Why Do The Third Party Support Another Ohio Recount?- Conspiracy Theory

[Corey_Baker08]

I guess I must be confused or don't see the point in these two 3rd party candidates requesting for a second recount of Ohio votes. Both with less than 0.3% have spent now $113,600.00 on a recount that is sure to have no effect on them. It makes me wonder if this is all out of stupidity or if there is a more strategic procedure thats uncoiling behind our backs right now.

It amazes me that we have heard more about the 3rd party candidates
than we have about John Kerry. it makes me want to suspect that this is all part of an strategic investigation being paid for by the Kerry campaign.

CAUTION: The Following is conspiracy theory on my behalf, none of the following details have been proven...

Just let your mind wonder for a minute, the 3rd parties absolutely have no doubt in their mind they will not win or even change the outcome of the election. Yet at paid request of the Kerry camp they have been completely outspoken and screaming investigation. While we have heard very little about a recount from Kerry himself, he signs on with the 3rds for "support basis". Yet this is all a plan to find further evidence of fraud and suppression on the republicans part.

Has the plan been working? Well if you ask me, yes it has. The Kerry camp now has evidence of fraud, voter suppression, malfunction of voting machines, an long lines in particularly democratic areas. The Kerry camp will then privately take this evidence to a Senator of their choosing. The Senator will then surprise us all by objecting on Jan 6 causing a major investigation into the Ohio election. The Kerry camp along w/ the 3rd parties will then show the stockpiles of evidence of fraud which will then cause Ohio to turn blue landing Kerry in the White House.

Yea Its a fairy tale ending, but you know he isn't called Comeback Kerry for nothing...

[liam97]

1. You are terribly, terribly misinformed

Pl go to votecobb.org. All is explained.

[Corey_Baker08]

2. Please Note: Conspiracy Theory

I know the reason why but it kinda makes you wonder, thats why they call it a conspiracy theory.

[liam97]

5. Sorry, I posted my answer in the wrong thread!

I was replying to some one else. sorry again

[Chimpanzee]

14. Still drinking on New Years day??? LOL

[clydefrand]

3. I'd love for this story to be true! I'm game in dreaming in the

dream. And yes, I think it strange that 3rd party candidates are the leaders in this quest to find the wrong doers.

I hope your hypothesis is correct.

[msgadget]

4. The third parties are working to fix the voting process

for the PEOPLE. Based on their composition and ideologies they would NOT work covertly for either party.

[Nite Owl]

11. Third parties also need

for the vote to be fair and honest more than the two parties. It's their only chance of ever winning or making a significant difference.

[msgadget]

20. And, isn't that something you wish every voter realized?

That the two major parties aren't enthusiastically upholding voting rights for the electorate. The vote investigation began outside and independent of the political process as will most future movements toward real change.

Edit for: :hi:

[bones_7672]

6. Doesn't matter, Ohio will not do a second recount. n/t

[Patchuli]

10. At this point,

the only 'cure' would be a true re-vote, including counting
the votes of all those who were wrongfully denied the vote,
the votes that were 'discarded' or 'spoiled'
(I mean, how easy would it be if you were a paid and unethical poll worker to
punch extra holes in the ballots, thereby disqualifying them?!), and gave
enough machines to all precincts without horrifyingly long waits?

I think if the Repub party won fair and square, they'd relish a chance to pound in the point, right? :scared:

Personally I think Germany has it right. Paper ballots, hand counting
by civil servants. Never does their exit poll differ from their hand
count. It was just plain wrong to allow private companies to have
control in elections! Where there are computers, there will be hacking.
It's modern 'stuffing.'

[SicTransit]

15. You must be joking:

"I think if the Repub party won fair and square, they'd relish a chance to pound in the point, right?"

Let's put it this way: you can say the same thing about the WA governor elections and the Democratic party - do you think Democrats in WA would relish a revote as a "chance to pound in the point"?

Come on - keep at least a tiny bit of objectivity.

As for paper ballots, hand counting - sure, I'm all for it. The problem and the difference between US and Germany is that in Germany the elections have maybe three-four races on one ballot. In Ohio, for example, voters in some precincts had more than 100 choices to make. How would you paper-count that?

[davidgmills]

21. Time for two ballots -- One national , one state

Federal Rules for the national ballots, with appropraite time tables

State Rules for state elections with appropraite time tables for state elections

[Patchuli]

22. No joke for the republican

who lost in Washington, is it?

I think there were way too many things on the ballot in my state
this time (CA). Luckily, there weren't too many reports (other
than San Diego, I believe) of problems on November 2.

I think computers need to be taken out of the process since it
appears to be impossible to find nonpartisan people to sell and
service them. It's possible for third parties to change whole
election numbers. The Ohio vote is fraudulent and worthless.

I consider none of this mess to be a 'joke.' We were ripped off,
again, plain and simply put.

Edited 1/1/05 for poor grammar!

[SicTransit]

24. As I said, do you think Democratic party

in the state of Washington state is eagerly looking for a re-vote in the gubernatorial to (as the OP said) "pound in the point"? After all, he is expecting the same of the Republicans in Ohio...

As for the computers being taken out of the process - sure, if there is a way to reduce the races on the ballot to a manageable number - let's say not more than 10. Any more (and especially if it is more than a 100 as was the case in Ohio) and there is absolutely no way you're going to be able to hand-count all of them.

[Patchuli]

25. Naysayer?

"As I said, do you think Democratic party"
Posted by SicTransit in the state of Washington state is eagerly looking for a re-vote in the gubernatorial to (as the OP said) "pound in the point"? After all, he is expecting the same of the Republicans in Ohio..."

If they care that it is historically noted that they correctly won, yes.
I would prefer them to want to know that it was correct and accurate
and no fraud took place. If these Dems deserve to be elected, then hell
yes, they should want to make sure it was fair.

As for computers in elections and private corporations handling said
computers, the system does not work. It is broken and until it's
impossible to tamper with results, untrustworthy.

Hand counting could be done.

[SicTransit]

28. If they (the Democratic party in WA) want a revote,

they really hide it well.

Please explain how you will do hand counting for Ohio, where there are 100 or more choices on the ballot.

[Patchuli]

34. I don't hear any allegations of fraud

in Washington, as there was in Ohio, Florida, New Mexico and the other Swing States.

If there were,I would hope they would want vote transparency to be sure of their victory. If not, they are not worthy of office.

Why doesn't Bush want to ensure that he really 'won?'

Why not just do a revote of President in Ohio since that is what
is at issue here? I don't believe I've heard an outcry about any of
the other 99 items.

Naysayer! I guess it'll all come out in the wash, huh?

[SicTransit]

35. there are allegations of fraud in Washington -

you don't hear of them because you're not interested - and because they come from Republicans. Some of those allegations were actually posted here on DU a while ago. Democrats are ignoring them, of course, and are not (obviously) enthusiastically pushing for a revote. You just don't see the parallels here do you?

I am not saying there should be a revote in WA - I don't think there should be. But I expect at least a bit of objectivity on your side to see that if you don't require it of one side, you should not require it of the other.

And BTW, if you say that you do want the Democrats in WA to push for a revote in the interests of "vote transparency" - I should expect you to email them vigorously about it, right?

[Patchuli]

43. I guess I've been pretty busy

with all the allegations of fraud regarding the presidential election,
which frankly, is of more interest to me. I haven't been on DU that
long and missed what you are talking about.

I've told you before and will so once more: if the republicans feel
there was fraud, then your party should do something about it. I will save my emails for what I feel is more important to me. How many rallies
have you attended? I've marched on my capital, sign in hand.

I resent your partisan assumptions on what I think. I think all elections should be transparent, regardless of the outcome. I also
think that the republican party stole the presidential election and
it ought to concern ALL, not just democrats. I doubt highly that
you've done any 'emailing' about that, have you?

You're being rather petty. Let me know if you want to engage in
a meaningful conversation rather than whining at progressives on DU.

[SicTransit]

45. first of all, labeling everyone who does not

agree with you a Republican is the petty thing to do, don't you agree?

Second - you may resent whatever you want, but if you require something of one side and do not require it of the other, that is called "hypocrisy".

[sickinohio]

44. There wasn't a hundred choices on my ballot

[SicTransit]

46. You personally may not have had 100 choices

but some people in Ohio had:

http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2004/11/27/20041127-B1-02.html

...Board of Elections Chairman William A. Anthony Jr. said he’s offended by accusations from "a band of conspiracy theorists."
Anthony, chairman of the Franklin County Democratic Party, said long lines weren’t caused by the allocation of machines — a process controlled by a Democratic supervisor, he added — but by higher turnout, the overall lack of voting machines and a ballot that included more than 100 choices for some voters.

[davidgmills]

19. Maybe we should coin a new phrase -- Hack the ballot computer

oops for post above.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

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

[righteous1]

7. It's all about profile and exposure. The Greens are posturing for a

significant showing in 2008. They have peeled off a certain percentage of left leaning Democrats already and are gunning for a whole lot more. While John Kerry has dissapointed a fair amount of people on everything from retaining funds after the election to being practically non-existant in the recount and election challenge, they are poised to capture a much larger % of disgruntled voters in the next election. That's what they believe and are banking on......they may be right.

[SicTransit]

17. and, of course, if that happens -

(that is, significant - even 10% - shift from D to G) you can kiss goodbye to 2006 and 2008, and say hello to R supermajority.

[politicasista]

23. That's not good

for whoever runs in 2008.

[Igel]

26. I've thought this, too. But can't decide what I believe.

They may be doing it out of principle.

But there's a less altruistic motive (which holds for Arnebeck, and almost anybody else--including Kerry in intervening in the Arnbeck suits). Publicity, notoriety, and being perceived as defending the voter.

As usual, I'll stay agnostic.

[IndyOp]

8. Hey Corey - I like the way you think. And --

I think that the third parties are doing the recount because WE asked them to. Maybe Kerry whispered encouragement, but I think they are acting independently.

I was one of about 12-16 people who apparently emailed the Badnarik campaign within a day or two after the election. Fred Hill, campaign manager of the Badnarik campaign emailed back saying that they could not do it because recounting Ohio, alone, would cost more than they had raised on the entire campaign. I suggested that he contact MoveOn and/or just ask people -- I thought that if he asked then people would volunteer to pay -- and they did. Over 6,000 people donated about $150,000 in four days to get the recount moving.

Maybe Kerry is encouraging their actions, but I think WE need to count this as a BIG SUCCESS for the people who suggested it, for the people who donated, and for the really good people with the Cobb and Badnarik campaigns for taking the ball and running!

:kick:

[malatesta1137]

9. they support it for one reason only

they want to expose Democrats as Republicans-lite, in fact just as corrupt. And so far they are SUCCEEDING.

[elizm]

13. Yes, they ARE succeeding..

Pretty smart move...they sure are getting my attention!

[pointsoflight]

12. WE paid for the recount with OUR donations.

The 3rd party candidates didn't pay for it and Kerry didn't sneak money to them. They asked for donations and we donated.

Yes, it does help the Kerry camp if they choose to step up. That's why dems stepped up to donate money for the recount.

[PennyMan]

18. Here Is A Link About The Second Recount

Candidates want second Ohio recount
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2005/01/01/candidates_want_second_ohio_recount/

[SharonRB]

47. Thanks for this post

I hadn't realized that the GLIBs had filed for another recount. I sure hope they are successful in getting one due to the fraudulent way the last one was carried out. I hope they have enough evidence that the court can't ignore them. We know they do, but how the court will act is always an unknown.

[Chimpanzee]

16. The reason they wanted a second recount

is because the first one was done improperly - in violation of state laws - they want their monies worth and I agree!

[Yellow Horse]

27. As a Dem who actually worked with the Greens on the Recount...

I know of no "conspiracy" going on, other than that the Greens want to see an honest, fair voting process as much as the rest of us do!

The Greens have an extremely well-defined set of Key Values -- core beliefs which are a foundation of their party. Two of them are "Grassroots Democracy" (more people participating in the political process at all levels), and "Social Justice / Equal Opportunity". Obviously, what is going on in our nation today with these election fraud "glitches" and the disenfranchisement "incidents" serves neither of these goals for the Greens OR for those of us who are Dems and share these values.

Working on this recount, I have sure learned a lot about the Greens (and the third-party movement in general) over the last few weeks. No, I am not necessarily planning to change my registration. But I do have new respect for the Green Party and for any and all others who have been willing to step up to the plate and really DO something in the fight to regain our voting system!

Marybeth

[Freddie Stubbs]

29. The 3rd parties didn't pay for the recount

They raised money online from suckers who thought that it would put Kerry in the White House.

[Corey_Baker08]

30. Maybe this Post was a Mistake

Earlier I thought I would just have fun and let our minds wonder for a moment to take us all away from reality with this post. The post was supposed to turn out to laughable reaction but unfortunately it has done otherwise. I know there was no conspiracy and I know Kerry is not funding them.

I regret the post please excuse it.

[Left coast liberal]

33. Can't put the Geenie back in the bottle. n/t

[Helga Scow Stern]

31. What if Kerry and Dems are eventually waking up because of them?

In some ways it doesn't matter which or who came first, as long as more and more stand up for that basic human need, the truth.

[Left coast liberal]

32. Interesting, and in some ways I agree.

The 3rd parties have the luxery of not being taken seriously by the right wing attack dogs. They are concidered laughably insignificant. But, they have done most of the heavy lifting here.

Honesty, I think there has been and still is a lot going on behind the sceens that we do not know about.

If they keep it quiet, they continue to fly under the radar. Which has given them the advantage of surprise.

As soon as anything concrete gets presented, watch Rush Scumbag and friends swing into action.

[rdmccur]

36. Yes I wondered about what you discuss as well

[rdmccur]

37. I've asked Jamboi about this

just to see what he thinks.

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[Pam-Moby]

40. Kerry's help

I started feeling in the beginning of this recount that Kerry was possibly using this time to gather information to prove fraud. Now that more has been found if they say another recount would cost over a million dollars, Kerry may step in and pay for it but this time all votes would probably be forced to be hand counted and the voting machines be aloud to be checked for there memory count.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

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

[mirrera]

41. Don't regret posting!

In another thread the same thing happened to me, I posited a theory just wanting to get an idea if it was possible... It took alot of replies before I got that answer. As for your idea/theory, I often thought/hoped that was the case, but feel that the Dems are not the drivers. I think the GLIBS have forced the Dems to make a showing. I think our two party system is more like 1 1/2. I think the third parties deserve us to fight for run off voting. We need a different kind of ballot where we have a first and second choice. It will force all candidates to listen to all sides of an issue in the hopes of at least being someone's second choice. It is the only way to strengthen the Democratic party and to allow third parties to grow along with the people's intention. Of course it is ALL moot with out hand counting. It is doable, where there is the will.

[babsbunny]

48. Wow!

Maybe your psychic!