EnglishElection Day
- Election Night Reporting: 416,458
- Cast Vote Records: 536,616
- Ballot Images: 536,616
Recount
- Election Night Reporting: 416,457
- Cast Vote Records: 536,226
- Ballot Images: 536,654
Aberrations
- Double counted ballots in original count: 453
- Double counted ballots in recount: 151
- Original ballots not appearing in recount: 963
- New Ballots not appearing in original: 576
Issue with Constitutional Ballots
Gwinnett County's ballot processing presented a distinctive challenge, primarily due to the utilization of dual-page ballots for each voter. In addition to the primary ballot, voters were provided with a secondary constitutional ballot page. During the hand count, these secondary pages were separated from the primary ballots, adding an additional layer of complexity to the process.
Given the dual ballot system in Gwinnett County, it's important to note that roughly half of the votes were for a presidential candidate. This aspect is crucial in understanding the distribution and significance of the votes and any discrepancies that arose during the counting process.
At first glance, the official ballot count of 416,064 may appear significantly lower than the total number of ballot images, which stands at 536,616. However, this discrepancy can be attributed to the structure of the ballots themselves. Many voters received two-page ballots, which included the Spanish translation of each contest. In the process of creating cast vote records and ballot images, these two-page ballots were counted as two separate ballots, effectively doubling their representation in the records.
During the recount, constitutional ballots were separated from the candidate ballots, making it challenging to identify stray constitutional ballots. It is estimated that approximately 250 additional stray constitutional ballots were not included in the recount count.
Original Count
In total, 453 ballots were identified as having been counted twice in the election day count. These double counted ballots were not confined to a single batch but were spread across nine different batches.
In the original count, there were 963 ballots that were not reflected in the recount. This discrepancy could have stemmed from actions taken during the Risk-Limiting Audit (RLA), which was focused primarily on the presidential vote. During the RLA's ballot sorting process, any ballot that featured a write-in candidate for president was excluded from the count. This approach resulted in a significant number of stray ballots in the original tally. It seems likely that these ballots were removed by election officials during one of the recount phases and were not subsequently re-incorporated into the final count.
963 Write-In Presidential Ballots Removed from the Recount
Recount Overview
In the recount, a total of 151 ballots were identified as having been counted twice.
11 of 151 Double Scanned Ballots added to the Recount
Additionally, there were 576 new ballot images, originating from various precincts, that were added to the recount without a clear explanation. While it is evident that a number of new ballots were introduced during the recount process, fully analyzing the extent and impact of these additions in this particular county presents a significant challenge.
54 of 576 New Ballots added to the Recount
Blank Presidential Pages Deleted
During either the Risk-Limiting Audit (RLA) or the recount in Gwinnett County, it appears that ballots with no votes on the first page or those marked poorly were either removed or deleted. Given that Gwinnett used two-page ballots, it seems someone made the decision to consider the first blank page of a ballot as redundant and consequently removed such ballots from the list of ballot images. As a result of this action, both pages of the ballot were discarded. This pattern is evident in the list of missing ballots from the original vote count, affecting over 180 ballots. This removal process based on the first page's status indicates a significant procedural decision that impacted the total number of ballots accounted for in the count.
Critical Issue: Overwriting of Votes
During the recount process, a significant issue emerged with the first batch of Tabulator 2036. The first 32 ballot records were overwritten with a different set of ballots.
16 Absentee Ballot Images
16 Replacement Cast Vote Records
16 Absentee Ballot Images
16 Replacement Cast Vote Records
This scenario closely resembles what occurred in both Appling and Bryant County, indicating a serious issue. In each case, the problems were associated with the first batches processed by the tabulators. This pattern suggests the possibility that a technician might have intentionally copied a new set of ballots over an existing set, resulting in the deletion of the original ballot images. Such an occurrence points to a significant procedural oversight in the recount process.
241 Replacement Cast Vote Records
After these first 32 ballots overridden, the problem continues with 241 additional ballot images that were in the batch that overwrote the ballots. When considering the double-ballot system in Gwinnett, this means that a total of 273 ballots overwrote the original 16 ballots.
The situation in Gwinnett County is particularly concerning. Unlike in the other counties, the discrepancies here occurred in the recount data and were not corrected. This distinction highlights a more severe problem in Gwinnett County, underscoring the need for a thorough investigation to address and rectify these issues.
241 Replacement Cast Vote Records
