "always break conservative," we are operating in an entirely new world because of Barack Obama's campaign strategy.  As the result of an Obama and Begich Campaign "Get Out the Vote" juggernaut, it's quite possible that those absentee, early voting and questioned ballots will break Progressive (I know mine is in there)...completely turning that "conventional wisdom" on its head.  Also, the absentee ballots are often military-dominated, which has caused them to trend towards conservative in the past, polls and FEC records have shown this election cycle that both the oversees and US-stationed military have heavily favored the Democratic presidential candidates...specifically Barack Obama...over the McCain ticket when it comes to political donations.  This "conservative assumption" no longer carries any weight.

3)  Much of this "poll angst" is based on the inaccuracy of the pre-election polls.  However, those are not the "canaries in a coal mine" when it comes to election tampering or election fraud.  International election-watching experts like Nobel Peace Prize recipient President Jimmy Carter have made the case for watching exit polls:

Exit polls are the most accurate way of detecting election fraud. In fact, according to my fellow peace witness, Dr. Daniel Hurwitz - professor of mathematics at Skidmore College - if the exit polls are more than 1 percent different from the outcome of the election, "something fishy" is going on. The 1 percent rule is what international election protection organizations (like the ones that send in Jimmy Carter as an observer) use to judge whether or not fraud is taking place.

The AP conducted an exit poll in Alaska of 20 random precincts polling of 1294 Alaskans:

"...the exit poll and incomplete ballot results had the 40-year incumbent with a very slight lead - 3,363 votes - over Democratic rival Mark Begich, the mayor of Anchorage. More than 60,000 absentee and questioned ballots remain to be counted, so the outcome may be days in coming."

I have talked to AP and have gotten some of the mathematical break-out.  However, since 253 of the 1294 polled were absentee/early voters, I won't be able to do an accurate comparison until all of those votes are counted.

4) Per the Democratic Party, changes have been made since 2004 which ensure that (and this is important) every Alaskan has a paper ballot.  Any possible machine discrepancies should be caught in a recount, which we can almost guarantee will happen by either the Begich or Stevens campaign after all ballots are counted.

5) Alaska is the only state in the US that knew Obama had probably clinched the presidency almost two hours before our polls closed at 8:00 PM. Between the the good folks at Rasmusson, both Begich and Berkowitz a "comfortable" lead and the news showing that Obama would probably be the victor before many folks got off work, it's possible they just went home.  This reason makes me the most uncomfortable and is the one I will refuse to accept unless, in the end, all evidence points this direction.  

While vigilance in the voting process is definitely required and rage over past problems is understandable, these accusations are premature.  According to the nice lady at the Division of Elections as well as Heather Rauch of the Begich Campaign, all ballots should be counted by November 21st.  

Let's wait until then before we "don the tin foil."

Linda Kellen Biegel is blogmistress at Celtic Diva's Blue Oasis--Alaska's only Progressive Community Blog.

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

I'm not ready to charge fraud (0.00 / 0)
But I'd like to get all the information so that we can make that decision. Why are those 70k ballots still uncounted three days after the election? Is counting in progress, or are they waiting for something? If they are waiting, why? That's the biggest thing that is making me suspicious right now.

Cross-Checking (0.00 / 0)
One reason it is expected to take so long is that in a somewhat recent race that was recounted (I want to say 2004, but don't remember) they found a couple dozen people had voted twice ... one via absentee ballot and once at the polls on election day.

Apparently one of their ways of avoiding this in the future is by not counting any absentee ballots before election day.  After election day, every absentee ballot is being cross-checked to make sure the person who signed it did not also sign the rolls on election day.

An Alaskan paper has predicted about 10 days before everything is counted.

[ Parent ]
So corruption in Alaska is not the default scenario? (0.00 / 0)
"Innocent until proven guilty" does not seem appropriate for the rulers of that territory.

I Think It's More Like Let The Smoke Clear A Bit (4.00 / 1)
There is ample confusion here.  Best to sort as much of it out as possible before assuming skulduggery.

There's surely tremendous skulduggery in the hearts of many.  No one can doubt that.  But the worse things get, the more important it is for us to maintain our reality-based cool.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
I hope so... (0.00 / 0)
I hope Begich takes this thing... If not I have lost all respect for Alaska and advocate kicking them out of the country for being stupid.  Of course DC did the same thing...

[ Parent ]
Yeah, obviously lets count the votes we have first (0.00 / 0)
But theres some crazy shit going on here. Pre-election polls can be wrong. But I've never seen one 22 points wrong. Seriously, if anyone can find another example of a legit polling firm being 22 points off the result I can relax.

Its just that that sort of error is totally, completely, unheard of.

Maybe this will help... (0.00 / 0)
Here is my follow-up story on this:

Poll workers and voters testify to a low-voter turn out.

Whether there is anything else going on or not remains to be seen after a count of the 75,000 votes and a recount.  However, I think we'll find the missing votes will probably be attributed to missing voters.

By the way, the 2004 numbers are an inflated mess and were NEVER fixed (some precincts showed more than 100% participation).  Comparing 2008 to them is pointless.

[ Parent ]
Chris posted something (0.00 / 0)
a week or two ago which proved to my satisfaction that exit polls are actually less reliable than "regular" polls.


Open Left Campaigns



Advanced Search

Powered by: SoapBlox