SC

Move Along, Nothing To See Here

“RICHLAND COUNTY ROBBERS” COVER THEIR TRACKS In an effort to silence allegations of voter suppression, perpetrators of the “Richland County Robbery” have trotted out a University professor who claims that there was “no bias” in the voting machine shortages that helped ensure passage of a $1.2 billion tax hike last…

“RICHLAND COUNTY ROBBERS” COVER THEIR TRACKS

In an effort to silence allegations of voter suppression, perpetrators of the “Richland County Robbery” have trotted out a University professor who claims that there was “no bias” in the voting machine shortages that helped ensure passage of a $1.2 billion tax hike last month.

The “Robbery” passed by a 52-48 percent margin after precincts that opposed the tax hike two years ago reported wait times of anywhere from four to seven hours on Election Day.

Nonetheless, University of South Carolina computer science professor Duncan Buell told The (Columbia, S.C.) State newspaper – itself a vocal proponent of the tax hike – that there was no “statistical imbalance” when it came to the shortages of voting machines at Richland County, S.C. precincts.

Never mind that the info used in Buell’s “analysis” was provided by county officials – or that the University where he is employed stands to make $50 million off of the heist.  Or that he conducted the analysis at the request of The State – which has been pushing this tax hike for the past four years.

“Instead of balance and fairness in its reporting, The State is giving us one-sided cheerleading that the local Democratic politicians and Chamber of Commerce types pushing for the tax hike should be paying for,” local public relations executive Kevin Fisher wrote just prior to the election in The (Columbia, S.C.) Free Times.

“Why buy ads in The State when they’re presenting your case for free, un-vetted and unchallenged?” Fisher mused.

In other words this analysis has all the legitimacy of  … well, a Richland County election.

Here’s the thing … no fancy educrat analysis is going to change the fact that excessive wait times on Election Day were reported almost exclusively in anti-tax precincts.  And in addition to the obvious unreliability of the data and the clear bias of the entities involved in its analysis – Buell doesn’t address who ordered the disbursement of machines and whether specific requests for additional machines (to accomodate expected turnout) were rejected.

And even if Buell’s analysis is accurate – which we highly doubt – it doesn’t change the fact that the machine shortages took place.  Which means that the election which took place in Richland County on November 6 was conducted illegally – and should not be permitted to stand.

***

Related posts

SC

Why Freedom Of Information Matters

Jenn Wood
SC

University Of South Carolina Gets ‘Green Light’ For Free Speech?

Erin Parrott
SC

Accused Voyeur At It Again?

Will Folks

32 comments

norman December 4, 2012 at 11:11 am

Little doubt the political smoke screen is pumping out at a record pace. Even the cabal member Courson is making a move with entertaining a bill to move the the criminal operation back to the county. The bold face lying and political cover up are on par with Shitcago/Crook county IL.

Reply
Guero December 4, 2012 at 4:22 pm

As usual for the mouth-breathers here, there’s no substance to norman’s post.

Reply
Trevor Bauknight December 4, 2012 at 11:29 am

It’s richly entertaining that you get upset about voting machines and procedures when you lose, but not so much when you win.

Reply
Peter O December 4, 2012 at 11:49 am

Um, Duncan Buell is not exactly an ally of Richland County government who can be “trotted out.” He was (and still is) one of those criticizing how the election was run. He even discovered a machine that the election commission “missed” and he let the media know about it.

He also slammed the county for how it handled the 2010 election.

Quite honestly, suggesting that he’s part of this debacle is nothing less than a slanderous smear.

Reply
Guero December 4, 2012 at 4:24 pm

Mr. O’Boyle: You need to stop drinking in the mornings. By confusing Billy Folks’ readers with the facts, you’ll scare them.

Reply
Recovering Lobbyist December 4, 2012 at 12:13 pm

If this mess should result in the invalidation of the sales tax referendum, wouldn’t it also necessitate the invalidation of other elections held in the affected precincts? Truths are often inconvenient Will.

Personally I am opposed the the penny and voted against it. But there is a larger picture here. The penny was not the only question in front of the voters in those precincts.

Note also that my precinct was at least one machine short (3 machines for 1050 registered voters). I stood in line and voted.

I think the bigger problem is poll worker training. Our precinct captain was great (Brennen Elm.) and worked hard to keep the line moving and her team on task.

I think they should set the vote aside. But if they do, how will that impact other questions on the ballot, particularly those with close votes?

Reply
WorkingTommyC December 4, 2012 at 12:31 pm

I’d like to see several lawsuits make their way to the SC Supreme Court over the Richland County elections so that the big government crooks there would have to dance around and figure out a way to invalidate Kirkman Finlay’s election yet keep the sales tax increase in place and not voted on again. That’s entertainment!

Reply
Fred Astaire December 4, 2012 at 12:35 pm

I agree with this statement. I would come out of retirement to teach them some of my specialty tap dance moves. Now THAT would be ENTERTAINMENT!

Reply
Janis Joplin December 4, 2012 at 12:37 pm

Can I give them singing lessons?

Reply
Willie Nelson December 4, 2012 at 12:38 pm

I’ll write the lyrics!

Reply
Barry Manilow December 4, 2012 at 12:39 pm

I’ll write the music!

Reply
The Rolling Stones December 4, 2012 at 12:41 pm

We’ll sing it for them!

Reply
Quentin Tarantino December 4, 2012 at 12:48 pm

I’ll film it, and call it a “ROCK-umentary”!

It will be unusual and colorful because it would be about WHITE folks in BLACK robes making a decision about a WHITE-wash issue concerning GREEN-bucks.

Reply
Johnson December 4, 2012 at 10:54 pm

Quentin: Are you Lillian McBride’s brother? Beatty is black and does any and everything Toal tells him to do and when she says to do it. Toal and Pleiconas are from the old Democratic elite so they are used to acting like they care about blacks. You blacks – if you are black – keep permitting the Massa’s to run your party. On and on. Toal thought she had ended the mess by splitting the baby and letting the penny tax thing pass and permitting the Repubs to have the Finley election.

Reply
? December 4, 2012 at 12:51 pm

People are making the mistake of thinking just because some professor doesn’t see evidence of statistical anomolies in voting machine distrubtion that it has bearing on whether the LACK of voting machines impacted the election or not.

Regardless of whether they were distributed in according with population or not the fact remains that people gainfully employed will in general have a more difficult time waiting 4-8 hours to vote versus those that have no job.

Obviously, those without a job are more inclined to vote for more “services”/gov’t via taxes, even if it’s a sales tax which is regressive because they lean on those services more than employed people.

Reply
? December 4, 2012 at 12:59 pm

edit: distribution

Reply
Guero December 4, 2012 at 4:36 pm

Once again, “?”, you’re an idiot. People without jobs includes retired people, housewives, and students.

Your analysis makes no sense and is as moronic as Mitten’s 47% comment. I will bet you’re a 1%, though.

Reply
? December 4, 2012 at 5:07 pm

lol…if it’s so “moronic” why bother responding?

It should be self evident, no?

I love your “slandering” me as a 1%er though, it shows how douchebags like yourself hate successful people.

Relax my friend, you’re getting your way. Everyone will be relatively equal in due time.

Reply
And the Mysterians December 4, 2012 at 6:18 pm

Ah “successful people”

I love the way you Republicans throw that term around!

Take Steve Forbes

He’s a rich guy and ipso a “successful people” in your world.

When actually he’s just some guy who happened to be born to a.fabulously wealthy father

I guess maybe that makes him some kind of “success”

However I would think that any of us here born in like circumstance could also label ourselves a “success”

Apparently in Republicanland mere wealth equates to “success”

Reply
? December 4, 2012 at 8:16 pm

Ok, a few things:

Wealth if one of many different measures of success that varies based on people, culture, etc. et al

If you are one of the people that does not value wealth or uses a different measure of success, I have ZERO PROBLEM with that.

Just do not pretend you do not care about money but then go on to use govt to grab as much of it from others as you can.

2nd, I am not a Republican.

3rd, just because some people inherited their wealth does not make them losers(or winners), similarly- others that gained it by ripping people off, being a crony capitalist, etc. et should not warrant any kind of admiration by anyone other than sociopaths.

If you are one of those people that can not appreciate some of the accomplishments of a Heny Ford or Steve Jobs then you are a sociopath in your own right. (and I am not saying they were perfect people)

Reply
? December 4, 2012 at 8:21 pm

edit: if to is

et to et al

Reply
Guero December 4, 2012 at 8:58 pm

Not a Repugnant? Ha! Your ballot most probably resembles the endorsement policy of The State, with the last Democratic candidate they endorsed for President being Harry Truman.

And, no, braying you’re not a Repugnant doesn’t fool anyone. “Libertarian” just means a Repugnant who wants to smoke a doobie or watch a little porno on your tv while you stay in a Mormon-owned hotel.

A lack of self-awareness on your part does not constitute a lack of recognition by non-1%ers.

Reply
And the Mysterians December 4, 2012 at 9:17 pm

Not a Republican eh?

Perhaps an “independent conservative” like Glenn Beck?

As for the response

I never said Forbes was a “loser”

I merely noted that his “wealth” was a direct result of his inheritance ,not of any particular action on his part.

And that just using ones financial staus as an indicator of “success” is not accurate.

Likewise labeling every person of wealth as a “job creator” ( a common “conservative ” practice)makes assumptions one cannot make.

Some are.

Some aren’t.

Reply
? December 4, 2012 at 9:51 pm

You both are completely clueless as to my leanings..lol…obviously you havent read enough of my bullshit here.

That being said, I suppose I could pigeon hole guero as a green card holder from a social democracy labeled banana republic in Central or S. America and maybe be 50% *right*….or 100% wrong buts it is nice to stick you in a box when I do not understand your perspective, right?

I hate Republicans more than Democrats. But I hate both of them none the less.

Making less than accurate generalizations are fun, so in general I view Republicans as small govt hypocrites(meaning they dont really want it) that love war, god and country-not necessarily in that order.

Dems on the other hand are slightly more truthful; so slightly less disgusting. They have little respect or understanding for property rights, hate being called socialists(even though they are), but at least tell you they are gonna take your shit and give it to other people for the social *good*.

Though I am starting to wonder about their truthfulness as well, as they claim to hate war(unless it is force to take your money) but when the Black Jesus is engaging in it remain largely silent. They also claim to be for civil liberty, but the NDAA was lobbied for hard by the Black Jesus this last go round with nary a whisper of dissent from commie lites…

Maybe I need to re-evaluate the truthfulness of *progressives* as well in fairness to all…and just settle on both sides sucking equally bad.

Reply
Destiny Now December 5, 2012 at 1:48 am

“?” speaks the truth and y’all don’t like it, so you attack him.

How lame.

“?” another aspect of this that I’m sure you’re thinking about is that if the legally prescribed number of machines per precinct were NOT in place, the election was not held legally, so it must be invalidated.

We don’t have to hold another special election. We can just wait until the next time.

Also, I know this is only anecdotal, but there was a letter to the editor in our local rag in which a voter described going back to “review” his/her votes (something I didn’t do) and when doing so, found that one or more votes had been recorded exactly opposite to the way he/she had voted. He/she said it took several redo’s and reviews before it could be corrected.

The whole thing is fishy. It can’t stand the way it is. Letts says he is gonna take it as far as it needs to go. I applaud him.

Reply
? December 5, 2012 at 9:18 am

“the legally prescribed number of machines per precinct were NOT in place, the election was not held legally, so it must be invalidated.”

I agree 100%, that part of the conversation/debate has dropped off the radar though, purposefully I’m sure.

They trot out the good professor who is unknowingly nothing but a tool to say that wasn’t purposeful manipulations of the machine count by district(which is probably true) but ignore the “question” as to whether there were 250 machines per registered voter.

They obviously have to if they want the penny tax.

It’s amazing how easy it is for the to obfuscate the general population by simply trotting out a professor who does a small analysis that is most unimportant in the big picture.

What? He couldn’t simply tell everyone if there were 250 machines/voter?

lol…sure he could…but that probably wouldn’t help save the penny tax

Reply
? December 5, 2012 at 9:39 am

edit: the to them

Reply
Bemused December 4, 2012 at 1:49 pm

Duncan Buell is not an “educrat.” The word has no meaning at all if you fling it at everyone in any way involved in any level of education. He has presented honest-to-goodness facts backed up by quantified analysis. So, those who have no confidence in either math or science are free to believe whatever they choose. Those who have some connection to the reality-based community, on the other hand, will take Buell’s analysis seriously.

Reply
Unkown December 4, 2012 at 4:53 pm

Just do what SCANA did, LEAVE! Let them tax that!

Reply
BigT December 4, 2012 at 6:00 pm

The State and this liberal “professor” both wanted the government to get that $1.2 B in TAXES from the people…

Fox guarding the henhouse…

That USC Clown is a joke w/ his “analysis.’

Reply
Guero December 4, 2012 at 9:00 pm

Our lives are complete. Teapot shows once again reality-based reasoning is beyond him. Teapot not only has his own opinions, as a true Faux-newser, he has his own “facts”.

Reply
james the foot soldier December 5, 2012 at 10:11 am

I for one am happy the libtards voted themselves a tax increase!

I simply choose to not participate in it and spend my hard earned in Lexington County.

Just as my next vehicle will be made by a patriotic American in Alabama working the Mercedes Benz assembly line.

Yes we can!!

Reply

Leave a Comment