A final rant. WARNING...

[mostly_lurking]

many of you will not like this, but it needs to be said.

It's time to let it go.

I joined this forum shortly after the election. As my forum name implies, I have spent most of my time here reading and researching, posting only when I thought I had something to contribute. What I have seen over the past 2 months, however, has been a spiral into self-delusion that is damaging to the Democratic party and threatens to keep Republicans in power for a generation at least.

In spite of repeated statements (in this forum) about all of the mounting "hard" evidence of fraud, any objective evaluation has to conclude that there is no "hard" evidence at all. Absolutely none. That's why the all the Democratic senators voted "nay" yesterday, leaving Boxer with her ??? hanging out all over the place.

The vaunted "exit polls" were useful at first as they cast suspicion and provided starting points to investigate. Well guess what. Every hand-count done, EVERY ONE, shows that the votes were properly counted. That includes counts in Florida by the Miami Herald, Ohio during the 3% recount, and most especially during the Ida Briggs/Nader recount in NJ.

Still, I see posts about how the chances that Bush won the election are 100,000,000,000,000 to 1 (sarcasm here, but the "odds" just get bigger and bigger). It's stupid. The polling firm itself isn't contesting the facts, and all these "odds" are based on mathematical "analyzes" of incomplete data with LOTS of unknown factors. But what this sounds like is this: "Hey, the exit polls are MUCH more reliable than the actual votes. Let's stop having elections... we can just use exit polls to determine the winners!" That, my friends, is why no one is paying any attention to this red herring.

And oh yes, the recount in Ohio was "rigged." Implying, of course, that all the Democrats in the BOE's are actually Republican plants. Wow, that is an amazing feat. I am continually amazed at how the Republicans managed to find this superhuman (with truly God-like powers)... Karl Rove. Oh, please. If he truly is as skillful at manipulating people as many here believe than perhaps the Bush administration deserves to be in power. Personally, I think you give Rove WAY to much credit.

So what's left? Bev, Curtis, Madsen, Fischer, and Arnebeck? Well, through all of Bev's public brashness and rants she has produced exactly ZERO evidence of vote rigging through BBV. She's reaching for the moon but is falling short. Madsen, Fischer, and Curtis? Well they are already on the moon (and from all I have read about them they should stay there). We have dead dogs, fake $21 million checks, sophomoric visual basic programs, and reform schools filled with teenage hackers trained to steal elections.

Arnebeck's suit is based primarily on the same flawed analysis of the "exit polls." It's going nowhere... Moyer is apparently being "polite" before he squashes it like a bug. It is moot now anyway as the US Constitution will trump anything a state court does.

So what's the point of this rant? To try and get the base here to WAKE UP. I believe the "victories" here are actually helping the Republicans, and in a big way.

The recount in Ohio was forced by the Greens/Libs by exploiting a law designed to allow serious candidates (i.e. with a real chance of winning) an avenue to redress real concerns. Kerry chose not to pursue that course, so the Glibs, at the urging of this forum, abused the law and forced Ohio to conduct the recount. The law, written in the mid 1950's, allowed the recount to be forced at a fraction of the actual cost. This, very rightly, PISSED OFF many in Ohio, INCLUDING many Democrats. The BOEs (which consist of both Republicans and Democrats) were insulted at the accusations of incompetence and fraud, and the taxpayers in Ohio get to pick up the bill for what many see as a frivolous fishing expedition forced by those who just couldn't accept the results of the election. Like it or not, that is the perception.

Similarly, the spectacle in the US Congress yesterday was extremely hurtful to the Democrats. Tubb-Jones and Boxer both admitted, in public speeches prior to the contest, that they weren't trying to really contest the election but rather wanted to shine a light on irregularities and voter problems. Fine... EXCEPT they abused a Constitutional provision and hence cheapened that provision for future, legitimate uses. Like the recount in Ohio, they abused a protection for political purposes and accomplished nothing.

If I subscribed to the Rove theories, I would swear that he is an active member in this forum, under many names, with the express purpose of keeping the faithful marching down the path it has taken over the past two months. All this is doing is taking our eyes off the real problems and issues and keeping us in the dark. Unless the Democrats wake up and start looking for the real reasons Kerry lost and Bush won, we are doomed to repeat this spectacle in election after election.

To sum up, I have become convinced over the last two months that Bush really did win. I will now direct my energies toward more productive pursuits designed at winning the next election and not moaning and whining about elections being "stolen."

The last one out, turn out the lights.

[Last Lemming]

1. Go back

to lurking

[uppityperson]

112. you are welcome to your opinion. Bye bye. n/t

[imenja]

202. I disagree with many of lurking's points, but your rudeness is uncalled for

This poster has a right to express an opinion and you a right to dispute it. What's fundamentally most destructive to Democrats is this sort of nastiness. What do you accomplish by repressing speech and promoting animosity?
I couldn't disagree more mostly lurking's comments on the contest to the seating of the Ohio electors. I wonder, lurking, if you listen to the speeches on CSPAN or if you are basing your conclusions on press accounts? Thursdays events were a step forward for democracy. Boxer and the Congressional Black Caucus affirmed the voters right to a transparent and fair election. What could be wrong with that? There are great numbers of reports of voting problems that must be addressed. We don't really know whether Kerry would have won otherwise, but the fact so many people doubt the outcome of the election demonstrates that our process lacks full legitimacy.
I agree we need to move forward, and what we need to do is to enact change in the electoral system. To take action, sign up on this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x262387

[rainy]

2. In all of your rant you are forgeting one thing

THE VOTE WAS STOLEN. Kerry won.

[demnan]

5. I think Bush won this time

but I think Gore won the last time. We should have gotten a Senator to do this the last time, when we had a really legitimate case for it. We can't go back and undo that mistake but I appreciate Boxer and Tubbs-Jones for their efforts to bring these issues to the forefront this time, and I don't think it cheapens the Democrats to stand up and question the electoral process which, regardless of who won, does need reform.

[Carolab]

194. Prove it. n/t

[imenja]

204. the only proof Bush and his supporters care about is Thursday's vote

That and the official tallies released following the election. Those charging fraud bear the burden of proof. The fact is the election is over. It's time to focus on changing the system for future elections.
Sign up here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x262387

[forgethell]

35. But as he said,

where's the proof?? I'd like to think the American people agreed with us, too. But the evidence I've seen says that the majority of them don't.

I have my own ideas about why that is. I live in a very conservative area, and I have asked my acquaintances. Some people say gay marriage, some people say high taxes, some people say the abuse of judicial power to force policies on the Americans citizens that would never be accepted at the ballot box. But almost all cite the threat of terrorism.

The people that I have talked to think that Kerry wouldn't protect them as well as Bush, and would try to treat this as a domestic crime problem rather than a war. His affinity for the French also did not help him. Scientific? No. Fair? Probably not. But a part of our problem? I think so.

So we put up a war-hero against a draft-dodger, and the draft-dodger wins. Why? Reluctantly I have come to the conclusion that our policies need some rethinking. What the resulting changes should be, I am not prepared to say. But thinking about it honestly won't hurt anything. What must we keep, what should we ditch?

[renaissanceguy]

111. I agree.

All we can do now is make sure these irregularities and fraud are investigated. We must focus on 2006 and 2008, too. We need to win back both houses of Congress. Let's hope, too, that * screws up so badly, that we'll have easy grounds of impeaching his ass.

http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues.16200506

[springhill]

206. Unbelievable........

Over and over again people talk about working towards 2006 and 2008. Dig your heads into the sand a little more, that ought to bring out a dem victory. What in the hell do you think is going to be different about voting in this country in two years? You think that magically we will get a fair election? There will be no more fair elections until we expose and change the corruption that now exists when it comes to voting. Period.

[Phentex]

3. But it doesn't change the fact that the process is fucked up!...

If you've been reading, you can see that it's AT LEAST time to make changes in the way elections are handled. Nothing will change if we don't try and change it.

The light is not on. It's a fire and the tribe has not spoken.

[truckin]

61. This is the main point: We need election reform

Whether Bush won fairly or not is not the point. It is obvious to anyone who is objective that the system is broken and is susceptible to all kinds of irregularities and we need to fix it. All those who think election reform is needed must unite and pressure the local, state and federal governments to make meaningful changes.

[OKthatsIT]

4. some lurking Bushie...getting his rocks off

talk about who's wasting whose time.....
CYA CYA wouldnt want to BYA

[cali]

6. Here, here.

Please don't go back to lurking, post more often. By and large, I agree with you, though I think contesting the certification yesterday may have been a good thing. I originally had grave misgivings about it, but think the focus on voting problems may prove beneficial.

[righteous1]

20. But bringing election issues "to light" under these circumstances

was both misguided and politicically self defeating. There is a time and a place for everything. This was not it. As ML stated abusing a constitutional provision for a political purpose other than for what is was intended is plain wrong no matter how noble your cause. The press is already playing this as a Democrat temper tantrum and the limited amount of Dem support yesterday makes it look like only the far left fringe elements were involved. I would have felt alot better had they used the 2 hours to produce hard compelling evidence supporting their claims. They did not, it was all rhetoric and ranting. They were pretty much limited to that position because after reading Conyers report 3 times, I came to one unavoidable conclusion, It was very long on rhetoric and supposition and extremely short on substance. We did ourselves a disservice yesterday, and I only hope it doesn't bite us in the a$$ for the next few election cycles. My gut feeling is , it could be quite a long time before we win a national election in Ohio

[cali]

32. I'm trying to look on the bright side

You may be right, but I suspect the party didn't do itself any long term harm. Americans have notoriously short memories.

I agree with you regarding the Conyers report. I've only read it once but I didn't see much in the way of substance.

I actually have a lot of hope for dems winning elections, and I think it depends on events and Democrats presenting a coherent and strong platform to the American people. (For you fraud believers, I don't believe that the rethugs stole the election and have set up the machinery for all future elections being stolen, so don't even bother with that canard.) Should we still be bogged down in Iraq in '06, or should civil war consume the country, Americans will turn from the repubs and we'll pick up seats in the House and Senate. Social Security really is the fifth rail in American politics and bush is about to reach out and touch it. You may be right about Ohio, but again, I believe the fruit of bush's policies will so poisonous by 2006, many Americans- no matter where they live- will turn from the repubs. Should bush not deliver on abortion by 2008, he'll lose a lot of his support from the religious right. If he does deliver, the repubs will lose moderate. All in all, I don't believe the future for the democrats is bleak.

[fasttense]

58. Sure huge ramifications from yesterday.

Seems to me people are scared to do anything against the Repugs. They act like if you stand up to these bullies they are going to get their heads handed to them.

What you fail to see is that yesterday a handful of people stood up to a bunch of bullies who rigged the election and guess what? The bullies/Repugs came off looking like a bunch of dictators arguing AGAINST fair and free election. Don't you think if their was even one sound bite that came off half decent by a Repug you would be seeing it all over the media. But you are Not. Why not? Because they looked like a bunch little children complaining to the teacher that the other kids are looking at them. They stood up and said they didn't care that minorities and others didn't get their votes counted and they looked like the fascists that they are.

[euler]

74. The forum isn't eady for this yet. Wait a week, and do it again.

[RevCheesehead]

There are also others forums on which one may post.

For those who call us delusional, I keep asking "why are you in here, peeing on my cornflakes?" Do you have some kind of obsession with getting everyone to adopt your own point of view?

[righteous1]

104. I would never call any of my fellow DUers delusional and for crying

out loud this is a discussion forum after all. You are generally going to get different points of view discussed. If you demand collective single minded thought , go join a cult jeeeez

[RevCheesehead]

134. Actually, I was replying to the post above mine,

but there was apparently a glitch in posting.

Why did you presume I was talking to you? I wasn't.

My post was a general commentary that was saying, in essence, THIS particular forum is for discussion of the 2004 election results. For all the people who come in here and constantly tell us to "get over it, move on, etc..", I will happily point out that there are forums on General Discussion, General Discussion: Politics, as well as Campaign 2006 & 2008, or the dozens of other forums available.

Too many people have come in here with a "hit and run" message, blurting their anger at those who want to continue to examine the election and what happened, or those who choose to remain positive.

Perhaps I should have replied to the original post (but that, too, could have been "glitched"), where ML began:

many of you will not like this, but it needs to be said.

It's time to let it go.

I joined this forum shortly after the election. As my forum name implies, I have spent most of my time here reading and researching, posting only when I thought I had something to contribute. What I have seen over the past 2 months, however, has been a spiral into self-delusion that is damaging to the Democratic party and threatens to keep Republicans in power for a generation at least.

In spite of repeated statements (in this forum) about all of the mounting "hard" evidence of fraud, any objective evaluation has to conclude that there is no "hard" evidence at all. Absolutely none. That's why the all the Democratic senators voted "nay" yesterday, leaving Boxer with her ??? hanging out all over the place.

Perhaps I misplaced a quotation remark. Maybe it should be punctuated:

For those who call us delusional, I keep asking "why are you in here, peeing on my cornflakes? Do you have some kind of obsession with getting everyone to adopt your own point of view?"

If this seemed demanding to you, I am sorry you took it that way.

[Eye_on_prize]

205. I know! These dire posts trivializing what's been accomplished seem weird

and why do they punish themselves (not to mention everyone else) by staying here? I just don't get that. Of course, just calling them freepers is easy, and does not always fit, but that's beside the point in a way. Freeper or not, the effect is the same: draining energy off the whole effort down into a sinkhole of pissing matches and mutual misery..

oh boy! where do I sign up for the Revolution..it sounds so inspirational and fun!!(

[Bill Bored]

149. Read the record

The repubs have blocked verified voting bills in both houses for 2 years. What's their f***ing problem? They brought it on themselves.
Read my thread:
<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=264034>

[Eye_on_prize]

203. "..abusing a constitutional provision for a political purpose? really?

this sounds more like a Rethug talking point than a really fair description of what happened Thurs. So, you really believe 10 hour lines, Triad machine rigging, etc. is mere 'rhetoric'? pleeezzzz!!

The biggest 'disservice' I'm aware of at the moment is one you are foisting on DUers with deliberately inaccurate drivel trivializing what happened Thurs.

I think it may be right to leave. Perhaps you really are on the wrong discussion board if you really believe what you posted.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

7. Sure - Let it go. No way in hell. Why

would you stop in the middle of a criminal investigation when you have proof fraud took place and you have prime suspects? All we need is the modis operandi. TRUST ME, THOUSANDS WILL NOT LET GO until the TRUTH comes out.

Nice try though. If I was complicit to a crime, I would say the same thing!

[TruthBeTold22]

37. Criminal investigation???

Who is pursuing criminal investigations? I'm from Ohio. There's not one federal prosecutor or state attorney or county prosuctor in Ohio pursuing ANY criminal investigation. Arnebecks suit is not "criminal" case. Conyers has no power to pursue "ciminal charges".

Please tell me who(that is a trained law inforcement agent or lawyer) and can prepare a case that would stand up in court under the rules of evidence is doing this?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

172. Sorry, you didn't understand what I was trying to say. I meant

if we equated the election with a criminal case.

[cali]

56. We don't have proof.

And if you've read Conyers report, you'd realize that. And stop with the endless attacks on people who don't agree with your frenzied and hysterical opinions. It's a pathetic response.

[euler]

77. I've concluded that...

...a lot of people in this forum don't understand what amounts to proof, or fraud. People here ignore alternate explanations for phenomenon and hone in on fraud as the only explanation. There were several alternate (and in many case, more-likely), explanations for just about every allegation presented here.

The real problem as I see it, is the fact that no one is willing to find the facts for themselves. Let me give some advice to all DU here. If someone you don't know makes a claim of fact, and that claim is something that can easily be checked by you by using Google or your favorite search engine, why not do so ? Especially if the topic is one you care about. There is so much misleading incorrect bunk posted here, almost all of which can be checked in 15 minutes of personal research. I don't think more than 15 people here know why exit polls are conducted, how they are conducted, what the MSM uses exit polls for, what the different types of exit polls are and what the difference is. People relied on one or two people here on DU to tell them everything about exit polls - and those 2 didn't really have a clue. Yet, all the information anyone needs to find these answers about exit polls is no more than a few clicks away.


Take this for what it's worth.

By the way, I already know that even though all I'm asking people to do is check there own facts if possible, someone (or many someones), will rip me a new one. That's another problem in this forum.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

173. In my opinion, your response here is very ugly and mean

sprited. And I have agreed with things I've read of yours. I understand that we are not ready to walk into a courtroom. But I, for the life of me, can not understand why all these people are saying give up. Maybe I am more passionate about this. BTW, there is plenty of evidence. What is lacking is HOW it occurred. Peace out.

P.S. I have read every piece that's out there about the election and I was equating the election to a criminal case, not calling it one.

[Ganja Ninja]

8. Blah blah blah. Here let me shorten it for you.

Be a good Democrat and don't resist. It'll only make things worse.

[euler]

131. Now you get it.

[EFerrari]

9. Bush won, there is no racism in America and War is Peace n/t

[rodeodance]

47. racism is everywhere in America (I realize you are being sarsastic)

[KerryOn]

169. War is not peace! n/t

[AuntiBush]

175. Swamp Land for...

sale? Do you have any while you're at it? :)

[burythehatchet]

10. nice try

it takes a small group of people committed to a cause to change the status quo. The hard part is dealing with the weak and spineless, who live among us as well.

So you watched CNN and spent some time at DU, compared the two and decided that the CNN story was better produced.

See ya in hell.

[Jersey Devil]

11. Good post and right on the money - but beware

To disagree in here from the widely accepted fantasy that Kerry actually won the election will result in you being called "Freeper", "Naysayer" and a variety of other names dreamed up by those whose political outlook was developed through repeated readings of Alice Through the Looking Glass.

BTW, the Mad Hatter wears tinfoil.

[itzamirakul]

12. Ahhhh....Mighty-Lurkey-Dorkey....thank

you for your great wisdom in these matters. Now go sit on toilet and dispense the rest of it.

[Berserker]

28. To Quote

the original post: Similarly, the spectacle in the US Congress yesterday was extremely hurtful to the Democrats. Thats Bullshit. The spectacle provided by the repukes was very hate oriented. Every word out of their mouth was hate toward the Democrats.

The Democrats who stood up in front of America and said what they believe are Real Patriots.

The poisonous repuke bastards brought up the secret computer at the Whitehouse (what ever the fuck that is)
And the lie about democrats paying to get votes with crack cocaine, Michael Moore and Moveon.org and every other type of bullshit smear they could think of.
Then you say The Democrats were a spectacle?
And Fuck You Tom DeLay.

[righteous1]

13. You nailed it n/t

[ICantBelieve]

14. WE MUST USE THIS TO OUR ADVANTAGE

I know we'd all like to have had 44 Senators vote to uphold the objection, but since they didn't, I think we can take advantage of what did happen to slam the Republicans for their blatent lack of concern for voting rights. Here's the letter I'm sending to my press contacts. Feel free to be as inspired by it as you wish. Let's hit these Republicans hard the same way they'd hit us. Ignore the issue of the vote itself and the objection itself. Focus on Trent Lott, et al, proclaiming that they didn't have the time to discuss YOUR right to vote for 2 hours, even though millions of people across the USA waited more than that long in line to vote.


Much will be said about today's objection to the Ohio electoral count by Barbara Boxer and Stephanie Tubbs-Jones. As a nation, I believe we should focus on how the Democrats calmly discussed fair voting and what we could do to make the process better to ensure that everyone has the right to vote while the Republicans called the discussion "unfortunate." How can a discussion of our right to vote be "unfortunate"? The Republicans seemed overly eager to use their time to criticize Michael Moore rather than to discuss the health of our democracy. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the outcome of this election, the Republicans behavior today was not in the best interest of our democracy or of the world. They do not wish to have a calm and open debate. They do not wish to ensure that everyone has the right to vote. They do not wish to discuss facts and issues. They wish only to attack personalities, and when the Democratic members of the Congress do not give them even the smallest morsel upon which to base their attacks, they switch to attacking Hollywood figures such as Michael Moore. Their closed-mindedness and resulting behavior should be questioned by all who value our system of government.

If anyone would like to post their ideas for this effort, please come to my blog on the CCN, http://meowmeow.forclark.com

[roenyc]

15. Did you know nothing happened at the Watergate hotel

either? well thats what they said before the smoking gun. and um, Iran/contra? no such thing! Kennedy? ha! one bullet - magic. came from a fairy in a cloud in the sky.

ebony and ivory live together in harmony! yes this is America. all is well. Ignorance is Strength. god bless de-regulation brought us newspeak.

i guess i have been seen enough shit over the years to know that things aren't black and white - there are many shades of gray.

and its people with the tin foil hats that can see the grey.

[righteous1]

99. You get the kind of solid clear convincing evidence you had

in the Watergate case and I'll jump on your bandwagon as well as probably 65% of the American people instead of 19%

[HEAVYHEART]

16. Thanks

But no thanks. That's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it. But I will not move on. I don't give up that easily.

[Stevepol]

17. Come on, use your common sense. No way did Bush win this election.

Of course there are those with unproven theories. That's all that people can have at present. (1) Look at the exit polls. They have been used and are used everywhere with perfect accuracy, always within the margin of error, yet whenever they are used where machines count the votes, the anomalies are in the favor of Republicans and very often beyond the MOE. Do you deny the authenticity of the one means that can be used to check machines that cannot otherwise be audited or that otherwise aren't audited? (2) Look at the demographics. During the four years from 2000 to 2004, the electorate has changed and every demographic showed that those sectors of the electorate that grew the most were Democratic. (3) Look at the issues. Every issue favored Kerry. (4) Look at the previous four years. Never in American history has there been such a disastrous 4 years, more people out of work, war, the environment destroyed.

And you're telling me that the American people elected this guy? Come on, I think you should lurk back to your Freeper cave and stay there. Nobody except the perpetrators can say exactly how the fraud took place but it would take an absolute moron not to realize that, if the exit polling numbers are correct, and there's no reason to suspect otherwise, this election was a fraud.

[TruthBeTold22]

39. Exit Polls

Read Mickey Kaus on Slate...the company that produced the exit polls is really tapping a fine dance to defend the misfeasance on these...in their public statements they admit the early polls were wrong and can't believe anyone including Drudge and the repugs put any faith in them.

[sunnystarr]

76. I bet a pretty penny was spent on those exit polls ....

so if they're wrong I'm sure that those polling companies will have to repay the fees collected. When I see that happen then I might believe that the exit polls were erroneous and skewed.

[borg5575]

57. Why aren't the Demos screaming about it?

Then why aren't Kerry and other democrats screaming about it? You mean to tell me that Kerry spent years and millions of dollars seeking the presidency, then he just gives up in the face of obvious election fraud? Come on now. Even Bill Clinton, my hero, said on CNN that Bush "won fair and square."

[steve2470]

198. Kerry had to make a fast decision. At that moment, it wasn't as

clear as it is now that the election had fraudulent elements. So, Kerry gave up rather than looking like "a sore loser".

[euler]

132. Well whose definition of 'common sense' are we going to use ?

[eridani]

18. Never heard of probable cause?

Why not quit investigating the cause of death whenever there is a dead body? The mere existence of a dead body doesn't prove anything. Just move on--they aren't going to become alive.

And if the score is 100-75 with 2 minutes to go in the 4th quarter, why then the referees should just quit calling fouls, right? After all, it won't make any difference to the outcome.

Given that the election has not been really audited, howthehell does anyone know who really won?

[TruthBeTold22]

40. Probable cause?

Sorry I haven't read any yet...just theories. Now if someone had witness testimony from BOE officials about fraud then we'd have probable cause.

By the way, no one can yet answer the fact that there are the same number of Democrats on every BOE in Ohio as there are repugs...were they all complicit in fraud too?

[sunnystarr]

78. That's really funny. Even you can change your registration and

call yourself a Repug and get on a BOE. Who selects the BOE?

[TruthBeTold22]

96. The County Party Aparatus

Get a life

[loudsue]

160. Not in Ohio, they don't

The Sec. of State APPOINTS them.

I'm REALLY REALLY sick of all you right wing democrats (?) showing up on DU.... people who haven't been involved in the Black Box Voting research, and who haven't bothered to read all the evidence gathered even WAY before the election.

You just show up here, slamming Kerry, slamming DU investigators and researchers, and spewing the right wing talking points.

Your "get a life" comment must mean "get off the research and activism bandwagon, and bend over for the repukes."

It ain't gonna happen!

Get a Democracy!!


:kick::kick::kick:

[Lurker321]

195. you may be loud, but you're incorrect

http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:Zty4lXUBqUAJ:www.s...

Boards of elections are bi-partisan boards. Two members of a four member county board are appointed in each even numbered year. One appointment is from the political party which cast the highest number of votes for the office of governor at the most recent regular state election. The other is from the political party which cast the next highest number of votes. See Ohio Rev. Code Ann § 3501.06 (Baldwin Supp. 1998).


Members of boards of elections are appointed by the secretary of state. The county executive committee of the major political party entitled to the appointment makes and files a recommendation with the secretary of state for the appointment. The secretary of state is required by law to appoint the elector recommended by the county executive committee, unless the secretary of state believes that the elector would not be a competent member of the board of elections. See Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§ 3501.05, 3501.06 (Baldwin Supp.1998) § 3501.07 (Baldwin 1995).

[righteous1]

59. Fine, keep investigating but don't go off half cocked. Wait

untill you have clear and convincing evidence that will stand up to scrutiny before making grandiose claims otherwise you leave yourself open to ridicule and public discredidation.

[eridani]

176. Excuse me, but Snohomish County in WA is ERASING--

--its Sequoia computer cartridges on Feb 4th. There is solid statistical evidence that Bush and the Wa gubernatorial candidate got a far higher percentage of votes on these touch screen machines that they did on absentee ballots which were optically scanned. The statistical odds are enormously against this happening by chance. That isn't PROOF, of course, but I am getting bloody sick and tired of people ragging on us for bringing it up, and then when all chance of a real forensic audit is gone hollering NEENER NEENER NEERNER, can't prove it can't prove it can't prove it, after deliberately destroying any chance of doing so.

[thanatonautos]

19. For future reference: it's the Democratic Party.

... damaging to the Democrat party and threatens to keep
Republicans in power for a generation at least.

... why the all the Democrat senators voted "nay"
yesterday, leaving Boxer with her ??? hanging out all over
the place.



It is generally called the Democratic party. Also, see,
Democratic National Committee, Democratic Leadership Council,
etcetera, etcetera.

Not that I'm saying you're actually a Republican, or anything
like that. It's just that this seems to be a common Republican
speech impediment.

If you really want to win the next election, and you think
that what took place was an `abuse of a Constitutional
provision' then maybe you should put your money where your
mouth is, and just vote for the Republicans next time around.
You seem to think that the Democratic party has done
itself irreparable damage by standing up for the integrity
of the electoral process. It's for damn sure the Republican
Party would never `abuse a Constitutional provision' for
such a nefarious purpose, now, isn't it?

[anaxarchos]

86. There's a clue there.

The pubs are absolutely religious about calling it the Democrat Party. Even when it sounds silly, they insist on this nutty reverse PC. What does that say about whether they think the "democracy issue" has "legs". Go to universal voter registration and the Republican Party ceases to exist. Eliminate the electoral college and elections gets fought out in New York and California, not Missouri.

I see nothing but panic in the GOP everytime the Democrats move even one inch towards taking their name seriously.

[thanatonautos]

171. Voter registration should be done the way it is in Canada.

Workers go to every household before an election
and ask how many adults are living there, are
they Canadian citizens, and what are their names.
A list is made up of all of the names they collect
and that list is posted in a public place.

If anyone wants to object to a name on the list,
they are free to do so, but they must make an
affirmative, specific objection, which is
then evaluated for correctness.

Otherwise, everyone on the list is presumed
to be a legal voter. That's all there is to it.

I think you have put your finger precisely on
the reason for this Republican linguisitic quirk.

They dislike calling the party the Democratic Party,
because they know perfectly well the word democratic
carries a positive connotation, so they would like if
possible to change the name to Democrat Party. Too
bad for them: it's not their party.

[katinmn]

21. Let it go? Not a chance. Just getting started.

[sendero]

22. I disagree with you...

... only in one respect. I do believe the vote was stolen, when there is that much smoke there has to be fire.

But the problem is, we will NEVER prove it - because we had 2-3 days after the election to lock down all the ballots and etc. and nobody did.

I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to "read between the lines" as to who I feel dropped the ball.

Beyond that, it is completely clear and inarguable that we need serious election reform. Until we have an auditable paper trail, nobody is going to believe the results, especially when they do wierd stuff like skewing to Kerry early and the Bush later. That doesn't happen in the real world.

So, in as much as keeping the issue of election reform alive goes, my hat is off in gratitude to Barbara Boxer and frankly had the Dems presented a UNITED FRONT, EVERY SENATOR doing what she did, we might actually make some progress and the media would not be able to paint this as the actions of a couple of kooks.

The excuse we hear is that "only one senator is needed" and endless implications of "behind the scenes" work are made, but we shall see won't we.

[righteous1]

108. You can do a hand recount of all the ballots as they did in Fla

2000. If there was anything there that would certainly unearth something

[beammeup]

23. Why don't you just say what you mean?

"It doesn't matter that free elections are a thing of the past, because my side won."

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

24. mostly_lurking, the name of the party is the

Democratic Party, not the Democrat Party.

I noticed that during yesterday's debate in the House and the Senate that the Republicans used this term quite often.

I also noticed that everyone of your points in your post echoes the Republican Party line from yesterday.

Do yourself a favor and please read the staff report that John Conyers referred to yesterday during the debate. It's very telling.

Face it, we Democrats aren't going away, but maybe you should.

[Jersey Devil]

27. Ahh, the subtle accusation without using the "F" word - clever!

I happen to agree with him and I assure you I am not a Republican.

[mountebank]

92. You have to admit, Jersey Devil, that the term "Democrat Party"

is a propaganda tool of the right wing to remove the association of our party with that wonderful thing called Democracy. They hate that everytime anyone refers to our party, we get the automatic association to democracy. And so they are engaging in a long term campaign to change the meme to Democrat Party. Anyone who uses that term is either highly suspect or just drinking Kool-Aid.

[Jersey Devil]

180. Well....yes

It does usually make the hair on the back of my neck stand up when someone says "Democrat Party" and my radar kicks into high gear. But before I would make a judgment about somebody using the term I would want to hear more from them.

I don't think it would be a bad idea to teach Democrats to insist, whenever the term is used, that it is the "Democratic Party." Some Dems in Congress, as pointed out elsewhere in this string, are rather careless about it as well.

[righteous1]

30. Look it up, Democrat party is correct and proper, just yesterday both

Levin and Begala referred to it that way. I believe "Democratic" is an adjective

[sunnystarr]

80. yes and an adjective modifies the noun "Party"

Are you saying that because Begala and Levin can't speak English correctly that Democrat Party is correct? Democrat is a noun. Democratic is the adjective. You don't use a noun to modify a noun.

[righteous1]

105. So using that line of reasoning

it should be the Republicanic party? And our party is comprised of of Democratics?

[Dervill Crow]

113. Usage

"So using that line of reasoning"
it should be the Republicanic party? And our party is comprised of of Democratics?

Republican is an adjective and describes the word Party.

noun - republic
adjective - republican

noun - democracy
adjective - democratic

This is the first time I've heard anyone refer to the "democrat party," but I can live with it. We've got bigger issues than how someone parses a sentence.

[righteous1]

115. We would have to be consistent then and call ourselves "Democratics"

btw Republican is duel use, noun and adjective. Trivial debate for sure, but it's a boring Friday

[Dervill Crow]

117. Re: We would have to be consistent then and call ourselves "democratics."

No, I don't think we need to be consistent with the republicans. They are the ones who are screwing up and using an adjective (republican) as a noun. But then what would you expect. . .

Yep, you're right. Trivial debate, boring Friday. So anticlimactic.

[steve2470]

193. DEMOCRATIC Party - It's the very top line of the web page

http://www.democrats.org

[madison2000]

167. Well said, I agree with you.

Mostly lurking should go lurk somewhere else.

[OneBlueSky]

25. the reason there is no "hard evidence" is . . .

that they rigged the system so there couldn't BE any hard evidence . . . such is the wonder of touchscreen machines controlled by Republican corporations . . . ain't technology grand? . . .

[righteous1]

26. Maybe, but you don't subject yourself to national scrutiny and ridicule by

pulling a stunt like yesterday untill you DO have it

[Steve2525]

33. Oh please, yesterday wasn't a "stunt"

Yesterday was a chance to point out several things:

a) Perhaps the most important one, that the idea that a debate could be had in congress (a serious one) challenging the election is nothing more than a featherweight one. Senatory Dayton of Minnesota said it well, that while he agreed that there are problems with voting, congress doesn't have a real forum for that.

b) It points out that there are congressmen and senators (who represent constituents who demanded this) willing to take it on the chin to address these issues. There are problems with our voting system. (personally I believe big ones) No one (not even HAVA) has really addressed these things like SOS being state chair or co-chairs of presidential campaigns on either side, is WRONG. Paperless voting trails are WRONG.

c) It let the American people know that there are problems that the MSM has not let them know about.

Finally, the rat wang will push this for a while, but to me they looked the most petty and defensive, quoting newspaper editorials as their defense for goodness sake! We had documents entered into the record!

This ain't over!

[steve2470]

196. It wasn't a stunt at all. If the Repugs did it, they would be hailed as

the saviors of democracy and would be given lots of free publicity. But, if the Democrats stand up for voting rights and not disenfranchising poor white and African-American voters, then it's a stunt. I'll gladly pull stunts over my right to vote.

[TruthBeTold22]

42. Touchscreen fraud

How many counties in Ohio used touchscreens? So what did they do in theother counties? The ones with other elctronic systems and punchcard?

[mimitabby]

166. yes, what about those touchscreens??

[KerryOn]

170. Voting machine types used in Ohio

http://my.core.com/3E/28/dlrslr/OhioDisputedVotes.htm

[mattclearing]

29. Democrat-IC Party. How many times does this have to be said?

It's the Democratic Party. This shouldn't be a newsflash to anyone on this board. Democrat is not an adjective.

[Steve2525]

31. While there is some merit to the idea of moving on

We aren't going to change this election, no matter what. It's done, it's over.

If we do indeed "move on" then we neglect the FACT that there were voters disenfranchised, evidence of possible tampering, etc. (Read the Conyers 101 page report for more details, I'm sure in your lurking you must have come across it)

In short, Hell no I won't move on!

I believe that there was fraud and the fraudsters won't stop until they are stopped!

Therefore, while I respect your right to "move on", I hope you respect my right to say that if you keep on doing the same thing, you'll keep getting the same results.

We have a prez with a 49% approval rating. He isn't popular! So to assume that 51% of people voted for him anyway, despite the exit polls reports to the contrary, (with their small, small margin of error) is to me the deluded position to take. We need to push this issue to the point where some people are going to jail.

No it may not have been a widespread conspiracy to defraud voters, but if there is fraud, and it may or may not be connected to other fraud, it needs to be found and rooted out.

So, move on, lurk away, and have fun!

[sunnystarr]

87. Shit I haven't moved on from 2000 yet! (nt)

[AngryAmish]

34. Kerry won the election

It has been repeatedly proven. Don't you realize Bush is Hitler?

[TruthBeTold22]

43. Bush = Hitler??

Not a chance

[righteous1]

63. If it was "proven" we wouldn't be having this discussion. n/t

[buddysmellgood]

36. I see. You actually LIKE to take it. Two elections stolen and you think

that by doing nothing democrats will come to power. We will never win another election without election reform. Go ahead, spin your wheels. I'll stand and fight with the patriots.

[TruthBeTold22]

45. I Think

I think what the intent was is that there are more important fights that this tilting at windmills...like insuring that the Party produces a progressive platform and picks a candidate that runs on it rather than away from it.

[buddysmellgood]

89. If we can't handle that AND election reform, we don't deserve to win.

[steve2470]

197. Windmills = Possible Election Fraud ? Call me Don Quixote nt

[meganmonkey]

38. If you're done fighting for the right to vote and have your voted counted

that's fine with me. Turn out your own light on this issue and go to the Election 2006/2008 forum or something.

But in 2006, when all the votes count thanks to our efforts, come back and thank us if you want.

It's not about John Kerry. It's not about George Bush**. It's about free and fair elections where all the votes count, no matter who casts them and no matter who counts them.

[forgethell]

41. I don't believe

the election was stolen. I do believe that errors undoubtedly occurred, there may have been some minor fraud, and that the election process could be improved.

I think optical scan equipment everywwhere would give a more accurate count than hand-counts, and leave a paper trail. I think the registration rolls should be purged commpletely, and every voter required to re-register, proving citizenship. I think it is the voters responsibility to make his intent clear, and that if he screws up his ballot, his vote cannot count becasue his intent was clear.

It seems to me that this would satisfy objections to the system by both parties. then if the Democrats won, excellent!! If the Republicans won, we can live with it knowing the results were fair.

[Don1]

44. I've been lurking, too

I have to ask you and others about the definition of recount. Aren't such phrases as "3% recount" and "partial recount" oxymorons? Imagine being a first grader in a first grade classroom. Your teacher says, okay everyone count to 100. Everyone does it. Then the teacher says, "Now, recount." Everyone, goes, "1, 2, 3." Teacher: "What is going on here?" Students: "We listened to you teacher and recounted. It was just a 'partial' recount." If you check 3% of the vote, then aren't "sampling" and "poll" much better (and possibly not contradictory) terms?

Perhaps, more importantly, if votes are to be sampled in a "partial recount," then the sampling of votes should contain at least some of the precincts where alleged misvoting occurred. That is to say, if we sample the vote, then we should expect to find some problems if and only if there were problems in the sample. This is a tautology. A 3% sampling of votes is therefore only most appropriate when voting problems are distributed nearly equally among precincts. Consider that if 10,000 votes were alleged to be missed in precinct 1 of County X, then it would make no sense to sample votes from precinct 2 of County X. If such an hypothesis as "Bush really did win" is to be elevated to the level of acceptance, then that hypothesis must actually be tested in a way where if it were not true, it would be discovered.

I've really been lurking, actually over the same timeframe as you. My first post was last night. My second post is now. I am a little irked that the term "self-delusion" is directed at those here who have high standards of our government. The much more delusional argument is to say that if we lay down and do nothing, then known liars won't try to slander us. People, like "Karl Rove" spin and lie about us regardless of the specifics of what we do. It is the concepts that they wish to destroy by their ad hominem slander of the people espousing those concepts.

[rodeodance]

46. the only "spectacle" yesterday was the name calling by the Repugs!

.....Similarly, the spectacle in the US Congress yesterday was extremely hurtful to the Democrats......

[rodeodance]

48. good post-thanks

[Straight Shooter]

72. Someone PLEASE address why 99.9% of "irregularities" went to Little Boots

By the way, WELCOME to DU, Don1 :hi:

[GOPBasher]

119. Great post!

Excellent post, and welcome to DU! :hi:

[rucky]

49. Thanks, Dr. Laura! n/t

[No Exit]

50. Bush has served illegitimately since 2001. How can he repay us?

HOW DOES HE PLAN TO REPAY US FOR THAT MISTAKE??!? IF I MAKE A MISTAKE, SAY, IF I TOOK GOVERNMENT BENEFITS THAT IT TURNED OUT I DIDN'T QUALIFY FOR, YOU BET THE GOV'T. WOULD BE AFTER ME TO PAY THEM BACK!

HOW WILL BUSH PAY US BACK?? GORE WON THE RACE IN 2000!! BUSH STOLE THAT FROM US!!!!

I DEMAND REPAYMENT!!!

NOW TAKE YOUR RANT AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE. I DON'T NEED YOU OR OTHERS LIKE YOU TO DO MY THINKING FOR ME.

BUSH CHEATED! GET OVER IT!

[The Gigmeister]

51. Thank you for writing what I'm not good enough to do.

I can think it, and sometimes get some points accross, but I'm just not a good writer. I hope people take your words and turn them into something positive.

But, look-out for the flames and the accusations of being a disruptor.

[No Exit]

53. BUSH CHEATED. AND BUSH ALSO STOLE THE

ELECTION OF 2000!!!

I DEMAND THAT HE REPAY US!! AND GUESS WHAT? I VOTED FOR HIM IN 2000!!!

I DEMAND BUSH'S RESIGNATION NOW!!!

NICE TRY, BUT I DON'T NEED YOU OR ANY OF YOUR FRIENDS TO MAKE UP MY MIND FOR ME!

[The Gigmeister]

55. Break the Prozac in half next time.

[No Exit]

52. HEY, MOSTLY LURKING!!

BUSH CHEATED!!! I will NOT get over it, not ever!!!

BUSH MUST RESIGN!! I demand that he resign!!!

[stl_dem1]

144. Right On No Exit

What if All Americans stood up and DEMAND that Bushitler resign? How could the Bush crime family cling to power then? That needs to be our focus educating americans about the massive vote fraWd. Our day WILL COME--SOON!!!!

[autorank]

177. Delete by autorank

[dedacherry]

I refuse to' let it go'

Or move on. That's exactly what they want. besides that I can't let it go the same as I could not let it go in 2000 . I don't like the feeling of being helpless.

The republicans showed their true axis of evil yesterday. They were disgusting. Even after Pelosi spoke and assured everyone that this was not contesting the election but a need for change in the voting process.... they still went on with their conspiracy dirty talk. Thats because they are a conspiracy and it's their only point of reference

They cheated this election and the elections in 2002 also. They used the excuse that the D voters had turned on the democrats after wellstones memorial because someone said boo to a republican who was walking in. AS IF... So suppossedly that turned all the democratic supporters into republican voters.There were no exit polls on those votes and damn right they cheated their way right into a majority position.

I am also disappointed that more democrats did not stand up with Boxer. They just roll over and by doing so they become a part of the problem. They are allowing corruption to rule.
Plus the republicans will always use any concession of the democrats against them in the end. Everytime.

When the dems sold out the people for Bush's 'war on a whim whenever wanted' even though they had received massive communications from the people warning them to not go that route ... but they did it anyway. I wrote to a few D senators back during that time and said "if you plan on running for president in the near future don't go with this vote, because it will come back to haunt you"
The republicans used this in 2002 by claiming that there was "overwelming support for the president" due to all the democrats giving their vote and support.
And then look how they used it during the campaign. The contenders had to try and explain why they supported it then, and not now. And Kerry never was clear enough until the end in explaining that he had given his vote but it had conditions . I was aware of this only because I watch cspan and heard him back then but most people did not know this fact.

When are they going to realize that it's only in the the voice of the people as a mass that the right direction can be found. Not some alter ego god voice inside george's head. We are the voice of God and we would never lead our country down the wrong road. The whole world responded and we were right as we can all see so well now. george called us a focus group. You see he does not recognize or know the real voice of God. It is us.

But the dems are continually disappointing, spineless and I cannot understand why they don't get down and dirty and blow the evil axis out of the white house with just the facts please. Are they truly as naive as they appear to be? I mean even I can see right through these lying republicans . I know everytime Bush lies and it's alot, because he gets this dopey look on his face. Dead giveaway. I also suspect he is often stoned on something .
And this Henry Hide saying a paper trail would somehow disturb our privacy. Paaaleese I think the patriot act has done accomplised this point already.
The thing is they are so bad at lying it brings to my mind my three year old with choclate all over her face while telling me no she has not been in the cookie jar.

I will never again vote for the sake of keeping the opponent from winning. If the dems don't start barking and biting some butt then I am going Green . No doubt about it.

[MadisonProgressive]

54. You are entitled to your own opinion

but my opinion is that you are wrong. I will not let this issue go until I see some answers to all the outstanding questions regarding Ohio, and see the implementation of reforms to prevent these documented problems from recurring. I also want to see Blackwell in stripes.

[SouthernDem2004]

60. Great post, You have said what alot of us believe.

[Name removed]

187. Deleted message

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

[dmac]

62. The MSM could not have written this better . . .

After reading your post my initial impression is that it is well-written and convincing. However, it totally misses the mark. Actually, I think your post further illustrates just "how" this coup d'etat has been accomplished: Say practically nothing about it, give scant news on the recount and what news is given, make sure to tell only the bottom line (that the recount came out perfectly --- not that random samples were not used or that technicians from the voting machine companies were replacing components of the machines throughout the recounting process), and then when the time comes, roll your eyes and pretend that the nuts who dreamed up the fraud idea are simply that - nuts or misguided or misinformed or sore losers. I have been mostly lurking myself for the last few weeks - simply because words elude me.

But if you have been lurking, I do not understand how you have become convinced that Bush won. Through my lurking I am more convinced than ever that this was a well-orchestrated coup - very, very clever, and so many different avenues traveled to accomplish it, that this is where we all get bogged down in trying to come up with something tangible. Because we "know" it, we grasp at straws and certainly many or most of us have gone off on tangents that are missing the mark, which is how I think Curtis and Fischer picked up some believers - at least for a while. Because we are all looking for something plausible and fully expect it to be something outrageous and deeply hidden.

As for you not buying into the machine tampering to steal the election --- if the general population agrees with you, then certainly the Dem's will not win another election. And not only will the Republicans have secured endless victories, they will have also succeeded in convincing the general population that the Dem's have done this to themselves - that they aren't winning because of the their platform or their policies or what they did in '04. Defeats will be automatically blamed on these things, just as you are blaming this "defeat" (at least you aren't buying into the media version that it is because they have values where we have none and they are principled and we are not - or are you?) Anyway, election cycle after election cycle, as we lose, it can be said it is because the Dem's hurt themselves by what they did in '04 or any of the other smoke screens available. And the Dem's even believe some of this themselves! So they have another success in that they have accomplished getting us to go completely off message. It has begun already - we begin to re-tailor our message again and again, trying to break the code - grasping to find a platform to lead us to victory - when in reality, we had the votes. What happened in Ohio happened in many other states to make the margin of victory appear larger. We will NEVER know what the real numbers were in this election. Living in a very conservative area myself, I certainly know * does have a HUGE following but I firmly believe there were too many strikes against him for those supporters to have carried him to victory. Through the black boxes, others are controlling even our party politics. Unless people like you can be helped to see how this is being accomplished, well ...... but perhaps I should say UNTIL people like you rather than 'unless' because I do believe it will ultimately happen and hopefully it won't be too late to take back all that has been stolen. Sadly, I know from my own experiences that the majority of Americans think just as you think - which leaves those of us who believe otherwise to suppress our thoughts because we have already been so discredited. The media's hand in what has occurred is the only piece of the puzzle I still cannot figure out. I can't figure out how they managed to blanket the US news with this strange silence, but I do know that their silence has succeeded in totally discrediting anything that has been uncovered. Except for those who SEEK more information, most Americans hardly even know there was a recount in Ohio, let alone any of the material truths that came out of it. Heck, most Americans didn't even realize that yesterday was anything more than just another day. As far as they are concerned Bush won and they are just waiting on the inauguration.

I have much more to say, but I have made a mess of what I have just written and unfortunately other commitments prohibit me taking the time to better articulate what I had hoped to say in this response. If I can't do better than this I won't bother to post again but it is so hard to read and read, and resist the urge to respond and engage in what is being bantered about. I hope to get my arms around what my real thoughts are soon - for my own sake. Lately I feel the data just banging about inside my head, and every single thought seems to be on a collision course with the next. By nature I am not a patient person but my gut tells me that this is going to be a trial for me and other people who want everything "yesterday but today will do". I have a feeling the truth of this election is going to be a long time coming out - if ever.

The only thing I am sure of anymore is that things are not as they are being presented.

[Kota]

81. You should keep posting, you make a lot of sense.

[steve2470]

201. Welcome to DU ! Keep on thinking and reading and posting ! :-) nt

[sportndandy]

64. Ha HAW! What a crock! Thanks wing-nut!

The only you got right is that Jan6 was hurtful to Dems, not because they stood up, but because they didn't march out! The dems should have thrown down the gauntlet and to hell with what anyone says!



OOh were afraid Bluto! The pugs might not like us anymore Bluto!

[righteous1]

67. Succinct, insightful, compelling and very convincing n/t

[bmoney07]

65. recount was not properly done or done at all

need to check yourself

[flpoljunkie]

66. Do you also intend to "let go" of voting reform?

http://www.avirubin.com/vote/op-ed.html

The Baltimore Sun

Op/Ed page

An Election Day clouded by doubt

By Avi Rubin
Originally published October 27, 2004

ABOUT 50 MILLION Americans will cast their ballots for president on touch-screen terminals Tuesday.

<>And if my experience as a computer scientist is any guide, those voters will not realize just how dangerous it is to rely on these machines to conduct a free and fair election with a reliable result.

Even if, on Wednesday, this election appears to have been a success, there will be no way of knowing for sure whether the will of the people was accomplished.

<>And even if there is no problem Tuesday, that does not imply that the election was secure - only that no one chose that day to exploit the insecurity. If an apparent success in November leads to greater adoption of fully electronic voting in the future, then subsequent elections will be even more vulnerable, providing increased incentive to attackers and, at the same time, more avenues for attack.

For voters to have confidence in the election process, it should be as transparent as possible. When technology that is inherently opaque is used in elections, peoples' confidence in the process will be justifiably shaken.

<>Our goal should be voting technology that is beyond reproach. That goal may never be fully attainable, but we must do better than this. The foundation of our democracy is at stake, and thus, ultimately, so is our freedom.

[BeFree]

68. That's pretty sad

Having been here for three years now gives me a much better perspective than one could ever have in two months, I guess.

It's sad you don't believe any of the facts displayed here. Over the last two months, there having been a deluge of damning articles, I would have imagined anyone would have become quite disturbed about how our votes are counted.

Maybe some people come here not to learn if and how our votes were stolen, but only to learn what we know so that they can try and refute us? Maybe some people are not able to be educated? Maybe some people don't want to be educated? Sadly, you seem to be in one of those categories.

[righteous1]

70. I happen to agree with ML . Personally I am a voracious

reader and don't rely exclusively on the FreePress, NA, Bradblog, Raw Story, and the Glib webpage for all my news. The truth is that the vast and overwhelming majority of people in this country including the press do not find the allegations substantial. That's not because they are uninformed or ignorant, it's simply they do not find the evidence convincing, as I don't. It's easy to fall into the "If they knew what I know, they would think as I do " mentality. But the undeniable fact is, many people do know what you know and they don't think as you do. If there was clear and convincing evidence of a fraudulent election it would have been a slam dunk, all the Dem Senators and half the Rs would have contested. But, thats is not the case. Just a lot of supposition with very little substantiation.

[BeFree]

79. They are ignorant

Don't give me that bullshit that they know.

I have talked to hundreds of people, telling them what I know about Diebold, ES&S and computer voting in general, and none of them had hardly more than a clue!

For three years now I've searched and researched this issue and am always learn something new, so don't give me that bullshit.

It's sad you've learned nothing. All of our efforts have been wasted on you. So Sad.

[righteous1]

98. I am an openminded thinker who does not let my idealogy

govern my rational. Using the argument that the only reason people don't believe as you do is because of their ignorance is egocentric and myopic. Dimunizing people that disagree with you is generally the sign of a weak argument and a lazy intellect. If your facts and evidence could weather scrutiny then there would be no discussion here, however at this point they cannot.

[dpibel]

137. What more authority could you want?

I mean the press and the majority of people do not find the allegations substantial, so end of story.

After all, the press and the majority of people believed that Saddam Hussein had giant stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. That worked out pretty well.

The press and the majority of people believe that Social Security is in crisis. But the CBO doesn't, and some pretty reliable economists don't. But, hey, if the press and majority says so, who am I to argue?

And on. And on.

[saracat]

153. And , according to this reasoning, those would be the same"informed

majority "of people who voted for Bush!


"The truth is that the vast and overwhelming majority of people in this country including the press do not find the allegations substantial. That's not because they are uninformed or ignorant, it's simply they do not find the evidence convincing, as I don't"

This statement supports the old adage "never underestimate the stupidity of the American voter".

[illuminaughty]

69. You are so mistaken I don't know where to begin

We are fighting a massive beast of a machinery, not just Repubs, but Dems who have shook hands with the devil also.

There was criminal action that I personally witnessed as did others, in states that have not even been mentioned. It makes me sick to my stomach to see what happened in 2000, 2002, 2004 and still people prefer to remain ignorant to the facts.

I suggest you walk a day in an African American's shoes and then come back here and post that the federal crime of vote suppression did not occur. There was another crime a few years ago that a jury decided that there wasn't enough evidence to convict. It was called the Rodney King trial. Remember that verdict. Insufficient evidence.
People can only be pushed so far and today was just one more day that showed justice is not blind and that apartheid and Jim Crow are alive in well in the U.S.

[righteous1]

71. There were over 3000 initial contentions of voter disenfranchisement

in Fla 2000. When hearings began 5 months later only 3 showed up to testify and all 3 of those were found to be frivolous. Accusations, rhetoric and demagoguery are rampant, you need veriable substantiation or you will be ignored by the press and the American people as a whole. I personally wish Conyers would have waited untill he had "the goods" and then let loose. Now it just looks like partisan crapolla.

[illuminaughty]

181. Apparently you missed part of the hearings

Did you watch them? There was an entire gallery of people there to testify each day the hearings were conducted. "you will be ignored by the press" ? That shows your ignorance of the current climate.

Today's press has chosen to ignore the fact that several bodies like the I.C.C. are seeking to indict this admin for war crimes. Our press has ignored the civilian count of 100,000 dead in Iraq. Our press chose to ignore an increasingly long list of people who have "the goods" against this administration, no matter the strength of the evidence. You, know...just disgruntled employess...like Zinni,
Richard Clarke, Paul O'Neil. And by the way, this country thrives on "partisan crapolla" But voting apartheid has been the key to repub domination for years.

[euler]

73. Yes ! In effect, Boxer and Tubb-Jones used a provision...

...of US law meant for one purpose and used it for another. This pissed me off more than anything yesterday. You can't use a law meant to be used for legitimate electoral objections to launch electoral reform. Did anyone know they were going to do that ? I don't think many people expected that. It wasn't just the two objectors, it was nearly every democrat who spoke. It went something like: "I'm not challenging the Ohio electors, I just want to use this opportunity to plug electoral reform." Do it somewhere else. This isn't the place. You make us look ridiculous.

This is the kind of thing that pisses Americans off. To me, it's no different from president Bush making recess appointments, or Republican senators trying to change filibuster rules.

[blueokie]

88. This isn't the place?

This isn't the right time?
We have been struggling to get MSM to pay attention! As far as I'm concerned my day wasn't wasted when they stood up for the rights of my fellow americans. It was the perfect place, the perfect time and if those senators actually had to do their jobs for one day well well worth the money we pay them.

[righteous1]

102. Precisely n/t

[Grammyto3]

75. Election Fraud is only a part of the plan

Like you, I have been lurking since shortly after the election. I have never posted here until now. Wanted to, but was reluctant to join in. Now I feel compelled to add my 2 cents.

If you only read and learn about election "irregularities" or fraud, you are probably only seeing part of the big picture. That is one of the methods that will be used to bring about a much bigger change in our government, indeed in our way of life. Do yourself a favor and do some reading on PNAC (Project for the New American Century). You will come to understand that hijacking our electoral system is one of the methods that will be used to put the bigger plan in place. A lot of what has happened in the current administration will start to become more understandable when you view it with an understanding of PNAC. A simple Google search will lead you to enough reading material to keep you up nights for quite a while. And while you're at it, get some insight on the Dominionists. It is all part of the same package.

I know, I know---My tinfoil sombrero is probably a bit too snug this a.m., but it's how I feel and I am tired of being labeled as the conspiracy theorist. I grew up in Mississippi in the 60s and I know that the people fighting for Civil Rights back then were maligned and mistreated, too. In fact, just this morning we are hearing about the indictment of people in Mississippi for the murder of the civil rights workers near Philadelphia, Miss that happened in 1964, I think. This has taken such a long time to get resolved. I think those of us who believe that our election was stolen and that perhaps a much bigger "conspiracy" (if we MUST use that term) is in play here will agree with the ones who say we must be patient and hold onto to what we believe and know. There were people who told the civil rights crusaders to sit down and shut up, too. We are still resolving crimes committed over 40 years ago. We have to learn from them---hang on, hold on and stand by your convictions!

Thanks for the chance to express my opinions. Most of the people who come here are like me---they just want the truth to be known. If the election was fair and free of fraud as we are being told, open the books, examine the machines and show the world that democracy works here! If it turns out not to be true, it is also the golden opportunity for the rest of the world to see that the people really can speak and make that which is wrong, right again!

[Starone]

85. Go Grammyto3!

Thanks for you opinions!

[sunnystarr]

93. Thank you so much for bringing that up. It probably deserves

it's own thread. But since these civil rights workers were also working hard to get Black voters registered and to pass the literacy test that was then required, it's only fitting that we remember and honor them on the day another KKK member is arrested for their murder. His name is Edgar Ray Killan and he's a minister (a Bush voter I'm sure).

The three murdered men were part of CORE and working on the Mississippi Summer Project.

Andy Goodman was only 20 when he died on Rock Cut Road on June 21, 1964, near the end of his first full day in Mississippi. Goodman had arrived in the state early the previous morning after attending a three-day training session in Ohio for volunteers for the Mississippi Summer Project. Goodman arrived in Mississippi excited and anxious to get to work.

Michael Schwerner, ... was the most despised civil rights worker in Mississippi. Klan Imperial Wizard Sam Bowers ordered Schwerner's "elimination" in May, 1964. The Klan finally got their chance to carry out the elimination order on June 21. Because they were with Schwerner, and would know too much if they were not killed, James Chaney and Andy Goodman also had to die.

James Chaney ...joined the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE). In 1964, CORE led a massive voter registration and desegregation campaign in Mississippi called Freedom Summer. As part of the Freedom Summer activities, Chaney was riding with two white activists in Mississippi when they were attacked and killed by the Ku Klux Klan on June 21, 1964.
http://www.core-online.org/history/chaney.htm

"After several weeks of searching and recovering more than a dozen other bodies, the authorities finally found the civil rights workers buried under an earthen dam. Seven Klansmen, including Price, were arrested and tried for the brutal killings. A jury of sympathizers found them all not guilty. Some time later, the federal government charged the murderers with violating the civil rights of Goodman, Schwerner, and Chaney. This time the Klansmen were convicted and served sentences ranging from two to ten years." http://themiddleoftheinternet.com/Chaney_Goodman_Schwerner.htm

It was a KKK conspiracy so I guess the jury found them all not guilty because after all us Dems are nothing but conspiracy theorists.

This was only 40 years ago - so recent in our history. Yes we can't give up and move on. We have to continue fighting for what we all know is right.

[Starone]

82. The Light Will Never Turn Off....

....because there will always be someone left in the room as long as your and my vote is not protected and confirmed. As you lurked you missed the point. Proving election fraud is not it. The point is our reassurance now and in the future that fraud didn't happen....that's what our Repug fearless leaders have failed to do. And not only did they fail to do it....they've done everything to keep the reassurance from happening. It's the cover-up that will prove the crime. And it will be the name-calling and the fight from non-believers who try to keep this movement under wraps that will keep the lights on as long as needed.

[GOPFighter]

83. A Standing O!

Mostly_Lurking, your post captures much of what I've been thinking lately. I applaud your candor.

Frankly, I was surprised that Kerry lost, and was shocked at how much he lost by. Right after the elections it was easy to believe that vote fraud had occurred. The initial statistical studies were intriguing and it looked like they were on to something. However, the recounts and investigations have done nothing to convince me that major fraud was, in fact, the reason Kerry was defeated.

Common sense tells me that large-scale fraud is hard to hide. The larger the attempt, the greater chance that someone is going to get caught cheating or someone is going to get an attack of the guilts and spill the beans. That may still happen, but until it does, I have to accept that Kerry lost.

I was a poll observer in New Mexico, and it was an eye-opener. I saw no evidence of wide-spread vote fraud, but I did see hundreds of examples of stupidity and poor training. It's obvious that election workers are very poorly trained, are sometimes incompetent, and there appears to be little or no contingency plans for handling problems when they arise.

It's obvious that the election process in this country must be radically changed in the future. Elections are just too damn important to be left to the a bunch of poorly trained citizens who often don't know the law or what they are doing.

I'm keeping an open mind about the possibility of vote fraud, but until we can come up with hard evidence I think we should tone down our drum-beat that we got robbed. Kerry happened to run at a time when too many Americans weren't willing to change horse in the middle of a war. In my opinion, the good news is what a great comeback we made in two short years. Democrats today are PUMPED and ready to fight. Let's focus on 2006!

[abbiehoff]

90. How do we know fraud is difficult to hide?

It is entirely possible (if not likely) that the DRE machines were programmed to count more votes for * than for Kerry. There is no way to know what the software, or the hardware for that matter, inside these machines looks like since it is proprietary and will certainly stay that way. We know absolutely that there was intentional vote suppression, not only in Ohio, but in other states as well. This may well have been enough to alter the outcome of the election, but did not result in votes that could be counted or re-counted. There may well have been machine fraud, but we will never know that, because the companies making the voting and tabulating machines are never going to be forced to unveil their proprietary holdings by a Republican congress. Unless a criminal case can be brought against these companies and their machines, I don't see how we will ever know what goes on inside them.

[GOPFighter]

97. I would be elated to find evidence of vote fraud

And I certainly agree that votong machine software and system security must be made available to public testing. I also favor making it illegal for the head of a State's Election Office to be held by someone who is also working for a candidate. That's outrageous!!!!

But also let me say that I feel that Al Gore should have been President in 2000 because he won the popular vote. If we had found that Kerry actually did win Ohio, he still would have lost the popular vote and to my way of thinking he would not be the legitimate President (however, I would enjoy the delicious irony and would be happy to see him sworn in!)

[sunnystarr]

94. The overwhelming evidence of Blackwell's partisan tactics

can't be ignored and they aren't legal. This tipped Ohio to Bush. He knows he "delivered" Ohio and brags about it. Why aren't there charges made? It's so outrageous that I can't believe the people in Ohio are sitting down for it.

[Carson]

100. Thank you, GOPFighter and Mostly_Lurking. Excellent posts.

It's what, I'm sure, many of us are thinking but are too leary to voice it. The name-calling can be pretty severe at times!

[dmac]

161. You said, "Common sense tells me

that large-scale fraud is hard to hide. The larger the attempt, the greater chance that someone is going to get caught cheating or someone is going to get an attack of the guilts and spill the beans. That may still happen, but until it does, I have to accept that Kerry lost.".

In my opinion, someone DID "get caught cheating" several different times in several different places and perhaps several different players. The problem is, we know what they did (padded the Bush votes), we just don't know exactly how or who. But the red flag of the foul play that occurred with the votes is there and it was one of the few things that did actually get reported - well, kind of. Come on, in how many different states, counties, precincts did the votes exceed the number of people voting - and in (I think) most, if not all of these cases, the excesses all fell to Bush. You tell me that isn't someone screwing up (caught cheating)! That was a big Whoops! and I bet someone's or someones' head/s rolled. But not to worry, the press made little of it - it was mentioned and then explained away with something like, "corrections were made and the extra votes were taken away", as in "no harm done". These extra votes were all computer "errors", not fraud. Though to my knowledge no one ever made any attempt to explain how or why these "errors" occurred. For that matter, how do we even know that "all" of the "extra votes" were "taken away" since no one knows how they got there in the first place? Yea, right.

Funny how the same event can say such different things to different people. I definitely feel this was but ONE (of many) instance(s) where some did get caught cheating. There just wasn't any real follow up. It dropped right off the radar screen just as quickly as the rest of the Bush inconvenient history dropped off.

As for waiting for someone to feel guilt and spill the beans? I guess that could conceivably happen. But I think it is more likely the ones chosen to work their magic were well paid for their efforts. And someone who would accept such a job in the first place is not likely to give up their greed for ethics (if they had any in the first place).

While you wait until someone gets "an attack of the guilts", I think I will continue to wait until someone explains these glitches, as well as hundreds of others. Bush won nothing and I will not acknowledge him as my President. You and ML go ahead and join the vast majority of Dems already out there accepting this false victory - you will certainly be in good company. I hope you find peace it in. I understand what you are doing, and almost wish I could do the same. But I already know there would be no peace in that route for me.

And so the division of our country grows ever greater. Now we are dividing within the already existing divides, growing ever more critical and isolated from those who do not share our own views. Maybe a real third party will be created after all through all of this. Can't help but wonder how that would impact the black box programming in '08? If they screwed up with two candidates, (plus the Greens and Independents in some states), imagine what might happen if they throw in another whole party? (It may actually make their job easier?) I sure would like to know where we are headed in this world spinning madly.

[euler]

84. I'm now convinced that....

...a lot of people in this forum don't understand what amounts to proof, or fraud. People here ignore alternate explanations for phenomenon and hone in on fraud as the only explanation. There were several alternate (and in many case, more-likely), explanations for just about every allegation presented here.

The real problem as I see it, is the fact that no one is willing to find the facts for themselves. Let me give some advice to all DU here. If someone you don't know makes a claim of fact, and that claim is something that can easily be checked by you by using Google or your favorite search engine, why not do so ? Especially if the topic is one you care about. There is so much misleading incorrect bunk posted here, almost all of which can be checked in 15 minutes of personal research. I don't think more than 15 people here know why exit polls are conducted, how they are conducted, what the MSM uses exit polls for, what the different types of exit polls are and what the difference is. People relied on one or two people here on DU to tell them everything about exit polls - and those 2 didn't really have a clue. Yet, all the information anyone needs to find these answers about exit polls is no more than a few clicks away.


Take this for what it's worth.

By the way, I already know that even though all I'm asking people to do is check there own facts if possible, someone (or many someones), will rip me a new one. That's another problem in this forum.

[righteous1]

101. When you read something and it backs up your preconceived

notion on something, why question or check whether or not its complete or accurate. It's only reinforcing what you already know to be true, right? Oftentimes we are as bad as the other side. We don't want to know the whole story if it contradicts our ideaology, soo we only get our facts from sources that back up our point of view. This is self deceiving and self imposed censorship

[dmac]

162. Maybe you can explain what the people

in the Ukraine understood about "proof and fraud" that has escaped us? Or perhaps you can explain what they understood about exit polls that we also have failed to grasp? Thank you.

[Stevepol]

163. Exit polls ARE proof. Statistical evidence is accepted in court.

DNA evidence, the kind of evidence used to back up Brown v Bd of Education and innumerable other cases. Plus, the exit polls have a long and almost faultless record, at least when conducted by the best companies (not by some Jerry Falwell funded clone of Zogby or such). The only time they are wrong is when they are used to check the results where the machines count the votes. Apparently, the only proof that some people think is possible is if the people who have orchestrated this fraud throw up their hands and say, "Oh my Gosh, my conscience is killing me. I have to tell the truth. I stole the election. I'm a programmer for Diebold and I programmed in a default that gave Bush the election." Get real. Even if Jeffrey Dean (the guy who spent 5 years behind bars for embezzlement by falsifying computer information, then started working for GES, which was bought up by Diebold in Jan 02, and served as a consultant for Diebold when they wrote up the program that stole the GA 02 election), even if this guy became a whistleblower on himself, there'd be somebody saying, "But we need actual proof that fraud took place. We're just whistling in the wind."

We just need to trust that when the time is right stuff will come to the surface but it will be quite some time evidently. All we can do is keep on educating people. We need to get all the info we can about the fraud and make it clear when we can, not in a haughty or arrogant way but just to inform and listen. In time the truth will out. It has never failed to out in the past and it won't this time.

[mountebank]

91. The NH recount was the back-breaker. But you're still wrong.

I myself have become very skeptical of the vote fraud allegations and I think, despite doing a fair bit of analyses myself, that there is NO "hard proof" of fraud. Believe me, I am "educated" on the issue.

What do the die-hard fraudsters who still cling to the exit polls say about the NH recount, the state where exit polls and actual votes deviated by the widest margins? The L.A. Times had a national exit poll with people all over the country. Here it is. Do the math: the national numbers add up almost exactly to the actual percentage. Bush 51, Kerry 49. I posted this at some point. Needless to say, it dropped right off the board.

http://www.latimes.com/news/custom/timespoll/

There is just no hard evidence of fraud, despite the inane, repetitive and all-capital-letters posts of some so-called statiticians that post day and night on this board. As Johnny Cougar has been saying for months, the real issue is disenfranchisement in Ohio and around the U.S. It's just as fraudulent as electronic vote-rigging, vastly more supported, but definitely less sexy than cyber-espionage fantasies.

But you are wrong that Boxer et al. hurt the DemocratIC Party yesterday. They are shining the light on voting reform and aiming that light directly on the fraud we know occurred: disenfranchisement of voters in Ohio. But this doesn't change the fact that Bush won the popular vote. I don't know how, and it depresses the bejesus out of me, but he did.

I would advocate for closing this forum. People should definitely carry on their research maybe in the voting issues forum because I don't think all questions have been answered and the more scrutiny the better. But this forum is, like you said, approaching the moon.

Btw, I see you editted your original post, I'm assuming to change Democrat to Democratic. As far as I have seen, Democrat Party is a term used almost exclusively by Republicans in their long-term campaign to divest Democrats of any association with democracy. I consider it propaganda, and it does make me curious that you use that term and then editted your post without saying what you changed.

[errorbells]

95. i borrowed this

from a poster at the Diebold Board at yahoo finance

tic..
DBD = diebold

Clint Curtis's sworn testimony before members of the
House Judiciary Committee in which he offers the opinion
that the Ohio election was hacked, tells how he would
go about hacking it, and relates having been asked by
a Florida legislator to write vote-switching software:

RealPlayer version:
http://www.edwardsdavid.com/BushVideos/2004-12-13_Conyers_Clint_Curtis01.ram

Windows version:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2004/12/18.html#a1102



http://www.votergate.org/

Interesting 34-minute film
on electronic voting issues. Emphasizes
security issues through interviews with hackers
and election officials. Available in RealPlayer
and mpeg4 format.

http://www.votergate.tv/
Bev Harris travels around
investigating electronic voting. She shows
Howard Dean how to hack the vote records in a
Diebold tabulator. She asks the Washington
State attorney general's office to prosecute
the secretary of state for installing illegal
voting software--the spokesman says she
should take it up with the sacretary of state.
She says she already did and the sos lied to
her. The spokesman says her only recourse is
to vote the sos out. "But what if the machines
are rigged?" Bev says. Music by Patti Smith.

http://avirubin.com/vote/60minutes.mov 14 minute
60 Minutes segment on electronic voting

http:///avirubin.com/vote/dailyshow.mov
John Stewart
Daily Show segment on electronic voting. Very
funny.

http://avirubin.com/WashingtonJournal1.mov Avi Rubin
talks to C-Span about electronic voting.
Rather dry, but interesting.

http://avirubin.com/WashingtonJournal2.mov
/avirubin.com/WashingtonJournal3.mov

http://www.votergate.org/

Interesting 34-minute film
on electronic voting issues. Emphasizes
security issues through interviews with hackers
and election officials. Available in RealPlayer
and mpeg4 format.

>>>>>>>>>>>
the votes were hacked kerry won
not just my belief

as Will Pitt says..
FALL IN LOVE THEN FALL IN LINE
like the repugs do....stay on topic..STICK TOGETHER
we got screwed...we being AMERICA..WE CHANGE IT.

[mountebank]

145. I am well aware of all of this info you present. Doesn't change my mind.

Back to the NH recount. There were hand-countable ballots that were recounted in NH. Electronic fraud was suspected because of the wide deviations between exit polls and vote tallies. No fraud was found.

Certainly fraud is possible on electronic machines - perhaps probable. The question of the moment is: did it occur in this election.

And to that I say: There is no hard evidence.

Doesn't mean everyone should shut up and go home.

But it does mean there are a lot of very gullible people in this forum with their heads in the clouds for whom denial is much easier than acceptance.

[Bill Bored]

152. thanks for posting another exit poll

that hopefully does NOT rely on Mitofsky's data or weightings. I will read it with interest. Last time I saw this, you had to register to read it, but apparently, you have a better link!

See my post further down please. Fraud has not been ruled out and there is something we can do NOW.

[mountebank]

159. Hi Bill - if you need to register go to www.bugmenot.com

You can get username and password in seconds.

[MrBeach]

103. As a lurker also...

This thread got me thinking and off my duff to respond.

I expect to be banned/flamed for this post but hope a
supportive post from an right leaning independent will get
some of you thinking also. I do not subscribe to the
conspiracy theories concerning the voting and do not believe
the vote was stolen... BUT... I do agree that the voting
system is flawed and it is critical that the issues be raised
and REAL remedies put in place. 

Regardless of whether you believe the vote was stolen or not,
the fact that there is a question about the outcome of any
election and hence less than 100% confidence in the process is
the real problem. I do not subscribe to the belief that any
use of technology is problematic and that only a completely
manual process is trustworthy. Reasonable citizens understand
that as long as partisan humans (on either side) are involved
in the process the opportunity for bias and/or fraud exists.

I believe we all need to refocus the issue on a national
standards for  the election process to include standards for
registration, trustworthy electronic voting systems (with
verifyable/auditable results), and standard methods for
handling paper provisional/absentee votes. These systems
should be audited and certified by independent technical
analysis whose results should be published and well known.

I agree with the poster who suggested that all the voting
rolls be purged and everyone be required to re-register. Every
voter should be issued a voter card with a picture ID on it
and a mag stripe with name, address, voter id #, etc. It would
then be a simple process to sign in by presenting your card
when voting, have it swiped by the election official, go to
the booth, swipe it again to vote, and be given a receipt
confirming your vote on it. This way everyone can be confident
that the actual voter placed the vote (ala picture id), their
vote was recorded, and that they only voted once. The system
used to register the voter at the door and the actual ballot
system should be completely independent to allow auditing and
insure that the votes in the machine are accounted for. This
is no more complex than using an ATM machine and should not be
difficult to use.

It is incomprehensable to me that with the technology
available we cannot have a system that is trustworthy and
uncomplicated to use, balance, and verify. We would never do
business with a company who balanced our accounts with the
same confusion/sloppyness that we have in our current voter
system.

I believe we all need to focus our energies on demanding a
real solution to election reform, and not the band-aid
political solutions that do nothing but complicated the
process more. 

Regardless of your political affiliation this should be an
issue that we all can get behind.

-- MrBeach

[mzmolly]

106. Welcome to DU! Excellent post!

If the YMCA can swipe a picture card, knowing every time I visit, we should be able to have a similar system here?

Heck most states issue drivers licences/ID's with this technology, we should use it!

... everyone can agree we need to have a system that breeds confidence by the voting public.

:hi:

[abbiehoff]

107. Thank you Mr. Beach

You are exactly right. Whether or not there was fraud, just the fact that there cannot be evidence either way with the current systems is appalling. A paper trail is not necessary as long as the process is auditable.

[righteous1]

109. They will pass legislation mandating a paper trail. It has

bipartisan support and will pass easily, bank on it.

[Bill Bored]

156. means nothing dude

you need to AUDIT the trail randomly. without that, it's just a placebo.
please do not spread the fallacy that just have a paper trail is enough. you need a law to actually USE IT!

[righteous1]

184. It's a step in the right direction, if you don't have a paper trail

you can't audit period

[LiberalUprising]

157. What are you smoking righteous1

The bill has been in Congress for 16 months ( OVER ONE AND A HALF YEARS).

HR 2239

To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to require a voter-verified permanent record or hardcopy under title III of such Act, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 22, 2003

Mr. HOLT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.2239:

Nothing has been done on the paper trail issue.

WHY?

The repugs don't want it.

WHY?

I don't know, you tell me.

It;s a damn shame not one repug would stand up for the American people yesterday, that's what the shame was.

[righteous1]

185. Time will show, but I'll give you great odds n/t

[Bill Bored]

155. Agreed, but this method is not a secret ballot!

the ID card should not be the voting card
the paper receipt has to be left at the polling place for manual recounts and audits.
go to verifiedvoting.org to learn more about this and keep in mind that is the Republican leadership that opposed verified voting at every turn. They brought this on themselves.

Welcome to DU, BTW!

[dmac]

165. I understand the right to a secret ballot

but when most people post those they support in their yards and on their cars, why would having a card that tied to your vote matter? I do not see the point in having to have two separate cards if that is what you were suggesting. Was it?

[dmac]

164. Great suggestions

and it all sounds plausible. Is part of your suggestion also that black box manufacturing companies are required to open their code for evaluation by software techs on request by either party - and also to have software representatives on-site throughout the voting process? Then I can see this working and it would give me a confidence I totally lack in today's methods.

[MrBeach]

207. I don't believe it's reasonable to "open source" the voting code

to anyone and everyone... I think its reasonable to have the code and Q/A testing audited by an independent accounting/tech firm and issued a certification. The certification standard should be uniform nationwide and published and the certification results should be public. It may even require certification by two separate firms if necessary to avoid concerns about colusion.

The aftervote handling process should also be made public as well as the data handling and network configuration. All this talk of "hacker kiddies" being able to hack the machines is mostly smoke as this equipment is generally never connected to a public network. As a security expert in the field we know that the more likely threat comes from inside access to the systems. Electronic voting systems (including post processing equipment) should be subject to the highest level of physical and network security with bi-partisan monitoring and review.

The bigest hurdle is getting over the "anonymous" vote issue. As long as we cannot "backtrack" a questionable vote through the system then there exists a gap in the ability to audit the entire process. I believe a unique voter ID # should be assigned with each "Voter Card" similar to a drivers license number. This voter id should accompany the vote all the way through the system. It is a simple matter then to audit the entire process from front to end.. You can randomly select votes at the back end of the process and verify that they where processed properly all the way back to the voting machine. You can then go the the separate voter log in/roll system and verify that the voter actually checked in prior to casting the vote. This would make it very difficult to insert "ghost" votes into the system.

Additionally, all the raw vote data should then be made public for scrutiny and independent processing. The Voter ID's should be "hashed" (MD5?) using "one-way" encryption to insure that the specific voter's privacy is not compromised but this would not interfer with any of the security review processes.

Finally, there should be a standard data format in which all vote records are stored. This standard record layout would facilitate the creation of open source vote data analysis programs that can be used in any state.

None of these ideas is complex to implement but it will require federal legislation to mandate the changes and we all know that will require public pressure to get the issue proposed. Unless there is a major bi-partisan effort what we will get, I'm afraid, is more band-aid political solutions from both sides.

BTW: Much of my thoughts on this issue come from my history in developing bank data processing software where we had many of the same issues. While the process a bank goes though on a nightly process to update your accounts is fairly complex it is "balance-able" and auditable and most everyone has a high degree of confidence in the results. Voting is no less important and there is no excuse for not changing the system to inspire the same degree of confidence in the system.

-- Mr Beach

[On the Road]

209. Mr Beach, You Are Almost the Only Person I've Heard

making anonymity of individual votes a central issue.

Privacy is a smokescreen. Lots of things are highly confidential -- like medical records. Doesn't mean they're anonymous and can't be tracked to an individual. That would be ridiculous.

But it's the single thing that makes auditing the vote impossible after the fact. And destroys trust in the system.

[MrBeach]

212. You are absolutly right

It is a major component of the trust problem. Electonic voting is NOT the problem, humans are.. machines do not care who wins, humans do. Voting security therefore requires that the human processes be subject to more scrutiny. It is impossible to scrutinize a process where you cannot track a transaction from front to end.

Having a unique voter id does not minimize the voter anonymity, particularly if that id is "one-way" encrypted, and the encrypted id is used in public data.

By using two separate systems, one to log in the voter and another to take the actual vote, you have the ability to audit the entire process with a high degree of confidence. Preferably these two separate systems would come from two different vendors to avoid the appearance of collusion.

-- Mr Beach

[Philly Buster]

213. I believe there was fraud in the election

But the election is over.

Fraud may not have determined the outcome of the election. Hell, it wasn't even close really. Or maybe it did. Only a thorough investigation will determine the truth.

My concern is to fix the election process. The question is, do the power brokers of either major party really want reform?

[k8conant]

110. Keep the lights burning!

It's time to let it go.
No
...What I have seen over the past 2 months, however, has been a spiral into self-delusion that is damaging to the Democratic party and threatens to keep Republicans in power for a generation at least.
If we don't fight now, they will keep stealing elections.

In spite of repeated statements (in this forum) about all of the mounting "hard" evidence of fraud, any objective evaluation has to conclude that there is no "hard" evidence at all. Absolutely none. That's why the all the Democratic senators voted "nay" yesterday, leaving Boxer with her ??? hanging out all over the place.
No. We have evidence that the Ohio recount was done contrary to law. We apparently need the evidence we are all looking for (which will come out eventually) of machine fraud.

The vaunted "exit polls" were useful at first as they cast suspicion and provided starting points to investigate. Well guess what. Every hand-count done, EVERY ONE, shows that the votes were properly counted. That includes counts in Florida by the Miami Herald, Ohio during the 3% recount, and most especially during the Ida Briggs/Nader recount in NJ.
I'll agree that the exit polls were useful at first. They are still useful. There are of course serious problems with the recounts since there were problems with the initial counts (machine, tabulation, etc.) Briggs/Nader in New Jersey I know nothing about

Still, I see posts about how the chances that Bush won the election are 100,000,000,000,000 to 1 (sarcasm here, but the "odds" just get bigger and bigger). It's stupid. The polling firm itself isn't contesting the facts, and all these "odds" are based on mathematical "analyzes" of incomplete data with LOTS of unknown factors. But what this sounds like is this: "Hey, the exit polls are MUCH more reliable than the actual votes. Let's stop having elections... we can just use exit polls to determine the winners!" That, my friends, is why no one is paying any attention to this red herring.
Not a red herring, when it's the truth (at least in this case:the exit polls are MUCH more reliable than the actual votes. The exit polls are based on the election.

And oh yes, the recount in Ohio was "rigged." Implying, of course, that all the Democrats in the BOE's are actually Republican plants. Wow, that is an amazing feat. I am continually amazed at how the Republicans managed to find this superhuman (with truly God-like powers)... Karl Rove. Oh, please. If he truly is as skillful at manipulating people as many here believe than perhaps the Bush administration deserves to be in power. Personally, I think you give Rove WAY to much credit.
No. You're throwing in a red herring here. If the count was rigged and the recount matches the count what does that prove? I see you're echoing Blackwell on this one. We're not talking about how Rove manipulated people but how (and I don't know how yet) he (I think) collaborated to manipulate machines. I'll be glad to give credit to the programmers who did this, whether Jeff Dean, Talbot Iredale, Tod A. Rapp, or whomever

So what's left? Bev, Curtis, Madsen, Fischer, and Arnebeck? Well, through all of Bev's public brashness and rants she has produced exactly ZERO evidence of vote rigging through BBV. She's reaching for the moon but is falling short. Madsen, Fischer, and Curtis? Well they are already on the moon (and from all I have read about them they should stay there). We have dead dogs, fake $21 million checks, sophomoric visual basic programs, and reform schools filled with teenage hackers trained to steal elections.
No. They're not what's left because the other issues have not been resolved. I don't know if their investigations will pan out or not. I know that B & C's conspiracy theories about WMD in Iraq were a fraud.

Arnebeck's suit is based primarily on the same flawed analysis of the "exit polls." It's going nowhere... Moyer is apparently being "polite" before he squashes it like a bug. It is moot now anyway as the US Constitution will trump anything a state court does.
I will agree that Arnebeck does not yet "have the goods" (nobody does, yet) The analyses of the "exit polls" have not been shown to be flawed. Moyer is not "polite": he is obstructing the suit in any way he can to try to run out time, hoping no one will find "the goods" in time to make this matter whole.

So what's the point of this rant? To try and get the base here to WAKE UP. I believe the "victories" here are actually helping the Republicans, and in a big way.
That, of course, is what the Republicans would want you to believe. Of course, the theft of the election helps them "in a big way".

The recount in Ohio was forced by the Greens/Libs by exploiting a law designed to allow serious candidates (i.e. with a real chance of winning) an avenue to redress real concerns. Kerry chose not to pursue that course, so the Glibs, at the urging of this forum, abused the law and forced Ohio to conduct the recount. The law, written in the mid 1950's, allowed the recount to be forced at a fraction of the actual cost. This, very rightly, PISSED OFF many in Ohio, INCLUDING many Democrats. The BOEs (which consist of both Republicans and Democrats) were insulted at the accusations of incompetence and fraud, and the taxpayers in Ohio get to pick up the bill for what many see as a frivolous fishing expedition forced by those who just couldn't accept the results of the election. Like it or not, that is the perception.
No. Use of the law is not "exploiting" the law, nor is it "abuse". Maybe Ohio will change its law; maybe not. Apparently Bush & Co. have thrown around the term "frivolous" enough for whatever they oppose that some people in Ohio and elsewhere are starting to believe them.

Similarly, the spectacle in the US Congress yesterday was extremely hurtful to the Democrats. Tubb-Jones and Boxer both admitted, in public speeches prior to the contest, that they weren't trying to really contest the election but rather wanted to shine a light on irregularities and voter problems. Fine... EXCEPT they abused a Constitutional provision and hence cheapened that provision for future, legitimate uses. Like the recount in Ohio, they abused a protection for political purposes and accomplished nothing.
Once again "using" is not "abusing". And what would be a "legitimate use"? If JEB was sick and couldn't vote on election day, could someone contest Florida?

If I subscribed to the Rove theories, I would swear that he is an active member in this forum, under many names, with the express purpose of keeping the faithful marching down the path it has taken over the past two months. All this is doing is taking our eyes off the real problems and issues and keeping us in the dark. Unless the Democrats wake up and start looking for the real reasons Kerry lost and Bush won, we are doomed to repeat this spectacle in election after election.
You do sound a lot like KR. What are these "real problems" that unrigging the election won't fix?

To sum up, I have become convinced over the last two months that Bush really did win. I will now direct my energies toward more productive pursuits designed at winning the next election and not moaning and whining about elections being "stolen."
Apparently you didn't think so on November 3rd. We have an unsolved crime here. We don't want it to become a cold case.

The last one out, turn out the lights.
Keep the lights on. We're not done yet!

:kick:

[Fortunato]

114. you raise some good points...

... in a rational way. Made me think about a few things in a different light than I had been.

I do think it worth noting that the word "exploit" points to both sides of the race. Democrats used certain laws in unexpected ways in order to bring problems with the vote to light; Republicans, however, were exploiting just as many laws (a la Blackwell and others) in order to avoid a true recount from occurring.

Exploitation goes both ways. The common rule for both sides seems to be that, however a law can be legally bent, then that is what is lawful. And the only way to close loopholes, legally, is through repealing the original legislation or creating new legislation. That's the system the US has seemingly agreed upon.

So if exploitation is the rule of the game, then can it rightfully any more be called "exploitation?" (It can be called "LAME," of course, but not exploitation. :) )

[Verve]

116. If we had fair and transparent elections this would not be an issue.

But we don't. So until it is fixed EVERY AMERICAN should be working to make our elections legit.

To paraphrase a Republican call-in on C-Span yesterday:

I'm tired of fighting with my liberal friends and family about Bush legitimately winning this election. This isn't right that I can't prove he won because our elections aren't transparent! Source codes need to be public, election officials need to be neutral, etc. etc. Our election system needs to change.

[GOPBasher]

118. You make a lot of good points, but please understand this.

I don't know exactly what happened on November 2nd. There's certainly no way I can prove any fraud. But here's the thing: Of course we can't prove fraud, because there's no way to verify the voting machines! If they were rigged -- I'm saying if -- then there would be no way of knowing. They can't be verified in any way. Doesn't that scare you? I'm not talking about this election, but I sure hope that by 2006, something is done about these things. All I want is to get people talking about this stuff; to put it into public debate. This way, maybe something can be done by 2006. I just want a way to verify that this is still a democracy. Is that asking so much?

And by the way, how come the exit polls were so accurate in Illinois, where they have paper ballots?

[Name removed]

120. Deleted message

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

[righteous1]

121. Good way to get yourself tombstoned pal, suggest you refrain from

name calling

[ClintCooper2003]

122. Are you a moderator? If not, buzz off.

[righteous1]

125. Bye bye

[Laurab]

129. Please don't judge a post-er by post count

I don't post nearly as much as I've read. I do disagree with the original poster, and I think this is only the beginning and we cannot afford to "move on". Anyway, the original poster sounds kind of like Tom Delay yesterday in his assertion that fighting election fraud will hurt democracy. It's one of the more ridiculous statements I've heard, albeit probably just a normal one for repugs.

I question why exit polls are accurate everywhere else, but not here, I don't understand why Blackwell isn't in jail - he did things that HAVE to be illegal. Most of all I know how much I can count on the integrity of the * administration. I don't, and won't,believe one frigging thing they say, and I put NOTHING past them. I'd say rigging an election fits right into their MO, although whether we'll ever be able to prove it or not is questionable.

I wonder though - how does ANYONE know exactly what is or isn't being investigated? Do you really think we'd be privy to that info? I don't. I'm not moving on as long as there are a lot of people who feel the way I do, thank you. Yesterday proved we can accomplish things.

[bruised]

123. more exit poll evidence

In reply see this thread http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x264199

[mountebank]

126. Ok - but explain the NH recount to me.

I agree the exit polls are fishy and need to be explained or it needs to be shown why they were wrong and all data needs to be released and transparent, independent groups need to conduct exit polling in the future.

But NH was the state in this election with the widest deviation between exit polls and vote tallies. A full manual recount there showed no signs of fraud. That, to me, is pretty powerful evidence that perhaps the exit polling was wrong somehow and not vote tallies.

Talk to me.

[bruised]

127. NH

I don't have the answer to your question about NH.
But it seems to me that if the election was rigged it would be done
in a way that would not show up easily in a recount.
On exitpollz site up to now we only put exit poll figures where there is supporting evidence - so right now there is nothing for NH.

Remind me what was the discrepancy between the exit poll figures and the vote?

[righteous1]

128. Glad you brought that up, and PA the exits had JK with a 20 point

lead. No poll taken in PA ever had more than a 3 point JK lead. And the final Mason Dixon (the gold standard of state polling) had JK up by 2% the night before the vote. Exactly what he won by. It's obvious that several of the exit polls had serious flaws.

[bruised]

130. exit polls right?

Did you say the PA exit gave JK a 20% lead or was that a typo?

Actually I don't think the exit were flawed- I think they right.
Just look at the Florida poll on exitpollz and see the breakdown by area. You will find that JK got nearly 8-10% less than what the exit said for Miami.
You will see the same thing happened in Cuyahoga county (Ohio) although not quite on the same scale. I think the exits were correct, but a lot of Kerry votes were lost in these 2 counties. Perhaps in Miami Dade they were lost because of vote electronic vote switching (see blackboxvoting.org).
In Cuyahoga a lot of votes were lost because of lines and because
people in the wrong line were given provisional ballots which were then disallowed. (or who knows maybe even lost) some of those people were almost certainly included in the exit poll. They thought they had voted.

[righteous1]

133. Yes, that is correct....they came down a bit later in the day but

the exits showed a really ludicrous lead in PA. The New Hampshire exits showed a +14% JK lead, ended up being +1. Glibs said the recount there was quite fair. If you look historically the exits have favored the Dems from 2-5% since 1966. But this time there were some really crazy numbers

[bruised]

135. By exit polls I mean exit polls based on evidence!

I don't have any exit poll documents yet for NH or PA .
But I have a source that I think is credible.
I will check the figures and will get back in 5 minutes.

[bruised]

139. PA & NH exit polls

So here are the figures - not so wildly out as you claim.
Although I don't have the documents - and there is no proof these figures are right without supporting evidence - I have been in touch with the authors and I believe that there are screen shots behind these figures. The source is http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm

PA Bush got 3.3% more than the exit poll
NH Bush got 4.4% more than the exit poll

Any wildly out exit polls were in my view because of figures given by phone and people confusing horizontal and vertical percentages! Figures without evidence are like rumors.

Sorry I have to quit for now.

[righteous1]

141. The figures you just gave are from that evening after they had been

"massaged" a half a dozen times. The figures I gave you were from _3:00 PM Election Day. The reason that New Hampshire was chosen for a recount was the huge spread between actual and exit numbers

[mountebank]

142. Not rumors - sorry.

As the other poster said, NH and PA exit poll numbers from the 3 PM release were wildly off. They got closer to the vote tally as the night wore on, but still were pretty far off. Exactly - NH was chosen for a recount precisely because activists in our party noted the wild disparity between exit polls and vote tallies. NH had hand-countable ballots. I'm willing to suspend disbelief that possible electronic fraud occurred somewhere on Election Day - but not in NH - and therefore the grand theories about nationwide electronic vote manipulation are, in my view, less credible now than a month ago.

[ClintCooper2003]

186. Sorry, you are incorrect. Mason-Dixon polls are notoriously right-wing...

Plus, exit polls are historically more accurate than pre-election polls because they include the undecideds who have just made up their minds. Additionally, there was no exit poll which showed Kerry leading by 20 points in PA - that is totally absurd. The final sweep of exit polls I saw indicated about a 7 or 8 point lead for Kerry in PA. Perhaps you missed Steve Freeman's paper where he uses the final weighted sweep for each battleground state?

[spooked911]

140. They only counted a few weird precincts where there were

large swings from 2000 to 2004. It was not a comprehensive recount.

I don't think they ruled out any fraud except in those precincts. There may have indeed been problems with the exit poll, particularly in NH. But overall the exit polls suggest something strange happened.

[mountebank]

158. Ida Briggs seemed pretty convinced that NH was clean....

And she's one of us and was closer to it than anyone else.

[candice]

154. Wasn't there one repug "victory" that was overturned in N.H.?

...at a local level as a result of the recount. Again, the recount was in a few counties with blackbox voting with reports of "irregularities."

[Mandate My Ass]

124. Final? Ya promise? because it's getting

:boring:

[spooked911]

136. There is lots of hard evidence for fraud.

But it's all little pieces here and there which nobody has put together comprehensively nor has any one bit of fraud been investigated thoroughly.

Has anyone looked at the source codes on the machines yet?

Does any one know where Bush got all his new votes from? Who voted for him-- what demographic?

Why were Bush's approval ratings below 50% both before and after the election?

Where were Bush's voters before, during and after the election? It's like they were ghost voters.

Finally-- why the hell should we trust these people?

If you want to move on, fine. But I still strongly suspect fraud.

[righteous1]

138. There are some noteworthy irregularities, but "hard evidence of

fraud" I sure have not seen it. I looked long and hard for it in the Conyers report and it's not there. Do you have any doubt that if that report had been submitted in a court of law that it would not be summarily dimissed? If you do, I have a really cool bridge in New York I'd like you to look at

[spooked911]

146. Of course we would never convince a jury right now

The point is that we are investigators and we have some evidence of a crime along with motive. Now we need to do more investigating and build our case.

The "hard" evidence I was referring to is:
1) votes defaulting to Bush on electronic machines-- many reports,
2) voting machine companies breaking rules in terms of conducting recounts, installing software.

Okay, so maybe it isn't THAT "hard" of evidence. But it is a strong place to start looking further.

Of course, it also depends if you want to include the suppression of African American votes in Ohio as fraud-- or if you want to call it something else.

[righteous1]

151. You wouldn't even get to a jury, wouldn't make it past a judge

[SmokingJacket]

143. Hmmm... do I agree with mostly lurking or with Will Pitt?

Will Pitt!!!

Many, many, many of us now distrust our election system. As many as 20% of Americans doubt Bush won fairly, even though the issue has not been covered by the MSM. That's fucked up!!

That's way too many, and it's because machines have secret software, are owned by partisans, are not subject to auditing, and because blacks were disenfranchised by challengers and long lines and lack of machines, and because exit polls -- the only independent verification system we have -- indicates the other guy won.

Dude... this is wrong. Hard evidence will not be had without an investigation that has access to everything, and maybe not even then.

In France, our friends told us, people vote with a check mark in a box. Cheap, efficient, and hard to cheat with. (Not impossible-- but not easy. Our friends said that when fraud occurs it's usually people voing in the wrong district. )That's what we're after -- WHAT'S WRONG WITH WANTING TO GUARANTEE FAIRNESS?

I want to TRUST that Americans really truly do want the guy who's in the White House. I don't trust that right now, and millions of Americans feel the same way.

[spooked911]

147. Exactly.

The Repubs need to prove to ME that they won fairly for me to believe it.

So far they have been far more secretive than transparent-- and that doesn't inspire faith in the process.

[righteous1]

150. Maybe for you, but for 80% of the American people you are going to

have toprove to them

[Bill Bored]

148. You don't have to agree with the fraudsters to take action!

Read this thread:
<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=264034>

Also, Ohio was not recounted legally, so if there was counting fraud, it may not have been detected. I am not a big exit poll believer. Anyone can paste a bunch of numbers into a spreadsheet and make odds. The exit poll was off mainly because they didn't poll enough Repubs and polled too many Dems in the West. This was the single biggest weighting change in the final adjusted version and it could have put Bush back in the game. If you can prove turnout was NOT equal between the 2 parties, THAT'S you best evidence using these polls, at least as far as the popular vote is concerned. Until then or until Mitofsky comes forward and admits something, forget the exit polls.

Having said that, fraud has not been ruled out by any means!

What we need is verified voting and the Repubs have blocked this at every turn! Read my thread, do something about it, and then you can go back and fix the Democratic party.

[KerryOn]

168. I agree with some of what you are saying..

... but not everything.

First let me say that I live in Ohio. This is the first time I have ever become involved with a political campaign in my life. As a result of my experiences I will continue to volunteer my time to the Democratic party and other organizations. My wife and I together registered dozens of new voters for the democratic party this year. I live in a city that has always gone republican, and there was no sign of voter suppression in our area. Why was there no voter suppression? Because it is made up of republicans and there didn't need to be. I did a comparison of my highly republican city to the 2000 election.

The voter turn out was 7.4% higher than in 2000.
Bush received (5% less) of the total vote than in 2000.
Kerry received 9% votes than Gore did in 2000.
So as you can see, Kerry got EVERY SINGLE NEW VOTER + in 2004.

If you look at most of the Democratic neighborhoods, you will find that the results did not come out like what I have shown above. Why?, because of voter suppression that was targeted at democratic neighbor hoods.

I have no idea if outright computer fraud took place or not, but my hunch is that it did take place in at least a few counties of Ohio. The voter suppression in Ohio was much greater than you may realize. If the thousands of people in Ohio that had the right to vote, could have voted, that alone would have been enough to change the outcome of the election. And I think my example above should prove my point.

You have to understand the problem here. In Ohio (like congress) the republicans have control. The Ohio supreme court justice Moyer is a republican, and he is the one that ruled on the Arnbeck law suite. The first suite filed not only contested the presidential election, but also that of the supreme court justice. Moyer got to throw out a law suite that was contesting his own election!

Blackwell is an SOB, and that is all there is to it. He should not have been allowed to be co-chairman of the Bush campaign and be in charge of the Ohio election. The republicans in the house and senate yesterday said this was OK, because the votes are counted by republicans and Democrats, but they missed the point. Blackwell and Blackwell alone was responsible for the disenfranchisement of thousands of voters.

THE MAIN POINT: It's not just counting the votes, but its making sure everyone that has the right to vote, gets to vote. And Blackwell made dam well sure that that didn't happen.

Take Care

[Bill Bored]

191. You are CORRECT!

I think I will write to the House Judiciary Republicans and tell them they brought the electoral challenge on themselves by not investigating Ohio with the Dems.

[Bill MI]

174. You haven't seen all the evidence.

check out:
<http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19>

Regardless, the system needs to be fixed.

We need to flood the Judiciary Repuglicans with e-mails, letters, and phone calls in order to get them to understand how important this is. They MUST hold FULL investigations with subpeona powers.

<http://judiciary.house.gov/contact.aspx>

The idiots have megaphones, but we have numbers!

The Senate Democrats were cowed, this time by their constituents, into doing what they should have done in 2000. We can't stop now. The Fight has only begun!

[autorank]

178. Hey, Mostly Lurking, my final rant: Take a hike, you lack any sense

of skill at argumentation and the research/evidence to back up your weak arguments is totally lacking.

What IS your movivation?

[Mistwell]

216. MOST.IRONIC.POST.EVER!

I love it. I find this response to be the most ironic response ever.
"Take a hike, you lack any sense of skill at argumentation and the research/evidence to back up your weak arguments is totally lacking."

Hahahaha...sooooo classic. :headbang:

[k8conant]

179. WARNING: it didn't NEED to be said, but you said it, and you're right...

it's a rant. Whether it's your final one, we'll see.

[righteous1]

182. Rant or not, he said what I have been thinking n/t

[steve2470]

183. Where there is smoke, there's fire - a usually reasonable

supposition. Once we get to the bottom of where the smoke is coming from, then we can "give it up".

[mousie]

188. sounds like the typical repub propaganda!

Did you know this site is a favorite place for repubs, they check it daily!

[autorank]

189. mousie, I think your right on target. Very Repuke like.

[saracat]

190. Why do you give Bush the benefit of the doubt?

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

192. Well, I just plain don't get this at all

One of the beautiful things of being involved in politics and in your party is finding your niche. What is your passion? What is your expertise? What holds your interest? What is important to you? One of the beautiful things about the Democratic party is welcoming such diversity of talent and passion.

You said, "... I will now direct my energies toward more productive pursuits designed at winning the next election and not moaning and whining about elections being "stolen."

Well, that's great. You go do that. I'm happy that you've found your niche. Do go forth and find whatever productive pursuits designed at winning the next election you can find.

But bear in mind that some of the people in the Democratic Party are going to investigate election fraud. Some are going to forge ahead with calls for election reform. Election reform, not a bad idea, eh?

You said you came to the conclusion that Bush won. Well, therefore you no longer need to be at this particular forum on D.U. which is looking at the 2004 Election Results. Cool. Pick the forum that fits your needs and passions and talents. Go for it.

But have the decency to consider that YOUR particular conclusion does not make it everyone's.

I'm from Florida. I have reason not to hold absolute faith in this election. I mostly lurk as well.

Tolerance for a wide array of ideas. That's the Democratic Party. If that's not a good fit for you, perhaps you are in the wrong party. Just a thought.

[MissBrooks]

199. Interesting...

I will say this - in 2000, people complained about paper ballots being unreliable - and insisted on electronic voting.
In 2004, we had electronic voting and people complained because there is no paper trail.

So which is it?

I don't understand why people are complaining about the voting process. I think it has worked for many years. It may not be perfect - but it's close.

I would, however, open up a discussion on the validity of the Electoral College in the future. The reasons the country went with one centuries ago are no longer valid.

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

200. Really?

"I will say this - in 2000, people complained about paper ballots being unreliable - and insisted on electronic voting."

They insisted on companies that give huge amounts of money to the Bush campaign designing and implementing machines with no way of verification?

Golly gee, I don't remember hearing anyone insisting on that.

[NationalEnquirer]

210. Why not both?

How about BOTH?!
Electronic machines that leave a paper trail!
I dont know why thats so hard to implement.
The criticisms of BOTH systems are valid.

[No Exit]

208. YOU MEAN LIKE THE REPUBS ARE LETTING WASHINGTON GO?

You mean, the adult, mature way that the Rossi backers are "letting go" of their loss in Washington state's governor's race?

Why don't you get on over to the republicans, and tell them how harmful it is to their party that they just can't get over that Rossi-Gregoire race? In my opinion, your selfless missionary work is needed by them more than it is needed by any democrats.

[nashville_brook]

211. the price of a searing critque is a constructive alternative

i appreciate the level of frustration you express, but i don't see any constructive suggestions or alternatives.

given your belief that Bush won fair and square, your energy *would* be better spent on another forum that looks ahead to 2006. good luck. we need committed folks like yourself working on the next round of elections.

meanwhile, the good folks here are going to continue to make sure the next elections are conducted fairly so your work in the next two years isn't all for naught.

[Niche]

214. F*ck Off. Don't visit if you don't like the company. I

personally don't care about the oppinions of those who keep saying this... Lurk, you move on! I'll keep my delisions... thanks for your rant- I got my own kinda rant going on. And it ain't so kind...

[bardgal]

215. Funny, I've had just the opposite happen - every day I am convinced

more and more Bush lost, and LOST BIG.

[McCamy Taylor]

217. For an alt opinion visit the "We Need a Special Prosecutor Thread" Thread

If we "get over it" how will we nail Blackwell's sorry ass?