20140711 - Original T-C Article: "Don't ignore concerns about Boulder County vote counting" http://tinyurl.com/pngkwm8 From the article: "Boulder County Clerk and Recorder Hillary Hall and Democratic Party representatives have taken the approach that the law has been or will be satisfied and that the results this year - as they were in 2012 - will likely be certified by the secretary of state's office, currently held by a Republican." 20140711 - Comment from NextVoiceUHear: Local Boulder County elections in 2012 were NOT certified by the Secretary of State. He only certified national races for Boulder County. That means (at least) that the "election" of two County Commissioners (Gardner and Jones) in 2012 are clouded. Ditto for a Longmont tax. NVUH 20140712 - Reply from GesHoo to NextVoiceUHear: That makes no sense to me. Why would he certified ANY election results on a set of ballots if he thought the ballots were compromised? it seems to me that if he were going to disqualify anything on a set of ballots, he should have disqualified everything on that set of ballots. 20140712 - Reply from Carroll1776 to GesHoo: Good question, but there are two different sets of rules governing Colorado State offices and Federal Elections. There are only two conditions in the State CSRs covering state elections. That is the number of ballots mailed out cannot exceed the number of registered voters; nor can the number of votes counted in a given precinct exceed the number of votes counted. That's it period and this is a formula for corruption if their is no integrity governing the process inside those two parameters. In the last national election I believe there were 110% more votes counted in one of Longmonts's precincts when less than 40% voters on the average across the whole voter population voted. You might ask how in the hell could that happen? Well inside the total population of BoCo voters there are two categories, those in good standing and those who did not vote in the previous national election who must re-register. Well for one thing since "standing" is not covered in the CSRs the BoCo Clerk was instructed by the BoCo Commissioners to release 40,000 "not in good standing" previously registered voters who didn't meet the requirements ballots in the last 3 or 4 weeks before the election. Now we can quibble over whether that is right or wrong but that would be over ethics. Our politics are no longer ethical because the political have chosen to reduce the nature and quality of our ethical standards to the lowest common denominator which is the law. That's political and in this day people can change it or amend it depending on who they elect. But what if that option is taken away from you by a manipulated vote by people in power who wish to neutralize your vote? In fact how could that even be done in the good ole USA? Well the Commissions have that all figured out. Send all the ballouts out to an independent mailing service as BoCo has chosen to do by sending them to Arvada. Include in the contract to the mailing agency a provision no one or agency can audit their records; and to make matters air tight don't publicize who is actually in control of the mailings because the law also does not cover this, only that the clerk must receive the ballots directly by return mail, which can be from anyone on the planet if they are in control of the ballots the clerk previously released to this 3rd party. Now Oregon pioneered mail vote ballots MVB years ago and immediately discover their own elections were being corrupted. So they reformed the system by contracting with UPS who by contract is required to post who they sent ballots too and their are return receipts by whom received the ballots. That system is auditable to confirm registered, qualified votes actually received the ballots; there is a lot more too it than that, but Oregon's experience puts the spotlight on the fundamental flaw from the get-go of BoCo's inherently corrupt MVB system. It should not matter what party, because the election process is the core element to maintaining our free society, so if the system is corrupt everyone of us lose our liberty, not just the controlling party.So this leads to the situtation whereby the Clerk is certifying his'her own reelections no matter which party is in control. That's ok for Vladimir Putin's Russia but is it ok for Hillary Hall's BoCo people? EOF