Front Page  »  

Hill supporters accused of manipulating poll

May 3, 2012

Adam Hill

In an apparent attempt to keep Adam Hill seated as 3rd District San Luis Obispo County Supervisor, several supporters allegedly used unethical methods to vote multiple times in a New Times poll. [NewTimes]

The weekly poll question asked, “Which of these candidates for SLO County Supervisor has your vote?” Answers included 3rd District candidates Adam Hill and Ed Waage and 5th District candidates Debbie Arnold and Jim Patterson.

On  April 28, Waage took a small lead over Hill with about 150 votes in. The Democratic Central Committee responded by sending an email to members explaining how to manipulate the vote by cleaning cookies and voting repeatedly.

Shortly afterwards, it appeared someone was using an automatic program. From about 8:30 p.m. until midnight, approximately three votes a minute were made in favor of Hill.

Waage supporter Kevin Rice, also a recipient of the committee email, checked to see if turning cookies off allowed a second vote, and then called several media outlets including the New Times and CalCoastNews to report the apparent crooked voting.

“It was very clear someone was using an automatic program because the votes were coming in consistently and then it just stopped,” Rice said “It looks like team Adam Hill shares the same ethics as their candidate.”

In the end, 86 percent of those votes, roughly 5,396, went to Hill with the other three candidates receiving between 4 percent to 5 percent of the vote.

In today’s New Times, the Shredder wrote that its “IT guy” discovered that 5,349 votes were made from just three IP addresses.


Loading...
Subjects:             
Related:


211 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

It’s a dirty little secret that in order to create the impression of more user traffic to attract sponsors, managers of many websites enjoy seeing multiple votes from a single IP address. And thus they allow for easy work-arounds that allow for multiple voting, such as simply requiring the removal of old “cookies” to allow a fresh new vote.


That seems to be the way the New Times website has been operating up until now. They have no rule against multiple votes, and have a system that allows for it, with the touch of a “remove cookie” button on one’s computer.


With no rules agasint it, and websites designed to allow for it, and the practice being nearly ubiquitous, how can anyone seriously or thoughtfully accuse someone of a breach of ethics for voting more than once on an internet popularity poll?


I’m disappointed that Ed Waage would employ people who make these kinds of sleazy, mud-slinging political attacks of no merit. It sounds a lot like Kevin P. Rice is too involved with the Waage campaign for anyone’s good. Sad.


0

>> Ed Waage would employ people…


A lie.


>> Kevin P. Rice is too involved with the Waage campaign


A lie.


0

Fact: Kevin P. Rice performs on Ed Waage campaign advertisements. If you are not being employed to do that work, Mr. Rice, what do YOU call it?


So, Mr. Rice, please spell out exactly the extent you ARE involved in the Ed Waage campaign, beyond your role in his advertising campaign. For instance, do you do any computer work for him?


0

ZERO. ZERO. NADA. I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH ED WAAGE’S CAMPAIGN. NO RELATION. NO WORK.


ARE YOU FOR REAL?


0

So, let me get this straight, Mr. Rice, are you claiming publicly that is NOT your voice on those political attack ads that are being broadcast on KVEC radio?


0

It’s been a week now and Adam Hill’s accusers STILL have not provided one shred of evidence that he orchestrated this kerfuffle. And yet his accusers to not issue any apologies or retractions.


No crimes were committed, no rules were broken and no evidence of wrong-doing on Hill’s part, but the absurd, unfounded politically and selfishly motivated attacks continue shamelessly.


Who is Kevin P. Rice and how does HE have the nerve to criticize the ethics of others!!??


Does Ed Waage condone this type of sleazy political mudslinging that is being done to support him? Or have some of his supporters gone rogue?


0

I am Kevin P. Rice. (805) 602-2616. Unlike you, I put my name to my words and stand behind them. It’s easy to sling lies and innuendo anonymously, as you are doing. Are you willing to step forward and stand behind your lies? No, I don’t think you are willing to stand up for your own words, as you would lose reputation in attempting to do so.


0

Mr. Rice, based on what I have heard about you and your tactics, YOU are one of the reasons I do not make my address or phone number public. I care about the safety of myself and my loved ones.


0

When is Ed Waage going to man-up and publicly distance himself from Kevin p. Rice and his self-serving , misleading political shenanigans?


0

I just checked the New Times website. There does not appear to be any rule posted that prohibits multiple votes from a single IP address. NO RULE AGAINST IT.


Secondly, no one who posts here seems to have ANY evidence or proof as to who orchestrated the multiple votes (for which there is no rule against.)


So how in heck do people like Kevin Rice (a case in himself) or some of the folks who post here justify claiming some sort of violation of ethics? Totally ridiculous. And some reporter of editor of CalCoastNews falls for this shameless, deceptive political propaganda of the worst kind.


Does Ed Waage condone this type of sleazy campaign tactics from his supporters? Why hasn’t he made a public statement on this?


Get real, please.


0

The New Times ‘Best Of…’ came out last week as well. I wonder how many people take that as an official vote as to what is the best restaurant, spa, best hang over food. God knows that no one would send in extra ballots. Novo is the best and it is official because it says so in the New Times.


Waage won’t say anything. Remember when that lady told McCain that Obama was a terrorist or something like that. McCain looked her in the eyes, took the mic away and said no, he’s an honorable man we just have different views on things (loose paraphrase). Yesterday a lady said similar things to Mitt, he wasn’t man enough like McCain to dispute the vicious attack. This reminds me of Waage. He knows that Hill isn’t a terrible person and that Hill has done a good job but he will allow mud to be slung. I haven’t heard one nasty thing from Adam Hill or Team Adam Hill (I am on their mailing list) about Waage, it just doesn’t happen. Every fundraiser that I’ve been to .Hill makes it a point to tell his supporters that he wants to run a clean raise and focus on the issues. He asks everyone to join him in making it a clean race, but he can’t control everyone. Like you I do wonder if this might have been a set up.


Wise, this is just an excuse to bag on Hill, they have a vendetta against him so any chance to get him they jump on it and take off. As usual around here, more slanderous and nasty accusations over something very petty.


0

Kevin Rice, Ed Waage or Adam Hlll might have orchestrated the voting. i don’t know. Anything is conceivable in politics. But the fact is, as of now, NO EVIDENCE has been presented that implicates any of them. Some of the folks who post here don’t seem to appreciate that. They spout off accusations and allegations based on total hearsay. They spew about “ethics” as if they know what the word means.


Have all the suspicions you want, but when you accuse someone of wrong-doing, you should have at least a shred of evidence to support the charge, otherwise it is total B.S..


0

That reminds me of some guy on here that made all these accusations against Republicans, Reagan, and others but presented not one fact. The same guy also asks questions and when he receives evidence and specific examples of why he is wrong, does not seem to register. Hate those types of people.


0

That’s interesting, because you, DowntownBob, continually accuse people of wrong-doing and yet present no evidence whatsoever to back up your allegations.


P.S. Don’t ge a hater.


By the way, it’s a fact that Ronald Reagan was a tool of organized crime. Here’s one of the places you can read all about the evidence that proves it:


http://www.amazon.com/Dark-Victory-Ronald-Reagan-MCA/dp/014010478X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1336543383&sr=1-1


0

What about all the direct accusation of corruptions? You responded only to John Edwards what I directly showed you to be incorrect based upon the court proceedings against him as evidence. Review the post to be reminded. Yet you point out A book as evidence against Ronald Reagan LOL! Perhaps meaningful debate is not worthwhile with someone who will not even consider the evidence back and forth. A book is not evidence Sir. News reports from reputable news agencies, indictments, and the like are evidence. And you have the audacity to tell me to get real. Take off the tin foil had and join us in the real world.


0

Consider READING the book before you criticize it, Bob. It’s a respected book and to my knowledge no one is refuting the facts it presents.


As far as John Edwards goes, I think we are getting a little too far off topic. i never voted for the guy, never intended to and don’t know anyone who did.


So, you’ve pointed out instances of corruption by Democratic politicians. What has that got to do with anything? What kind of “news” is that? Very old news!


Nevertheless, Republican is a brand that i most dissatisfied with. I have a hard time respecting anyone who would willingly want to be part of that brand. It’s tainted and these days represents the very worst aspects of American politics. What kind of a person wants to be in the same club that makes a guy like Dick Cheney or George Bush it’s leader?


0

If this was truly a worthy political controversy, instead of an absurdity, then we would expect Ed Waage to publicly make a statement with his teams’ official campaign allegations. But no. To do that would make him look as petty, absurd and ridiculous as our local media lynch mob. And, for all we know, it may have been Waage supporters who concocted this entire controversy. The fact is that multiple votes on internet polls is ubiquitous, legal and often encouraged by members of the public. What is the etiquette about this? You tell me. But don’t be ridiculous. Get real, please.


0

Some of you are spending an inordinate amount of time on this old thread, so it must be noteworthy. The evidence from the New Times, as well as Rice’s receipt of a DCC email, seem to prove that readers of the NT were encouraged to vote multiple times and 3 contributors did so. We’re not talking 3 or 4 extra times. It was a concentrated effort to skew the poll. Why? The DCC would have their own answer, but mine would be to give the impression that Adam Hill is a highly regarded Supe who deserves to be reelected based on a hugely popular vote by the NT reading public. There were no laws broken, not even rules, just ethics so much as most of us would think it improper to try and slant a poll to influence potential voters. Why else would this be worthwhile?

If some of you don’t mind, that’s your choice, but to condemn those of us that feel honesty should count, even in a little poll, seems unjustified.


0

I’m with Wiseguy. Team Adam Hill should not take *all* the blame for this skulldruggery.


The Demo Central Committee needs to own up, as well, to recommending that their lemmings “game the system” in this non-partisan election. The stinkiness of that hasn’t been fully explored here yet.


0

“And, for all we know, it may have been Waage supporters who concocted this entire controversy.”


I agree

Began to be obvious early on to me


0

There are a couple of tenacious whack jobs on this thread that don’t seem to understand that the proof they seek lies with the New Times IT department. If you want proof as you don’t believe the New Times, then that is where you need to voice your requests and accusations, at the NEW TIMES…


0

Whack job? OK, “Cindy”, why don’t you tell us EXACTLY what you are accusing Adam Hill of doing and provide ANY evidence to prove it. You have exactly NOTHING. Correct? If not, please give us the details instead of the empty, obfuscating insults that only suggest that you have no true foundation for the wild accusations.


Also, where is the crime, or the breach of ethics. If there was a rule broken, please cite the rule verbatim and where we can find it. But even if some tenuous “rule” of some kind is posted somewhere, that does not provide ANY evidence of WHO broke that “rule” And besides, why should ANYONE feel compelled to follow some unenforceable rule for an inconsequential, absolutely NON-scientific internet poll.


You are being ridiculous as far as I can tell. You have NOTHING as far as anyone who reads this forum can tell. Just an over abundance of the LYNCH MOB MENTALITY that prizes blind emotional reaction over truth and rationality. You make yourself judge and jury regarding something ridiculous and you don’t even have any solid evidence to present to back up your absurd outrage.


You act sure of yourself but in reality you have NOTHING to show. Do you honestly not see it?


0

“You act sure of yourself but in reality you have NOTHING to show. Do you honestly not see it?”


No, she doesn’t see it. She thinks that she sees facts in her head that no one else can see and we are supposed to believe these voices or facts in her head. This happens with almost every thread.


0

Face it, the story above is a travesty of supposed “journalism.” It’s got Kevin Rice (which Kevin Rice? Who can tell?) making accusations for which he has absolutely no evidence for. For all we know from the story and the facts presented, Rice himself may have orchestrated the multiple votes.


And it is days later and STILL not one shred of evidence to back up the wild accusations by Waage’s supporters.


It’s a sorry state of journalism where a guy like Rice can so easily manipulate the media for his own selfish purposes.


And what laws says it is “crooked’ to vote more than once on an internet “best of” poll?


Still waiting…


0

It’s been a couple days and still not one shred of evidence has been presented by Hill’s opponents to support their wild accusations. It’s the lynch mob mentality on steroids.


0

Still waiting.


I wonder who the partisan lynch mob is threatening today. Who will they try to run out of the state for voting twice on a newspaper “best of” internet poll? Woe is me if someone clicks “like” twice on this posting. They probably have a rope ready and a tree picked out for me.


Are these the kind of campaign tactics that Ed Waage endorses? Or have his supporters gone rogue on him while he works out his real estate deals with his buddies in anticipation of taking over the Board of Supervisors?


0

WiseGuy. You have a habit of blitzing a discussion with illogical answers and name calling (lynch mob mentality) and when people grow tired of your rampages and stop commenting, then you declare victory.


You are only victorious in your own mind. The truth is that people are just fed up with your garbage reasoning and name calling. No victory for you.


0

Since when do you speak for the entire community, “Citizen”? Speaking for YOURSELF, if you are so “fed up” what the heck are you doing posting a comment. But since you have, are you willing to back up ANYTHING you have written? Care to specify exactly what I have written that YOU consider “illogical”?


And where is your evidence, ANY evidence, to support your accusations against Adam Hill?


By the way, I’m not seeking “victory”, I’m promoting TRUTH and combatting the LYNCH MOB MENTALITY that you so eagerly promote. And since when are YOU the one who decides whether or not I am victorious?


0

The truth can be painful Citizen so I would imagine that you are in a lot of pain.


He absolutely is victorious. You people blast out nasty accusations but you can’t back them. You gossip like school girls.


That term that he uses does fit. Once some of you get your teeth in someone they’re in trouble. Facts or no facts you’ll take any excuse to ruin someone, that’s what you do.


0
1 … 3 4 5 6