|
|
Post by mank on Mar 6, 2013 15:12:43 GMT 3
Phil Nothing new you are telling us. We always knew that the electronic figures were provisional until the signed off results were received at the national tallying centre and released by the commission. Only two constituencies have been announced.....so what huge difference is being given? I am for a fair result and will take it as announced by the IEBC....question is will you??
Right now tallying tells me Raila 50% and Uhuru 45%, that is from the official manual tallying already received. Now did someone say Kajiado County is a TNA zone?
You can proceed and believe the ghost figures you are seeing on TV, and as RR tells you IEBC systems were actually hacked and compromised by known individuals thus the decision to shift to manual.Raila was leading at some point early in the presentation of provisional results too. We are upon a dangerous trend ... ofcourse if the count deviates in a big way from provisional results then people will want to know where the provisional results were coming from such that they are delinked from official results. |
|
|
|
Post by nowayhaha on Mar 6, 2013 15:18:49 GMT 3
Phil Nothing new you are telling us. We always knew that the electronic figures were provisional until the signed off results were received at the national tallying centre and released by the commission. Only two constituencies have been announced.....so what huge difference is being given? I am for a fair result and will take it as announced by the IEBC....question is will you?? I will accept just, free and fair result. Right now tallying tells me Raila 50% and Uhuru 45%, that is from the official manual tallying already received. Now did someone say Kajiado County is a TNA zone? You can proceed and believe the ghost figures you are seeing on TV, and as RR tells you IEBC systems were actually hacked and compromised by known individuals thus the decision to shift to manual. Phil the fact is in Kajiado County with the results of two constituencies announced the following are the results , for a moment Phil lets stop wishful thinking ,where does it indicate Raila is leading in Kajiado Constituency ? elections.nation.co.ke/news/-/1631868/1712792/-/oshxpaz/-/index.html13:45 Kenyatta (39,698) leads Raila (38,679) in final results released by IEBC from Kajiado South, Kajiado Central and Diaspora constituencies. 13:25 Kajiado Central presidential results: Odinga 19,955, Kenyatta 14,747, Kiyiapi 691, Kenneth 639, Mudavadi 110, Dida 65, Karua 43, Muite 9. 13:20 Kajiado South presidential results: Kenyatta 24,000, Odinga 17,500, Kiyiapi 186, Kenneth 127, Mudavadi 106, Karua 44, Dida 14, Muite 9. |
|
|
|
Post by foresight on Mar 6, 2013 15:24:55 GMT 3
"ofcourse if the count deviates in a big way from provisional results then people will want to know where the provisional results were coming from"
Mank isn't that what Franklin Bett all along wanted to know?
Someone said DIGITAL vs ANALOGUE...
Betts question was "WHERE ARE ALL THESE FIGURES COMING FROM?
The man must have looked at those screens and the never changing margin of 500000 plus and concluded that something aint just right!!
From what I now hear... HACKERS were busy cooking figures to match the TYRANNY OF NUMBERS hypothesis...
WHERE ARE ALL THESE FIGURES COMING FROM.... yawa!
|
|
|
|
Post by nowayhaha on Mar 6, 2013 15:35:18 GMT 3
"ofcourse if the count deviates in a big way from provisional results then people will want to know where the provisional results were coming from" Mank isn't that what Franklin Bett all along wanted to know? Someone said DIGITAL vs ANALOGUE... Betts question was "WHERE ARE ALL THESE FIGURES COMING FROM?
The man must have looked at those screens and the never changing margin of 500000 plus and concluded that something aint just right!!From what I now hear... HACKERS were busy cooking figures to match the TYRANNY OF NUMBERS hypothesis... WHERE ARE ALL THESE FIGURES COMING FROM.... yawa! Foresight - can you just ask yourself a simple question why has IEBC dispatched helicopters to airlift returning officers ? With that you have your answers there is nothing like cooking of figures by hackers , its simple results were not being relayed and it started from areas where CORD enjoys massive support. We are off the campaign period where we could manufacture propaganda for the purpose of mudslinging the opponents so sit back relax and wait for the results as they start trickling in |
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 6, 2013 15:58:40 GMT 3
"ofcourse if the count deviates in a big way from provisional results then people will want to know where the provisional results were coming from" Mank isn't that what Franklin Bett all along wanted to know? Someone said DIGITAL vs ANALOGUE... Betts question was "WHERE ARE ALL THESE FIGURES COMING FROM?
The man must have looked at those screens and the never changing margin of 500000 plus and concluded that something aint just right!!From what I now hear... HACKERS were busy cooking figures to match the TYRANNY OF NUMBERS hypothesis... WHERE ARE ALL THESE FIGURES COMING FROM.... yawa! Foresight - can you just ask yourself a simple question why has IEBC dispatched helicopters to airlift returning officers ? With that you have your answers there is nothing like cooking of figures by hackers , its simple results were not being relayed and it started from areas where CORD enjoys massive support. We are off the campaign period where we could manufacture propaganda for the purpose of mudslinging the opponents so sit back relax and wait for the results as they start trickling in The IEBC is airlifting returning officers because the digital system had been compromised. They will now only use the analogue system. |
|
|
|
Post by nowayhaha on Mar 6, 2013 16:12:17 GMT 3
Foresight - can you just ask yourself a simple question why has IEBC dispatched helicopters to airlift returning officers ? With that you have your answers there is nothing like cooking of figures by hackers , its simple results were not being relayed and it started from areas where CORD enjoys massive support. We are off the campaign period where we could manufacture propaganda for the purpose of mudslinging the opponents so sit back relax and wait for the results as they start trickling in The IEBC is airlifting returning officers because the digital system had been compromised. They will now only use the analogue system. This what IEBC chairman had to say on the reason for recalling back to Nairobi the returning officers Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission ( IEBC) has refuted claims of a server crash at the tallying centre. In a press conference, IEBC chair Isaack Hassan said there were delays in transmission of results from polling centres by returning ofiicers. He added that they will resort to manual tallying due to the challenges they were experiencing. www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000078747&story_title=Kenya--IEBC:-There-is-delay-in-results-transmissionRead more: jukwaa.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=8058#ixzz2MlSiaxvb |
|
|
|
Post by mank on Mar 6, 2013 16:58:12 GMT 3
The IEBC is airlifting returning officers because the digital system had been compromised. They will now only use the analogue system.It is strange that you feel others should wait without discussing the issues but for you its different ... you continue discussing the issues and trying to get others to see things your way. I think you should heed your own advice and wait. ..... The IEBC is announcing results. Let us wait patiently and if we are unhappy, there is a frond judiciary to arbitrate. |
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 6, 2013 17:07:22 GMT 3
The IEBC is airlifting returning officers because the digital system had been compromised. They will now only use the analogue system.It is strange that you feel others should should wait without discussing the issues but for you its different ... you continue discussing the issues and trying to get others to see things your way. I think you should heed your advice and wait. ..... The IEBC is announcing results. Let us wait patiently and if we are unhappy, there is a frond judiciary to arbitrate. Sir, people like me can of course talk and discuss and still be patient. But campaigns have a responsibility that they signed on to accept the authority of the IEBC, not to announce purl eel results etc |
|
|
|
Post by mank on Mar 6, 2013 17:08:51 GMT 3
It is strange that you feel others should should wait without discussing the issues but for you its different ... you continue discussing the issues and trying to get others to see things your way. I think you should heed your advice and wait. Sir, people like me can of course talk and discuss and still be patient. But campaigns have a responsibility that they signed on to accept the authority of the IEBC, not to announce purl eel results etc Well sir, it was me you were trying to silence with that irresponsible advice, not any campaign. Now let's just agree that you are free to air your opinions, but not free to tell me when not to air mine. That's all. |
|
|
|
Post by nowayhaha on Mar 6, 2013 17:14:44 GMT 3
Sir, people like me can of course talk and discuss and still be patient. But campaigns have a responsibility that they signed on to accept the authority of the IEBC, not to announce purl eel results etc Well sir, it was me you were trying to silence with that irresponsible advice, not any campaign. Now let's just agree that you are free to air your opinions, but not free to tell me when not to air mine. That's all. Mank, RR is high on something , just look at his most recent posts-so hilarious . Muache huyo ))) |
|
|
|
Post by mank on Mar 6, 2013 17:17:40 GMT 3
Well sir, it was me you were trying to silence with that irresponsible advice, not any campaign. Now let's just agree that you are free to air your opinions, but not free to tell me when not to air mine. That's all.
Mank,
RR is high on something , just look at his most recent posts-so hilarious . Muache huyo )))Hapo nimekusikia! Nilishangaa nikamfanya nini? |
|
|
|
Post by samson on Mar 6, 2013 18:24:51 GMT 3
About the rejected votes(those unmarked, have multiple marking,) can be allocated to sum-1, but the technicality is at the polling statiön the po do not note whose mark/vote the ballot was four. They only note their numbers, if you wound like to find out at national tallying center who to allocate these vote you must open each box in all polling station reason being po return them in their respective boxes, good people spoilt votes are diffrent from rejected where rejected are cast spoilt are not
|
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Mar 6, 2013 18:49:09 GMT 3
About the rejected votes(those unmarked, have multiple marking,) can be allocated to sum-1, but the technicality is at the polling statiön the po do not note whose mark/vote the ballot was four. They only note their numbers, if you wound like to find out at national tallying center who to allocate these vote you must open each box in all polling station reason being po return them in their respective boxes, good people spoilt votes are diffrent from rejected where rejected are cast spoilt are not You have spoken! |
|
|
|
Post by mank on Mar 6, 2013 21:15:44 GMT 3
I am surprised the media is not attempting to compare the official results with the provisional results they had announced. This would take some concentration as it would require making sure to pair up the same constituences in the comparisons. They should do this not only so it can be clear whether there was substance in the allegation of fiddling, but to absorb the various stake holders from potentially unfounded blemish.
|
|
|
|
Post by foresight on Mar 7, 2013 10:38:30 GMT 3
www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Rejected-papers-open-new-battlefront/-/1064/1713514/-/tyhok8z/-/index.htmlODM’s National Elections Board chairman Franklin Bett, basing his arguments on Article 138 (4) (a) of the Constitution and the Election Regulations of November 2012 said: “The word shall is used in (138 (4) (a)) and it shall be 50 plus one per cent of cast votes. I want to specifically state that any votes indicated up there (on the screens) were cast. They were placed in a ballot box so they must be part of all votes cast. If the votes were spoilt, they were cast before they were spoilt. They cannot be defined any other way.
If English means anything, that is what it means.”
|
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 8, 2013 18:46:38 GMT 3
www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Rejected-papers-open-new-battlefront/-/1064/1713514/-/tyhok8z/-/index.htmlODM’s National Elections Board chairman Franklin Bett, basing his arguments on Article 138 (4) (a) of the Constitution and the Election Regulations of November 2012 said: “ The word shall is used in (138 (4) (a)) and it shall be 50 plus one per cent of cast votes. I want to specifically state that any votes indicated up there (on the screens) were cast. They were placed in a ballot box so they must be part of all votes cast. If the votes were spoilt, they were cast before they were spoilt. They cannot be defined any other way.
If English means anything, that is what it means.” , compare the section of your post I have high-lighted above with this: " The Constitution states that the winner of a presidential election must garner at least 50 per cent plus one of the total cast votes. Article 138(4)(a) of the supreme law on procedure at presidential elections states among others that “a candidate shall be declared elected as president if the candidate receives more than half of the votes cast in the election.”" The contentious word in your post is not even the word "shall" but the fact that you have moved " per cent" from where it belongs after the " 50" to put it after the the " one" where it changes the entire meaning of the clause. More than half the vote refers to more than half the vote plus one vote, not by one percentage point above the half mark. What are you up to?  www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000078765&pageNo=2&story_title=Kenya-Rejected-votes-'make-run-off-likely%E2%80%99 |
|
|
|
Post by mank on Mar 8, 2013 19:14:26 GMT 3
www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/Rejected-papers-open-new-battlefront/-/1064/1713514/-/tyhok8z/-/index.htmlODM’s National Elections Board chairman Franklin Bett, basing his arguments on Article 138 (4) (a) of the Constitution and the Election Regulations of November 2012 said: “ The word shall is used in (138 (4) (a)) and it shall be 50 plus one per cent of cast votes. I want to specifically state that any votes indicated up there (on the screens) were cast. They were placed in a ballot box so they must be part of all votes cast. If the votes were spoilt, they were cast before they were spoilt. They cannot be defined any other way.
If English means anything, that is what it means.” , compare the section of your post I have high-lighted above with this: " The Constitution states that the winner of a presidential election must garner at least 50 per cent plus one of the total cast votes. Article 138(4)(a) of the supreme law on procedure at presidential elections states among others that “a candidate shall be declared elected as president if the candidate receives more than half of the votes cast in the election.”" The contentious word in your post is not even the word "shall" but the fact that you have moved " per cent" from where it belongs after the " 50" to put it after the the " one" where it changes the entire meaning of the clause. More than half the vote refers to more than half the vote plus one vote, not by one percentage point above the half mark. What are you up to? www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000078765&pageNo=2&story_title=Kenya-Rejected-votes-'make-run-off-likely%E2%80%99 I also wondered why "shall" was the controversy. The other controversy besides the one you pointed out is whether rejected votes are to count as cast votes hence a factor to the percentage of votes received. In my logic, votes cast should not include rejected votes. If they are rejected they can't count. More over, summed across candidates, votes received should sum to 100% of votes cast ... hence the logic, "rejected" votes aren't "cast" votes, since they are not cast for any particular candidate. "Rejected" also would have a new meaning if votes in that category count anyway! Neither of these issues are that difficult to settle if indeed all concerned respect the English Language and some logic. |
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Mar 8, 2013 19:24:03 GMT 3
how about the rule that defines what is a valid vote and which says that rejected votes are void and will not be counted?
For you to reach the 50%+1 threshhold, it must be on the basis of votes that can be counted.
I imagine you only count the rejected votes to audit that you did not start with more votes that should have been issued rather than to make the count towards the election.
|
|
|
|
Post by mank on Mar 8, 2013 19:53:03 GMT 3
how about the rule that defines what is a valid vote and which says that rejected votes are void and will not be counted?
For you to reach the 50%+1 threshhold, it must be on the basis of votes that can be counted.
I imagine you only count the rejected votes to audit that you did not start with more votes that should have been issued rather than to make the count towards the election. I think we are in agreement, but I am not so sure - you start of as if disagreeing, but I think you are saying same thing I am saying. In algebraic expresion this is what I am saying: Let's say there are N votes registered all together and all N voters turn out (plus no ghost voters). Now assume x votes are rejected, hence null. Of course IEBC would have to count them to know they are x in number ... and that's as far as they work with x. So we remain with N-X votes. These are the valid and "cast" votes that should determine whether anyone gets 50% + 1. In that sense the average number of votes per candidate is (N-x)/8, and the sum of all votes received by candidates (valid and considered cast) is 100%. |
|
