"Drum roll, please."
Those were the words uttered as elections consultant Barb Hansen read aloud the vote tally for the final polling ward for the City of Brookfield.
And with that, at 6:19 p.m. Saturday, volunteer tabulators finished the meticulous three-day hand recount of the more than 14,000 votes cast by City of Brookfield voters for the state Supreme Court race on April 5.
Its finish is just the beginning for the Waukesha County Board of Canvassers, who still have about 70% of the county's votes to recount, after 10 days of work including two consecutive Saturdays. That's in stark contrast to 67 other counties that have finished their recounts, and the four others that expect to be complete by Monday, leaving Waukesha alone in the spotlight.
But it was a milestone for tabulators because much scrutiny has been on the City of Brookfield's votes ever since Waukesha County two days after the election to announce a stunner: that in the razor-thin high court race in which Assistant State Attorney General JoAnne Kloppenburg had declared victory with a 200-vote margin out of 1.5 million cast, an entire city's votes had not been included in the statewide tally.
A city with 14,315 votes, about 76 percent of which went to the other candidate, the conservative incumbent, Justice David Prosser Jr.
The sudden "discovery" of votes that had not been previously reported — coming from one of the most conservative municipalities in one of the most conservative counties — had many crying foul. The votes, however, had been reported in a detailed ward-by-ward breakdown in a Brookfield Patch story .
But after the three-day hand recount, the city's votes were for the most part upheld as accurate. The recount netted three additional votes for Prosser and one additional vote for Kloppenburg, for a final city margin of 10,862 to 3,457, according to Ellen Nowak, chief of staff for Waukesha County Executive Dan Vrakas.
The city's recount was not without disputes and controversy. It is yet unclear whether Kloppenburg will challenge any of the votes in court, such as more the more than 1,500 votes cast in the high court race by voters in the city's Wards 1, 2 and 3.
Those ballots were inside post-election and found partially open during the recount. Kloppenburg campaign representatives objected to the bags being opened and votes counted due to questions about the ballots' security and potential tampering.
But retired Waukesha County Circuit Judge Robert Mawdsley, appointed to oversee the recount in lieu of Nickolaus, allowed their recount, saying it would be up another court to decide, should it be challenged in court.
On Monday morning, Waukesha County Corporation Counsel Tom Farley will explain why more time is needed as the state Government Accountability Board asks a Dane County judge to extend the May 9 deadline for finishing the historic statewide recount.
And back in Waukesha, the recount will move to the cafeteria in the Administration Building, a much larger room than the first-floor conference room where it has been held since April 27. Double the number of tabulators will be on hand to try to speed up the county's recount, while still undergoing a more detailed process than many counties, recorded for posterity by a court reporter hired by the county.
I *cough* recall a candidate insisting he'd won on the basis of a 327 lead and moving heaven and earth in the courts to stop a hand recount. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0884144.html There was even outrage over the fact that the other candidate had withdrawn his concession.
A comprehensive review of the uncounted Florida ballots from last year's presidential election reveals that George W. Bush would have won even if the United States Supreme Court had allowed the statewide manual recount of the votes that the Florida Supreme Court had ordered to go forward. Contrary to what many partisans of former Vice President Al Gore have charged, the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore. A close examination of the ballots found that Mr. Bush would have retained a slender margin over Mr. Gore if the Florida court's order to recount more than 43,000 ballots had not been reversed by the United States Supreme Court.
This is from the Washington Post. These articles were after multiple recounts by new organizations. Washington Post In all likelihood, George W. Bush still would have won Florida and the presidency last year if either of two limited recounts – one requested by Al Gore, the other ordered by the Florida Supreme Court – had been completed, Using the most inclusive standards, Bush actually gained more votes than Gore -- about 300 net -- from the examination of the undervote ballots
When Nolan said "Al Gore won the popular vote in FL...", I stopped reading. When the beginning of the first sentence is inaccurate, there is little chance that the rest of the post will be anything but useless drivel.
We now know, thanks to the Sentinel, that this Times take (and the somewhat more hedged ledes in the Journal and Post) is thoroughly bogus—unfounded and inaccurate. If the recount had gone forward Judge Lewis might well have counted the overvotes in which case Gore might well have won." http://www.slate.com/id/2058603/ But, I made a mistake rehashing old news, sorry. Lets stick to present day WI. We've got laws, lets follow them. Easy.
It doesn't matter sinee the margin between the two was under .5%, allowing either to ask for a hand count. Now you know the frustration the Democrats felt after the Florida debacle. Recounts may become the chic thing this year with at least recall elections coming up. If it's the Republican's ask for the recounts, we'll see what tune your singing them.
"before the missing Brookfield ballots were found. If the missing ballots hadn't been found, " Quite a leap there buddy. Who said, "Repeat a lie often enough......"
Errors of omission are just as serious as errors of commission.
I believe we are going to have "rolling recounts" beginning in July and continuing through the next year. With Wisconsin's current law you don't need a reason to recall someone. Everytime a person reaches one year in office, someone is going to start a recall petition. Won't all these Democrats be surprised next year when everyone on their side finds recall petitions being circulated against them. Chaos will rain (pun intended) until Wisconsin fixes its crazy system.
What does Gore/Bush election of 2000 with Kloppenburg/Prosser? Nothing, so lets drop that crap. What votes were "Found"? None... they were simply not reported to the AP on election night. Why did she wait till Thursday to own up to the error? Pretty simple, if you screw up that big who wouldn't want to be sure that there were not other big mistakes? Use some common sense. As far as would have Prossor recounted with a vote difference of 204? Of course he would have. However even if the difference was of less that 1,000 votes out of 1.5 million for either candidate, I dont think i would blame them for wanting a recount. However 7,000+ seems pretty insurmountable even if it is 0.488%. So I still come back to the why? @Lyle and @MM... I agree with Lyle... it is much easier to get the signatures for a recall that to actually be successful with the recall election. There are 9 recall elections coming up... 3 Dems and 6 GOP. I would be surprised to see more that one seat flip either way. Not that it is likely, but wouldn't the irony be wonderful if it was a Dem seat that was lost, giving the GOP a 20 to 13 margin in the senate? Sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for. :)
I think there will be many recall petitions circulating and those will be in the news, successful or not. For those that are successful, there will be elections. I believe some of these elections will be close....thus the demand for recounts. I cannot predict the current recall elections...my guess would be that there will be losses on both sides. I can predict that many who were just elected will be facing recall petition gathering next year....on both sides of the aisle.
I don't think we'll know for awhile why Kloppenburg has not ceded defeat. My own feeling is that if they throw out any of the bags of ballots it won't change the outcome. Although there were 14000 Brookfield votes, it they disqualify whole bags, they would be disqualifying Kloppenburg votes also.
It appears we need new practices/procedures all over the state not just in counties we want to pick and choose. I doubt things are as evil and fishy as the Kloppenburg camp is making them out to be. Easy to make that conclusion if you limit what you actually look at.
Read the official Dane County minutes..especially the parts of how who groups of mostly Prosser ballots were not placed in the bags and only found later. http://gab.wi.gov/sites/default/files/recount/dane_county_recount_minutes_pdf_14565.pdf
She has neither so it won't happen. She will do what liberals always do...take it to the courts and hope for a liberal judge.