Dean Supporters -- URGENT

[Eloriel]

For some reason I can't post to the blog lately -- I even registered again, and still keep getting an error message after I sign in, get recognized by the system, and post. After that it tells me I am not registered....?? I've sent a couple of bug reports now.

Anyway, trust me. Dean didn't lose this badly in these states. Following is what I would have posted to the blog had I been able to get in tonight. Those of you who can post to the blog, you know they pay more attention when more than one person is singing the same song. Let's get to work.

***URGENT***HQ***PROBABLE ELECTION FRAUD***HQ***URGENT***

I am positive these two elections in NH and NM (and probably OK too) did NOT go as badly for Dean as they appeared to have gone.

We had:

* Discrepancies between pre-election polls and results,

* Statistically significant difference between votes for Kerry and Dean in NH on optical scan versus non-computerized systems. Optical scan more likely to yield Kerry wins

* Discrepancies between exit polls in NH and results (right? -- just as in FL 2000 where computerized voting machines WERE in use and DID account for some of the anomalies, including a MINUS 16,000 votes for Al Gore in one county using optical scans and where exit polls, which are used in 3rd World countries to ensure there's no vote fraud, confounded the experts),

* Anomalies in the results reporting as this evening wore on (ex., as one observer pointed out in another discussion forum tonight: "Yeah...this smells like BS to me. Dean was at 27%...now at 19%. Statistically, that's a very long way to fall.")

* All three states using enough computerized systems (touchscreen or DREs and optical scan are EQUALLY vulnerable to errors and fraud)

I know in my heart from studying this issue intently ALL of last year, and from the symptoms listed above that these computers gave us wrong results. WE MUST ASK FOR RECOUNTS.

Please, bloggers -- help me persuade HQ to demand recounts in NH and NM and possibly OK -- BY HAND. It's essential.

We've given our all to this campaign, we can't let this go down this way now.


WE MUST REQUEST RECOUNTS BY HAND IN BOTH NH AND NM. We must. If anyone can do anything to get your state organizations to press this issue, please do.

The campaign has GOT to take this seriously, and NOW. Not a minute to lose.

It's essential to understand that while touchscreens (DREs) have gotten all the bad press, optical scans are equally bad. They run on the same software as the DREs.

Further, they are capable of allowing vote manipulation in realtime, which is one reason some of the results are screwy as they come in later and seem to defy logic (LOL -- not to mention gravity!). Those who manufacture these things also learned well in FL that they do NOT want to let the results be close enough to trigger recounts or recount requests (tho they sometimes screw up, as they did in FL -- and yes, optical scan anomalies were a part of what went wrong in FL, and a huge part of why James Baker was so eager to stop any and all recounts).


MORE INFORMATION:
Here's an interactive map that you can scoll down the drop down menu, choose "Voting Systems Used" and then click on the state. DREs (touchscreens) and Optical Scan machines are equally bad -- they're computerized, and whether from Diebold or ES&S or Sequoia, they're ALL bad. They allow realtime vote manipulation.

MAP: http://www.electionline.org/interactiveMap.jsp?page=Interactive+Map

Look at VT and look at NM and look at OK too -- and look at the states coming up as well if you're curious. remember: DREs and Optical Scans are both horrible news.

Here's a very powerful blog entry about the NH results:
Kerry Beat Dean in New Hampshire by Only 1.5% When Computers Were Not Doing the Counting
http://www.livejournal.com/users/explodedview/

CI have an excel file of towns in NH and votes for the various candidates -- it's raw data (percentages would be more helpful IMO), but it could be useful, esp. for anyone who can actually use Excel (unlike me). It also incudes income, etc. I can send it to anyone who can use it.

Here are some discussion forum threads for you to look at a few questionable "results" (from DemocraticUnderground.com) and other links:
DEAN supporters and well-wishers only
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=261505#261534
(See exchange starting at Post #17)

NH BBV?: Dean within 2% of Kerry in hand counts, creamed in digital counts
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=263919

Odd pattern in NH. I'm just reporting the numbers here. (cretivelcro)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=215244

On Jan. 26 SUSA has Kerry 33, Dean 28 in NH
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=250700

Here are a couple of recent articles (remember -- optical scans are just as vulnerable):
Md. computer testers cast a vote: Election boxes easy to mess with
In Annapolis, tales of trickery, vote rigging
http://www.sunspot.net/news/local/bal-te.md.machine30jan30,0,4050694.story?coll=bal-local-headlines

Md. Vote Machines Flawed, Consultant Says
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-voting-machines,0,30387.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines

C'mon, team, we've sent all our money to the Governor, let's team up and not let this happen to us. HQ -- please do this. We MUST.

-------------------------------------------------

And hey!!! Let's stop this nonsense about going over to any other candidates. You KNOW Dean is the best one -- let's help HQ understand what's going on, and get them to request recounts.

Now, let's get to work. ;-)

[bluestateguy]

1. You have got to be kidding me

Believe it or not Howard Dean was defeated resoundingly in 9 states. Not every election defeat can be attributed to Diebold, voting machine conspiracies and black helicopters.

Our energies should be foucused around uniting around the Democratic nominee, no matter who it is.

[mb7588a]

3. You forgot all the pigs of Iowa flying about...

All jokes and conspiracies aside, we all know voting machines suck...


This could be an opportunity to expose those God-playing assholes who won't release their software etc. Using our own elections to debunk the whole thing - brilliant.


Though I'm not sure the time is right for the Dean campaign to go about asking for recounts - they're expensive.

[KeepItReal]

11. Those "expensive recounts" would've gotten Al Gore the Presidency

If he's recounted the whole state of Florida.

I'd challenge those counts, especially if its based on a computerized tally.

[mb7588a]

15. Unfortuantely, right now it matters only for future elections

Unless Dean can really make something of the delegate numbers game.

[BurtWorm]

14. One Democratic value "election" 2000 should have instilled in us:

Insistence on the integrity of the vote casting and counting system. Perhaps there was nothing wrong with the counting, but if there are legitimate questions raised about them, I don't see how a Democrat can comfortably dismiss them.

I think the DNC should foot the bill to have the ballots in NH and NM counted by hand. They don't have to make a gigantic stink about this, but we're talking about the integrity of the system used to elect the party's nominee. They could at least do a sample manual count. I'd feel better about that.

[Bucky]

105. Warning: My man lost. There must be a CONSPIRACY afoot! MUST be!

Dr Watson, fetch me my opium needle and my funny two-billed cap. We must go investigate this conundrum!

The only discrepancy between Dean's polling numbers and his votes is that he got more votes than his popularity indicated. All those absentee ballots cast before he imploded helped him. Lesson #1 is that organization at the grassroots level matters a whole lot. Lesson #2 is that Dean isn't electable.

[loudnclear]

114. Even so, Dean is second with delegates....don't give up!!

My dad used to say when playing checkers after an opponent made a mistake and he trounced him: "Always play to win and always play for the fuck up." There boubnd to be a screw-up so no one of the candidates should cave at this point. If we are left with only one person standing now the opposition could lop his head off and we would have no options. We need them all--Kerry, Dean, Edwards, Kucinich, Clark, and Sharpton to be getting out the message and the issues. We have free media exposure....we should USE IT to the hilt. Once the campaigns are over, the Rethugs will dominate the media!

[rumguy]

2. I admire your dedication - but come on now - don't tarnish the whole

process - Kerry and Edwards won fair and square

[Andy_Stephenson]

8. Really???

New Hampshire was using uncertified software.

[rumguy]

12. alright then, Kerry stole the election....

yeah right...

[Andy_Stephenson]

17. Did I say Kerry stole the election???

No...I merely stated a point of fact. New Hampshire is using uncertified software.

[rumguy]

20. alright then, as long as you don't attack Kerry using some kinda

bogus conspiracy BS....

[Eloriel]

29. I didn't actually know that -- thanks for that info

Of course, the question is, is ANY Diebold locality using certified software? (Not that, as we both know, certified means much, but it IS a law in most states, isn't it?)

Andy -- is BBV looking at some of this data from any of these 3 states? If so, I may have a bit more info to pass along.

[Andy_Stephenson]

80. Please do!

Send it to [e-mail]

[BurtWorm]

16. "Election" 2000 tarnished the whole process.

Remember?

[rumguy]

19. it tarnished the Bush presidency - and has nothing, absolutely nothing

to do with Kerry's victory of Dean...

Give me a goddamn break - this kind of shit makes me sick...it makes me not want to hang around DU...

[BurtWorm]

25. I don't know if there's anything to the suspicion.

I'd like to think there isn't. But Election 2000 taught me not to take any "official" outcome for granted. It did tarnish the whole electoral system. If you're not suspicious of it, you weren't paying attention.

[shance]

32. LOL!** Says YOU???

Lets get real shall we? The fact is that electronic voting has been an issue since 2000.

You may enjoy the fact that your candidate won, but the fact is he will be SCREWED by Bush in the general due to electronic unless we address the issue.

[bigtree]

33. If nominated John Kerry plans to challenge the paperless ballots in court.

[BurtWorm]

37. Great. What if he isn't nominated?

That's the real test of his commitment.

[bigtree]

39. Money

Conflict with someone who might overtake him.

[BurtWorm]

43. Could you rephrase that?

I don't follow. Thank you. :hi:

[Mairead]

65. "Tarnish the whole process"??

Vote fraud 'tarnishes' the process! Please, get some perspective. If you are a democrat, you should be eager to expose chicanery whether or not your candidate would benefit. We all benefit when the process is honest, and we all lose when it's not.

I wouldn't vote for Dean on a bet, but I certainly support Eloriel's call for at least one or two hand recounts to test for fraud. If the DNC won't fund them even given what we know for sure about system vulnerabilities....

[Dookus]

66. But there is absolutely no evidence of voter fraud...

the only thing we know is that different counties voted differently.

Kerry was leading big in the polls going into NH, and he won big. Dean had already tanked in Iowa, and was going down in the polls going into NH.

Why would somebody risk going to jail to skew an election that was already in the bag?

Did they skew it so much that Dean lost because of it? That's a helluva lot of votes. Who skewed it? Kerry? He was already gonna win solidly. The GOP? Why? Kerry's the strongest candidate against Bush right now. Why wouldn't they skew it to Sharpton or Kucinich?

[shance]

74. Lucky for us in NH Dookus** There IS evidence of Voter fraud....

Sorry to bring that to your attention, but thanks to PAPER EVIDENCE in New Hampshire, there is indeed evidence!

IF there hadnt been tangible evidence, those who wanted a certain outcome (being careful here, dont want to get deleted for telling the truth!) might be very excited over the easy and improved method of winning a non-Democratic election.

OF course, like 2000 and 2002, we probably wont verifiably see the truth and yet it is there.

THERE IS PROOF....although there are some who want to vehemently deny the truth, regardless of its effect on Democracy at large.....

[Dookus]

75. I'll keep asking...

what proof? What EVIDENCE?

The whole claim is based on one blogger's observation that different areas voted differently. He THINKS the fact that the different areas use different voting systems is the cause. But a moment's thought will show that different counties ALWAYS vote differently, for a variety of reasons. The voting system is a red herring - it has nothing to do with the basic discrepancy, which is geographical.

And can YOU post the exit poll data?

[The Magistrate]

77. No Evidence Whatever, Fellow

You would need some indication the votes produced in the counties using machines differed from the votes actually cast in those counties. You have no evidence whatever of that.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

[Mairead]

76. Can you impeach this statement of Eloriel's, then?

Statistically significant difference between votes for Kerry and Dean in NH on optical scan versus non-computerized systems.

If she's right, then that is the evidence that there is a problem of some kind. How big a problem and what kind? We won't know unless we investigate by testing. Maybe it's a huge problem! Or maybe it's a subtle one that's just good enough to poison a closer election. Maybe it's not fraud but simple craziness. How will we ever know unless we investigate?

The bottom line is that elections in a democracy are about accurately counting all votes. If that's not happening, then we need either to fix it or accept that we only have a pantomime democracy, not anything resembling a real one.

[Dookus]

79. No, it really isn't evidence of that.

Let's make up an example:

Half the state of New Hampshire on the Massachussetts side gets blue ballots, and the other half of the state, on the Vermont side, get pink ballots.

There would be a big discrepancy between the pink votes and the blue votes - the pinks would vote more for Dean, and the blues for Kerry.

That's what's going on here. It'd be like saying "colored ballots" are corrupt because of the discrepancy. It turns out the discrepancy is actually geographical, not related to the voting system. It's a correlation, but not a cause.

[Mairead]

89. You're assuming your conclusion!

Do you know the corelation Eloriel is claiming is geographic? Why not point us to the evidence of that, then? Yes, there are many perfectly natural reasons why a correlation might appear--but there are also unnatural reasons. So which is this one? I don't know. Do you? If you do, then why not point to the evidence?

[Dookus]

92. read the other threads on the subject

there was a fair amount of discussion. Plus, I make the reasonable jump that they probably stick to one system per county, which means that there are, in fact, geographical among between the systems.

[The Magistrate]

95. If, Ma'am

You will consult the vanity site on which the allegation cited is to be found, the writer there acknowledges that the machines were used in the larger towns and cities, and not in the rural counties. Thus even the poor soul who began this is aware of the geographical factor, though he closes his eye firmly against it in pursuit of his dreams of near victory for Gov. Dean.

[Mairead]

98. (this is a reply to both Dookus and Magistrate)

From your replies, I'd guess that there is is a lot of opinion, but no evidence, that geography accounts for the variance Eloriel claims. Yes?

Perhaps Eloriel will post her evidence of significant correlation.

[Dookus]

100. yes, that is what I believe

the original blog referenced merely notes that three types of vote-counting systems were used, and there were differences in the results between the types.

I believe he mistakenly jumped to the conclusion that it was the machines themselves causing the discrepancy, rather than the geographical location of the systems.

I've seen no evidence anywhere to indicate that he has somehow accounted for that.

[Mairead]

102. Fair enough. If Eloriel gives evidence of significance, would you agree

that it should be investigated?

[Dookus]

104. absolutely!

I'm all for rooting out any kind of voter fraud wherever it's found. But I just need to see some evidence before I grab my pitchfork and join the mob.

[Mairead]

106. Well, I'll let someone whose stats courses are more recent than mine

do the work here, but this (from the blog site) seems interesting:

Is there any other explanation for the discrepancy? Well, the computerized systems are mostly used in the larger towns in New Hampshire. Can this be attributed to a rural preference for Dean? If the sample is limited to towns with fewer than 20,000 voters, the results are but slightly different.

VotingTechUsed
Kerry
Kperc
Dean
Dperc
Edwards
Eperc
Clark
Cperc
Lieberman
Lperc

Diebold
43428
39.4%
29456
26.8%
13283
12.1%
14632
13.3%
9289
8.44%

ES&S
5952
37.6%
4415
27.9%
1877
11.9%
2076
13.1%
1516
9.57%

Hand
19004
34.9%
18148
33.3%
6276
11.5%
7217
13.2%
3846
7.05%


Since 20K people is still a good-sized town in NH, I'd like to see slices at 10K, 5K, and 1K. If they are similar, then I'd say Eloriel is presumptively onto something.

[Nazgul35]

117. which is why you would

add a dummy variable to account for region....

But to discount this and not at least take a look at it is silly!

Do you think we can afford to go into the general election with these machines in place?

Any opportunity to expose possible nonsense with these things should be examined.

But we never will get that as long as people who are satisfied with the results are willing to win at all costs.....but we will never know because those who did well in NH don't want to hear anything....

Let me ask those who are defending the results...what if it is the hand counted ballots that were screwed up? What if the win in NH was larger than the results that we finally got? What it was a Kerry landslide?

But we will never know....

I would suggest all here atke a look at the excellent book Cheater Nation! It seems winning in this country is more important than the rules and process....

[The Magistrate]

81. Easily Impeachable, Ma'am

The different systems were used in different counties. The various counties have different demographic characters; rural versus urban or suburban, different economic characters, and a variety of other differences. It is absolutely commonplace for there to be differences in the voting patterns of different counties within a state; in some, it is so marked that the state's elections constitute contests between regions as much as parties. In Illinois, for example, easily four fifths of the Democratic vote often comes from a mere six counties of the state in a general election, and the party primaries show a similar division between left and centerist figures.

There really is nothing of importance behind this brouha, axcept the refusal of some partisans to acknowledge their championm was handily defeated by the voters, against their own desires and expectations.

[Mairead]

97. Eloriel is claiming a statistically-significant difference

which should mean that all 'innocent' sources of variance have already been accounted for. Is she wrong? Is she using the term inappropriately?

[The Magistrate]

103. It Would Seem So, Ma'am

With all due respect to a valued member of our forum here.

The root article does not provide an analysis sufficient to rule out any cause of the variation in votes cast, but merely observes a different rate in different forms of counting. That difference, if the writer is accurate in his observations, is sizeable, but can be correlated to a number of factors seperate from the counting method.

[bushwakker]

4. I respect your passion and commitment to Gov Dean

but this is really ignoring reality.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

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

[Dookus]

38. what facts?

Dean tanked in Iowa - which doesn't even USE ballots!

He was clearly on the descent going into NH, and Kerry was on the rise. the eventual results bore that out.

I know it seems inconceivable to a lot of Dean supporters that he could actually lose, but he did. Convincingly.

BTW... he lost 7 more states today. But it's always somebody else's fault....

[The Magistrate]

45. Indeed, Sir

It is not a question of facts, in this instance, but of the theory by which the facts are organized. It is not a sound one. It is simply an assumption that there is a conspiratorial cabal in control of all voting machines, and that Gov. Dean enjoys the wholehearted support of the great bulk of the Democratic Party rank and file, with the first assumption enlisted in support of the second when the vote totals fail to bear that latter out. Although less comfortable for the supporters of Gov. Dean, it seems a sounder theory that the rank and file of the Democratic Party is not nearly so enchanted with him as the activists who support him....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[shance]

51. Oh thy Magistrate, thou art so profoundeth......NOT****

Get real and face the reality that this election is rigged and establishment is behind it.

Or at least that there is something veddy interesting about the results.

I dont give a rats damn who the winner is, I just want to know the TRUTH. Then I can sleep with what I am living with.

[Dookus]

53. WHAT is so

"veddy interesting" about the results?

Different counties voted differently. It would be interesting if they didn't!

Dean lost big in Iowa - without using any form of ballots. He lost big in NH. He lost 7 states today. Why MUST it be voter fraud? Why can't it simply be that voters prefer somebody else?

Hey, MY guy isn't winning, either. But I don't feel the need to tear down Kerry's wins.

[The Magistrate]

54. What Are You Living With, Fellow?

Enquiring minds want to know....

If you are having trouble getting sleep, healthy exercise is the ticket, topped off with a bit of warm milk, sugared with a little rum.

"It is wrong to divide people into good and bad. People are either charming or tedious."

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

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

[Dookus]

49. LOL

no need to make it so personal.

I'm playing nothing safe. You're making an assertion that Dean is losing because of voting fraud. It's a serious charge, and there is absolutely NO evidence to back it up.

THere's also no REASON for it. Kerry was leading heavily in all the polls going into NH - why would somebody need to skew the numbers when he was already going to win?

If you posit that the Republicans are behind it, why? Kerry does much better against Bush than the previous front-runner (Dean). If the republicans really wanted to control the democratic primary, why skew it to pick the strongest candidate? It doesn't make sense on its face.

And I'll talk as big and bold as I like for as long as I want, thank you very much.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

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

[Dookus]

56. No shance..

there is NO proof. Only an assertion made on a weblog by some guy who thought he found something interesting.

Different counties voted differently. That's the simple explanation.

[The Magistrate]

57. There Is No Proof At All, Fellow

You have a theory for why the different counties voted differently, for which you have adduced no proof whatever. Your suspicions, dear as they may be to you, are no proof at all.

"By compare to chaotic indifference, human malice bears a friendly face."

[tobinov]

5. I have to agree...

Edwards and Kerry won fair and square.

Dean made mistakes and his run for president suffered for it.
He was a great candidate who changed the landscape of this race but do not try to bring everyone down with you.

Lets focus on the White House now.

[BurtWorm]

18. Remember 2000.

Just because this is an election between Democrats doesn't mean something couldn't have "gone wrong."

[JCMach1]

6. The law's not on our side Eloriel...

I am still convinced there were Black Box irregularities in Florida in 2002. I firmly believe the fix was in when it didn't need to be...

In reality, I believe JEBtm and his cronies won a narrow victory. Instead, with the fix, it appeared to be an utter landslide.

I still believe I got between 44-48% of the vote. Even given that, I would have still lost to the incumbent.

HQ needs to focus on getting the most delegates it can... and I hope the nomination.

I don't think they can fight this battle at the moment.

[shance]

36. What does that cowardice reply mean? Sit back and enjoy it?

So if THEY are not going to like it, then we must cover in fear. Whos side are you on?

I hope Im never in a situation that I need cover from you.

[D G]

40. "Cowardice" is a pretty strong accusation

The poster you were replying to was talking about priorities, not giving up. If I supported Dean, I would hope his top priority would be achieving solid wins in future states, rather than disputing margins in past ones. That is not cowardice; it's pragmatism.

[shance]

44. I will take the truth over pragmatism any day DG****

we all should, that is, if we have the guts to let the REAL winners win.

[Dookus]

46. sorry to break it to you..

but the REAL winners are the ones who get the most votes. Right now that's Kerry.

[shance]

62. So you must be following mainstream media......

I have so much faith in them myself....after all, they gave us the 2000 and 2002 elections....both pillars of elections touting integrity and fairness.

[Dookus]

64. I'll keep asking... but you seem to not want to answer:

Why should we assume that the fact that different counties in NH had differing results is the result of fraud? Do you know of any election in which all counties had the SAME results?

[DoveTurnedHawk]

7. Par for the Course

:eyes:

DTH

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

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

[The Magistrate]

52. 'The Potential Of Truth', Sir?

The voters did not do as you would wish: that is the truth, and one of the hazards of democracy, Mr. Shance. You find the truth uncomfortable, apparently, and cling to some belief that allows you to maintain your desire really did come true, despite evident facts to the contrary. It is a waste of effort....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

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

[Dookus]

61. rather than attack someone

why not explain why we should believe voter fraud is the likely explanation for the fact that different counties had different election results?

Personally, I'd suspect fraud if every county had the SAME returns!

[The Magistrate]

63. In Fact, Fellow

You do take the easy way out. You refuse to face facts that contradict your desires. Almost anything is easier to do than that, even the effort of contructing an elaborate illusion, and clinging to it like a plank in mid-ocean.

It seems to me that what is most important to you is a particular self-image, that lets you view yourself as somehow superior to the ordinary run of compromised mortals, unable or unwilling to rise to the moral heights that are the prerogative of higher creatures only. You will find, if you have not already, that such a pinnacle is a damned un-promising base for mass political action. Most people rather resent someone claiming to be superior to them....

"Saints should be judged guilty till proved innocent."

[shance]

67. Where do you come up with this drama Shakespeare? Whos the saint?

Bring it on****

[The Magistrate]

68. It Is A Profile Common Enough, Fellow

Among those who proclaim themselves dedicated to humanity and the planet....

The quote is from Mr. Orwell, in an essay on Gahndi.

"Kill one, warn one hundred."

[shance]

71. Your generalizations are safe...truth however is courageous and fearless

Your statement could apply to anyone on either side.

Get specific fellow****

[The Magistrate]

73. Mere Blatherskite, Fellow

Only persons are courageous and fearless: truth is simply accurate.

It is a question, of course, whether courage can exist in the absence of fear; most consider it to consist in perseverance in the face of fear of real danger.

"Can't nobody here play this game?"

[hedda_foil]

9. I posted it, El.

It's up right now.

[Lorien]

10. I'm with you, Eloriel

It's been obvious all along that Kerry is the establishment's choice (yet they will turn on him the moment he has been declared the nominee). Dean is a threat, therefore we have the infamous "Dean scream". I couldn't believe it when even a good friend of mine said she wouldn't be voting for Dean because the repukes will replay the scream over and over during the campaign. Most undecideds I've talked to actually started paying attention to Dean BECAUSE of the scream-and now they like what they see.

My state-Florida-hasn't had it's primary yet(do we expect a fair voting system? What do you think)? How do we get the media to make an issue of the flaws of BBV?I doubt candidates will bring it up at this point, because they'll only look like "sore losers" and desparate if they do. Who do we, the people, appeal to for a hand recount?

[BruinAlum]

13. It comes across as an incredibly sore loser reaction

It won't change any of the standings, so whats the point? So he might get 11% somewhere instead of 9%, it's still not enough to even gain a delgate.

He didn't lose as badly? But he still lost, there's no point in this.

I think you'll be flatly denied, and the whole idea is in poor taste.

[HFishbine]

111. What's the point?

Try telling people it's important to vote, that their vote matters when we have apologists for vote counts that are "close enough."

Whatever one may make of the evidence at hand, it is shocking that there is even a single democrat left in this country who fails to understand the importance of unquestionably precise vote tabulation.

[Skip Intro]

21. Thanks Eloriel

This is a big deal. NH is very suspicious, imho. Possibly NM too.

There's no doubt that dirty tricks have been used against Dean (media, Osama ad, robocalls, etc.), and, given the discrepancy between exit polls and vote totals, and the difference between hand count results vs. machine count results, I don't see why vote manipulation wouldn't be part of the stop Dean effort.

Don't waste time arguing with those who want to call you names or suggest this isn't worth looking into. A lot of people said the same thing about the machines re: 2000. Some people would choose to ignore the smoke until they're actually being burned. Scary re: the GE, no matter who's the nominee.

A manual recount would settle this once and for all. I just don't think Dean can bring it up without being ridiculed. Is there another avenue to persue?

[foo_bar]

22. I guess anything's possible

touchscreen or DREs and optical scan are EQUALLY vulnerable to errors and fraud

Maybe the corrupt election officials rigged it for Dean on the old-fashioned system but were thwarted by the optical scanners. Losing boxes of paper ballots is historically much easier than grand hacker conspiracies.

and from the symptoms listed above that these computers gave us wrong results

Sounds like human error. This sort of thing has cropped up before.

[frustrated_lefty]

23. posted on DFA n/t

[bigtree]

24. Exit polls are always flawed and wrong

-More voters in the rural districts voted for Dean.

-The larger towns went for Kerry.

-livejournal.com is a blog, not a credible source.

-These are spurious charges however you couch them, belied by the breathless urgency in the appeals to recount the vote.

However, outside of links to other states and other purported abuses elswhere, there has been no credible proof of anything other than some lies told to the exit pollers.

The continuation of this line of attack - and it is an attack on the integrity of John Kerry's victory - is a slap in the face and a slander to those who have come out to support John.

This is an expedition for fishermen. It stinks.



Oh yeah, #8:

8. If you make a factual assertion about a candidate that is not generally accepted to be true, you must provide a link to a reputable source to back up your claim. Allegedly "innocent" questions which are actually an underhanded effort to spread rumors are not allowed. If you really need to know the answer to your question, try Google.


Awful close to rumor, notwithstanding the blog link and the DU links. Definitely slandering candidates other than Dean who the poster holds blameless and victimized.

[HFishbine]

112. From reasons for war to defense of DREs

DU is sounding more and more like the republicans.

"Bush (or your favorite candidate) won fair and square. This is an attack on Bush's (or your favorite candidate's) integrity."

[KFC]

26. Holy shit! Discrepancies between pre-election polls and actual results?!

And EXIT POLLS weren't perfect?!

Next thing you'll tell me is that all of those football prognostigators don't have a 90% Monday Night winning average.

[eridani]

27. Jolly well should be urgent for non-Dean supporters too

This crap will cost the Dems the election in November if not stopped now.

[Dookus]

28. what crap?

there are two known facts:

1) exit polls didn't exactly match the final outcome (although, I haven't seen anybody post the actual exit poll data)

2) Different precincts had differing results for the candidates.

That's it.

The whole voting machine argument being used is analogous to this:

Let's say the entire South uses Diebold. The coasts use another machine, and the midwest uses hand counts.

It would turn out that GWB did better among the diebold machines, Gore did better using the other manufacturer, and they were sorta split even in the handcounts.

Is this evidence of fraud or corruption? Of course not. It simply means Bush carried the south.

[bigtree]

31. I just watched some of these voters they disregard as discrepancies,

in Virginia.

They were mostly undecided but all but one had decided to vote Kerry. And they had a variety of reasons for their support. That is where you should take your cues from. Listen to the people. They want to beat Bush. They want you to know that they will show up in what looks like large numbers to vote for John Kerry in Virginia. Dean supporters, are you listening?

[The Magistrate]

48. Unfortunately, Mr. Tree

Many of them are not. We may confidently expect to be treated to this sort of thing after each upcoming primary in which Gov. Dean performs as poorly as those who do not support him expect he will....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[Desertrose]

30. Just be careful it doesn't sound whiney or like sour grapes....

would probably be better if the complaints came from a camp other than Deans.....

I agree the voting fraud is out of hand...but I would just want to be careful if I were the Dean campaign/supporters on how I raised this issue. Could too easily go the wrong way for your guy.

I'm not so sure it would change the results enough to change the outcome. (....and really, I don't KNOW that Dean is the best.....)

Peace
DR

[shance]

42. We cant afford the luxury of being 'careful' anymore....

The truth has been so sorely neglected, diplomacy and cowardice dont play much of a role these days.

You either speak it as intelligently and/or as forthrightly as you can, or you enter the world of marginal and ineffective leadership that enables those that are attacking our nation at large.

[Dover]

50. I agree. Be cautious. But this is a great opportunity to put E-Voting

to the test PRIOR to the Nov. vote. You cannot be sloppy about this though or it could undermine BOTH Dean and the whole E-Voting issue. If the test results or intentions are perceived to be just as bogus as the accusations being made, much ground could be lost.

[D G]

35. I was just looking at "blogforamerica.com"

There are at least twenty references to this issue in the latest comments. All linking to the same "livejournal.com" blogger. So I would hope that the campaign has checked things out by now, if they intend to.

[rumguy]

58. BOTTOM LINE: If Dean had won, you wouldn't be hyperventilating about this

Oh, no, instead it would all be peachy. Democracy would be working and our country would be on the verge of being saved...

Can't you see how transparent this is? And how self-serving it is?

[shance]

60. The truth speaks for itself Rummy.....

i think it will be you who chooses to hyperventilate.

You keep dreamin that Kerry is the Democrats ticket.

[Cooley Hurd]

69. maybe not, but I would respect the other candidates' supporters...

...if they had similar concerns about the process.

This should be investigated. Not necessarily for Dean's sake, but for the sake of the process. If there's tangible discrepancies (which there appears to be by virtue of exit polls alone), then it warrants scrutiny. Every one of us, despite candidate affiliation, should respect what Eloriel is trying to do here. Fair and transparent balloting MUST be assured, or the Repugs could run the board come November!

This is in the best interests of us all!

[Dookus]

72. I've asked repeatedly here and nobody will answer...

WHAT exactly is suspicious about different counties having different returns? Seems perfectly natural to me.

And can somebody post the exit poll data so we can see if it's sizeably MORE wrong than average exit polls?

[Cooley Hurd]

78. Personally, I don't know...

...but deriding Eloriel or any Dean supporter for wanting to scrutinize the process - a process that, due to PROVEN BBV issues, should be under constant scrutiny - is doing a disservice to every Democrat, including themselves.

Maybe what Eloriel's saying turns out to be false. But what if, by some oft chance, she's correct? Best to air it out NOW, instead of November.

Don't let your dislike for Dean or his supporters get in the way of what is right. Prudence is warranted, especially in light of what we already know about BBV!

[Dookus]

82. because I'm a skeptic

an official one. I get the magazines.

Eloriel is making an extraordinary claim: that some person or persons conspired to throw an election. The evidence for that claim? Two things:

a) an assertin that the exit polls differed more than usual for the outcome (but nobody has produced the exit poll data for us to see that)

and

b) the fact that different counties reported different results. That's the crux of it. The voting machine style is a red herring.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I've seen absolutely zero evidence that a crime was committed.

[Andy_Stephenson]

91. Have you read Guy Lancasters resume?

He BTW is the Gentleman who invented the Global aka Diebold optical scan machine.

http://www.guylancaster.com/resumes/guylancaster.html


Developed secure Internet based protocols for transmitting election information and results.
Designed and developed a compiler and interpreter for an embedded report generator system known as AccuBasic.
Designed and developed a central count election system in which ballot scanners pass raw images directly to the central server running Progress 4GL. This required a bi-directional variation of the proprietary communications protocol used at the time.

snip

"Later assumed development of the firmware for the AccuVote ballot scanner. Converted most of the assembler code to C and designed and developed extensive new functionality to meet local, state, and federal voting requirements and user requests."

Guy told Bev and I he rarely if ever read the law

[Cooley Hurd]

93. You've missed my point...

Even if Eloriel has one grain of suspicion, it's enough to warrant closer scrutiny of the process.

Do you deny what happened in FL in 2000?

Do you deny the BBV issue?

Do you deny that the process in general, given how the Repugs have proven that they'll cheat to win at any cost, could be suspect?

If you say "yes" to even one of thes questions, then you should at least respect what Eloriel is trying to do.

[Dookus]

96. Well

I think you missed my point, too.

I don't deny anythng about shenanigans in Florida.

I don't deny the possibility of electronic tampering, and I believe it's probably occurred.

I don't deny anything, other than the fact that Eloriel's supicions aside, there is not a single IOTA of evidence that a crime was committed. None. Zip. Nada.

[Cooley Hurd]

99. She says there is...

...I'll repeat one more time before I go back to bed:

If Eloriel has one grain of suspicion, then she has every right to persue an investigation. Given Florida and BBV, every suspicion should be acted upon.

This is in ALL our best interests...

Good night... :)

[Dookus]

101. well that's clearly your right...

I believe having some evidence would be the only reason to do so.

I DO hope, though, that if it's pursued it's by the Dean campaign. I think it would hurt the Party to make such an unfounded assertion, and it's not fair the whole party should suffer for it. If it's only Dean's camp who believes this, then they should pay for it and be known as the force behind it.

[Mairead]

83. If the "different returns" are correlated with different voting systems

then the reason for the correlation should be investigated because there's no obviously 'natural' reason for it. You're presuming (I suppose) that different counties have different results irrespective of the different systems in use; Eloriel is charging that there's a significant correlation that needs explained. If there is such a correlation, then she's right!

[Dookus]

84. If in fact

all three types of machines were distributed evenly throughout the state, and such a discrepancy occurred, it would indeed by suspicious.

But they're not. Different areas use different systems.

[The Magistrate]

85. Not So, Ma'am

You must first determine if there are other factors of correlation, and it seems there are, in this case. The counties using paper ballots are small rural ones; the ones using machines are urban in character. There are many natural differences between venues of such differing character.

[Dookus]

87. to clarify something, Magistrate...

ALL the ballots are paper ballots. It's a matter of what the counting mechanism is.

[The Magistrate]

90. Thank You, Sir

For the record, my own preference is for hand counting, though having known some precinct workers in my day, let me assure you shady business can be easily done by that method as well....

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[sendero]

116. Without exit polls ....

.... in the contrasting counties, I agree that it does not mean much.

However, if someone did want to mess with the vote numbers, having this geographical split would give them perfect plausible denyability now wouldn't it.

Exit polls are the only way this can be ferreted out IMHO.

[Andy_Stephenson]

86. Republican, Democrat, Green, Black, White, Gay or Straight

or Naturalized Martian. By God I want your Vote counted as cast. I will die for your right to vote.

But the system is broken and We The People...must fix it.

[Dookus]

88. And I'd die for yours...

I feel as strongly about the subject as you do.

But in this instance, there is absolutely NO reason to believe anything occurred. There is no evidence whatsoever. Somebody saw a correlation and jumped to the conclusion that there was a cause associated. It's very lazy thinking, and one of my pet peeves. It's the rooster thinking he causes the sunrise.

If there were ANY evidence for this charge, I'd be right there with you. But there truly is NONE. Democrats would look insane to go after this. Does anybody think Kerry rigged an election he was already going to win, according to all polls? Or that the GOP rigged it in order to ensure Kerry's election, even though all polls show Kerry as the TOUGHEST opponent for Bush?

I see no evidence, no motive, and in fact, nothing even unusual. The NH results were well within my range of expectations. I think that a lot of Dean supporters found the results far outside THEIR range of expectations, and now are looking for a way to explain it. This isn't it.

[Andy_Stephenson]

94. I'm not sayig it was rigged...I'm not saying it wasn't...

but they were using uncertified software.

Such as certification is :shrug: But they still broke FEC rules. So do we let an election stand, that was counted on a machine that broke the rules? I for one would say we should hand count get a true total then announce. This year is too important to have any doubt about the elections.

Just my .02

[creativelcro]

109. I think that all election performed with uncertified software

should go through a full manual recount. The company responsible should pay for it. In NH that is possible since they did not have any DREs. If that is not possible, then the election shoudl be void.

[Mairead]

70. Bottom line: that might be true, but it changes nothing

Anyone willing to win by fraud is not a democrat, whatever else they might be. Even if Dean supporters would gleefully keep silent (and for sure not all of them would) if the shoe were on the other foot, it doesn't absolve anyone else of the obligation to demand real democracy.

Don't sell your birthright for a mess of pottage.

[creativelcro]

108. That is the point.

Losers are the ones who complain, obviously. If there was objective evidence the system is not fixed (e.g., by some independent recount) then the losers could not argue with it... That's the point of transparent elections.

[creativelcro]

107. Dookus I posted the initial thread on this topic, and it was balanced.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=215244

Personally, I'm not claiming it is fraud, there are a number of elements that suggest it wasn't (or at least, not at the scale we are talking about). Your point (from the other thread in Discussion that got locked) that different counties voted differently is only half of the argument; the other half is that the pattern correlates pretty well with the voting machine systems used in the counties. That is the crucial point. It could be a spurious correlation, due to other demographic variables, as it was pointed out in the above thread. But nobody has shown to me statistically that that is the case. I posted the data and everything. The BEST argument against the charge would be for somebody to show that some other demographic variable predicts the results better than the voting system used. I have done a quick analysis with income, which does not seem to account for the pattern. Don't have time for more, right now...

PS. EVEN BETTER evidence, would be a recount, obviously. See ? Another case in which the lack of a recount procedure causes suspicion. You cannot call the Dean people "sour losers". Fair elections that can be verified etc have exactly the purpose of makeing the losers accept they lost.

[Freddie Stubbs]

110. So did Kerry rig the vote?

:shrug:

[opihimoimoi]

113. Pubs using their networks to scuttle the front runners

first Dean, now Kerry. They want us to nom Al Sharpton.

[Freddie Stubbs]

118. When Al Sharpton starts winning primaries,

I will believe this. Until then, it is just sour grapes.

[theboss]

115. Oh, for Pete's sake

First of all Dean lost by 13 points. No one steals an election by 13 points. It would be like counting cards in Vegas and never losing a hand; it's too obvious.

But that's not even the point. The point is Kerry was rising rapidly and Dean was sinking like a stone. Dean managed to win in the lightly-populated counties next to Vermont. Kerry won in the heavily-populated counties next to Massachusetts. I see no discrepancy in any of these facts.

Show me one "exit poll" that supports your conclusion and maybe I will be interested. Otherwise, it sounds like the worst kind of sour grapes.

[NNN0LHI]

119. Eloriel aren't you a green who voted AGAINST the Democratic nominee...

...back in 2000 and assisted in putting Bush in office? Can you tell me if you have changed party affiliation since then? This is important. Thanks in advance.

Don