Wisconsin Supreme Court Recount – Day 2 (and some recall news)

posted at 3:32 pm on April 29, 2011 by Steve Eggleston

There actually is a dearth of stories from Wisconsin media today on the recount in the Supreme Court race. A quick scan of various state media sites turned up only stories filed about yesterday’s start to the recount, and those were almost completely without exception general “the recount has started slowly but surely” pieces.

That is not to say that there wasn’t any news today. The first bit of news came when the Government Accountability Board took down the running-total spreadsheet this morning, with very little explanation and a promise to have a revised one up by noon. Noon came and went without an update, but a fuller explanation came just after 5 pm – they made some data entry errors yesterday.

I’ll cut them just a bit of slack; this is the first election where either the GAB or its predecessor State Elections Board has reported any election results other than the official and certified numbers. However, this is also not the first time this election they had to pull back reported unofficial numbers; while the counties were reporting their canvassed totals, GAB pulled back numbers reported for two different counties for unspecified reasons, then put up revised numbers before the last county reported just before the deadline. In those two cases, a total of six reported votes were affected.

As of 6:05 pm, they released an updated spreadsheet, with 52 reporting units “reviewed by G.A.B. staff”. Consequently, I have updated my tracking spreadsheet with the numbers from (and only from) those 52 reporting units. I almost don’t want to report the change from such a small number of the 3,602 reporting units, mostly because there are a significant number of counties that have reported results from reporting units to the GAB but have not had numbers entered into GAB’s spreadsheet, but Prosser did gain a net 10 votes on his pre-recount 7,316-vote lead.

The other item comes out of Waukesha County, from a friend who was at the recount, Kyle Maichle (note; the vote totals Kyle mentions were not included above):

Day 2 of the recount in Waukesha County resulted in all of the wards in the Town of Brookfield and the Town of Delafield fully counted. Waukesha County Spokeswoman Ellen Nowak, told me that there is no change on Prosser’s lead in Waukesha County. The only thing has had change was the votes that Prosser gained yesterday in the Town of Brookfield.

After recount activity resumed after the lunch break, there was a very contentious moment when ballot bags for the Town of Delafield were about to be opened. A Kloppenburg campaign attorney challenged one of the bags due to no inspector statement written on the bag. After both campaigns huddled with the presiding judge to go over the ballot bag issue, the Clerk for the Town of Delafield was asked to testify to campaign representatives and the canvassers to determine if the ballots should be allowed. The Board of Canvassers unanimously rejected the Kloppenburg Campaign’s challenge and allowed the ballots to be counted.

There were two other ballot issues today involving the Town of Brookfield. In wards 9 and 10, one ballot was never assigned a voter number and canvassers had to examine if the ballot was valid. In wards 5 and 7, a hand recount of Prosser absentee ballots were ordered after one of their attorneys successfully challenged the canvassing board on grounds that two folded absentee ballots issued on election day were put in the wrong pile.

Do note the “unanimously” above. That means Ramona Kitzinger, the Democrat on the canvassing board, voted to reject Kloppenburg’s challenge of the bag of ballots in question. Side question – what is the over/under on Kitzinger recanting that decision in the same vein of her recantation of her declaration the canvas was on the up-and-up?

Meanwhile, Wisconsin political news was dominated by the recalls (first 2 items courtesy the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, the third courtesy WisPolitics):

  • The Democrats turned in recall petitions against the 6th of their targeted 8 Senate Repbulicans, Robert Cowles (R-Green Bay). There’s going to be more elections than I anticipated, but I still am not moving off my early prediction of a 2-2 split of flips or a 3-2 Republican advantage.
  • The local-based group that fell just short of enough signatures to force a recall of Senate Minority Leader Mark Miller (D-Monona) said that it will not consolidate its efforts with those of the Utah-based American Patriot Recall Coalition.
  • The GAB has gone to court to seek an extension of the 31-day signature review period of the recall petitions against Sens. Dan Kapanke (R-La Crosse) and Randy Hopper (R-Fond du Lac) so that the first 8 recall elections (or at least primaries; if more than one Democrat, one Republican or one Constitution Party candidate files to run, the first election would be a partisan primary with the general recall election 4 weeks later) could all be held on the same day, July 12. In response, the Democrat Party of Wisconsin wants to force at least three separate recall election dates – one for Kapanke and Hopper, one for Sens. Jim Holperin (D-Conover), Bob Wirch (D-Burlington), Dave Hansen (D-Green Bay), Luther Olsen (R-Ripon), Sheila Harsdorf (R-River Falls) and Alberta Darling (R-River Hills), and a third for Cowles.

Revisions/extensions (8:46 am 4/28/2011) - For those of you who think Kloppenburg will go quietly into the good night once the recount affirms Prosser’s win, WisPolitics has a dose of cold water for you – Kloppenburg campaign says ‘anomalies’ warrant more review.

Back at my blog, I’ve resurrected a category I had hoped would remain permanently retired – “Grand Theft Courts”. That bit of news is another datum in the theory that Kloppenburg intends to have a judge (or as I tend to call the liberal ones, Lawgiver-In-Black) overturn the results of the election.

R&E part 2 (11:48 am 4/29/2011) - WISC-TV’s Jessica Arp is live-tweeting the court proceedings in the “recall election consolidation” case. Running through the by-the-book timeline (31 days after the petitions are received to review, GAB needs to determine whether the petitions are sufficient for filing, then 6 weeks plus the days to the following Tuesday if the 6 weeks doesn’t end on a Tuesday before the election), the recall election of Cowles would also be on July 12, which would, if GAB is successful, put all 9 recall elections (or primaries as the case may be) on the same day.

I blog over at No Runny Eggs, and am on Twitter @steveegg

This post was promoted from GreenRoom to HotAir.com.
To see the comments on the original post, look here.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Finally.

So is there any indication how this is playing with the public? Yes, I guess I mean polls.

And how is the press covering the items you mention about break ins and phones and such?

As long as real information is getting out there is hope.

petunia on April 29, 2011 at 3:19 PM

petunia on April 29, 2011 at 3:35 PM

They need to get some union volunteers to help them with the counting.

“People, we’ll be here counting, and counting again until these numbers come out correct!!!!”

Hening on April 29, 2011 at 3:37 PM

The NFL draft was yesterday and HA’s completely ignoring it in favor of this kinda stuff?

Akzed on April 29, 2011 at 3:38 PM

Revisions/extensions (8:46 am 4/28/2011) – For those of you who think Kloppenburg will go quietly into the good night once the recount affirms Prosser’s win, WisPolitics has a dose of cold water for you – Kloppenburg campaign says ‘anomalies’ warrant more review.

Back at my blog, I’ve resurrected a category I had hoped would remain permanently retired – “Grand Theft Courts”. That bit of news is another datum in the theory that Kloppenburg intends to have a judge (or as I tend to call the liberal ones, Lawgiver-In-Black) overturn the results of the election.

What a surprise.

Win at all costs, and if you lose, steal the election.

fossten on April 29, 2011 at 3:43 PM

Kloppenpuss should be forced to pay for this whole thing.

NJ Red on April 29, 2011 at 3:45 PM

The NFL draft was yesterday and HA’s completely ignoring it in favor of this kinda stuff?

Akzed on April 29, 2011 at 3:38 PM

Haven’t had a chance to digest the early draft picks-all I know is my Patriots friends are whining that the Saints took the Pats to the cleaners in that trade they made in the first round. The Saints got running back Mark Ingram, who won the Heisman in 2009. Needless to say Reggie Bush may not be long for the Dats.

Del Dolemonte on April 29, 2011 at 3:45 PM

That bit of news is another datum in the theory that Kloppenburg intends to have a judge (or as I tend to call the liberal ones, Lawgiver-In-Black) overturn the results of the election.

Doesn’t that require some legal grounds? Seriously, based on what? Maybe Judge Sue-Me would try that, but it would have to come from a higher court, right?

iurockhead on April 29, 2011 at 3:47 PM

Increasingly, democrats stand for nothing but lie, cheat, steal, tear down, and destroy. What an awful party. I continue to be appalled that I share my country with people who think this party has anything of value to offer the citizenry.

Rational Thought on April 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Flat out, Klopperfluffer will have to dragged, kicking, screaming, clawing like a rabid cat, by WI state police from the justice’s chambers and locked in a jail cell to keep her from trying to steal this election.

This time next year she will STILL be doing her level best to sue someone, anyone, into giving her the seat; the woman is a creepy weirdo.

Bishop on April 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM

Tip

Behar compares Palin to jock itch

Nearly Nobody on April 29, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Kloppenpuss should be forced to pay for this whole thing.

NJ Red on April 29, 2011 at 3:45 PM

Yes and the unions should be made to pay for the damages to the capitol building.

tinkerthinker on April 29, 2011 at 3:56 PM

Tip

Behar compares Palin to jock itch

Nearly Nobody on April 29, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Why do you listen to her?

She gets more powerful because she makes you mad.

Ignore these idiots they know what they are doing, and you are helping them do it.

petunia on April 29, 2011 at 4:01 PM

Great reporting. Any developments on Judge Sue Me’s injunction dysfunctions?

Mark30339 on April 29, 2011 at 4:05 PM

Doesn’t that require some legal grounds? Seriously, based on what? Maybe Judge Sue-Me would try that, but it would have to come from a higher court, right?

iurockhead on April 29, 2011 at 3:47 PM

I can predict, with more than the usual amount of confidence, the reserve judge who will get that case – former Supreme Court justice Louis Butler (tossed off the court in 2008 by we the voters after being appointed by former governor Jim Doyle). There are a multitude of reasons he’s known as “Loophole Louis”, chief among them his decision in a case that, for a few years, allowed people to sue paint companies that never made lead paint because they bought companies that may or may not have made the lead paint that affected them.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Great reporting. Any developments on Judge Sue Me’s injunction dysfunctions?

Mark30339 on April 29, 2011 at 4:05 PM

Nothing definitive on that front, sorry.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Tip

Behar compares Palin to jock itch

Nearly Nobody on April 29, 2011 at 3:54 PM

Palin’s beauty, like jock itch, may give some men the desire to scratch their “junk”. Which is more than one can say about Behar.

Steve Z on April 29, 2011 at 4:06 PM

I suspect Kloppenburg will keep the outrage/litigation/whatever going until the recall elections in July.

The Dems need to keep the lefty outrage level high for their GOTV.

Wethal on April 29, 2011 at 4:07 PM

The NFL draft was yesterday and HA’s completely ignoring it in favor of this kinda stuff?

Akzed on April 29, 2011 at 3:38 PM

It was just the first round last night, and I don’t know enough about college ball to properly analyze it.

As for the rest of the crew, I can’t speak for them.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:08 PM

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Wouldn’t the reserve judge have to be a retired judge, rather than one who got tossed off the bench?

Wethal on April 29, 2011 at 4:09 PM

Akzed on April 29, 2011 at 3:38 PM

Just the first round was yesterday. Rounds 2-3 are today, and 4-7 are tomorrow. But I agree, there needs to be an open thread. Round 2 starts in a little under 2 hours.

As for the topic at hand…I just want to see a side-by-side of the original and recount vote tallies. If Kloppenitis pulls this off by gaining 7500+ votes, I’m guessing the libs will have dumped them in from one county/precinct.

Left Coast Right Mind on April 29, 2011 at 4:15 PM

This time next year she will STILL be doing her level best to sue someone, anyone, into giving her the seat; the woman is a creepy weirdo.

Bishop on April 29, 2011 at 3:49 PM

The good news is there’s only one bite at that apple. The bad is she’ll still be doing her main job as chief persec…er, prosecutor of those who, through whatever circumstances, find themselves on the wrong side of the DNR’s shoreline protection administrative rule, NR 115.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Wouldn’t the reserve judge have to be a retired judge, rather than one who got tossed off the bench?

Wethal on April 29, 2011 at 4:09 PM

Wish it were that way, but no matter what the reason for departure from the bench is, a departing judge is eligible to apply to become a reserve judge.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:17 PM

As for the topic at hand…I just want to see a side-by-side of the original and recount vote tallies. If Kloppenitis pulls this off by gaining 7500+ votes, I’m guessing the libs will have dumped them in from one county/precinct.

Left Coast Right Mind on April 29, 2011 at 4:15 PM

The Government Accountability Board does have a spreadsheet that lists both the unofficial recounted totals and the pre-recount county-canvassed totals, but it does not contain the difference (one can, if one has Microsoft Excel or a spreadsheet program which can read Excel files, create a formula to do that on their spreadsheet). In fact, that spreadsheet is the basis for my tracking spreadsheet (also linked up in the post) which does contain the difference.

Housekeeping note – while the GAB updates their spreadsheet twice daily (and in fact, did so just after noon), I plan on waiting until the second update around 6 so I can include that in the daily update posts that start off in the Green Room (and my blog).

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:25 PM

As for the requests for an NFL draft open thread, unless you want one in the Green Room, I can’t quite help you. My key ring doesn’t cover the door to the front page (honestly, rightly so).

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:28 PM

That means Ramona Kitzinger, the Democrat on the canvassing board, voted…

Wait a minute. Am I correct in understanding that Kathy Nickolaus was removed from this process but that Ramona Kitzinger, who later changed her story to say the she’s old and easily confused, was allowed to remain involved in the process?

Big John on April 29, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Anybody in any of the three districts that we’re going after the Dems have any idea on potential challengers?

lowandslow on April 29, 2011 at 4:34 PM

Wait a minute. Am I correct in understanding that Kathy Nickolaus was removed from this process but that Ramona Kitzinger, who later changed her story to say the she’s old and easily confused, was allowed to remain involved in the process?

Big John on April 29, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Because Nicklaus had the intelligence and integrity to realize her continued presence might leave the recount open to criticism by Dems.

Wethal on April 29, 2011 at 4:41 PM

So is there any indication how this is playing with the public? Yes, I guess I mean polls.

And how is the press covering the items you mention about break ins and phones and such?

As long as real information is getting out there is hope.

petunia on April 29, 2011 at 3:19 PM

Sorry about the lack of links for the historic items, but my archives are a bit “scattered” at the moment.

The only poll that I saw was one taken about a month ago by Public Policy Polling for DailyKos on the 8 Republicans. It suggested that Kapanke and Hopper were as good as gone, and Olsen and Harsdorf were in potential trouble.

There were local press reports of the break-in at the Recall Hansen office (which did not mention the number of petitions taken; that info came from the group itself) and of the caller-ID fraud (also in the Hansen district). The remainder of the information came mostly from the recall committees themselves.

Fresh info that came across my feed reader since I put the post up in the Green Room are reports of phone intimidation by the DPW against signers of the Recall Holperin and Recall Wirch groups (courtesy Kevin Fischer and William Jacobson, respectively).

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:43 PM

Wait a minute. Am I correct in understanding that Kathy Nickolaus was removed from this process but that Ramona Kitzinger, who later changed her story to say the she’s old and easily confused, was allowed to remain involved in the process?

Big John on April 29, 2011 at 4:33 PM

Except for the fact that Nickoulas removed herself from the Board of Canvassers for the recount (she is still present because she, as county clerk, is ultimately in charge of the election process in Waukesha County), you pretty much got it.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Anybody in any of the three districts that we’re going after the Dems have any idea on potential challengers?

lowandslow on April 29, 2011 at 4:34 PM

The only name I’ve heard being tossed about with any certainty is Representative John Nygren, who would be challenging Hansen. Of note, until the GAB actually calls for the election, nomination papers can’t be circulated, and then potential candidates would have 2 weeks (plus, if it isn’t already Tuesday, until the following Tuesday), or until 4 weeks before the election, to get 400 signatures.

I must note, however, I’m not in any of those three districts, so there may (and probably are) names I’m not aware of.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 4:50 PM

What a surprise.

Win at all costs, and if you lose, steal the election.

fossten on April 29, 2011 at 3:43 PM

Hey, it worked for Stuart Smalley!

Wonder if Proud Rino and crr6 are there as “Recount Observers”?

Del Dolemonte on April 29, 2011 at 4:55 PM

The NFL draft was yesterday and HA’s completely ignoring it in favor of this kinda stuff?

Akzed on April 29, 2011 at 3:38 PM

That’s because Ed’s on vacation. He’s Hot Air’s NFL guy.

joejm65 on April 29, 2011 at 5:07 PM

Fresh info that came across my feed reader since I put the post up in the Green Room are reports of phone intimidation by the DPW against signers of the Recall Holperin

Yes!! My son received a call and said “yes I signed it I want him outta there.” It was from a 920 Verizon number was all I could find on google.

qestout on April 29, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Oh, I forgot to mention, this was on his cellphone, and I don’t recall listing phone numbers on the recall petition. How did they get it?

qestout on April 29, 2011 at 5:24 PM

Oh, I forgot to mention, this was on his cellphone, and I don’t recall listing phone numbers on the recall petition. How did they get it?

qestout on April 29, 2011 at 5:24 PM

The DPW likely had their telemarketing firm cross-reference the name/address on the petitions (they became public records the moment they were turned in for filing) with various telemarketing lists.

The fact they would expend the money to do so in all three districts suggests they are very worried about losing all three seats.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 5:34 PM

So the unions are paying for all this, right? Yeah, I didn’t think so.

GarandFan on April 29, 2011 at 6:09 PM

The DPW likely had their telemarketing firm cross-reference the name/address on the petitions (they became public records the moment they were turned in for filing) with various telemarketing lists.

But, Mr. Steve, his cellphone is listed to a PO Box in my last name, which is different. And I KNOW we put the actual address on the recall, and there is no mailbox here. Plus, it was three different last names on the recall. I’m remarried, have my maiden name, hubby has different name, son has his father’s last name that lives in Illinois. It is SO odd they could find it. The bill is in my name. They didn’t call me.

qestout on April 29, 2011 at 6:38 PM

qestout on April 29, 2011 at 6:38 PM

I don’t see my dad around :-)

Which district does your son live in? If it’s Hansen’s, and he gave the cell number to the recall group (not on the recall petition; it does not ask for a phone number), it might have been on the computer that was stolen when “somebody” broke into that group’s offices. If that is the case, have him get a hold of the district attorney’s office.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 7:02 PM

No, it was Holperin.

qestout on April 29, 2011 at 8:25 PM

No, it was Holperin.

qestout on April 29, 2011 at 8:25 PM

I’m actually relieved to hear that.

Back to the issue, the likeliest answer is that a telemarketing list that has both your son’s name and the cell number (yes, it is easy to have happen; it can be as “innoculous” as putting the cell number on a store “savings card” application) got to the DPW.

Steve Eggleston on April 29, 2011 at 8:34 PM

Typical Democrat approach to close elections: Keep counting until the Democrat wins. Same back in ’04, same now. Unless, that is, adults stand up and say enough is enough.

Dandapani on April 30, 2011 at 12:51 PM