Bob
From: Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.
Date: November 19, 2004
Attached is my recently completed precinct by precinct analysis of the 2004 presidential vote in Cleveland. There are wholesale shifts of scores of votes from the Kerry column to other candidates, and astonishingly low turnouts in certain precincts and entire wards. The Ohio recount will prove these numbers to be fraudulent.
I may have identified only the tip of the iceberg. I note that there are 17,741 uncounted ballots in Cuyahoga County. Kerry's margin in Cleveland was reportedly 108,659 votes with a 49.89% turnout. The rest of Cuyahoga County had a 71.95% turnout. Such a turnout in Cleveland would have given Kerry a margin of 156,705 votes, left Bush with a statewide margin of 85,007 votes, and with 248,100 votes still uncounted, nobody would be conceding Ohio.
This is a situation that demands rigorous investigation. I can imagine Michael Moore going door to door in Ward 4, Precinct F, looking for the 215 Peroutka voters, or in Ward 4, Precinct N, looking for the 163 Badnarik voters. Or going door to door in Ward 6, Precinct C, to find out why the turnout was only 7.10% - or in Ward 13, Precincts D, F, and O, to find out why the turnout was only 13.05%, 19.60%, and 21.01%, respectively.
CUYAHOGA COUNTY CANVASS SHEET ? 2004 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
THE FOLLOWING IS A PRECINCT BY PRECINCT ANALYSIS OF THE REPORTED VOTE TOTALS FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES IN THE CITY OF CLEVELAND, CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO, IN THE 2004 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. THESE ARE DATA READILY AVAILABLE ONLINE AT THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE OF THE CUYAHOGA COUNTY BOARD OF ELECTIONS. WHAT YOU SEE IS AN ACTUAL REPRINT OF THE CUYAHOGA COUNTY CANVASS SHEET.
IN ORDER TO CONDUCT THIS ANALYSIS I SET UP SEPARATE MICROSOFT WINDOWS FOR: (1) REGISTERED VOTERS, 2004; (2) VOTER TURNOUT, BY PERCENTAGE, 2004; (3) VOTE TOTALS FOR PRESIDENT, 2004; AND (4) VOTE TOTALS FOR PRESIDENT, 2000. BY CLICKING BACK AND FORTH ON THE WINDOWS I WAS ABLE TO COMPARE THESE DATA EASILY, IF TEDIOUSLY.
I HAVE DISCOVERED WHOLESALE ?IRREGULARITIES? IN THE REPORTED VOTES, SOME OF THEM HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS, OTHERS OBVIOUSLY FRAUDULENT. EVERY NUMBER I BELIEVE TO BE UNTRUE I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED, AND I HAVE WRITTEN A BRIEF ONE-LINE EXPLANATION, ALSO HIGHLIGHTED IN RED, IN THE RIGHT-HAND COLUMN NEXT TO THE HIGHLIGHTED NUMBER. THE FOLLOWING WRITE-UP IS THE BEST ESTIMATE I CAN MAKE AS TO HOW MANY VOTES WERE STOLEN FROM JOHN F. KERRY IN CLEVELAND, OHIO. IN SOME CASES THERE HAVE BEEN WHOLESALE SHIFTS OF VOTES FROM THE KERRY COLUMN TO THE BUSH COLUMN OR TO THIRD-PARTY CANDIDATES; TO ESTIMATE THE NUMBER OF VOTES TAKEN FROM KERRY, I HAVE ASSUMED THAT THE PROPORTIONS OF THE VOTE ALLOTTED ELSEWHERE IN THE WARD ARE CORRECT; IN FACT, ANY UNREPORTED VOTES COULD ALL HAVE COME FROM KERRY. IN OTHER CASES THE REPORTED VOTER TURNOUT WAS ASTONISHINGLY LOW FOR A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. FOR PURPOSES OF THIS ANALYSIS, I HAVE ADOPTED 50% AS AN ARBITRARY ESTIMATE OF THE TRUE VOTER TURNOUT FOR THE UNDERREPORTED PRECINCTS, AND HAVE ASSUMED THAT THE PROPORTIONS OF THE VOTE ALLOTTED ARE CORRECT FOR THESE PRECINCTS.
THESE ESTIMATES ARE JUST THAT. FORTUNATELY, OHIO HAS A PAPER TRAIL AND THERE WILL BE A RECOUNT. HOPEFULLY THE CORRECT NUMBERS WILL EMERGE. SOME, BUT NOT ALL, OF THE UNREPORTED VOTES WILL TURN UP AS PROVISIONAL BALLOTS OR UNCOUNTED PUNCH CARDS. WHERE WHOLESALE SHIFTING HAS OCCURRED FROM ONE COLUMN TO ANOTHER, I EXPECT THAT THE OHIO RECOUNT WILL PROVE, ONCE AND FOR ALL, ELECTION FRAUD.
LINE 1604 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 129 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 25 VOTES.
LINE 1614 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 166 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 38 VOTES.
LINE 1702 41 VOTES APPEAR IN BADNARIK COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 41 VOTES.
LINE 1709 70 VOTES APPEAR IN PETROUKA COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 70 VOTES.
LINE 1806 215 VOTES APPEAR IN PETROUKA COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 213 VOTES.
LINE 1814 163 VOTES APPEAR IN BADNARIK COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 162 VOTES.
LINE 1902 16 VOTES APPEAR IN PETROUKA COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 15 VOTES.
LINE 1903 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 390 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 142 VOTES.
LINE 1909 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 362 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 119 VOTES.
LINE 1910 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 228 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 66 VOTES.
LINE 1912 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 324 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 93 VOTES.
LINE 1915 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 157 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 25 VOTES.
LINE 1916 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 49 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 11 VOTES.
LINE 2002 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 197 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 106 VOTES.
LINE 2003 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 324 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 272 VOTES.
LINE 2004 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 229 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 93 VOTES.
LINE 2011 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 283 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 81 VOTES.
LINE 2006 NOT AN IRREGULARITY; BUSH DID WELL IN CLEVELAND 6F IN 2000.
LINE 2012 81 VOTES APPEAR IN BUSH COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 36 VOTES.
LINE 2023 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 144 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 20 VOTES.
LINE 2103 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 276 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 74 VOTES.
LINE 2111 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 120 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 35 VOTES.
LINE 2122 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 482 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 177 VOTES.
LINE 2207 51 VOTES APPEAR IN BADNARIK COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 51 VOTES.
LINE 2208 45 VOTES APPEAR IN BUSH COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 32 VOTES.
LINE 2209 27 VOTES APPEAR IN PETROUKA COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 26 VOTES.
LINE 2301 41 VOTES APPEAR IN BUSH COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 33 VOTES.
LINE 2316 87 VOTES APPEAR IN BUSH COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 68 VOTES.
LINE 2319 39 VOTES APPEAR IN BUSH COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 31 VOTES.
LINE 2412 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 433 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 212 VOTES.
LINE 2513 35 VOTES APPEAR IN THIRD PARTY COLUMNS, KERRY LOSES 33 VOTES.
LINE 2521 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 377 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 104 VOTES.
WARD 12 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 6095 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 475 VOTES.
LINE 2704 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 962 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 586 VOTES.
LINE 2706 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 411 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 242 VOTES.
LINE 2708 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 134 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 41 VOTES.
LINE 2715 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 117 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 61 VOTES.
LINE 2717 17 VOTES APPEAR IN THIRD PARTY COLUMNS, KERRY LOSES 15 VOTES.
LINE 2723 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 481 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 133 VOTES.
LINE 2724 37 VOTES APPEAR IN BADNARIK COLUMN, KERRY LOSES 36 VOTES.
LINE 2725 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 28 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 7 VOTES.
WARD 14 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 6878 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 1106 VOTES.
LINE 2902 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 132 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 36 VOTES.
LINE 2908 22 VOTES APPEAR IN THIRD PARTY COLUMNS, KERRY LOSES 20 VOTES.
LINE 2919 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 138 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 20 VOTES.
WARD 17 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 6394 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 706 VOTES.
LINE 19O 50% TURNOUT WOULD BE 239 VOTES, KERRY LOSES 44 VOTES.
CLEVELAND KERRY LOSES 6032 VOTES
THUS, A NOT UNREASONABLE CONCLUSION IS THAT TAMPERING WITH THE NUMBERS HAS COST JOHN KERRY 6,000 VOTES IN CLEVELAND.
I AM NOT CLAIMING THAT THE FINAL RESULTS, WHEN ALL THE VOTES HAVE BEEN COUNTED AND RECOUNTED, WILL COME CLOSE TO MATCHING UP WITH THE ESTIMATES I HAVE GIVEN ABOVE. I HAVE MADE THESE ESTIMATES ONLY TO GIVE THE READER SOME IDEA OF THE MAGNITUDE OF THE PROBLEM. NOT ALL OF THESE IRREGULARITIES WILL TURN OUT TO BE FRAUD. BUT SOME OF THEM WILL. WHOLESALE SHIFTING OF SCORES OF VOTES TO THE COLUMNS OF THIRD PARTY CANDIDATES WHO RECEIVED LESS THAN ONE HALF OF ONE PERCENT OF THE STATEWIDE VOTE BETWEEN THEM, VOTER TURNOUTS OF 7.10%, 13.05%, 19.60%, 21.01%, 21.80%, 24.72%, 28.83%, 28.97%, 29.25% IN CERTAIN PRECINCTS, AND A VOTER TURNOUT OF 39.35% FOR AN ENTIRE WARD, ARE SIMPLY NOT CREDIBLE.
THERE MAY BE SOME CORRELATION BETWEEN THE PRECINCTS WITH ASTONISHINGLY LOW VOTER TURNOUT, AND THE REPORTS OF LONG LINES AT THE POLLING PLACES DUE TO A LACK OF ENOUGH VOTING MACHINES. PEOPLE ON THE GROUND IN OHIO SHOULD LOOK AT THE PRECINCT MAPS, CHECK THE NEWS REPORTS, TALK WITH LOCAL RESIDENTS, AND FIGURE THIS OUT.
I WISH TO EXPRESS MY DEEPEST APPRECIATION FOR THE GRASSROOTS EFFORT THAT HAS MADE AN OHIO RECOUNT POSSIBLE. I AWAIT THE RESULTS.
RICHARD HAYES PHILLIPS, Ph.D.
http://www.northnet.org/minstrel
Bob Fitrakis says some of these issues were raised in Saturday's hearings:
In Cleveland, where a public hearing was held on Saturday, November 20, there was a different pattern of voting irregularities. These include heavily Democratic wards with abnormally low reported rates of voter turnout, three under 20%. In Precinct 6-C where Kerry beat Bush 45 votes to one, allegedly only 7.1% of the registered voters cast ballots. In precinct 13-D where Kerry received 83.8% of the vote, only 13.05% reportedly voted. In precinct 13-F where Kerry received 97.5%, the turnout was reported to be only 19.6%.
One explanation comes from Irma Olmedo, who provided the Free Press with a written statement of her activities in the heavily Hispanic ward 13, which contained the three low voter turnout precincts.
?Ohio does not have bilingual ballots and this disenfranchises many Latino voters who are not totally fluent in English . . . there were 13 poll workers at the school and none knew Spanish. Some could not even find the names of the people on the list because they couldn?t understand well when people said their names. . . . Some people put their punch card ballots in backwards when they voted and discovered that they couldn?t punch out the holes. They had not read the instructions which were in English, that they had to turn the card around in order to vote,? Olmedo stated.
Olmedo translated at precinct 13-O, where 90% of the votes were for Kerry and only 53 votes were counted. The turnout of 21% was due to the lack of Spanish instructions and the misspelling of names: ?I noticed that one named Nieves was misspelled as Nieues and the pollworkers were not able to find his name, these people were told to complete a provisional ballot because their names were not on the list.?
In Cuyahoga County, according to the Secretary of State?s website there are 24,788 provisional ballots, most of them from the city of Cleveland, not its surrounding suburbs. Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell served as Co-Chair of the Bush/Cheney Ohio reelection committee.
There also seems to be an abnormally high vote count for third party candidates who received less than one-half of one percent of the statewide vote total combined. For example, in precinct 4-F, the right-wing Constitutional Law candidate Peroutka received 215 votes to Bush?s 21 and Kerry?s 290. In this precinct, Kerry received 55% of the vote where Gore received 91% of the vote in the year 200. These numbers suggest that Kerry?s votes were inadvertently or intentionally shifted to Peroutka.
2004 President
Stealing votes in Columbus
by Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.
November 23, 2004
The Free Press on Election Day posted a disturbing story, later confirmed by the Columbus Dispatch. The Free Press reported that Franklin County Board of Elections Director Matt Damschroder deliberately withheld voting machines from predominantly black Democratic wards in Columbus, and dispersed some of the machines to affluent suburbs in Franklin County.
Damschroder is the former Executive Director of the Franklin County Republican Party. Sources close to the Board of Elections told the Free Press that Damschroder and Ohio?s Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell met with President George W. Bush in Columbus on Election Day.
The idea was to discourage turnout in Democratic wards by forcing voters to wait in long lines at the polling places. Such a strategy would be far more effective than encouraging turnout in Republican wards. Elections are all about margins. There are 74 wards in Columbus. George W. Bush won 12 wards, with a margin of 7.35%. John F. Kerry won 62 wards, with a margin of 37.62%. Affecting Kerry?s turnout would greatly reduce his margin of victory in Columbus, giving the Republicans a much better chance of overtaking Kerry given a strong enough showing in suburban and small town Republican strongholds.
COLUMBUS POPULAR VOTE (EXCLUDING PROVISIONAL BALLOTS)
Location Kerry Bush Others
Kerry Wards 141520 68.40% 63693 30.78% 1704 0.82%
Bush Wards 36228 46.01% 42015 53.36% 496 0.63%
Grand Total 177748 62.22% 105708 37.01% 2200 0.77%
In order to investigate this matter, I obtained from the Franklin County Board of Elections all the data I needed in order to calculate, ward by ward, and precinct by precinct: (1) The ratio of registered voters per voting machine. (2) Percent turnout, calculated as total ballots cast divided by the number of registered voters. (3) Percent for Kerry, calculated as votes cast for Kerry divided by votes cast for president. (4) Margin of victory or defeat for Kerry, calculated as the difference between the vote totals for Kerry and Bush.
The first thing I noticed was the distribution of turnout. There is a statistically significant difference between the turnout in the Bush precincts and the turnout in the Kerry precincts.
DISTRIBUTION OF TURNOUT
Percent Bush Kerry
Turnout Precincts Precincts
> 60 68 57
55-60 32 55
50-55 17 73
45-50 7 78
40-45 1 49
< 40 0 34
Total 125 346
Median Bush Precinct: 60.56%
Median Kerry Precinct: 50.78%
Best Bush Precinct: Ward 57, Precinct F
Bush 64.97% Kerry 34.82% Margin 30.05%
Best Kerry Precinct: Ward 17, Precinct D
Kerry 97.66% Bush 1.98% Margin 95.68%
Note: Ward 22, Precinct H was a tie.
As the above table shows, turnout was over 60% in 68 of 125 Bush precincts (54.4%), and over 50% in 117 of 125 Bush precincts (93.6%). By contrast, turnout was over 60% in only 57 of 346 Kerry precincts (16.5%), over 50% in only 185 of 346 Kerry precincts (53.5%), and under 40% in 34 of 346 Kerry precincts (9.8%).
Was the uneven distribution of turnout due to a lack of enthusiasm for the Democratic candidate? Or was it due to an uneven distribution of voting machines? To answer this question, I arranged the data, ward by ward, according to the ratio of registered voters per voting machine.
DISTRIBUTION OF VOTING MACHINES, TOP OF THE LIST
Ward Voters/ Percent Kerry Kerry
Machine Turnout Percent Margin
WARD 19 261.2 67.99 63.33 + 1491
WARD 65 265.1 60.10 44.33 - 496
WARD 30 266.4 56.25 52.50 + 147
WARD 72 267.4 62.33 39.42 - 774
WARD 22 274.1 60.21 54.89 + 465
WARD 28 276.2 58.48 82.04 + 2371
WARD 63 278.7 56.10 47.37 - 242
WARD 48 278.9 52.84 82.37 + 1909
WARD 46 279.8 58.22 55.19 + 981
WARD 70 285.5 61.17 50.95 + 79
WARD 06 292.9 47.44 91.29 + 2494
WARD 21 293.9 57.92 58.45 + 719
WARD 34 295.8 55.85 65.05 + 1051
WARD 69 296.4 57.97 41.98 - 1030
WARD 60 296.7 55.97 44.27 - 478
WARD 66 300.0 53.01 52.32 + 203
WARD 05 302.9 46.24 94.34 + 1854
WARD 62 303.2 57.96 55.68 + 760
WARD 45 303.8 57.89 55.47 + 1208
WARD 47 304.8 52.85 73.83 + 1534
WARD 20 306.2 61.96 71.46 + 1077
WARD 53 307.2 53.66 55.01 + 499
WARD 15 308.4 51.88 60.71 + 291
WARD 27 308.4 53.06 68.63 + 1283
WARD 56 308.6 55.71 82.75 + 4065
WARD 52 308.7 53.68 68.52 + 1610
WARD 10 311.5 57.18 47.58 - 560
WARD 67 313.1 54.17 48.03 - 221
WARD 64 313.6 52.73 47.88 - 153
WARD 57 314.2 56.81 48.74 - 155
WARD 50 316.4 59.54 77.14 + 1447
WARD 58 317.6 55.04 49.82 + 41
WARD 07 318.1 44.24 94.21 + 2332
WARD 36 318.7 53.31 50.57 + 91
WARD 43 319.9 56.27 58.53 + 475
WARD 73 320.6 58.23 44.18 - 1032
WARD 71 322.2 53.93 47.58 - 307
WARD 74 322.8 55.02 46.19 - 339
As the above table shows, the 38 wards in which the number of registered voters per voting machine was the lowest enjoyed high voter turnout. All but 3 of the 38 wards at the top of Damschroder?s list had a turnout above 50%, and 6 of the 38 wards at the top of the list had a turnout above 60%. All 12 of the Bush wards are included in the top of the list. The 26 Kerry wards in the top of the list are not his biggest strongholds. In only 13 of the 26 wards did Kerry exceed his city wide share of 62.22% of the vote, which makes 13 of 38 wards altogether. However, these Kerry wards did enjoy a high voter turnout. In 23 of the 26 wards, Kerry?s turnout exceeded that of his median precinct, 50.78%. Turnout exceeded 55% in 14 Kerry wards, and exceeded 60% in 3 Kerry wards. Clearly, Kerry enjoyed a higher turnout where the polling places had enough voting machines. What about the bottom of the list?
DISTRIBUTION OF VOTING MACHINES, BOTTOM OF THE LIST
Ward Voters/ Percent Kerry Kerry
Machine Turnout Percent Margin
WARD 38 324.4 48.15 67.32 + 546
WARD 35 327.5 50.90 92.36 + 2104
WARD 17 330.6 48.67 93.12 + 2465
WARD 42 330.6 46.34 70.77 + 966
WARD 14 333.4 49.37 81.31 + 2068
WARD 13 338.6 44.91 93.36 + 1702
WARD 44 340.7 48.87 72.98 + 3212
WARD 18 342.4 55.15 76.84 + 2043
WARD 51 343.6 46.93 88.59 + 1857
WARD 61 345.6 49.28 62.35 + 594
WARD 68 347.3 44.61 75.43 + 950
WARD 04 348.6 37.69 91.75 + 1643
WARD 32 348.7 55.11 58.82 + 456
WARD 26 349.3 41.34 89.69 + 1692
WARD 33 350.1 52.64 69.19 + 1803
WARD 54 350.6 52.77 59.82 + 668
WARD 49 353.9 50.76 54.45 + 370
WARD 25 354.6 52.90 91.57 + 3872
WARD 24 356.9 48.99 68.47 + 991
WARD 37 356.9 44.37 58.99 + 441
WARD 02 357.1 52.56 69.94 + 1517
WARD 11 365.4 49.14 58.80 + 531
WARD 31 367.0 45.05 69.86 + 1000
WARD 29 369.2 45.65 61.09 + 417
WARD 16 369.5 44.61 75.98 + 1732
WARD 09 373.4 35.06 68.71 + 497
WARD 39 374.4 46.29 70.06 + 711
WARD 55 377.3 43.55 88.64 + 1644
WARD 59 381.2 48.32 54.16 + 288
WARD 08 381.8 41.52 68.99 + 974
WARD 40 381.8 42.41 78.15 + 1205
WARD 03 396.9 44.69 84.66 + 1728
WARD 41 400.5 40.22 65.95 + 1110
WARD 23 400.9 47.57 73.47 + 1252
WARD 01 407.1 44.37 68.50 + 744
WARD 12 423.9 41.81 86.47 + 1557
As the above table shows, the 36 wards in which the number of registered voters per voting machine was the highest suffered low voter turnout. All but 8 of the 36 wards at the bottom of Damschroder?s list had a turnout below 50%, and 2 of the 36 wards at the bottom of the list had a turnout below 40%. All 36 of the wards at the bottom of the list were won by Kerry, and they include most of his strongholds. In 29 of the 36 wards, Kerry exceeded his city wide share of 62.22% of the vote. However, these wards suffered a low voter turnout. In only 7 of the 36 wards did Kerry?s turnout exceed that of his median precinct, 50.78%. Turnout was below 45% in 14 of the 36 wards, and was below 40% in 2 Kerry wards. Clearly, Kerry suffered a lower turnout where the polling places did not have enough voting machines.
A similar pattern is evident when examining the data for individual precincts. I have arranged the data in the same manner as above, precinct by precinct, according to the ratio of registered voters per voting machine. The 61 precincts with the lowest ratio of registered voters per voting machine are shown below:
PRECINCTS WITH THE MOST VOTING MACHINES
Ward & Voters/ Percent Kerry Kerry
Precinct Machine Turnout Percent Margin
60-G 166.0 65.06 40.99 - 56
22-H 176.3 63.52 49.23 0
63-I 180.0 53.52 52.10 + 14
28-G 185.7 57.99 76.34 + 170
69-G 190.0 53.16 48.33 - 10
63-E 192.3 62.05 43.75 - 41
52-H 192.7 52.08 70.76 + 133
70-C 199.5 63.73 50.47 + 12
67-K 212.7 64.58 42.16 - 61
65-G 213.8 61.57 40.15 - 153
46-F 215.7 65.84 39.71 - 85
30-C 216.7 66.00 50.95 + 10
65-D 219.3 65.65 44.08 - 50
33-H 221.7 52.48 78.03 + 195
72-D 228.0 67.21 38.30 - 136
46-I 228.2 64.68 54.96 + 76
69-D 228.6 64.48 47.81 - 29
28-E 229.0 69.98 88.23 + 488
21-E 231.0 68.57 58.93 + 142
19-D 232.0 66.55 58.87 + 142
64-D 235.3 58.50 47.33 - 20
46-A 235.7 61.53 48.85 - 10
71-A 236.3 67.14 42.19 - 69
10-E 238.6 67.73 36.63 - 211
56-C 239.3 63.51 74.67 + 224
57-D 240.0 67.33 43.50 - 102
19-G 241.0 68.36 58.66 + 117
21-F 242.0 66.63 57.98 + 105
57-H 242.3 63.82 50.22 + 6
15-B 242.5 62.47 54.62 + 68
34-E 242.7 63.32 59.04 + 90
60-F 242.8 64.37 37.18 - 155
10-H 244.0 64.07 49.46 - 2
66-F 244.3 66.85 46.42 - 32
57-K 245.0 68.42 46.31 - 75
18-D 246.7 67.97 71.49 + 217
72-A 247.0 64.68 40.13 - 122
18-E 247.3 62.89 75.84 + 308
65-H 247.3 50.27 54.86 + 40
48-D 247.5 56.67 83.70 + 380
14-D 249.7 56.88 79.48 + 252
19-C 250.0 72.00 59.55 + 139
70-E 250.0 51.11 65.83 + 167
46-B 250.8 58.13 51.94 + 27
60-D 251.5 63.62 45.02 - 61
45-I 251.6 52.31 56.31 + 85
64-H 252.8 54.70 52.28 + 26
48-E 253.0 58.50 62.33 + 78
73-E 253.1 60.78 49.67 - 1
06-E 254.0 50.49 94.43 + 453
70-D 255.3 66.41 50.30 + 11
66-D 255.6 55.79 48.52 - 18
69-C 255.8 54.50 36.10 - 186
42-C 256.0 61.98 57.14 + 74
46-L 256.0 66.54 57.84 + 162
10-P 256.5 65.30 35.33 - 190
47-F 257.7 50.84 76.96 + 211
45-H 259.8 60.59 44.03 - 183
19-B 261.0 70.11 60.80 + 164
52-B 261.5 62.43 62.21 + 159
69-I 261.5 68.36 37.80 - 169
As the table above shows, of the 61 precincts with the most voting machines per registered voter, 26 were won by Bush, 34 were won by Kerry, and one was a tie. Again, Bush enjoys disproportional favoritism. Bush won 125 precincts and 26 of them (20.80%) are represented here. Kerry won 346 precincts, only 34 (0.98%) are represented here, and they are not his major strongholds. In only 12 of the 34 Kerry precincts did he exceed his city wide share of 62.22% of the vote, which makes 12 of 61 precincts altogether. Most of these precincts enjoyed high voter turnout. In all 61 precincts, turnout was above 50%. In 42 of the 61 precincts, turnout was above that of Bush?s median precinct, 60.56%. Of these 42 precincts, 22 were won by Bush, and 20 were won by Kerry. This proves once and for all that the Kerry precincts could have enjoyed a voter turnout similar to that of the Bush precincts, if only they had been supplied with enough voting machines.
And what of the precincts with not enough voting machines? The 60 precincts with the highest ratio of registered voters per voting machine are shown below:
PRECINCTS WITH THE FEWEST VOTING MACHINES
Ward & Voters/ Percent Kerry Kerry
Precinct Machine Turnout Percent Margin
12-A 551.7 34.50 84.96 + 407
01-B 540.0 34.57 68.41 + 211
25-B 507.7 41.56 91.33 + 522
23-B 501.0 41.38 79.13 + 363
41-C 490.0 38.91 60.53 + 127
60-E 481.0 40.47 51.05 + 15
11-A 476.7 35.24 74.80 + 252
18-A 475.0 48.77 80.46 + 430
59-D 464.3 45.51 59.46 + 123
03-D 462.3 46.21 79.15 + 374
03-A 461.0 37.09 92.37 + 442
54-C 459.7 40.54 63.82 + 159
40-A 458.0 40.90 77.10 + 312
10-U 455.0 52.00 53.15 + 85
12-B 453.3 38.60 92.31 + 445
61-C 449.7 43.66 70.31 + 234
49-E 447.3 38.75 52.70 + 30
55-B 446.0 42.38 91.80 + 473
23-A 444.0 45.12 81.76 + 381
09-B 439.8 28.82 68.66 + 195
02-A 439.7 38.06 80.32 + 308
57-A 437.3 42.91 65.41 + 176
31-C 437.0 39.97 65.07 + 160
16-E 436.7 41.98 68.50 + 205
32-C 436.3 43.54 60.99 + 128
74-F 436.3 45.23 51.86 + 25
54-A 435.7 46.82 67.77 + 218
11-D 435.0 47.28 55.67 + 81
69-H 433.8 54.76 40.93 - 167
53-G 432.7 45.30 68.49 + 219
10-C 431.0 39.68 81.80 + 321
69-J 428.8 47.00 47.44 - 38
67-A 427.3 54.37 41.99 - 108
16-C 427.0 40.28 77.13 + 475
29-A 426.0 36.85 70.81 + 196
04-C 423.3 32.44 89.46 + 332
41-D 423.0 42.47 64.75 + 165
36-G 421.0 37.29 66.52 + 156
08-D 419.7 51.55 69.47 + 253
42-A 417.7 40.30 81.64 + 321
57-B 417.0 48.28 57.87 + 97
73-B 415.0 41.69 46.41 - 29
26-A 413.0 41.81 89.88 + 403
02-B 412.3 53.27 69.54 + 263
52-E 412.0 46.60 87.39 + 431
08-A 411.6 30.95 79.75 + 381
73-J 411.6 63.56 42.62 - 189
44-A 409.7 48.90 86.36 + 434
57-G 409.0 43.60 50.00 + 7
33-C 407.0 47.42 64.11 + 170
46-J 405.7 47.99 66.38 + 197
44-B 405.3 45.97 81.37 + 348
44-G 405.0 37.22 79.02 + 348
71-B 404.3 42.04 49.80 + 1
49-D 403.7 45.33 51.58 + 22
24-B 402.7 45.45 65.50 + 174
39-A 401.0 46.05 67.51 + 398
55-D 400.7 42.43 87.38 + 382
10-A 400.3 39.72 55.91 + 60
45-J 398.8 57.30 58.77 + 165
As the table above shows, of the 60 precincts with the fewest voting machines per registered voter, only 5 were won by Bush, and 55 were won by Kerry. Again, Bush enjoys disproportional favoritism. Bush won 125 precincts, and only 5 of them (4.00%) are represented here. Kerry won 346 precincts, 55 (15.9%) are represented here, and they include his major strongholds. In 41 of the 55 Kerry precincts, he exceeded his city wide share of 62.22% of the vote. None of these precincts enjoyed high voter turnout. In only 7 of the precincts was turnout was above 50%. Of these, 4 were won by Kerry, and 3 were won by Bush. Turnout was below 45% in 34 precincts, below 40% in 16 precincts, below 35% in 5 precincts, and below 30% in one precinct.
It is important to understand what these numbers mean. The polls in Ohio were open from 6:30 A.M. to 7:30 P.M. That is 13 hours, or 780 minutes. If there are 400 registered voters per voting machine, and turnout is 60%, each voter has less than 3.5 minutes to vote, and that is assuming a steady stream of voters, with no rushes at certain hours. It also assumes no challenges to voters at the polls. If there are 550 registered voters per voting machine, and the turnout is 60%, each voter has 2.4 minutes.
All of this amounts to theft of votes. It has been shown above that the Kerry precincts enjoyed a voter turnout similar to that of the Bush precincts when supplied with enough voting machines.
It is an easy matter to calculate, assuming the same vote percentages for each ward, how many more votes John Kerry would have gotten with a 60% voter turnout. This is not an unreasonable number. The median Bush precinct enjoyed a turnout of 60.56%. The turnout was 66.31% for Cincinnati, city wide.
I am aware that because the Franklin County Board of Elections did not purge its voter rolls, there are more registered voters than adults listed as living in Franklin County by the United States Census. There are many ?registered? voters who are dead or have moved away. One might expect, therefore, a lower percentage of voter turnout in Cleveland than in Cincinnati. However, 60% of the voting age population is a reasonable figure. Presidential elections have surpassed this figure four times in my lifetime: 1952 (61.6%), 1960 (62.8%), 1964 (61.9%), and 1968 (60.9%). In 1992 the figure was 55.9%, and the 2004 election was probably more hotly contested.
PROJECTED COLUMBUS RETURNS WITH 60% TURNOUT
Ward or Percent Kerry With 60% Gain or
Precinct Turnout Margin Turnout Loss
WARD 01 44.37 + 744 + 1006 + 262
WARD 02 52.56 + 1517 + 1732 + 215
WARD 03 44.69 + 1728 + 2320 + 592
WARD 04 37.69 + 1643 + 2616 + 973
WARD 05 46.24 + 1854 + 2406 + 552
WARD 06 47.44 + 2494 + 3154 + 660
WARD 07 44.24 + 2332 + 3163 + 831
WARD 08 41.52 + 974 + 1408 + 434
WARD 09 35.06 + 497 + 851 + 354
WARD 10 57.18 - 560 - 588 - 28
WARD 11 49.14 + 531 + 648 + 117
WARD 12 41.81 + 1557 + 2234 + 677
WARD 13 44.91 + 1702 + 2274 + 572
WARD 14 49.37 + 2068 + 2513 + 445
WARD 15 51.88 + 291 + 337 + 46
WARD 16 44.61 + 1732 + 2330 + 598
WARD 17 48.67 + 2465 + 3039 + 574
WARD 18 55.15 + 2043 + 2223 + 180
WARD 19 67.99 + 1491
WARD 20 61.96 + 1077
WARD 21 57.92 + 719 + 745 + 26
WARD 22 60.21 + 465
WARD 23 47.57 + 1252 + 1579 + 327
WARD 24 48.99 + 991 + 1214 + 223
WARD 25 52.90 + 3872 + 4392 + 520
WARD 26 41.34 + 1692 + 2456 + 764
WARD 27 53.06 + 1283 + 1451 + 168
WARD 28 58.48 + 2371 + 2433 + 62
WARD 29 45.65 + 417 + 548 + 131
WARD 30 56.25 + 147 + 157 + 10
WARD 31 45.05 + 1000 + 1332 + 332
WARD 32 55.11 + 456 + 496 + 40
WARD 33 52.64 + 1803 + 2055 + 252
WARD 34 55.85 + 1051 + 1129 + 78
WARD 35 50.90 + 2104 + 2480 + 376
WARD 36 53.31 + 91 + 102 + 11
WARD 37 44.37 + 441 + 596 + 155
WARD 38 48.15 + 546 + 680 + 134
WARD 39 46.29 + 711 + 922 + 211
WARD 40 42.41 + 1205 + 1705 + 500
WARD 41 40.22 + 1110 + 1656 + 546
WARD 42 46.34 + 966 + 1251 + 285
WARD 43 56.27 + 475 + 506 + 31
WARD 44 48.87 + 3212 + 3944 + 732
WARD 45 57.89 + 1208 + 1252 + 44
WARD 46 58.22 + 981 + 1011 + 30
WARD 47 52.85 + 1534 + 1742 + 208
WARD 48 52.84 + 1909 + 2168 + 259
WARD 49 50.76 + 370 + 437 + 67
WARD 50 59.54 + 1447 + 1458 + 11
WARD 51 46.93 + 1857 + 2374 + 517
WARD 52 53.68 + 1610 + 1800 + 190
WARD 53 53.66 + 499 + 558 + 59
WARD 54 52.77 + 668 + 760 + 92
WARD 55 43.55 + 1644 + 2265 + 621
WARD 56 55.71 + 4065 + 4378 + 313
WARD 57 56.81 - 155 - 164 - 9
WARD 58 55.04 + 41 + 45 + 4
WARD 59 48.32 + 288 + 358 + 70
WARD 60 55.97 - 478 - 512 - 34
WARD 61 49.28 + 594 + 723 + 129
WARD 62 57.96 + 760 + 787 + 27
WARD 63 56.10 - 242 - 259 - 17
WARD 64 52.73 - 153 - 174 - 21
WARD 65 60.10 - 496
WARD 66 53.01 + 203 + 230 + 27
WARD 67 54.17 - 221 - 245 - 24
WARD 68 44.61 + 950 + 1278 + 328
WARD 69 57.97 - 1030 - 1066 - 36
WARD 70 61.17 + 79
WARD 71 53.93 - 307 - 342 - 35
WARD 72 62.33 - 774
WARD 73 58.23 - 1032 - 1063 - 31
WARD 74 55.02 - 339 - 370 - 31
GRAND TOTAL +16788
Thus I conclude that the withholding of voting machines from predominantly Democratic wards in the City of Columbus cost John Kerry upwards of 17,000 votes. A more detailed calculation could be done on a precinct by precinct basis, but that is not necessary here. The purpose is to illustrate the magnitude of the conspiracy.
Matt Damschroder did not act alone. There are 74 wards and 472 precincts in Columbus, Ohio. It is not possible for one person to have delivered all the voting machines, and it is unlikely that nobody else was involved in planning where to deliver them. Anyone who associated with Mr. Damschroder on or shortly before Election Day should be investigated for possible complicity.
Richard Hayes Phillips, Ph.D.
Canton, New York