Another Republican upset 'win' at 52-48?

[shance]

I have to call BULL.SHIT.

I don't believe it after witnessing the unlimited amount of cheating, lying and dishonesty that has occured by many Republican leaders in every single level of governing.

How and why would we put faith in those that cheat consistently?

Such is the logic of fools.

Why would we assume this election was legitimate when noticing the consistent patterns in these Republican "upsets"?

So it perhaps could be that Schmidt won, how can we feel confident in a legitimate win for her when the Republican owned companies conveniently handle the ballot data?

In addition, the elephant in the living room is the reality that there is NO way to be fully sure of the outcome, due to those who have had the ballot data in their possession.

How many 'questionable' Republican victories have consistently been this close so as to slip under the alarm signal?

When are we going to face the fact that we are seeing a pattern? Are we going to sit back and ignore the pattern that is desperately trying to tell us something?

A pattern that, I believe at the very least should be telling our leaders to quit being cowards, start speaking out and help us to take our elections back.

[Fiona]

1. How was it an upset?

Was there a single poll that showed Hackett leading at any point?

[autorank]

2. Share the polls. Have you seen any non-partisan polls?

[Fiona]

3. Me?

No. I'm asking if any of the polls showed Hackett winning. I didn't see any polls, but I'd never heard that Hackett was leading.

If he was never leading, Schmidt's win can hardly be called an "upset".

[autorank]

16. That's a lot of "ifs" -- maybe it wasn't an upset, maybe it was a "theft"

[Fiona]

19. that's deep

but there's not too many "ifs" there.

I'm only talking about the narrow point of whether or not there was an "upset" here. I don't think there was, and I don't see what good comes from claiming there was. Hackett ran a damn fine race, and did far better than any Democrat in that district in decades.

I wanted him to win. I sent him money. But I knew it would be an upset if he won.

[shance]

21. His comment is more realistic and "deep" than yours Fiona.

His point is we don't know. If you have a crystal ball that DUers are not privy to, then please by all means share with us.

You seem to have all the answers and are quite prone to shaming those of us who believe differently than you. Some of us want the truth.

What is it you want? For us to be quiet so you can feel indignant and/or more comfortable?

[Fiona]

42. LOL

no, I just want somebody to explain how the word "upset" applies here.

[autorank]

23. The smart money is on why Claremont had to be hand counted...

and what happened. The race was neck and neck until the last county (Claremont)was to be counted, then things stop and the machines won't work. Legitimate problem? or convenient excuse? At the end of the hand recount, instead of being dead even, Hackett loses by 4%. There may be a reason for the machines having problems (they claim it was lack of air conditioning). There is an easier explanation for what happened. This is a Republican area but there is a heavy democratic part, where the auto plant workers live. When did their votes get counted? Pretty interesting stuff. You can never trust an election in Ohio after 2004. I don't think there were any recent non partisan polls. Nevertheless, since the last guy out for us lost by 70-30% or something like that, it would have been an upset if Hackett won. But, if they pilfered it, another Ohio special, then "upset" doesn't apply unless you're talking about how people will feel if that's found out.

Too early to call. The Cincy Inquirer, a Republican paper, referred to the "apparent victory" of the incumbent. That's about the only appropriate terminology until we know what really happened in Claremont.

[Tigress DEM]

47. There was a whole post with the results as they were coming out...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1975530


And at one point CNN showed Hackett in the lead..

http://www.channelcincinnati.com/politics/4800140/detail.html

Aug. 2 Special Election
U.S. House (Ohio Second District)
Candidate Votes Percent Winner
Jean Schmidt (R) 49,681 50%
Paul Hackett (D) 48,811 50%
Precincts Reporting - 662 out of 763 - 88%

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[snowbear]

9. SouthernLib... do you seriously think we'd open that link?

:puke:

[SoutherLib]

12. A view of the enemy?????

Is it against policy here? Make it cold?

[ncrainbowgrrl]

37. Yes, links to that site are against DU policy.

Again, Welcome to DU! :hi:

-ncrainbowgrrl
General Discussion- Politics forum moderator.

[AntiCoup2K4]

6. Yes. Actually, he was leading for most of the night.

It went back and forth a little, but he had a small lead for most of the time.....

Until the "humidity" ruined the machines in the ugly crone's home county, that is :eyes:

[Fiona]

10. I'm sorry

but there's no reason, when counting election returns that come in various places at various times, to believe that a lead early on will or must be maintained. Losing a lead on election day isn't an upset.

Again, was there any poll prior to the election that showed Hackett winning?

[snowbear]

13. LOL Anti-Coup...

I posted that same picture of her and someone jumped on me for calling her ugly.. :o

I didn't even mention her looks.. I just said to "take a look Rethugs" :shrug:

How come you get away with it and I get chewed out?

[DemInDistress]

25. Humidity

I dont understand,were votes ruined,cast aside,thrown out ,not counted ,disregarded..if so,how many and were they democratic votes,Deibold has a history of theft,cheating and win by all means..

[snowbear]

5. Ms. SHITdmt only won by 3 pts according to Wash Post...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/03/AR2005080300077.html

[shance]

8. That's the point and that's the pattern.

Close races and upsets.

[auburngrad82]

35. Guys, a Repug won in a heavily Repug district. No upset.

I'm proud of how well Hackett did in this district. It gives me hope that more and more people are beginning to see through the bullshit that is the GOP.

We need to do something to counter the religious fundies that come out in force to support these assholes. That is the GOP's strength right now.

And I don't need to hear about rigged elections and voting machines. Yes, it has happened in the past and many, many people are working very hard to try to prevent it from happening again. We need to quit making excuses and work on getting our message out to people.

If we can't be one party and come up with a cohesive message then we cannot win. It's as simple as that.

I thought the numbers for Hackett in a heavily Republican district gave us reason to be hopeful for 2006, where some of the seats aren't so right-leaning.

[terrya]

36. I completely agree with you.

And Paul Hackett should be very proud of the campaign he waged. The fact that it was THIS close in a very Republican district should alarm the RNC.

Plus, we have a terrific strategy for 2006. The platform that Paul Hackett ran on was a good one. Let's use that for 2006, IMO.

[eridani]

45. If we continue to tolerate Republican cheating, we will never win

Clermont County is where people were caught putting stickers over punch holes for Kerry in Nov. 2004, and Warren County is where there was no oversight whatsoever of the counting process because they put our a fake terror alert. Given those facts, I flat out don't believe any results coming from those two counties. Hackett probably did lose Clermont, but by how many votes?p/b] Critical question--the answer to which might yield a win for Hackett, or at least a far closer loss.

Do you know something about how there was public oversight of the tabulation process that the rest of us don't know? At any rate, demonstrating that we won't tolerate any more of this crap is critical for future elections, regardless of who won this one.

[Robeson]

7. The "upset" would have been if he had won....

...now saying that, I do agree with you in that I don't know how we can put our faith in the election system in general, since I think that voter irregularities are rampant in our system. And fixing elections, historically, is nothing new to America. So I understand your frustration with the voting system in its entirety.

[shance]

15. Oh no, you misunderstand me, my problem is with Republicans owning

our balloting data and COUNTING the votes. Let me be clear.

That's the core problem, it would be the core problem if the ballot data was owned and tabulated by Democrats.

The problem is not in some obscure, safe, broad generalization that leaves no one accountable.

[Robeson]

18. I fully understand what you are saying, and I agree,...

...thats a huge - even THE huge - part of the problem. So I'm not disagreeing with you there. When I mentioned that its the history of this country, thats what I mean. At various times, each party has been in control of the vote count. Look at the Presidential Election of 1876 in which the Repugs got some state voting boards to completely overturn some initial counts, simply by bribing the officials they owned. They were in charge of the system then, as they are now.

[Up2Late]

11. Exactly, I don't even know what election you're talking about, but...

...I can tell you with full confidence that you are right.

Democrats will NEVER win another election until we get rid of the Corrupt Republican Run Corporations that Count the Votes.

It's time to stop whining, and get back to work, we need to see some "Perp Walks!"

[wli]

14. "none dare call it stolen"

It was rigged, and our "fearless leaders" are just rolling over again.

[dolstein]

17. Please don't let your paranoid fantasies get in the way of the facts

This is a solidly Republican district that gave Bush 60% of its vote in 2004 and routinely re-elected Republican Rob Portman by lopsided margins. A Republican victory in this special election is not, by any stretch of the imagination an upset.

[shance]

20. Dolstein, quit projecting your own paranoia. If you want to believe this

election is legitimate, you keep believing in the tooth fairy and the Republicans are counting fairly as they count the ballots THEMSELVES. I will say this election will be considered legitimate when it is proven.

And there is no way to prove it, which is the main problem, and which seems to be why Democrats conveniently keep getting hit with these 'upsets'.

BTW, there is no solid Republican district anymore. The Bush Administration has done enough damage to jeopardize their standing nationwide.

[dolstein]

22. Excuse me, but you guys are the ones screaming election fraud

without any evidence whatsoever. Sorry, but a Republican winning a special election in a district that has traditionally voted Republican is NOT prima facie evidence of election fraud.

[TheWatcher]

28. But Dolstien, when there is no Paper Trail

How can their be ANY EVIDENCE?

When you can't see the source code of the machines, because they are owned by PRIVATE CORPORATIONS, making the code proprietary, You can't SEE any evidence.

What do you think the whole point of HAVING these machines in the First Place IS?

SO THERE IS NO DISCERNIBLE EVIDENCE.

You might call it the perfect crime.

And that is the problem.

Until it is addressed, there will never be another Free and Fair Election in this country.

I do not care if you do not wish to believe it.

I do not care if you choose to be blind to it.

That is the reality.

This country is NOT salvageable through the Electoral Process any longer.

The Machines have taken that option away.

If you truly believe that nonsense about "humidity", then you are truly in denial. Nothing personal against you, and nothing derogatory meant, by all means, but I'm sorry, that story is nonsense and so blatant as to be juvenile.

They are openly committing fraud and rubbing our faces in it because they can.

[loyalsister]

32. Actually they are owned by the taxpayers

I am astonished by how little people here know about elections.
They may have been manufactured by a company that leans Republican, but the county clerk buys the equipment.
There are federal, state, county funds that originate from taxes that buy that equipment. It's ours, the clerks buy them. If you have complaints discuss it with them.
If people would learn a little about elections here, they might be a little less paranoid.

[annabanana]

33. and the couty clerks are technically equipped to

handle anomalies?..... straighten things out if the machines freeze up, or glitch? know how to reboot without losing data?

and all county clecks are strictly non-partisan,,

uh huh

[Time for change]

38. What does it matter that the machines are "owned" by the taxpayer

Do we taxpayers run "our" machines?

Do we taxpayers count "our" votes?

Do we taxpayers know anything whatsoever about "our" software that is used to count "our" votes?

I don't quite understand what it is that you know about these elections that makes you so less paranoid than some of the rest of us.

[loyalsister]

44. I have actually researched

how this system operates in my county. When these theories surfaced, I spent time with that office and have seen how it works. They hire staff to deal with the equiupment, and everything. They control it.
It is up to counties to take responsibility and deal with it. Of course partisanship "can" enter into it but it usually takes a lot of people keeping secrets and a pretty complicated operation.
If people are worried, get jobs at those offices, volunteer on election day, run for county clerk.
Unfortunately, the left has sold a lot of people out on this issue.

[Time for change]

49. Well, it's really great to know that your county runs fair elections

Now we know that all we have to do to ensure fair elections in this country is volunteer to work in each of the county offices in the U.S. on election day and get us all elected county clerks, etc.

We can all rest a lot easier now. I'm really ashamed that I've been so paranoid.

[rexcat]

24. I agree with you...

I live in Warren County and worked as a polling judge in the November 2004 general election. Warren County still uses punch ballots and there are two repukes and two Democrats at each polling station. Diebold is not in play in Warren County or Ohio. Cheating at that level would be very difficult. In fact I know there are Democrats who work for the Warren County B of E. I hate to put a damper on the party but if there were fraud at the County level I don't think it would go on without someone filing a complaint. The turn out in Warren County last November was incredible but when you are facing a County that is 88% repuke Bush* winning should not be a great surprise. Not that it makes it any easier to stomach the son-of-bitch winning (to use a quote from Paul Hackett).

None the less I am still sever ly disappointed that Paul lost the race. I now have to face the taunts of the repukes who know my political views in the area.

As a side light I wish Skinner would fix the spell checker so that "repuke" doesn't pop up as a misspelling.

[In Truth We Trust]

27. Warren "terrorist lockdown-keep the media out" County?!? WTF

[rexcat]

43. That was because the County Commissioners are a bunch of...

fucking idiots. They are the ones that had the B of E locked down, not the head of the Warren County B of E.

I was just at the B of E Saturday voting for Paul Hackett and I struck up a conversation with the woman who took my ballot. She is a Democrat and explained the whole mess to me. From what I understand the B of E has both repukes and and Democrats on staff and one will not let the other do anything illegal (as they say).

I also worked the election as a polling judge for the Democrat side. By Ohio law there has to be an equal number of Democrats and repukes at each polling station and there must be Democrats and repukes at the B of E's when the ballots come in so they are not "spoiled" per say.

As much as anyone else on DU I would like to think we lost because of outright fraud but as far as I can see that is just not the case. Where things get interesting is the provisional ballots, where they counted or not. My guess is they were not handled the same at each B of E in the State and most were not counted. That would be 88 B of E's since there are 88 counties in the State.

One grip I do have is why in the hell would anyone put themselves in a position to have to receive a provisional ballot in the first place other than the voter registrations being mishandled by the B of E's which in my opinion would constitute fraud. I know Ken Blackwell tried to have voter registrations deemed spoiled if the proper weight of paper was not used. Luckily that was thrown out by the courts.

Considering the overwhelming turn out in Warren County it was unlikely that John Kerry would have come close to winning. This fucking county is 88% repuke. The split was 64% for Bush* and 36% for Kerry. Considering that only 12% of the registered voters in the County are Democrats we were 300% above our numbers. I do realize that there are some Democrats that register repuke here in the county but that is so they can vote in the primaries for many of the city, township and county positions they are run unopposed in the general election (i.e. no Democrats on the ballot).

[OneBlueSky]

26. sorry, but with all we know from past elections . . .

about the accuracy of races counted by Republicans (or Republican corporations), anyone who accepts the results of ANY race counted by Republicans is a damn fool . . .

maybe Hackett lost . . . then again, maybe he didn't . . . the problem is that WE'LL NEVER KNOW! . . . and we'll have the same problem with every race in 2006 and 2008 . . .

[bluestateguy]

29. You have provided no proof

A lot of accusations and charges and suspicions, but no proof.

Paul Hackett polled better than any Democrat in that district has run in 40 years. He pulled the upset by making this safe Republican district very competitive.

Believe it or not every Democratic election loss is because of magic voting machines or Republican conspiracies. All Republicans had to do was get their base out to vote--even just some of them--and they would win. That was well known to any objective and informed observer of this race.

[eridani]

46. Nope, but definitely probable cause

The information that would provide real proof one way or another is kept hidden from the public. And you approve of this?

[bluestateguy]

48. No, that's not going to cut it

"The evidence is there is no evidence because it's all been covered up", is not going to cut it.

That's a tactic of argument often used by conspiracy theorists when hard evidence does not support their theories. That is to say, the absence of evidence that would prove a conspiracy is by itself further proof of the existence of a conspiracy.

[eridani]

51. Bullshit

If the voting process was not transparent, I flat out refuse the assumption that it was not fraudulent. Anyone who thinks that the public should not have the right to oversee vote tabulation can just go straight to hell.

I suppose you'd ignore a corpse in your back yard, on the grounds that its mere existence doesn't prove foul play, and you can't bring it back to life in any case.

[tritsofme]

30. IF a Republican wins any election we know its the FRAUD!

Democrats can't lose elections, especially in heavily GOP districts...

Quick, somebody find TIA!!!!!

[TruthIsAll]

34. The Real Inside Truth Supports Obvious Fraud: Machine Employment

TRITSOFME:

(T)he (R)eal (I)nside (T)ruth (S)upports (O)bvious (F)raud: (M)achine(E)mployment

You found me. Sorry, I'm late.
My computer went down.

Before the central tabulators went down, the Democrat was leading.
When they came back up, the Repuke was ahead. SOS.

Just like they did in 2000.
Just like they did in 2002.
Just like they did in 2004

Just like they did in Ohio last night.

And it will happen again in 2006.
Count on it.

It's who counts the votes.

[lesab]

41. I thought fraud was an excuse......

I didn't believe that it was happening and that people were just upset because they were so invested in the election....but then the same exact thing happens with the machines and bam, the Puke wins. Then the next election happens and the same exact thing.......the machines go down and bam, the Puke wins. By the third time I was saying.."woooooo hooooo such coincidences". But now I am smart enough to know that coincidences happen once or twice but

EVERY TIME?

I have to just believe it was stolen....I am logical enough to believe that there are a limited amount of coincidences. How many do we just accept as real before we get it?

[Swamp Rat]

31. Another stolen election!

[WI_DEM]

39. It was an almost upset in reverse--this is the most GOP district in Ohio

and Hackett came within four of winning when the usual victory margin for the REPUBLICAN is 50-points. Hackett almost won the most republican district in the state of Ohio--that is a huge moral victory for the Democrats and an indication that the Republicans are in trouble in 2006--especially in swing districts where the house will be decided--but also--perhaps in otherwise safe GOP districts.

[shance]

40. I think at the very least it's another questionable election and we

should not be ashamed or reticent to say that. I feel its our responsibility to speak up.

I believe one of our core problems is a lack of confidence to say what we believe to be true, or what is in question, and remembering and reminding others what we have observed from past experiences.

We either learn from our mistakes or we will continue witnessing the same results and repeat performances. I'm not saying Republicans cannot win. Of course they can. However, the process by which the votes are being counted and by WHOM right now is the primary issue that needs to be addressed. In the end, this affects everyone. It is not a "Democrat" problem, it's an American problem that affects all of us and our willingness and commitment to do what it takes to preserve our Democracy and a fair electoral process.

Our country and Democracy deserve as much, don't you think?

If we fail to ask the necessary questions and take the necessary actions, we stand to become so disillusioned that we give up. For those who desire unlimited power, that is what they would like for us to do.

[second edition]

50. It does seem interesting that the repubs seem to win by just 2-3

points. This is just enough to look legitimate and not close enough to contest. Are we to believe this is how were are divided in this country now?

[NVMojo]

52. When Dems get tired of finishing with close seconds, this will get fixed.