I can't shake the feeling that they are up to something

[ariellyn]

I am ecstatic that we won.

But...

Bush's reticent, concilliatory speech right off the bat disturbs me. It's out of character for him and for all Cons.

Bush's 180 turn on Rumsfeld within one week, disturbs me. It occurred to me this morning that it was an attempt to eclipse and be ahead of the inevitable changes due from our newly elected democratic leadership. I think that we will see a lot of attempts to eclipse what our reps will do; when they can't eclipse or take credit, then I expect the media to turn on the mute button. See, people have been saying for years that the Dems haven't done anything, and rightfully so. They couldn't. But now, they can. I don't expect that what they accomplish will be heralded in the right-wing media and I expect nothing but carping and criticism for all that they do.

I am disturbed that every election since 2000 is neck and neck/50-50. We are not a "divided" country. People wanted the crooked Cons out. Yet, the vote margins were miniscule. Yes we won, but even on DU there are posts identifying election fraud. However, because we "won" people will pay less and less attention to the fraud issue. (I even heard Al Franken say yesterday that he does not believe that eVoting machines have been used to steal ANY election) :wtf:.

I am disturbed at the all-or-nothing outcomes of the elections. Either we get 50/50 vote splits or we get the Dems take both the House and the Senate. Does anybody see the contrivance here? I'm no statistician but the probability that in '94 Cons took both bodies and now the Dems take both bodies is not likely. Elections don't work that way IMHO. Radical takeovers don't happen overnight or that sweepingly. I just don't believe that they do anyway. I have two concerns here:

(1) that the takeover was overdue, people voted for this representation in 2004 but their votes were stolen and the takeover would have happened more gradually had votes been counted as they were cast.
(2) For some reason Cons want to hand over control to the Dems now because they have the means to totally control elections in this country IMHO. I believe that they want to let the Dems in for two years and then claim they messed things up to justify another theft on a grand scale in 2008. I believe that they also let Dems win to throw people off the scent of stolen elections--even they know they can't win all the time.

There's more rattling around in my head about the election results but I'll put this out for now. I wanted to see if anybody else feels the same way I do.

[Don_1967]

1. Liberman is

the only person who can screw this up he says he's with us but he could still go over to the repukes . so everbody line up to kiss his ass.

[ariellyn]

4. The fact that control hinges on one person is exactly the kind

of improbable situation that I am referring to. It is impossible to have so many of these type of do-or-die situations happen back to back.

[Ringo84]

2. I wouldn't be so paranoid

I mean, it's possible. But I think we should just accept the fact that we won big. It makes us look bad when we see conspiracy around every corner. No offense. You could be right. But I just don't get that feeling.

It is true that clean elections are vital to the democratic process. I don't think you're a "moonbat"; I just disagree. The Freepers are the moonbats.
Ringo

[fooj]

3. Dean said that one of the first things we are going to do is

ELECTION REFORM! That was music to my ears.

[ariellyn]

5. Music to my ears too. I think if they do nothing else, election reform

for the next two years and the overturn of HAVA would be all that I would want to see.

[Blackthorn]

6. So you're cool with the MCA? That should be front and centre.

I know I'd want my habeas corpus back.

[fooj]

11. Me, too.

I think there are a buncb of *uckups that need to be corrected.

[pretzel4gore]

9. what about the pigmedia?

fact is, the pigmedia is going to use the election to ...to fukk things even worse somehow-and none of the dems is saying anything about them. the media is the most powerful factor in politics, and it's corrupt beyond salvation....

[NanceGreggs]

7. We won because more people voted for Dems than ...

... Republicans.

It's that simple. They did not LET us win. THEY do not control the universe, nor have they ever.

[BeFree]

17. Uhhhh

You're right, in a sense. They saw the uprising against the e-vote. They saw it even on the Nightly News in the week before the elections. There was even a movie based on the subject!

They didn't let us win, that's correct, but the fact is they didn't steal it, did they? They didn't steal the whole thing anyway, but the numbers in some races are still in dispute and fraud looks to be the reason. Fraud and *glitiches*.

The thinking, by those in the know, is that their gig was up if we were to catch them, as we would have had there been wholesale theft. We are hot on their trail and catching them this time with their hands in all the machines would have made even you finally realize what went down in 2004, so they pulled back hoping people will just forget between now and 2008.

But we won't forget, will we?

[TXN in WA]

8. I have to admit

...that I've been thinking about practically everything you
brought up. 

Oh and thanks, DUers, for distracting me just in time for my
organic chemistry test! I'll be lucky if I get a C!

[Ignacio Upton]

10. Well Bush is planning on pretending to move to the "center"

In order to replicate the triangulation sucesses of Clinton after he lost Congress, and of Arnold after he lost his right-wing ballot initiatives were crushed. We can't let him get away with it either.

[KarenS]

12. I agree with the "We won" but I also believe that

these power-crazed SOB's are already plotting & planning their next coup d'etat. Hopefully, next time the voters will not be as gullible.

[Ringo84]

15. Very true, KarenS (nt)

[sadiesworld]

13. The bush/senate immigration reform bill was a non-starter

with a repub house, the party would not have survived its passage. The dems' can now be blamed that for the inevitable passage of that unpopular, wage-killing legislation. Also, the nafta superhighway may finally become newsworthy and responsibility for that too will be placed at the dems' feet. The repubs may not even need to steal the presidency in '08 although the cause of election fraud has been advanced this week as well.

I sure hope the dems have more up their sleeves than a few no-brainers like raising the minimum wage (hell, even bush knew when to hop on a train leaving the station,i.e., the no-call list) and passing the stem cell research bill (another popular bill which has the added benefit of financing research for drug companies).

Unless I see some pretty big changes (or at least full-strength party attempts at change) I'll be calling bs on the whole shebang.

[Life Long Dem]

14. I agree. I have this feeling too.

First thing to know is there are no more tin hats over this admin.

Second is, can anyone trust these guys?

I've been thinking this same thing over the last day. We win this one for 2 years and 08 wipes everything. It's just to quiet for the Repubs.

[Conker]

16. Neck and neck results

"I am disturbed that every election since 2000 is neck and neck/50-50. We are not a "divided" country. People wanted the crooked Cons out. Yet, the vote margins were miniscule."

I found that suspicious, aswell.Was it really that close?

[Peace Patriot]

18. We would be naive fools not to realize that Bushite corporations are now

"counting" all the votes with TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code--code so secret that not even our secretaries of state are permitted to review it. And this, with virtually no audit/recount controls.

DIRECT secret corporate control over election results is the latest outrage in a long history of corporate corruption of our election process, including the filthy campaign contribution system (billions poured right into the pockets of the war profiteering corporate news monopolies for TV ads), and lavish lobbying. This new power--the secret code in electronic voting systems--means that we CANNOT KNOW whether, or by how much, they are changing the will of the voters.

I'm with you, Ariellyn, in strongly suspecting a highly crafted Congress, based on selective tweaks starting way back in the primaries--direct, fraudulent, secret programming tweaks, which, combined with filthy money and other kinds of corruption, remove true left (majorityist) voices from the political discussion and bar them from office. EVEN WITH a Dem majority in Congress, we STILL have a Congress that doesn't even come close to representing the SEVENTY PERCENT of the American people who oppose the Iraq War and other Bush policy, nor the 63% of the American people who oppose torture "under any circumstances," nor the 92% of the American people (in a recent Zogby poll) who want transparent vote counting. I think this Congress has been designed to include a significant component of "Bushite Democrats"--like the ones who voted for torture and suspension of habeas corpus a few weeks ago-- who hold "swing vote" power. It's worst in the Senate, but it's true also in the House. We would be very foolish to believe that elections conducted by Diebold/ES&S are going to produce an end to the Iraq War, or any significant reform--let alone impeachment, which, in typical fashion, the Diebold II Congressional leaders have ALREADY taken "off the table." Some will say they're being cagey. When, in the last six years, has our Dem Party leadership proven itself to be cagey? I think the good Dems like Conyers are being realistic--they know what's what with the election system. This unrepresentative Congress was put together to create something of an illusion of a Dem victory. Too many of the Dems are Dems in name only. And too many of the Dems DON'T CARE if private corporations are "counting" all our votes with "trade secret" programming. They are almost all beholden to those corporations for their power (--even those who would have been elected anyway, with few exceptions). (New York and Oregon and a few other states still have transparent vote counting. All the others do not.)

But I am hopeful for two reasons:

1. That our Corporate Rulers think it necessary to create this illusion of democracy--the illusion of responsiveness to the wishes of SEVENTY PERCENT of the American people. They fear us. They know that their propaganda machine has failed--has miserably failed. Before the invasion--back in Feb. '03--56% of the American people opposed the Iraq War. (That would be a landslide in a presidential election!) Now it's 70%! The great progressive American majority has proven far more savvy and more resilient than they expected. They really can't rule us with puppetry and lies. This Dem Congress is the retrenchment, the fallback position. Mere Corporate Rule (as opposed to Fascist Corporate Rule). And, intermingled in this picture of an awesome, dauntless, relentlessly progressive American electorate, is the rebellion in the military and intelligence establishments, who I think have also been a factor in a pullback from outright fascist rule. We can't expect real reform, but I think we can expect SOME relief for ordinary Americans, for our soldiers and for some of the other victims of this awful regime. That, too, is heartening. But what heartens me most is the American people, who have tried so hard to "read between the lines" and see past the propaganda, and have stubbornly stuck to their progressive views in so many ways. (An example: Something like 50% of the American people still believe that Saddam Hussein had WMDs, and/or had something to do with 9/11. Yet 56% opposed the war before it began. And that's now up to 70%. Think about this. What it means is that many Americans--despite this disinformation rattling around in their heads--have tried to figure out both the level of threat that Iraq posed, and the APPROPRIATE response. And they have disagreed with Bush on both items. To me that says: people are THINKING. Even disinformed people are trying to see through the propaganda, and have succeeded!)

2. The huge increase in Absentee Ballot voting--indicating big voter distrust of the voting machines. I think it's a good base of support with which to create transparent vote counting through pressure on LOCAL election officials to, a) HAND COUNT the Absentee Ballot votes, and b) POST the results BEFORE any electronics are involved. This is a backdoor strategy that circumvents the corruption wrought by the billions of dollars in e-voting contracts (the biggest obstacle to election reform). By this means, we can create a paper ballot system BY DEFAULT--by attrition. If we can win these simple, common sense points for the AB votes--clearly what the AB voters want--it will snowball. AB voting got up to 50%-60% of the vote in some places. This is a REBELLION, and it bodes well for the future. But it does need focus and leadership--which election reform activists could provide, if they will only get on it. I don't have much confidence in the Diebold II Congress to enact real reform. And even if the House tries to, the Senate will gut it. We'll be lucky to get a mandated "paper trail"--and that isn't nearly enough. As long as our elections are being run by private corporations, using "trade secret" code, and in the absence of strong audits (and NO state has that), a "paper trail" is a sop. We have to get the votes COUNTED--BEFORE electronic tallying. And this AB strategy is a means of getting that done BY THE PEOPLE, at the LOCAL level, NOW. It is the only strategy I can see that could work. And, at the least, it IS a strategy! The election reform movement has been awesome at raising public consciousness, but has NOT suggested any strategy for achieving our goal. This is a way to do it. And we must not wait for what may turn out to be a very lame Corporate Congress solution (or worse--some "poison pill" limitation on our local options, such as uniform mandated e-voting "with a paper trail." The so-called "Help America Vote Act," for all its evil, did NOT mandate e-voting; it just funded it with $3.9 billion, in order to corrupt everybody. A typical Tom Delay sort of act. Will the Corporate Dems do worse? We shouldn't wait to find out!).