Oregon Mail In Voting vs. Battleground, NY & CA

In 2000, Gore won Oregon by 47.0-46.5%. Oregon deviated slightly from the National (48.4%) and other Battleground states (48.3%). The strong Nader vote in Oregon hurt Gore more than it did in the other battleground states.

The situation changed in 2004. Kerry’s Oregon share (51.4%) deviated sharply from the National (48.3%) and battleground (49.0%). The vast majority (78%) of returning Nader voters from 2000 defected to Kerry by a 65-13% margin over Bush. Kerry improved on Gore’s 0.5% Oregon margin due to his commanding share of Nader voters and his solid (59-39%) margin in new voters.

Oregon’s adjusted vote share makes sense based on the best available data. But the question that needs to be asked is this: Why did Kerry do so much better in Oregon than in the other battleground states? Did it have something to do with Oregon’s unique mail-in-voting system?

In 2008, Obama won Oregon by a 56.7-40.4% recorded margin. The True Vote Model indicated that he won by 56.0-42.8% (see below).

Obama won the national recorded vote by 52.87-45.62%. The True Vote Model indicates that he had a 58% national share (see below).

As in 2004, there was a big discrepancy between the Oregon and National shares. The 2008 unadjusted exit polls have not been released. This would indicate that the 2004 voting anomalies remain in place today.

If in fact the recorded 2004 vote was accurate in the battleground states, then you must believe that….

1- Bush won in a fair election. The electronic and mechanical voting machines were accurate. There was little or no fraud. All election reform efforts are meaningless. There is nothing wrong with our national voting system.

2- Oregon’s voting system was obviously ripe for manipulation since it was the only battleground state that shifted sharply from Gore to Kerry.

3- The pre-election polls which indicated a 47% tie, but projected Kerry would win by 51-48% after undecided voters were allocated, were wrong.

4- The unadjusted state and national exit polls which had Kerry winning by 5-7% were wrong.

5- The Oregon Election Day telephone survey which indicated that Kerry had a 52.3% share was wrong.

6- Votes were padded for Kerry and Obama by corrupt Oregon election officials and/or voter fraud.

7- Election officials in Florida, Ohio and the other battleground states did a great job in making sure that the elections were clean.

Because of the above, election activists must convince state officials to stop the vote-by-mail trend, otherwise the currrent fraud-free HAVA-compliant voting systems will morph into a national version of the Oregon system. There will no longer be a need for voting machine precincts. Activists will have to broaden their reform efforts in all 50 states, rather than just focus on the bad seed that is Oregon.

The following analysis, for some strange reason, indicates that Oregon’s mail-in system works just fine. It is obviously incorrect. I would greatly appreciate any effort by interested readers to find flaws in the assumptions, logic or math. A revised analysis can be forwarded to Oregon’s election officials that will prove its system is hopelessly corrupted. Hopefully, they will see the light and get rid of the vote-by-mail, fraud-inducing paper ballots and install one or more of the voting systems used in the battleground states: DREs, Optical scanners, Punch cards, Levers.

There are many advantages in voting at the precinct rather than by mail: voters can get to see their friends and make new ones, take time off from work, project a patriotic image by voting in full view, look smart by touching the computer screen, exercise their legs while waiting to vote and get some cheap coffee.

In order to keep the analysis focused on returning Nader 2000 voters and new (DNV) voters, I have assumed that all votes were counted in 2000 and 2004. In other words, the recorded vote was equal to total votes cast in both elections. However, in the 2000 election , approximately 6 million votes were uncounted; in 2004, about 4 million. Approximately 75% of the uncounted votes were for Gore and Kerry.

Another simplifying assumption is that there was zero net defection of returning Gore and Bush voters (they cancelled each other). However the 12:22am National Exit Poll indicates that 10% of Bush voters defected to Kerry and only 8% of Gore voters defected to Bush.

Therefore, it is safe to say that Kerry’s True Vote exceeded the 52% indicated in this analysis. In fact, the Recursive True Vote Model indicates that he had 53-54% of the vote, depending on voter turnout assumptions.

The results make sense intuitively. Battleground states by definition represent the national electorate and nearly equal vote shares. As a battleground state, Oregon’s recorded vote share should have been close to the average. But it wasn’t. That indicates a fundamental difference in vote counting between Oregon and the Battleground states. Oregon gets it right. The process is transparent; the vote count can be verified by hand-counting the paper ballots. All other Battleground states get it wrong.

If they use DREs there is no paper to verify the vote; votes can be switched in cyberspace. If they use optical scanners, that’s fine – but the election officials refuse to verify the vote by hand-counting the ballots. If they use punch cars, as they did in Florida 2000, the cards can be voided by double and triple-punching them after the polls close - and “stupid” voters will be blamed.

Iif they use lever machines, as in NY and PA, there are no paper ballots to verify the vote; too few machines can be placed in heavily Democratic precincts; or bad machines that will likely break down will cause voters to leave the polling booth; the levers can be “stuck” on one candidate, like they were for Bush in 2004; votes can be switched by central tabulators that calculate the lever totals; lever machines gears can be shaved. There are many ways to skin the cat. In NY, Gore, Kerry and Obama each enjoyed a 7% higher late (paper ballot) vote share than they did on Election Day (lever votes). What does that tell us?

Here is an amazing statistic that very few are even aware of: Obama had 52% of the 121 million votes recorded on Election Day. He had 59% of the 10 million late (paper ballot) votes. What are the odds of the 7% discrepancy? Should we even bother to calculate the margin of error in a poll with 10 million respondents?

The 2004 adjusted vote analysis indicates that Oregon is representative of the adjusted National and Battleground states:

1- Kerry’s adjusted vote shares (National, Oregon and Battleground states) were within 0.8% of each other.
2- Kerry’s exit poll vote shares (National, Oregon telephone poll and Battleground) were within 1.1% of each other.
3- Kerry’s average adjusted share (National, Oregon, Battleground) was within 0.2% of the average poll

The 1996-2008 correlation analysis of Oregon voting by county indicates that the system worked well since the 1998 switch to mail-in ballots.

Before the switch to mail:
The relatively low 0.93 correlation ratio for 1996 and 2000 county votes is evidence of possible vote miscounts in 1996.
The high 5.0% standard deviation in percentage change from 1996 to 2000 is further confirmation of vote miscounts.

After the switch to mail:
The almost perfect 0.98 correlation ratio for 2000 and 2004 county votes is evidence of an accurate vote count.
The low 2.2% standard deviation in percentage change is further confirmation of an accurate count.

The almost perfect 0.99 correlation ratio for 2004 and 2008 county votes is evidence of an accurate vote count.
The very low1.5% standard deviation in percentage change is further confirmation of an accurate count

The True Vote Analysis below indicates that Obama won nationally with 57-58%, an approximate 22 million margin.
His official vote share was 52.9%, a 9.5 million margin. In Oregon, he had 56.7%, matching his national True Vote.
Inquiring minds need to know: What was Obama’s True Vote in the other battleground states?

© Scoop Media