Uhuru Says Portal Showed Statistics NOT Results

[vooke]

vooke

Taking someone's words out of context and using them to support what he was in effect opposing is worse than forgery. Now read your favorite tweet after reading this one:

We deliberately enacted law to ensure IEBC transmitted & published forms of results for all elections to avoid the current impasse.

— Mutula KilonzoJR CBS (@GvnMutula) August 9, 2017

what he means therefore:
The joint select Committee was aware that figures were subject to alterations & or amendments. [to prevent that mischief from happening again] We deliberately enacted law to ensure IEBC transmitted & published forms of results for all elections to avoid the current impasse. This impasse in wholly unnecessary.[/b]

I hope this wean you of the habit of posting and reposting something that in effect opposes what you are trying to state.

That's your spin. He was responding to claims that the portal results had errors

[vooke]

If you need some extra tuition I would be glad to help. Your skull has proved impervious to the absorption of a simple fact that PROVISIONAL RESULTS were abolished! I have asked you to produce any legal basis for this but you have not. That has not stopped you from singing the gospel of provisional results. Why?

Because you continue to refuse to READ the verdict of the Court of Appeal! But that notwithstanding you continue to pretend to be an expert on elections - with all this ignorance and stupidity!

Only NASA are having a problem with commonsensical explanation and expectation. The key-in data was always provisional. The final results were those declare at polling station as form 34A. That is what Maina Kia got in Court of Appeal.

There are no provisional results, but final results arrived in two formats; scanned 34A and keyed-in results from 34A. It was agreed that in case of any discrepancy, 34A was the arbiter.

[bryan275]

Why did the Iebc bother to beam the result as they came in?  Especially if it had no bearing on the real final tally?  Hu ni utoto sana.  The iebc thought that their dodgy  live results would be accepted as final and are only engaging in damage control after getting caught faking the result.  They're making it up as they go along.  Iebc=jubilee=SCoK.  With the sole motive of defeating the voice of Kenya expressed through the ballot.

Divorce Now!

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Why did the Iebc bother to beam the result as they came in?  Especially if it had no bearing on the real final tally?  Hu ni utoto sana.  The iebc thought that their dodgy  live results would be accepted as final and are only engaging in damage control after getting caught faking the result.  They're making it up as they go along.  Iebc=jubilee=SCoK.  With the sole motive of defeating the voice of Kenya expressed through the ballot.

Divorce Now!

I have mentioned this before.  The jubilant will declare the electronic transmission irrelevant or relevant depending on whether it supports or puts into question their preferred outcome.  I am no longer even sure they understand why electronic transmission was required in the first place. 

With Forms 34A scans, there was actually no need to text the data.  If they couldn't scan and send the form, they could simply have held onto the information.  They had 7 days. 

The raw forms would have been dumped online in the order they came, in a list(not a fancy looking but useless page where you need to guess what may or may not be there), and people would be free to make up the tallies as they came in.  Texting in so-called provisional data that everyone agrees is not official, and then tallying it to show an outcome just muddies the process.

[Omollo]

I am sure you know I am not trying to convince you - that is a job I stopped doing years ago. It is up to those receiving your propaganda to get the context and compare with your interpretation of one of the tweets sent within seconds of each other, discussing the same issue.

vooke

Taking someone's words out of context and using them to support what he was in effect opposing is worse than forgery. Now read your favorite tweet after reading this one:

The joint select Commitee was aware that figures were subject to alterations & or amendments. This impasse in wholly unnecessary.

— Mutula KilonzoJR CBS (@GvnMutula) August 9, 2017

We deliberately enacted law to ensure IEBC transmitted & published forms of results for all elections to avoid the current impasse.

— Mutula KilonzoJR CBS (@GvnMutula) August 9, 2017

what he means therefore:
The joint select Committee was aware that figures were subject to alterations & or amendments. [to prevent that mischief from happening again] We deliberately enacted law to ensure IEBC transmitted & published forms of results for all elections to avoid the current impasse. This impasse in wholly unnecessary.[/b]

I hope this wean you of the habit of posting and reposting something that in effect opposes what you are trying to state.

That's your spin. He was responding to claims that the portal results had errors

[vooke]

Why did the Iebc bother to beam the result as they came in?  Especially if it had no bearing on the real final tally?  Hu ni utoto sana.  The iebc thought that their dodgy  live results would be accepted as final and are only engaging in damage control after getting caught faking the result.  They're making it up as they go along.  Iebc=jubilee=SCoK.  With the sole motive of defeating the voice of Kenya expressed through the ballot.

Divorce Now!

Divorce yesterday.
Think about it. Results declaration is at Constituency and final. This means National tallying center had no job to do other than wait for Constituency tallying centers to send in their 34B and make a declaration.

But tallying at Constituency is tedious and time consuming. So the legislators agreed IEBC should release results from the polling stations even as they await the forms 34B Reduces anxiety.

Results from the polling stations were to be sent in keyed in forms and scans. Keyed in probably saved time it takes to beam these on the portal. That's the ONLY reason I can guess for keying in what's already contained in 34As.

But this carries a risk of data entry errors. IEBC anticipates this and arrives at a consensus; scans of 34A are final arbiter should there be any discrepancy. Makes tons of sense to me instead of
1. Rejecting results where there is discrepancy
2. Randomly picking either of the two results as final


In any case 34 is final in law and not any extract from it.

There were variances of course, and the fact that the final results were derived from 34A and not keyed in results essentially makes the portal/keyed-in results provisional.

But the variances were negligible

[RV Pundit]

Common sense vooke is no longer common

[vooke]

I am sure you know I am not trying to convince you - that is a job I stopped doing years ago. It is up to those receiving your propaganda to get the context and compare with your interpretation of one of the tweets sent within seconds of each other, discussing the same issue.

vooke

Taking someone's words out of context and using them to support what he was in effect opposing is worse than forgery. Now read your favorite tweet after reading this one:

The joint select Commitee was aware that figures were subject to alterations & or amendments. This impasse in wholly unnecessary.

— Mutula KilonzoJR CBS (@GvnMutula) August 9, 2017

We deliberately enacted law to ensure IEBC transmitted & published forms of results for all elections to avoid the current impasse.

— Mutula KilonzoJR CBS (@GvnMutula) August 9, 2017

what he means therefore:
The joint select Committee was aware that figures were subject to alterations & or amendments. [to prevent that mischief from happening again] We deliberately enacted law to ensure IEBC transmitted & published forms of results for all elections to avoid the current impasse. This impasse in wholly unnecessary.[/b]

I hope this wean you of the habit of posting and reposting something that in effect opposes what you are trying to state.

That's your spin. He was responding to claims that the portal results had errors

Omorlo, I'm sorry I misread him. You are right, I'm wrong.
So the 'impasse' was declaration of results without forms 34B and A. He wondered why IEBC was not releasing these. Ok.

Asante.


But IEBC anticipated discrepancies between keyed-in results and forms 34A,and issued a statement to this effect days to the election. Most you can hang IEBC for is streaming unverified results which had ZERO bearing on forms 34B,and C. At most,IEBC will walk away with some mild scolding for not verifying.

[Omollo]

That is why I respect you. You follow the 10 rules of argumentation.

Omorlo, I'm sorry I misread him. You are right, I'm wrong.
So the 'impasse' was declaration of results without forms 34B and A. He wondered why IEBC was not releasing these. Ok.

Asante.


But IEBC anticipated discrepancies between keyed-in results and forms 34A,and issued a statement to this effect days to the election. Most you can hang IEBC for is streaming unverified results which had ZERO bearing on forms 34B,and C. At most,IEBC will walk away with some mild scolding for not verifying.

[vooke]

IEBC too has said there were no results on the portal


Kassait's affidavit
http://www.judiciary.go.ke/portal/assets/filemanager_uploads/A%20-%20Presidential%20Petitions%202017/REPLYING%20AFFIDAVIT_IMMACULATE%20KASSAIT.pdf

76. THAT Paragraph 75 is denied and the Petitioners put to strict proof thereof. The online statistics and those projected at the National Tallying Centre are not a representation of the results.

I'd very much love to hear what they were not what they were not