The Maryland Miracle or killing our democracy one state at a time.

[Botany]

Originally posted by Miss Weaverly but I had never seen these #s.

maryland results

"Kerry won with 1,334,493, 1,340,778 registered dems voted
Bush 1,024,703 733,643 81.37 of registered republicans
where did Bush get those votes from the Greens???? or maybe the
Independents???"

So * picked up 291,060 votes and Kerry got about 4,000?

[chomskysright]

1. I sent it to an interested MD person and put it in my files....for fodder

THANKS.

[MissWaverly]

2. these numbers are real

I got them from our state of Maryland web site, and botany gets a big
salute from me for posting the numbers here!

Miss Waverly




http://www.elections.state.md.us/SBE_Election/turnout/turnout2.html
:dem:

[leyton]

3. Can you say what number refers to what?

I can't understand your post.

[Botany]

4. It means

That Kerry got about 4,000 more votes than registered democrats who voted

but Bush got 291,060 more votes than registered republicans that voted.

It is the footprint of vote migration that is unexplainable. i.e. * cheated
and not just in Ohio.

[MissWaverly]

5. More facts

In Baltimore, MD

Republican candidate for mayor rec'd 22,872 votes 12.26%

In Baltimore County, MD
there were 1,089 blank votes for president
Bush rec'd 46.98% of the vote with 166,051 votes
Republican for Senate rec'd 35.75% of vote with 124,092
Republican for House Rep. rec'd 31.44% of vote with 46,236
and 7,498 people voted at the top of the ballot on Diebold machines
but didn't vote for anything else on the ballot.
With a mandate here, and a mandate there, here a mandate there
a mandate, whooah!

[stickdog]

6. kick (nt)

[DaveinMD]

7. not all registered Dems vote Dem

there are a lot of dixiecrats in Maryland. Especially on the Eastern Shore and in Southern Maryland.

[MissWaverly]

9. Yes, and not all Republicans vote Republican

Look at the facts

Kerry rec'd 1,334,493 in the entire state of Maryland
the most likely source is from registered Dems,
so there were 1,340,798 registered Dem voters in all of Maryland
so when I divided 1,334,493 by the no. of dems = 99.5%
so if 99.5% of ALL dems voted for Kerry
then where did George get 1,024,703 votes when
there were only 733,643 or 81.37% of the registered republicans voting in the entire state of Maryland
the only possibility was from the Greens and Independents
which I don't believe because the other Republicans challengers
rec'd from 12.26%, 31.44%, 35.75% in Baltimore County and Baltimore City

[DaveinMD]

13. Kerry's margin

was pretty much in line with how Gore did 4 years earlier.

[MissWaverly]

19. I just went on the web site for Maryland

Baltimore City is shown as only having a 70% voter turnout on November 2nd, 2004, the lowest turnout in the state. That did not
happen, my precinct was jammed yet only 944 votes were shown.

[DaveinMD]

20. when did you go to vote

I worked the polls all day at a very Democratic precinct. It was packed in the morning rush and sporadic in what is typically the evening rush. Kerry got just about the same percentage as Gore. Nothing fishy happened in Maryland.

[MissWaverly]

21. Dave, I am not talking about Kerry

I am talking about the 1 million+ votes for GWB that came out of nowhere, if it happened here, it happened other places.

[DaveinMD]

22. it seems that

the margin just wasn't that different. I still need to be convinced on this one.

[MissWaverly]

24. what I saw

if 99.5% of the democrats voted for Kerry
and there were
733,643 Republicans who voted (only 81% of all Registered Republicans voted)

then how did Bush get
1,024,703 votes

I waited 2 hours to vote, my precint was jam packed all day,
the machine shows only 944 votes, The Baltimore City Board of Elections will not release the
numbers from the poll book, the State of Maryland shows Baltimore
City with only 70% voter turnout the lowest in the State.
I personally saw the machine I voted on default to GWB 5 times.
If you don't believe me watch Votergate, you will see it happen there
on the same machine I voted on in Baltimore City.

The 2004 election results for the general election have been
scrubbed from the City of Baltimore Board of Elections site.

That's what I saw, maybe you see something different.

[AP]

11. A look at 2000, '96, '92... would prove whether '04 was an anomally.

[ticapnews]

25. previous election results....

Maryland, 2000:

Gore
1,093,344 57% 10

Bush
770,911 40% 0

Nader
51,078 3% 0

Browne
4,992 0% 0

Buchanan
4,067 0% 0

Phillips
864 0% 0

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

27. Stop saying rational things.

In the context of this "discussion" it's completely unwarranted.

[orpupilofnature57]

8. Kkkarl, found a way to franchise fraud.

When he made " LOCK BOX " sound ludicrous.

[MissWaverly]

10. It has to be rigged from start to finish

I am 52 and I have never seen such widespread corruption on every level of government, it's like they know that they can't lose, it ranges from cheating the Indians, to investing monies for injured workers in "rare" coins that are so rare no one can find them to outright lying about Iraq and then invading it. It's pathetic.

[Botany]

12. The face of evil is running the govt.

These guys make the mafia look small time. They own so much of the
media and with huge money backing them they do what ever they want.
Hell nationally known professors at the University of Michigan, MIT, and
Cal Tech publish papers saying that the election was fine it was just
those darn exit polls. Fucking whores they must know the truth or are
being deliberately obtuse. The U of M prof wrote that early release of
the exit poll data caused all the problems with the "bad exit polls."
After I read his paper I had to shower to rid myself of the dirty feeling.
Who is paying him for that crap?

We need to

1 Expose the election fraud and rub people's noses in it.
2 Get verifiable voting w/ paper trials and no back doors into
the central tabulators or hidden source codes
3 In '06 link any all repugs to bush, his war, and the economy
4 Demand some spine in our leadership
5 Never stop fighting and speaking the truth

:patriot:

[Stinky The Clown]

14. compared to them, the mafia **is** small time

[VoiceOfFreedom]

15. Well............

What we need is a massive rising of people in the streets. We need the days of million-man marches to return again. THAT would get the attention of the shadow government that rules over us. Oh wait, there are a few little problems that I've covered in my previous posts. For those of you who still in the blissful ignorance the media has imposed upon us. The masses are too opiated on a mass-media(that's why mass-media is called that way.) that is in the back pocket of a military which is becoming increasingly isolated from the people and the constitution it was sworn to defend. The same military is controlled by Reich-Wingers in all levels of government who are in turn beholden to the defense contractors that put them in office. Pretty big problems to surmount you'd think. "How do we rise against such a Juggernaut of oppression?" you'd think. What needs to be done is that somehow (violence included so we can FINALLY get rid of all those clone/lookalike newscasters) the People of America need to take back their media from those who rule from the shadows in the halls of power with impunity. To show the truth to the people with the very technology used to keep us in ignorance and slavery. To show those in power that they can NEVER TAKE OUR GOD-GIVEN FREEDOM!!! And THAT is what is needed to bring about change so that ALL may be "FREE AT LAST".

[VoiceOfFreedom]

17. look..................

I really don't like violence and don't condone it in MOST cases. That's why I have Ghandaji as my avatar. But Newscasters that parrot the administration all the day long and look like each other just piss me off, and I want them all to die horrible deaths by way of smallpox or amoebic dysentary!!!

[snowbear]

16. What if...

What if someone on the inside.. someone who actually manipulated these machines.. stepped up and provided the proof to the world of what they did.

Would the media listen? :shrug:

Would it be taken seriously if there was hardcore evidence? :shrug:

Wondering what the thoughts are on that?

[VoiceOfFreedom]

18. Well............

Well......... That person would be a hero in my book and all other Free-thinkers in america and the world. The same person would be regarded as a traitor by his/her reich-winger comrades and dispatched dishonorably by the shadow-government before his/her transmission had elapsed 30 seconds. The media wouldn't listen because they would just throw together some bullshit story about how he/she was insane as a way to disprove the evidence provided and the herd of america that wants to be "politically correct" would just do what their "need to know network" would tell them to do and just forget it ever happened, Like with how Bush Stole the 2000 election.

[carpetbagger]

23. It was independents, conserv. dems, and people between.

An interesting result from CNN's exit polling showed a higher number of self-identified independents than what the elections board showed. I think that means that the final shakedown is going on in the democratic ranks in Maryland.

so Bush got a little more than 1 million votes. Let's say he carried 90% of his own party. That makes 660k. He takes 1/3 of the independents, giving him 760k. that leaves him needing 260k. That's only 20% of the democratic pile. If he takes 1/2 of the independents (which is what the exit polls had him at), he only needs 200K democratic votes.

I think Bush taking 20% of the registered democratic vote is quite probable in Maryland. Although Maryland is mostly a northeastern state, it's got three pockets of republican strength. Western Maryland votes conservatively, and it's not surprising that Bush carried significant numbers of registered democrats. He carried West Virignia. I think the exurban areas are a wash for him vis-a-vis party affiliation, since most of the republicans have already registered as such. The Eastern Shore also gives him signficant votes. The rural areas make up about 25% of Maryland's population, so if you figure he carried 10% of the democratic vote in the BW corridor, which might be low given terra terra terra, and give him, say 40% of the independents, he'd need about 40% of the democratic vote in the two rural areas to get what he got. Remember, exit polls in WV had him at 30% of democrats, and I suspect that those results are also skewed with some registered dems calling themselves independents. If he carried 50% of the independents, which is what the exit polls had him at, a 30% dem vote in the rural areas, 10% in the BW corridor, and 90% of dems would do it.

[mikelewis]

26. New Registered Voters and old voters...

In your state, you had 370,311 new registered voters.

In 2000 you had...
1,145,782 for Gore
813,797 for Bush

In 2004 you had...
1,334,493 for Kerry
1,024,703 For Bush

Net Gain
Dem 188,711
Rep 210,906

This equates into a gain of 399,617 votes for both parties combined. You would had to have some major party lines being crossed to produce these results. Nearly 30,000 past voters who voted for the Democrat candidate would have had to have voted with Bush in addition to all of the new registrants. It appears as if you do have a problem in Maryland.

[MissWaverly]

28. thank you for input

I believe that we do have a problem in Maryland,

I think that Bush pulled in the same amount of votes as he did in 2000, which was not a million votes, I think the total was then adjusted, that's what I object to, one voter = 1 vote, should be what it is, no adjustments