On the first day of Minnesota's recount process, the Coleman campaign challenged roughly 2.3 ballots for every 10,000 cast, and the Franken campaign challenged 2.5, for a total of 4.8 challenges per 10,000 ballots according to figures compiled by Minnesota Secretary of State.
Yesterday, the second day of the process, that challenge rate rose to 3.1 per 10,000 ballots for Coleman, and 3.4 per 10,000 ballots for Franken, for a challenge rate of 6.5 ballots per 10,000.
And now, on day three, according to the Star Tribune, "a rash of challenges has marked today's recount action in Ramsey County [St. Paul and outskirts], with observers from both campaigns questioning voters' intent far more widely than they did the first two days."
It is hard to know whether this phenomenon is statewide or occurring in Ramsay County only, which had had an usually low rate of challenges over the first two days of ballot counting. Nevertheless, given that there are very few disincentives to challenge ballots, it is not surprising that something of an arm's-race has occurred as both sides learn from one another's behavior.
EDIT: The Uptake has video of 10 ballots identified by Franken that were challenged by the Coleman campaign simply because voter voted both for John McCain and Al Franken! Uh, in case you were wondering, the campaigns are no longer leaving any stone unturned.
The disincentive to challenge ballots is precisely this sort of thing -- challenges that look so ridiculous that they'll weaken your ability to take the moral highground. If the Coleman campaign is on the ball, they'll be ready to show similar frivolities from the Franken campaign as well. The Uptake also reports that the Secretary of State is also taking under advisement a proposal to make all challenged ballots available for public viewing on a website.
11.21.2008
Ballot Challenges On Rise in Minnesota
@ 1:55 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
114 comments
First??
This would make a fascinating case study for strategy (think game theory) and behavioral psychology.
I can't believe my fellow MN's let this get this close, Coleman was a decent mayor but has been a terrible senator. Time for a new one.
Fascinating stuff. I have been as addicted to the MN recount as I was to the Presidential election, which has been tough considering there is FAR less information out there on it. Thanks for feeding my habit.
I *so* hope that Franken pulls it out. I understand why people don't like him, but I think that he would be one of the most intelligent and truthful Senators out there, even if he has been a bit of an extreme before.
Besides, I would just revel in the fact that a radio host would finally put up or shut up. Unlike all of the multiple Republican ones that have never put up, Franken, who I have always respected (even though I don't agree with all of his views) will have done so.
What this comes down to, then, is that the *real* recount will occur when the commission meets to review these challenged ballots since any questionable ballots--and many which aren't really questionable--will be removed from all initial recount figures.
WV: doless - the Republican answer to financial regulation.
There is no way to tell who really won this race. The senate should refuse to seat either one and tell MN. to have a runoff.
I don`t know if that is possible but a guy winning with 42% of the vote doesn`t seem right. Plus having Franken in the senate would just piss off Rush and O`reilly so much it would be worth it.
Besides Coleman will probably be indicted before another term is up.
HuffPo says that Franken camp believes they are within 100 votes.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/21/franken-camp-colemans-lea_n_145526.html
I see this as potentially long and drawn out. Why?
The trajectory shows it to end up very close. Blind linear extrapolation would suggest Franken will come up just short. Previous separation was 215; now 136 with 46% re-counted.
(215-136)/0.46 = 172 net gain by Franken leaves Coleman up by 43.
43 vote separation = lots of tugs every direction that can potentially affect the outcome.
Litigation city... I think Garrison Keillor has assured material for several weeks. The election that just keeps on giving...
Should be interesting.
"EDIT: The Uptake has video of 10 ballots identified by Franken that were challenged by the Coleman campaign simply because voter voted both for John McCain and Al Franken!"
How about this: if you filled in the oval across from Sarah Palin's name, your Senate vote should be voided on the grounds that you are clearly insane.
"I don`t know if that is possible but a guy winning with 42% of the vote doesn`t seem right."
So you weren't a big fan of Clinton, then, I take it. Or is 43% of the vote significantly better than 42%?
Coleman should just concede already. When you are the incumbent, and it remains too close to call weeks later, have the decency to just go away.
Disagree, Joel. "Who" is elected is not nearly as important as having closure to the process. I despise Dubya and these have been eight years of horror, but I still think somebody had to draw a line in the sand in 2000 and say, after this point, the election is done. Minnesota's process seems to be well laid out and rational, and who cares if the methods for verifying questionable ballots are arbitrary. Somebody's gotta win, we had an election to decide it, and when the framework has been followed to its conclusion, whoever has more votes than anybody else wins.
In other news, last week's NBA game between Atlanta and Boston will be replayed from the beginning, as the final score was 93-92. Deciding a game that makes up 1/82nd of a professional season by only one point hardly seems fair. How can you really say which is the better team?
Deciding when and where to replay the other 7800+ one-point games in NBA history will be difficult, as several franchises are no longer in existence or have moved to other cities. Although many members of those teams are still active in basketball, it is likely that the quality of play will deteriorate from the original contest as a good percentage of them are unable to run, or are dead.
The way I see it, if Franken is still behind, even by just a few votes, after the recount and the legal disposition of the challenged ballots, then he will probably concede. On the other hand, if Coleman comes out behind, you can bet the farm that he'll respond in true GOP form with litigation, astroturf, and a few well-placed spontaneous riots.
Audient -
If Coleman conceded, all it would mean (if he won the final vote) that the seat would be declared vacant and Tim Pawlenty would name the new Senator.
Franken would not win just because Coleman conceded if he is certified the winner.
Joel, I want Franken to win as much as the next liberal, but Congress can't make us have a run off. I'm no lover of the "states rights" argument that gets screamed at us by the right, but really now. Minnesota can handle this just fine.
What does "WV" mean that people keep putting up at the bottom of their posts?
Can we run some sort of E-pool on how close this will be?
I guess 5 votes will be the difference!
Google 1974 US Senate New Hampshire election - a new election was ordered (or at least requested) in that case, so there is a precedent
Pretty sure challenging a ballot just because it's marked McCain for Pres. and Franken for Senate is a violation of state law, which says that challenges need a legal justification to go forward. Yes, even some McCain voters knew that Norm is a lying fraud. Don't really see how this does them much good, though, unless the judges on the canvassing board are extremely partisan to the point of absurdity.
There is nothing arbitrary about the MN system. It's actually a model of how all states should do elections. There are paper ballots that can be reviewed and recounted and there is a very clear and precise rule for who rules on disputed ballots. Coleman or Franken can sue after the canvassing board has made its decisions, but they will never win that suit.
The supreme court, or the US Senate should not need to be called to enter this situation.
Huffinton Post is reporting that Coleman's lead is now less than 100 with 51.1% counted.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/21/franken-camp-colemans-lea_n_145526.html
Let's say, that means 99.
Revised arithmetic for Franken.
(215-99)/0.511 = 227 net gain for Franken.
In that case, Franken would win by 12 votes.
Total chaos....
Ugh, but making the scanned challenged ballots public will set a precedent and might encourage goofballs to come up with creative ways to get their ballots challenged in the future, just so they show up on the internet. Of course, recounts aren't likely...
btw Clinton for Sec State on nytimes.
sfergus483 said...
There has been a similar race.
Google New Hampshire Senate 1974.
Several recounts, as I recall the final margin was 7 votes, lots of dispute, ultimately the Senate suggested a new election which took place in Sept 75.
This seems like a necessary evil this time. To those fo you saying a runoff is ridiculous and not resonable and not the law. I agree completely. I'm two steps ahead of that thought though. There's no other reasonable alternative. It's very likely that the courts will not have a potentially fair choice. If the recount leaves Coleman ahead by less than 100 votes, but there are a couple thousand challenged ballots and those ballots favor Franken, then how do you determine a winner fairly? It would not be possible. You'd almost have to have a runoff. If the courts could say we believe with 80% certainty that the will of the people was Candidate X over Y, fine. But, I believe they'll be stuck with no fair way to interpret the results. The challenged ballots will represent less than 0.1% of all ballots and yet would be determinative. If you look at a sampling of them, it's extremely difficult to say throw that one out, give that one to Coleman, and that one to Franken. The most just thing to do would be have a runoff. It's the lesser of two evils in my opinion.
Nate, I think the moral highground is irrelevant in this case, inasmuch as the recount process is not really open to debate in any sense. It's very well laid out.
There is really no good solution to really REALLY close elections. That said, Minnesota probably does it the right way, with a complete manual recount of paper ballots with the opportunity to challenge and a board's decision based on the intent of the voter. But look at the Minnesota Public Radio ballots. For most of them, the intent of the voter is relatively clear cut, and the web "poll" results as to how to count them is lopsided, but there are a few that are close to 50/50 and neither choice is unreasonable. If the margin is single digits or slightly more, it's probably fair to say that reasonable people could disagree as to who won the election. In that situation, the usual process is to resolve a close election POLITICALLY (as we would in an electoral tie). So, what is that process? Does the Senate have any rules on that, or do they just decide some other process for calling a winner (revote, coin flip, appoint a 15 member commission with 8 Dems. and 7 Repubs.)?
If Franken has a one vote lead or more at the end of the recount, the absentee ballot issue raised by Franken legitimizes that narrow result.
@ Andy -- I had the same thought yesterday when I went through that "who should get this vote" thing with some examples of the challenged ballots, but the truth is that other than the "Lizard People" ballot, no one did anything overly creative, and even that ballot while it is kind of amusing isn't the type of thing that I see tons of people doing just in the off case that someone would select it out of the 3+ million in a state to highlight.
Besides, unless you write your name on the ballot or leave a distinguishing mark (something that disqualifies the ballot), I could claim that I was the Lizard People person and no one can disprove that. Of course, you could also claim the same thing, and I couldn't prove that you were any more or less correct than I was.
If the recount leaves Coleman ahead by less than 100 votes, but there are a couple thousand challenged ballots and those ballots favor Franken, then how do you determine a winner fairly?
This is easy. Whoever has the most votes is the winner. There's a process in place to count the challenged ballots. Follow the process. In your scenario, if Franken made up enough votes to pass Coleman, then he wins. If not, then Coleman wins.
"What does "WV" mean that people keep putting up at the bottom of their posts?"
Andy JS,
It stands for word verification, what Blogger prompts you to input to verify that you are a human being rather than a spamming program. Lots of folks here like to give little fake, fun definitions for the "words" that they have to enter. So my word -- "straph" -- I could "define" as a strange graph, like the Super Tracker. I'm not a big fan of the whole WV thing, but it doesn't do any harm and some people seem to really enjoy it. Posts that contain only WVs, however, should be discouraged in my view.
BTW: In the olden days there were no WVs, you simply posted your comment. In the even older days (like the late spring) commentators could be anonymous, which many were. So there were these really confusing changes where people would constantly be starting their comments with things like "To Anon @12:18" which got very, very confusing.
What I've read suggests that Minnesota's procedure for challenged ballots is like ours in NH. I've participated in several recounts here - both as an arbiter of challenges in local elections and an observer when the Secretary of State is the arbiter in state elections. It's not too difficult to follow the law and be consistent about what is a vote and what is not. I've seen no advantage to having a greater or lesser number of challenged ballots. The only challenges that matter are the borderline ballots. There are plenty of those. The challenge causes them to be decided consistently by a single team. The full recount (non-challenged) is done by many teams and therefore will not be consistent at the boundary. But frivolous challenges have zero effect on the result. Credibility of the challeger has zero effect.
It's all done in public with sharp-eyed observers. You will not get away with inconsistency in the decisions whether or not to vote each challenged ballots.
does anyone else see Nate's (unintentional?) puppet-master abilities over politics?
Franken's 450 challenges have contributed to a net decline in Coleman's numbers by 256, or a batting average decline over challenges of .569.
Coleman's 436 challenges have contributed to a net decline in Franken's numbers of 181, for a batting average of decline over challenges of .415.
Statitistically significant difference?
well, I don't agree that a game is equivalent to an election where a majority being able to proceed with legislation is in question.
A new election would be interesting, as it would be decoupled from Obama, possibly losing Franken some votes, but voter intimidation etc. would be more difficult, gaining Franken votes, plus the climate has changed and Obama is proving out as not the monster people on the right tried to make his appear.
And on Obama proving out, amazing that we all waited in dread almost 8 years and watched our worst nightmares exceed, and now we want things done yesterday.
One question - in the unlikely event of a revote, would it be the same 5 names on the ballot, or just Franken and Coleman?
Star Tribune says Coleman lead is back up to 162. Wrong direction.
Your assigned word verification for the day is.. 'analogy'.
Re challenges: It's a tough mine to pull data. From Franken's view.. he might challenge:
1. a ballot previously rejected that should be for him but was not accepted
2. a ballot previously rejected that is to be given to Coleman
3. a ballot previously counted for Coleman that is ruled to count for Coleman or
4. a ballot previously ruled for Franken than is rejected.
Hey, Right Wing Coward -
You've been going on and on about how the stock market crash is all Obama's fault.
So now in the last hour of today's session, after leaking of Timothy Geithner's name as Secy of Treasury and plans to announce his economic team on Monday - the first move he has made - the DJ quickly surged 500 points.
Sort of makes your recent nonsense even more nonsensical.
By the way, my previous was not intended to recommend an election, just to comment on possible inputs if it happened.
Re smokeyust's comment that Norm was a bad Senator but a good Mayor...did you live in St. Paul when he was Mayor? Because I did, and as I recall, not only did he go from being a lifelong pro-choice liberal who was one of the most vocal protestors of Vietnam there was in the late 60s, to being a pro-life Republican aligned with whatever the Republicans wanted, basically overnight (the night after he met with Washington Republican leadership, I might add), but I also recall that when he took office, he brought in some big businesses into the downtown area by giving them huge tax breaks at the expense of residents, and then a couple years later when they took the money and ran, leaving downtown St. Paul a nearly vacant ghost town and it's residents much poorer, he didn't do a damn thing to try to recoup that money.
Norm has basically gone along with whatever the Republican agenda is time after time ever since he aligned with them, and truth be told, he did the same as a Dem (aligned with the Dems), but that ended once he realized he had a place on the national stage if he switched parties. There's a reason 37% of Minnesotans voted for a Professional Wrestler rather than see this guy become our governor.
He's the one saying let's keep this thing respectful, then he calls himself the winner 4 times, challenges every attempt by the Franken campaign to get votes counted, and tries to steal every vote he can on the flimsiest of grounds in the recount, all the while he plays the PR game trying to make it seem like Al Franken, Mark Ritchie and the Dems are stopping at nothing to get 60.
I hope Coleman loses by one vote and is forced to accept the result.
@ magster -- StarTribune has 145 votes separating the difference. I believe that the StarTribune was at the 162 number yesterday?
There is an obvious difference in the makeup of the Franken and Coleman challenges. The way I see the universe of possibilities:
Franken:
A. Contests a Coleman vote allowed in the original count. I would say there must be at least 256 of those.
B. Contest a decision not to count an apparent Franken vote not counted originally.
C. Contest a decision to count an apparent Coleman vote not counted Originally but that was going to be allowed.
D. Contest the denial of a Franken vote that was counted originally but was going to be disallowed.
There is probably somewhat less than 194 of B and C.
Coleman:
A. Contest a Franken vote allowed in the original count. There must be at least 181 of these.
B. Contest an apparent Coleman vote not allowed in the original.
C. Contest an apparent Franken vote not allowed in the original but that was going to be allowed on the recount.
D. Contest the denial of a Coleman vote that had been counted in the original.
For Coleman, there must be somewhat less than 255 of B and C.
bcf:
Don't forget that during this process, sometimes the candidates just "lose" or "gain" votes too. Not all of the variation in vote totals is due to challenges. There was one precinct in Northern Minnesota yesterday that uses the old voting machines where Franken gained 20 votes and Coleman gained 12!
@bcf:
Franken's 450 challenges have contributed to a net decline in Coleman's numbers by 256, or a batting average decline over challenges of .569.
Coleman's 436 challenges have contributed to a net decline in Franken's numbers of 181, for a batting average of decline over challenges of .415.
Statitistically significant difference?
Judging from the absolute figures 1,211,xxx shown by the STrib, you seem to be taking your "nets" from the pre-recount figures. Thus you're not accounting for how many un-challenged votes each has {\em gained\/} (or unchallengedly lost) from the recount. Since we know Franken has at least gained 30-odd iron-clad votes in the Iron Range north of Duluth, that would lose much of the difference you see.
But you have a great idea: If we can obtain separate counts of the unchallenged-gained and unchallenged-lost votes for each side, then we can figure out how many cases there are of (a) Franken challenging a likely vote for Coleman, and (b) vice-versa. Adding back the totals of (a) and (b) will give a pretty good estimate of the state of the recount.
WV: "keness"---to answer a commenter above, if we can make a definition or sample-sentence relevant to the topic, then it's fun. Here I could pun on "keenness" or my own name being "Ken", but neither is relevant so I'll pass.
Can somebody direct me how to find the video in question on The Uptake?
WV: loustapo: I don't know who designed The Uptake website, but it's definitely lousetapo.
A slightly esoteric question: does anyone know if people who turn 18 between November 5th and December 2nd will be able to vote in the Georgia runoff election?
This process is so obfuscated, it's hard to know what is really going on. Surprising to anyone? It is riddled with public relations issues and psychological warfare. It's almost impossible to know what the real gains/losses are.
It's really time for a federal amendment to standardize voting procedures and ballot style across the entire country. Early voting and same-day registration in every district in the country? I like the sound of that.
I think only people who were registered for the Georgia general election can vote in the runoff.
"Coleman should just concede already. When you are the incumbent, and it remains too close to call weeks later, have the decency to just go away."
I don't like Coleman much, but that's silly. Franken hasn't even been ahead yet -- why would Coleman concede?
--
Charles M. Kozierok
Publisher & Webmaster
CurEvents.com - A Global Current Events and News Discussion Forum - News, Politics, Science and more... join us!
Trick question, Andy JS.
To register to vote in the state of Georgia, you must be:
A citizen of the United States.
A legal resident of Georgia and of the county in which you wish to vote.
At least 17 1/2 years of age.
http://sos.georgia.gov/elections/voter_eligibility.htm
"The Uptake has video of 10 ballots identified by Franken that were challenged by the Coleman campaign simply because voter voted both for John McCain and Al Franken!"
See, now those are people Coleman should never challenge. Colemen spent millions accusing Franken of being an angry, beligerent, crude jerk with no comprehension of his personal financial situation. McCain has the exact same traits, so those votes make perfect sense to me.
Star Tribune says 50% of the vote has been counted and Coleman is back up to 147 lead. So - right now - it's not looking that good for Franken - He needs to pull a rabbit out of the hat to start gaining ground in a big way.
I had heard one report - unconfirmed - that only people who voted in the 11/4 election can vote in the runoff (which does make sense on some level.) Anyone know for sure?
By the way -- Coleman sent out an e-mail this morning in which he showed various frivolous challenges by Franken, so he took either your advice or someone else's similar advice and fought fire with fire.
I fear an Al loss. 6 more years of Norm -- sigh -- maybe he can become a Dem again and get appointed Ambassador of Chad or some such place?
Totally OT but I was looking at votes by county across the US.
Obama carried every county in HI, NH, VT, MA, CT and RI.
McCain carried every county in OK.
2 counties had ties:
Jerauld county in SD had 535 for both Obama and McCain
Iowa county in IA had 4173 for both Obama and McCain
Obama carrying all counties in NH is a seachange. I wonder if even LBJ achieved that. The whole state has become lean Dem.
BTW - Alaska does not have any counties; not sure if there are regions that if they were organized as such that Obama would have won.
Hey, thanks for the return comments. Anyway, All my numbers are approximations, of course.
I hope I'm wrong, but it seems like a larger portion of Franken's challenges may be against opponent votes counted in the original count. I've got to believe that the chances of sustaining a challenge to votes already counted is not very good. If that's the case, Franken's gains in the recount so far may be illusory.
I'm just trying to figure out if there's anyway to tell which candidates' challenges are "better.
Guess we'll know the answer sometime before 2009.
franken people were playing it clean as far as i saw. the coleman camp was really outrageous. really. a vote for no one, barkley or franken is not a vote for coleman. they were contesting these. all day yesterday. what's up w/that? we could only come up w/the fact that if folk don't think norm will win they will quit giving $$$ for recount. so get his number "up". that's why it won't mean anything until the votes are looked at in december. the laws are quite clear. imo
Hah, I know someone who voted for both McCain and Franken...
Reposting my recent comment with updated data:
My latest simple projection: Coleman will win by 11.
This assumes that:
- 75% of all challenges are against ballots counted for your opponent (requesting that they be thrown out), while 25% are against ballots that were not previously counted (requesting that they be counted for you).
- 75% of all challenges, of either kind and by either side, will be denied.
- Candidates will continue to gain votes in counties where the recount is partially completed at the same rate they have previously been gaining votes in that county
- Candidates will gain votes in counties where the recount has not started at the same rate that they have previously been gaining votes statewide
Note: Changing these assumptions, or differentiating them between the two candidates or types of challenge can be done easily. (Differentiating among counties can also be done, although less easily)
Note: Holding constant all other assumptions:
- The winner is dependent on what proportion of challenges are of one type vs the other. (ex: If the two 'types' of ballot challenges are made in equal numbers (50/50 split instead of 75/25) Franken wins by 3
- If more than 65% of all challenges are upheld, Franken wins - again assuming that this rate is similar for both candidates and both types of challenge.
- Coleman wins by 33 if there is no net gain for either candidate in any counties where the recount has not yet begun.
- Coleman wins by 143 if there is no net gain for either candidate in any county from this point on
- My prediction assumes a net gain of 102 and 105 votes by Franken in St. Louis and Ramsey counties, and a net loss of 53 votes by Franken in Hennepin County - based on the results that have come out of those counties so far.
About people voting for McCain and Franken, of course it could happen. I would think it would happen most amongst people that vote based on name recognition. Not the best way to vote, but I know one person at least who did that once in the past...
I hate Al Franken, but he had better win.
There is one very big disincentive to frivolous challenges -- all the challenges are being reviewed by the same five people.
Take one of Coleman's apparent sets of challenges from the MPR site. On one ballot, his team has claimed that a tiny dot in the Barkley oval is a vote (to create an overvote denying Franken a vote). On a different ballot, he has claimed that a partially completed Franken oval is not a vote (to prevent a vote for Coleman from being classified as an overvote). It is hard to make those two arguments to the same group and keep any credibility for other challenges.
Andy JS if you are 18 on December 2nd, you can vote in the runoff. A little bit of trivia--Georgia was the first state to lower the voting age to 18--back in 1945. One of the (very) few times Georgia has been a progressive leader.
Here's where you went off the rails with your prediction Mark Ludwidck: "- 75% of all challenges, of either kind and by either side, will be denied."
Actually, according to Minnesota's "leading elections expert" ALL or ALMOST ALL of the challenges are going to be denied!
This is according to Joe Mansky, "Minnesota's leading elections expert" per the Minneapolis Star Tribune:
"Ramsey County Elections Manager Joe Mansky -- already named in Wednesday's lawsuit because of his refusal to share absentee ballot information with the Franken camp -- took another strong stand on Wednesday afternoon, insisting that in disputed ballots where voter intent was clear, he should make the call.
Coleman recount attorney Knaak told reporters that Mansky "just can't do that," and had to be made to understand that once challenged, ballots had to be set aside for the state Canvassing Board to make a determination.
But Mansky, a longtime elections expert who logged years at the Secretary of State's office, instead called Franken and Coleman lawyers aside at the end of the day to review the 13 challenged ballots. "I'm going to win all those challenges, I guarantee 100 percent," Mansky said. "We have some folks who are new to this and feel they have to challenge something."
When the informal meeting was over, only a single ballot remained in dispute, out of 30,000 votes counted that day."
Mansky insisted that in all his years of service at the Secretary of State's office he's only seen TWO challenges be upheld. That means that neither Coleman NOR Franken has more than an infinitesimal chance of having their ballot challenges sustained.
Whatever the count is when they're done is likely to be the final result within maybe a couple of votes.
If either party is ahead by 10 or more votes then the challenges aren't going to change the result -- if Joe Mansky is right about the rate of successful challengers, and he seems to be the leading expert on the matter.
@goatdan:
The McCain-Franken voters are most likely the ones who vote against Obama based on race.
" Jack said...
What I've read suggests that Minnesota's procedure for challenged ballots is like ours in NH. I've participated in several recounts here - both as an arbiter of challenges in local elections and an observer when the Secretary of State is the arbiter in state elections. It's not too difficult to follow the law and be consistent about what is a vote and what is not. I've seen no advantage to having a greater or lesser number of challenged ballots. The only challenges that matter are the borderline ballots. There are plenty of those. The challenge causes them to be decided consistently by a single team. The full recount (non-challenged) is done by many teams and therefore will not be consistent at the boundary. But frivolous challenges have zero effect on the result. Credibility of the challeger has zero effect.
It's all done in public with sharp-eyed observers. You will not get away with inconsistency in the decisions whether or not to vote each challenged ballots."
You're absolutely right Jack, and that's what the Minnesota experts are saying too.
There are three types of common voter errors according to Joe Mansky MN Elections supervisor:
1. Voter marks one oval (often voter tapping with her pen while deciding) then fills in other. Voter intent clear: vote counts.
2. Voter fills in one oval, then realizes they made a mistake or changes their mind and crosses it out, then fills in the other: voter intent clear. Vote counts.
"We see this in every election" Mansky says.
3. Voter makes stray marks on ballot that might be identifying: "unless it's clear that the marks are identifying" the vote should count Mansky says.
These common errors account for the vast majority of challenged ballots.
Undervotes include faint marks that can't be read by the machine (not filling in the oval completely, or not using a black pen or pencil but a red or other colored one).
All clear indications of voter intent count.
"I'm just trying to figure out if there's anyway to tell which candidates' challenges are "better."
According to MN elections supervisor Joe Mansky NONE of the challenges are "better."
He thinks all or almost all are going to be denied.
That leaves the official count as the most accurate and the challenges as almost all bogus.
Everyone needs to remember... the votes that have been challenged haven't been counted in ANY way for EITHER candidate. So the semi-final "total" for the candidates when the statewide handcount ends will be nowhere near their final-final total after the canvass board meets to judge these contested ballots.
Also, bear in mind it's entirely possible that the two campaigns will meet before the canvass board meeting to make decisions on cases of obvious voter intent. "OK, every ballot that has one single filled in oval with an X mark through it will count for the candidate." That alone would eliminate like 40% of the challenges (based on my observations). I would anticipate several of these "agreements" from the campaigns, and if not the campaigns, I would expect a series of "rules" to come from the canvass board that accomplish the same task.
The vast vast majority of the challenged ballots will be counted based on voter intent. The reason there are so many challenges is that the campaign volunteers have probably been coached to not take any chances.
kind of sounds like we we in agreement that coleman wins.
today was not a good day for al.
Maybe the best thing for Minnesota would be to have another Senate election in the next month or so. The chances of having another equally close result must be infinitesimal.
@Cugel- It may well be that almost all challenges are denied. That doesn't mean that the final vote will be the same as the on-going count. The reason, as others have pointed out above, is that only a fraction of the challenges are requests for votes. These give no change when denied. Most challenges are requests to have votes not counted, and these lead to vote changes when denied. What we don't know is how the ratios of these two different types of challenge compare for the two campaigns. Unless they're quite unequal, we're not in good shape./mbw
"Nate said:
The disincentive to challenge ballots is precisely this sort of thing -- challenges that look so ridiculous that they'll weaken your ability to take the moral highground."
Nate: The "moral highground" isn't going to mean squat in this case!
As Mark Ludwick points out, "
It's all done in public with sharp-eyed observers. You will not get away with inconsistency in the decisions whether or not to vote each challenged ballots."
Joe Mansky commented yesterday in the Star-Tribune and again today that he "100% guarantees" he as elections supervisor is "going to win all those challenges."
This is because the disputed ballots are almost all from a couple of common types of voter errors. And the judges will determine how they are going to approach ruling on those disputed ballots.
They are going to try and determine "voter intent." And in doing so if it's a case of where the voter marked one oval and then crossed it out and marked the other one, then they're going to rule the same way every time!
There might be 100 such errors and they'll all be counted (most likely) since MN state statute instructs them to favor including the ballot in doubtful cases.
Almost all challenges are going to be denied and almost all decisions by the county election judges are going to be upheld.
And the expert canvassing board is going to rule one way or the other on every type of voter error. And so, when another example of that type of error appears they're going to be CONSISTENT.
And the pontificating in the media by the two campaigns isn't going to affect anything at all if their challenges are all thrown out.
I think that's a fair result.
Cugel's comments, or conclusion, don't make a lot of sense to me.
Challenges can come in two basic forms (despite the myriad of reasons behind the challenge).
One party can say "That vote should count for x because" or "That vote should not count for x because".
So having the challenge denied does not mean no votes will change. It could easily mean some challenges are denied because the voter intent on the ballot is ruled clear.
I'm not arguing one way or another who will come out ahead (because we don't know from any evidence at hand).
But it is a false conclusion to say that "denied challenges" mean vote tallies "won't change" after the initial precinct level recounts. The tallies most certainly will changes because some challenges are that a vote shouldn't count (when in fact the canvassing board will say the intention is clear).
Followed to a naturally absurd conclusion, if any vote challenge meant the vote would ultimately be kicked out, then both parties would just be challenging any vote for the other party.
I have no personal knowledge, but it seems likely that most challenges will not be upheld. This does NOT mean that the totals before reviewing the challenged ballots will not change significantly.
If the person counting is trying to put it in the Coleman pile, and Franken challenges it, that vote will probably end up in the Coleman pile.
If the person counting is trying to put it in the nobody pile, and Franken challenges it, that vote will probably end up in the nobody pile.
Since no one seems to know how many of the challenges are of each of these types, it is hard to tell what the relationship between the pre- and post- final adjudication will be. It would help a lot if these challenged ballots were labeled "what the counter wanted to call them," but we don't know that.
You're correct Michael that the final result will be different that the posted unofficial interim result.
However, the final result WILL be within a few votes of the result the counties decide. According to Joe Mansky again, the campaigns have "given instructions" to make sure that all their votes count. Thus, they are trying to challenge every time the county disallows one of their votes. That would mean that the majority of the challenges are to try and preserve YOUR votes and not to wipe out your opponents'.
And, so far, Coleman has lost MORE votes this way than Franken, which is why the margin keeps narrowing.
Since BOTH candidates have actually LOST votes from their starting totals, it's clear that many challenges are the campaigns trying to keep their votes from being tossed by the election judges.
It's THOSE efforts that are going to fail. And we have running totals of how many votes have been subtracted from each candidate so far.
So, contrary to what you said, the majority of the challenge resolutions won't change the published totals.
As of NOW, at 5:52 CDT Coleman has lost 310 and Franken 262 votes, leaving Coleman up by 162 votes.
In the end it'll be pretty close to the unofficial totals.
Drudge report had a ballot clearly marked for Coleman that they claimed Franken was contesting. The link has since been removed. I would like more information on that. Does anyone know if there is a site that track's drudge's most appalling headlines? Here's an example from his current page:
Headline: "PAPER: BAILOUT FOR HUFFINGTON; QUEEN OF BLOG GETS $15M LIFELINE..."
Reality: Huffington got a $15 million dollar investment to expand...
I ONLY read Drudge to know what conservatives are thinking. I just found out about redstate.com and that will be added to my political website rounds.
Thanks Nate for the great work. I'm sure you will see continued success in between elections. Your analysis has saved me in conversations many times (today it was explaining to a friend how President-elect Obama was not personally responsible for Prop 8's passage). Anyhow, I appreciate it.
Odds on these folks becoming Senators:
Jesse Jackson Jr.
Andrew Cuomo
Caroline Kennedy (NY or Mass?)
Robert Kennedy Jr. (NY or Mass?)
The kids are coming out of the woodworks. I don't see Bill going to the Senate. to bad Chelsea isn't a couple yearsolder. Joe was 29 when he went. I know she's not ready, just interesting thought.
Where is Real Joe?
Cugel:
You are wrong here. It will depend to a large extent of the nature of which ballots were challenged by Coleman and which were challenged by Franken.
Let me add to the chorus of practical examples.
Somene just wrote else where that the Coleman people challenged several ballots because the Senate race was left blank.
Not that there was any mark, but that it was left blank.
They challenged it under the view that if the other spots on the ballot for President and Congressman were filled in,t hen , the voter intent was to fill in Coleman for Senate.
To you see why those ballots would not be included.
I think you are approaching this from the theorectical understanding, but the question is does that matter the behavior ont he ground. We don't know. Neither to you.
I therefore remain neutral until the board meets.
Given your own numbers, Cugel, there have been over twice as many challenges between the two campaigns as there are lost votes so challenges are being made for any reason.
You may ultimately be correct that the challenges count yields roughly the same delta as the pre-challenge counts. But the evidence you give doesn't really show that to be a natural conclusion.
You are assuming an equal amount of questionable versus clear challenges between the two parties. And we don't know that to be the case at all. It might be true, but it might not be.
I just don't see how you can claim a conclusion at this point. I don't see how anyone could.
That's why they are reviewing those votes, and I am sure (and hope) the people on that review panel take their charge seriously in calmly evaluating intent on each ballot.
Cugel
A follow up: The unanswered question sis how many ballots so challenged that would go to Franken are a part of the mix versus those which would result in no vote versus those that would result in a vote for Coleman. We don't know the mix yet. Neither do you. All we know are the rules for out the board will make its decisions. Certainly so far I've heard of at least 30 votes that are clearly either not going to count for Coleman or will evetually be added to Franken's numbers. This as a practice effect means there is no way yet to determine the outcome. It depends on how frugal Franken's people were in their challenges. Not in absolute numbers, but in quality of challenge- as per the example of no name marked at all.
@Cugel- I suspect you're right that the local boards' decisions will almost always stand. We have a sample of these in the 200+ precincts included in the hand audit. A majority of those are now in the recount. So we can, in this sample, get a feel for whether the final tally will differ from the running 'challenged' recount, and if so which way. I'll try to get to that tonight after it's too late to call GA.
You do realize that the implication of your current claims is that Coleman wins, quite the opposite of what you were sure of a few days ago. I suspect you're right this time, but there's a lot of uncertainty.
/mbw
Check this video of Coleman's challenges:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/21/174840/55/274/664838
He's challenging on the basis that an unequivocally clearly marked ballot for McCain-Franken, or McCain-No Senate Vote, must be an example of the voter's intent being misrepresented!!! It's insane! Watch the video. Coleman is delusional.
All of the ballots in that video can safely be added to the current running tally in Franken's favor.
Looks like Hennepin is not coming through for Franken after all. 50% of the vote counted in the county, Franken way ahead in the total votes cast - but both Franken and Coleman have lost 110 votes on the recount. This is where he shoud be picking up votes-or at least not losing as many as Coleman.
i feel sorry for the people of MN.
6 more yrs of looking at those teeth.
those big blinding white ivories would have been enough for me to vote for franken.
anyone see any hope for al?
im getting depressed what with richardson going to commerce when he should have gone to state (im in NM)
just looks like a consolation prize for richarsons help with the latino vote.
Eric,
A small correction: Joe was 29 when he was elected, but he turned 30 (on Nov. 21, 1972) before he actually joined the Senate.
It would appear many of the Coleman challenges are outrageously frivalous (to the point of absurdity...as if a voter can't decide to vote for 1 party for president, and a different 1 for senator). That idea is just offensive to democracy.
I wonder, though, in all fairness, if the Franken challenges are equally as offensive to one's common sense. I'd like to see.
Coleman camp?
I do hope this is not an attempt to run down Franken's total enough to make enough people think he lost as to delegitimize the challenge process. Then again...these challenges are low-class.
Minneapolis which is within Hennepin has only shown a return of 25 percent. Those numbers you are seeing are actually from the parts of the county that has Franken and Coleman equal. Honeslty, i give up. It's like talking to impatient children since everything I just wrote could be figured out by looking it up.
Yeah but he is losing ground fast in those supposedly equal precincts. He has challenged 54 more ballots than Coleman and is still down.
Since BOTH candidates have actually LOST votes from their starting totals, it's clear that many challenges are the campaigns trying to keep their votes from being tossed by the election judges
F1 = a Franken challenge on a Coleman vote
F2 = a Franken challenge on a nobody vote
C1 = a Coleman challenge on a Franken vote
C2 = a Coleman challenge on a nobody vote
Why do you think F2 and C2 are greater than F1 and C1?
Assuming all challenges fail, final vote totals will be:
Franken = Franken_recount + C1
Coleman = Coleman_recount + F1
Nate Silver has made the big time. He was on Jimmy Kimmel Live last night.
In the clip, they first showed Arianna Huffington introduce Silver, saying: "The biggest weaner in this year's presidential election, Nate Silver."
They then showed a picture of the "weaner," smiling.
Actually, your comment just_looking is based on a fautly assumption.
I imagine both camps are trying to keep their votes from being lost.
However, that only accounts for HALF of the challenges. So the amount no even included in your assumption is over four four times the amount of the delta between the two at this point in the recount.
You could therefore surmize how ever you want on those calculations and still miss the votes that may tell the difference between the two.
Joseph,
I don't understand your critique. You say I missed half the challenges.
F2 and C2 are the camps trying to keep what they believe are their votes from being lost. But, F1 and C1 are the other half (*) you claim I missed.
We have no idea whether the two types (F1 and C1 versus F2 and C2) are split half and half.
Norm Coleman SHAVES HIS BEAVER, and that's a fact.
New SOS numbers have Franken down by 100!
http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/20081104/SenateRecount.asp
so with 60% down 100
wish it was more but still could go to franken
just_looking,
I'm embarrassed then. I misinterpreted your calculations. I got thrown off on your comment about most challenges being the camps just trying to keep from losing votes so I thought at first reading your calculations were all based on variations of those challenges.
As another SNL character might say, "Never mind" ; )
So, Franken has made up 100 votes with 61% of the votes recounted. At this pace, he loses by about 50.
What can save him? A combination of:
1) The votes counted so far went 51-49 for Coleman on the first count. Franken might get a larger net gain the rest of the way.
2) The votes gained, as opposed to those lost in challenges, come in bursts. The nature of bursts suggests against a simple extrapolation from the current bursts. Franken needs a greater number of additional bursts than the current rates suggests.
3) The type of challenges. If Franken is challenging more to add to his totals, and Coleman to erase from Franken, Franken will pick up votes after these challenges are denied.
testing
I think more disturbing are the rejected absentee ballots from people that were sent absentee ballots to vote but later the county said they were not registered. How does that happen? Also interesting is the fact that forgetting to sign the absentee takes away a person's right to vote. What a terrible rule.
So, Franken has made up 100 votes with 61% of the votes recounted. At this pace, he loses by about 50.
He's made up 115 votes. At this rate, he'd lose by 27 votes.
Nobody has enough information to say anything about the MN recount. The challenged ballots are the new front in the battle. The fact is that people do not know how to vote or follow instructions; older optical scan machines failed to read certain votes; absentee voting in MN is crap (a voter must give a reason and being old and having trouble walking is not good enough.) Sad to think MN is little better than FL when it comes to disenfranchising the elderly.
The proposal to publish all challenged ballots has a worrying component. One of the criteria for disallowing a ballot in Minnesota is an "identifying mark." Ballots with such a mark are (rightly) challenged as invalid. Such ballots are also NOT SECRET. If I signed my name on my ballot, and then that ballot is published, my right to a secret ballot has been violated. This should be avoided.
sfergus483 said... "BTW - Alaska does not have any counties; not sure if there are regions that if they were organized as such that Obama would have won."
Alaska has "boroughs"; but unlike the "parishes" in Louisiana, which are exactly the same as "counties" in every other state except for the name, the "boroughs" in Alaska are just rough administrative units (named for their largest cities, "borough of Anchorage" etc.) without separate governmental structures.
The law in Georgia: you must be recorded as HAVING VOTED on Nov. 4 to be eligible to vote in the runoff. You cannot register now, nor is it enough to have been registered before, if you failed to show up. Is everybody "comoolu" with that?
A representative of Chicago Better Government Association clearly states in the report that there was nothing illegal in the challenges. Also interviewed is disqualified challenger Gha is Askia. Askia makes a few quick references to technicalities that reduced his 1000 signatures below the threshold of 750 or so. The incumbent, Alice Palmer, is not interviewed, but was apparently also prevented from entering the primary by similar means.
--------------------------
Jenifer
iowa drug rehab
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,美國aneros,rudeboy,英國rudeboy,英國Rocksoff,德國Fun Factory,Fun Factory,英國甜筒造型按摩座,甜筒造型按摩座,英國Rock Chic ,瑞典 Lelo ,英國Emotional Bliss,英國 E.B,荷蘭 Natural Contours,荷蘭 N C,美國 OhMiBod,美國 OMB,Naughti Nano ,音樂按摩棒,ipod按摩棒,美國 The Screaming O,美國TSO,美國TOPCO,美國Doc Johnson,美國CA Exotic,美國CEN,美國Nasstoy,美國Tonguejoy,英國Je Joue,美國Pipe Dream,美國California Exotic,美國NassToys,美國Vibropod,美國Penthouse,仿真按摩棒,矽膠按摩棒,猛男倒模,真人倒模,仿真倒模,PJUR,Zestra,適趣液,穿戴套具,日本NPG,雙頭龍,FANCARNAL,日本NIPPORI,日本GEL,日本Aqua Style,美國WET,費洛蒙,費洛蒙香水,仿真名器,av女優,打炮,做愛,性愛,口交,吹喇叭,肛交,魔女訓練大師,無線跳蛋,有線跳蛋,震動棒,震動保險套,震動套,TOY-情趣用品,情趣用品網,情趣購物網,成人用品網,情趣用品討論,成人購物網,鎖精套,鎖精環,持久環,持久套,拉珠,逼真按摩棒,名器,超名器,逼真老二,電動自慰,自慰,打手槍,仿真女郎,SM道具,SM,性感內褲,仿真按摩棒,pornograph,hunter系列,h動畫,成人動畫,成人卡通,情色動畫,情色卡通,色情動畫,色情卡通,無修正,禁斷,人妻,極悪調教,姦淫,近親相姦,顏射,盜攝,偷拍,本土自拍,素人自拍,公園露出,街道露出,野外露出,誘姦,迷姦,輪姦,凌辱,痴漢,痴女,素人娘,中出,巨乳,調教,潮吹,av,a片,成人影片,成人影音,線上影片,成人光碟,成人無碼,成人dvd,情色影音,情色影片,情色dvd,情色光碟,航空版,薄碼,色情dvd,色情影音,色情光碟,線上A片,免費A片,A片下載,成人電影,色情電影,TOKYO HOT,SKY ANGEL,一本道,SOD,S1,ALICE JAPAN,皇冠系列,老虎系列,東京熱,亞熱,武士系列,新潮館,情趣用品,約定金生,約定金生,情趣,情趣商品,約定金生,情趣網站,跳蛋, 約定金生,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,約定金生,自慰套,G點,性感內衣,約定金生,情趣內衣,約定金生,角色扮演,生日禮物,生日精品,約定金生,自慰,打手槍,約定金生,潮吹,高潮,後庭,約定金生,情色論譠,影片下載,約定金生,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,約定金生,音樂下載, 約定金生,約定金生,開獎號碼,統一發票號碼,夜市,統一發票對獎,保險套, 約定金生,約定金生,做愛,約定金生,減肥,美容,瘦身,約定金生,當舖,軟體下載,汽車,機車, 約定金生,手機,來電答鈴, 約定金生,週年慶,美食,約定金生,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計, 約定金生,室內設計, 約定金生,靈異照片,約定金生,同志,約定金生,聊天室,運動彩券,大樂透,約定金生,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍, 約定金生,無名破解,av女優, 約定金生,小說,約定金生,民宿,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,約定金生,討論區,痴漢,懷孕, 約定金生,約定金生,美女交友,約定金生,交友,日本av,日本,機票, 約定金生,香水,股市, 約定金生,股市行情, 股市分析,租房子,成人影片,約定金生,免費影片,醫學美容, 約定金生,免費算命,算命,約定金生,姓名配對,姓名學,約定金生,姓名學免費,遊戲, 約定金生,好玩遊戲,好玩遊戲區,約定金生,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,約定金生,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片, 約定金生,桌布,桌布下載,電視節目表, 約定金生,線上電視,約定金生,線上a片,約定金生,線上掃毒,線上翻譯,購物車,約定金生,身分證製造機,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車, 約定金生,約定金生,法拍屋,約定金生,歌詞,音樂,音樂網,火車,房屋,情趣用品,約定金生,情趣,情趣商品,情趣網站,跳蛋,約定金生,按摩棒,充氣娃娃,自慰套, 約定金生, G點,性感內衣,約定金生,情趣內衣,約定金生,角色扮演,生日禮物,精品,禮品,約定金生,自慰,打手槍,潮吹,高潮,約定金生,後庭,情色論譠,約定金生,影片下載,約定金生,遊戲下載,手機鈴聲,音樂下載,開獎號碼,統一發票,夜市,保險套,做愛,約定金生,減肥,美容,瘦身,當舖,約定金生,軟體下載,約定金生,汽車,機車,手機,來電答鈴,約定金生,週年慶,美食,徵信社,網頁設計,網站設計,室內設計,靈異照片, 約定金生,同志,聊天室,約定金生,運動彩券,,大樂透,約定金生,威力彩,搬家公司,除蟲,偷拍,自拍, 約定金生,無名破解, av女優,小說,民宿,約定金生,大樂透開獎號碼,大樂透中獎號碼,威力彩開獎號碼,討論區,痴漢, 約定金生,懷孕,約定金生,美女交友,約定金生,交友,日本av ,日本,機票, 約定金生,香水,股市, 約定金生,股市行情,股市分析,租房子,約定金生,成人影片,免費影片,醫學美容,免費算命,算命, 約定金生,姓名配對,姓名學, 約定金生,姓名學免費,遊戲,約定金生,好玩遊戲,約定金生,好玩遊戲區,線上遊戲,新遊戲,漫畫,線上漫畫,動畫,成人圖片,桌布,約定金生,桌布下載,電視節目表,線上電視, 約定金生,線上a片,線上a片,線上翻譯, 約定金生,購物車,身分證製造機,約定金生,身分證產生器,手機,二手車,中古車,法拍屋,歌詞,音樂,音樂網, 約定金生,借錢,房屋,街頭籃球,找工作,旅行社,約定金生,六合彩,整型論壇,整型論壇,珠海,雷射溶脂,婚紗,網頁設計,水噹噹論壇,台中隆鼻,果凍隆乳,改運整型,自體脂肪移植,新娘造型,婚禮顧問,下川島,常平,常平,珠海,澳門機票,香港機票,貸款,貸款,信用貸款,宜蘭民宿,花蓮民宿,未婚聯誼,網路購物,婚友,婚友社,未婚聯誼,交友,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,未婚聯誼,未婚聯誼, 婚友社,婚友,婚友社,單身聯誼,婚友,未婚聯誼,婚友社,未婚聯誼,單身聯誼,單身聯誼,白蟻,白蟻,除蟲,老鼠,減肥,減肥,在家工作,在家工作,
^^ nice blog!! ^@^
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 感情挽回, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 挽回感情, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信, 捉姦, 徵信公司, 通姦, 通姦罪, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 捉姦, 監聽, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 外遇問題, 徵信, 捉姦, 女人徵信, 女子徵信, 外遇問題, 女子徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 徵信公司, 徵信網, 外遇蒐證, 抓姦, 抓猴, 捉猴, 調查跟蹤, 反跟蹤, 感情挽回, 挽回感情, 婚姻挽回, 挽回婚姻, 外遇沖開, 抓姦, 女子徵信, 外遇蒐證, 外遇, 通姦, 通姦罪, 贍養費, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信公司, 女人徵信, 外遇
徵信, 徵信網, 徵信社, 徵信網, 外遇, 徵信, 徵信社, 抓姦, 徵信, 女人徵信, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信公司, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 女人徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 女子徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社,
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 外遇, 抓姦, 離婚, 外遇,離婚,
徵信, 外遇, 離婚, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信社, 征信, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 征信, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信社, 徵信, 外遇, 抓姦, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信,
^^ very nice
徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社, 徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,
徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,徵信, 徵信社,
外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇
外遇
外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 ,
外遇 外遇 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇外遇 外遇外遇 外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇
外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇 , 外遇劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿劈腿喜帖囍帖卡片外遇外遇 外遇 外遇外遇 外遇
外遇 外遇 外遇 外遇剖析 外遇調查 外遇案例 外遇諮詢 偷情 第三者外遇話題 外遇發洩 感情挽回 徵信社 外遇心態 外遇 通姦 通姦罪 外遇徵信社徵信社外遇 外遇 抓姦徵信協會徵信公司 包二奶 徵信社 徵信 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信社 徵信 徵信 婚姻 婚前徵信 前科 個人資料 外遇 第三者 徵信社 偵探社 抓姦 偵探社 偵探社婚 偵探社 偵探社偵探家事服務家事服務家電維修家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務家事服務持久持久持久持久持久持久持久離婚網頁設計徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社外遇離婚協議書劈腿持久持久持久持久持久劈腿剖析徵信徵信社外遇外遇外遇外遇徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信徵信社徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社徵信社
艾葳酒店經紀公司提供專業的酒店經紀, 飯局小姐,領檯人員,領台,傳播妹,或者想要到台北酒店、林森北路酒店,私人招待所,或者八大行業當酒店PT,酒店公關,酒店兼職,想去酒店上班, 日式酒店,制服酒店,ktv酒店,禮服店,整天穿得水水漂漂的禮服酒店,鋼琴酒吧當酒店領檯,酒店小姐,公關小姐??,還是想去制服店當上班小姐,水水們如果想要擁有打工工作、晚上兼差工作、兼差打工、假日兼職、兼職工作、學生兼差、兼差、打工兼差、日領工作、晚上兼差工作、酒店工作、酒店上班、酒店打工、兼職、兼差、兼差工作、酒店上班等,想了解酒店相關工作和特種行業內容,想找打工、假日兼職、兼差打工、或晚班兼職想擁有快速賺錢又有保障的工作嗎???又可以現領請找專業又有保障的艾葳酒店經紀公司!
艾葳酒店經紀是合法的公司工作環境高雅時尚，無業績壓力，無脫秀無喝酒壓力，高層次會員制客源，工作輕鬆，可日領、現領。
一般的酒店經紀只會在水水們第一次上班和領薪水時出現而已，對水水們的上班安全一點保障都沒有！艾葳酒店經紀公司的水水們上班時全程媽咪作陪，不需擔心！只提供最優質的酒店打工,酒店上班,酒店打工環境、上班條件給水水們。
水水們妳有缺現金、有卡債、缺錢卡奴的煩腦嗎?想到日本留學日本打工嗎?妳是工讀生找工作??想要擁有高時薪又輕鬆的夜間兼職工作,打工機會和,假日打工,兼職工作日領假日打工的機會嗎??想實現夢想卻又缺錢沒錢嗎!??整天還在煩腦如何賺錢有什麼賺錢方法,和賺錢最快方法!?,想要打工,日領工作,短期打工,兼差工作,打工兼差工作嗎!?,
請加入我們艾葳酒店經紀公司工作單純輕鬆”高時薪”又可日領徵想要當傳播妹,上班小姐,酒店兼差,酒店兼職,歡迎學生打工,!!!
加入我們實現夢想就從現在開始^__^
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,
Post a Comment