<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Expected Vidak-Perez runoff would spark national attention	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://calwatchdog.com/2013/05/28/expected-vidak-perez-runoff-would-spark-national-attention/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/05/28/expected-vidak-perez-runoff-would-spark-national-attention/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Mar 2015 06:01:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: jimmydeeoc		</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/05/28/expected-vidak-perez-runoff-would-spark-national-attention/#comment-12010</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jimmydeeoc]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 19:54:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=43185#comment-12010</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I should hasten to add (18 hours later...LOL)  that when a majority of your population is  either directly from or recent descents from residents of said banana republics, I guess one shouldn&#039;t be too surprised.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I should hasten to add (18 hours later&#8230;LOL)  that when a majority of your population is  either directly from or recent descents from residents of said banana republics, I guess one shouldn&#8217;t be too surprised.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: jimmydeeoc		</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/05/28/expected-vidak-perez-runoff-would-spark-national-attention/#comment-12009</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jimmydeeoc]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 01:31:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=43185#comment-12009</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[We have become a Banana Republic.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We have become a Banana Republic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Bill - San Jose		</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/05/28/expected-vidak-perez-runoff-would-spark-national-attention/#comment-12008</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bill - San Jose]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 May 2013 20:35:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=43185#comment-12008</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[As a whole, we all need to call the news outlets (local and national) to bring notice to this rather bold effort to steal an election.

I hate people.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As a whole, we all need to call the news outlets (local and national) to bring notice to this rather bold effort to steal an election.</p>
<p>I hate people.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Take California Back		</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/05/28/expected-vidak-perez-runoff-would-spark-national-attention/#comment-12007</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Take California Back]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 19:17:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=43185#comment-12007</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The run off is scheduled for JULY 23rd, not June.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The run off is scheduled for JULY 23rd, not June.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Take California Back		</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/05/28/expected-vidak-perez-runoff-would-spark-national-attention/#comment-12006</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Take California Back]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 19:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=43185#comment-12006</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[We did a story and some research on this as well!

This is crazy and no one is doing anything!

https://www.facebook.com/notes/take-california-back/your-help-is-needed-now/412048478913387

If you were to go back to election night, you would remember that the media and both campaigns acknowledged that Vidak was far enough ahead, that the outstanding ballots would not have made a difference. This is precisely why Perez conceded so quickly. But then, something happened, and even the Fresno County Elections office was quoted as saying &quot;They didn&#039;t know WHAT happened&quot;.  
 
In this election Andy Vidak only needed 50% of the vote plus ONE vote in order to avoid the run off. On election night, he was well above that. But, after all the absentees and provisionals were counted, he only sits at 49.9%, not enough to avoid the run off. 
 
I have done all the numbers for all 4 counties in the election (I do not yet have the final provisional count from Fresno). I started printing out the official numbers each day from all of the official county websites and compared them with the subsequent numbers. I kept close tabs on all the results and where those results changed. 
 
Of particular interest are the Kern county provisional ballot numbers. 
 
There was an unusually high percentage in Kern County, when compared to the other counties.  
 
What is a provisional ballot? It is not an absentee ballot. Absentee ballots are another source of voting which can bring a lot of voter fraud and it is next to impossible to detect. 
 
http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_provisional.htm 
 
Kern county (the home of Leticia Perez) had a total of 14,798 ballots cast in this election. Of that amount, 554 were provisional ballots. That is 3.74% (almost 4%!). That is not a small number! 
 
Kings County had 15,314 ballots cast in this election (which is more than Kern county) and of that amount, only 128 ballots were provisionals. That is only 0.84% (less than 1%)! Kern county has more than THREE times that amount! For this reason, we targeted Kern county for our first audit. 
 
According to Kern County, the cost of a recount is only $1,567.00 per day for one team, or around $2,000.00 per day for two (for Kern County). One presumes that if the original election can be counted in less than 10 days, so can a recount. If that were the case, that would mean it would cost around $15,670.00. Even a worst case scenario would likely cost less than $40,000.00. We do not believe that is a hardship for a campaign that has raised at least between $500,000 and $1,000,000.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We did a story and some research on this as well!</p>
<p>This is crazy and no one is doing anything!</p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/notes/take-california-back/your-help-is-needed-now/412048478913387" rel="nofollow ugc">https://www.facebook.com/notes/take-california-back/your-help-is-needed-now/412048478913387</a></p>
<p>If you were to go back to election night, you would remember that the media and both campaigns acknowledged that Vidak was far enough ahead, that the outstanding ballots would not have made a difference. This is precisely why Perez conceded so quickly. But then, something happened, and even the Fresno County Elections office was quoted as saying &#8220;They didn&#8217;t know WHAT happened&#8221;.  </p>
<p>In this election Andy Vidak only needed 50% of the vote plus ONE vote in order to avoid the run off. On election night, he was well above that. But, after all the absentees and provisionals were counted, he only sits at 49.9%, not enough to avoid the run off. </p>
<p>I have done all the numbers for all 4 counties in the election (I do not yet have the final provisional count from Fresno). I started printing out the official numbers each day from all of the official county websites and compared them with the subsequent numbers. I kept close tabs on all the results and where those results changed. </p>
<p>Of particular interest are the Kern county provisional ballot numbers. </p>
<p>There was an unusually high percentage in Kern County, when compared to the other counties.  </p>
<p>What is a provisional ballot? It is not an absentee ballot. Absentee ballots are another source of voting which can bring a lot of voter fraud and it is next to impossible to detect. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_provisional.htm" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_provisional.htm</a> </p>
<p>Kern county (the home of Leticia Perez) had a total of 14,798 ballots cast in this election. Of that amount, 554 were provisional ballots. That is 3.74% (almost 4%!). That is not a small number! </p>
<p>Kings County had 15,314 ballots cast in this election (which is more than Kern county) and of that amount, only 128 ballots were provisionals. That is only 0.84% (less than 1%)! Kern county has more than THREE times that amount! For this reason, we targeted Kern county for our first audit. </p>
<p>According to Kern County, the cost of a recount is only $1,567.00 per day for one team, or around $2,000.00 per day for two (for Kern County). One presumes that if the original election can be counted in less than 10 days, so can a recount. If that were the case, that would mean it would cost around $15,670.00. Even a worst case scenario would likely cost less than $40,000.00. We do not believe that is a hardship for a campaign that has raised at least between $500,000 and $1,000,000.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Susan		</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/05/28/expected-vidak-perez-runoff-would-spark-national-attention/#comment-12005</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Susan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 18:16:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=43185#comment-12005</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Seems pretty obvious there were some shenanigans here and I hope the CRP will take it on because you&#039;re right, it is a high-profile race and a perception of voter fraud with impunity has the potential to affect future such races in California and elsewhere.  
P.S. Bakersfield Californian says the runoff date is JULY 23 (not June).  Not sure which is correct.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Seems pretty obvious there were some shenanigans here and I hope the CRP will take it on because you&#8217;re right, it is a high-profile race and a perception of voter fraud with impunity has the potential to affect future such races in California and elsewhere.<br />
P.S. Bakersfield Californian says the runoff date is JULY 23 (not June).  Not sure which is correct.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Bob Smith		</title>
		<link>https://calwatchdog.com/2013/05/28/expected-vidak-perez-runoff-would-spark-national-attention/#comment-12004</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Smith]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 May 2013 16:47:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=43185#comment-12004</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Surprising last-minute ballots: vote fraud? The Democrats pulled the same stunt in Washington State to take the governor&#039;s seat.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surprising last-minute ballots: vote fraud? The Democrats pulled the same stunt in Washington State to take the governor&#8217;s seat.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!--
Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: https://www.boldgrid.com/w3-total-cache/


Served from: calwatchdog.com @ 2026-04-14 16:37:35 by W3 Total Cache
-->