What Impedes Election Reform?

[Dover]

http://www.buyingofthepresident.org/index.php/stories/broken_elections_stolen_votes_part_five/

The Buying of The President 2008
http://www.buyingofthepresident.org/

[redqueen]

1. Those who benefit from the laws as they are now. (nt)

[Hydra]

2. Word

Congress rebuffed our request to look into election fraud when Pelosi took the gavel.

Given that everyone in the system right now had to win with it, you can see why they might not want it go back to an actual VOTE.

[redqueen]

3. Yes I can see why criminals like being able to get away with crimes.

x(

[BrklynLiberal]

4. Exactly. The inertia of those entrenched in, and therefore benefit from, the status quo.

[GreenPartyVoter]

6. Yup.

[Overseas]

5. The article isn't very helpful for a discussion of election reform needed.

It talks about limited voter fraud -- the very few cases of alleged false voter registrations or double voting. Takes the more Republican approach.

Didn't see a discussion of the much larger problems of allowing electronic voting machines with no paper trail and great flaws in their security. Didn't see a discussion of what an odd coincidence it was that discrepancies between election results and exit polls favored Democrats almost all the time.

They discuss a couple of Republican techniques -- misleading robocalls and fliers misdirecting voters to the wrong polling places and such -- as very hard to track down.

Also didn't see a discussion of Republicans becoming election officials, able to influence the distribution of voting machines, and how they have just somehow messed up and sent too few into the Democratic precincts.

[Peace Patriot]

7. Your sentence on the exit polls is confusing. The 'official,' TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY

'results'--with the code owned and controlled by rightwing Bushite corporations--favor Republicans (surprise, surprise), while the exit polls favor Democrats. This was most marked in the 2002 and 2004 (s)elections. The corporate exit pollsters have since refused to disclose the real data from the exit polls (the data before it is doctored to conform to the 'TRADE SECRET' results). In 2006, we had the phenomenon of the 'TRADE SECRET' results favoring warmongering, corporatist Democrats in the primaries (the "Blue Dog" Democrats), and (s)electing them in the general election, because they could be counted on to escalate and fund the war, despite SEVENTY PERCENT of the American people opposing the war and wanting it ended, and the Iraq War being THE top issue to the voters in the 2006 (s)elections.

We're looking at a flexible election fraud system, that always has one result: more war.

And Obama's war speech yesterday provided no hope of a change, although "change" is his motto. He's just going to move the endless war to Afghanistan and Pakistan--with a major escalation. You see, the Iraq War will have accomplished its purpose by the time Obama moves some troops to Kuwait to keep watch, and others to fight tribes in Afghanistan and Pakistan that haven't been conquered in 5,000 years. The purpose in Iraq was to install a government that would sign the oil contracts, and agreements for permanent U.S. protection of those contracts. And the Iraqi/U.S. puppet government can't do it, we'll be right back in--with a two front war. And this will go on until the U.S. is totally broken--busted, kaput, fini--with debt and economic collapse. We're looking at a $10 TRILLION deficit already, and we have nothing left--no manufacturing, no jobs--with which to build capital back up, to be looted once again.

Although Obama got his insurgent campaign off the ground in the caucus states--which are NOT COUNTED BY DIEBOLD & BRETHREN--and on the backs of the antiwar movement (money, volunteers), the rest of his primary win occurred on 'TRADE SECRET' code machines. And I think why they (s)elected him, over Clinton, is that he's a smoother, slicker image for this shift in the war profiteer budget. As you might guess, I'm rather in despair about the whole thing. I shouldn't be. I saw it coming. Obama's foreign policy articles told me enough to realize that he is a U.S. imperialist. What that means is the hijacking of our military for global corporate predator purposes. We, the people, won't benefit. Exxon Mobil, Monsanto, Lockheed Martin, DynCorp, Bechtel--that's who benefits, and they long ago ceased giving a crap about the American people. We are just stooges, to them. Obama cares about us to some extent, I think--far more than Bush/Cheney or McCain do (which isn't saying much). For what it's worth, I think we should support him--because of the little sops he'll be giving to the working class and the poor (who are going to be hurting really badly--even more so than now), because he would be less likely to use the nazi boot to repress us (might have a conscience about it), and because it will probably be easier to reform our election system during an Obama administration--something that must be our FIRST PRIORITY.

We do need to vote--again, for what it's worth. If Diebold & brethren decide to (s)elect McCain, we will need an overwhelming landslide just to get an escalated war in Afghanistan/Pakistan, a few sops to the poor, and lighter nazi boots into the White House.

As to reforming our election system--especially as to the 'TRADE SECRET' voting counting--this likely can only be done at the state/local level, where ordinary people still have some influence. Congress is hopelessly corrupt and treasonous on this vital matter. We need a very concerted citizen movement to do it. But it can be done. And it must be done.



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

Election reform resources:

Here is a list of states and their current voting systems, for reference. All e-voting systems are run on TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code. The biggest of these democracy-killing corporations are Diebold (now called Premier), ES&S and Sequoia.
http://electionline.org/Default.aspx?tabid=1099

For an overview of the 2004 election theft, see:
"Was the 2004 Election Stolen?" by Robert Kennedy Jr. 6/1/06
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen
"Secret Vote Counting Crammed Down the Throat of Democracy, " by Michael Collins (DU's Autorank) (--a searing election reform article for New Zealand's Scoop.com)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x971363

Information on electronic voting:
The Princeton study (2006) (e-voting machines extremely hackable)
http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/
(comment on the Princeton study) http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3467
www.votersunite.org (MythBreakers - easy primer on electronic voting--one of the myths is that HAVA requires electronic voting; it does not.)

Activist and informations sites:
www.UScountvotes.org (statistical monitoring of '06 and '08 elections--they need donations)
www.votetrustusa.org (news of this great movement from around the country)
www.votersunite.org (good general info, and state links)
www.verifiedvoting.org (great activist site)
www.solarbus.org/election/index.shtml (fab compendium of all election info)
www.freepress.org (devoted to election reform)
www.bradblog.com (also great, and devoted to election reform)
www.TruthIsAll.net (analysis of the 2004 election) :patriot: :applause: :patriot:

Read this and you will never vote on another electronic voting machine in your life:
"Poll Shock," by Bob Koehler (11/24/05)
http://commonwonders.com/archives/col321.htm

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

:patriot: :think: :woohoo: :think: :patriot:

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

[Liberal In Texas]

8. Elected officials.

It's a Catch 22.

[trof]

9. Professional Politicians.

In the beginning, it was a part-time job.

Guys (exclusively) had businesses, farms/plantations to look after in their day jobs.

The politician job didn't pay all that much.
The perks were few.

Now...it's a career.
Financed by Big Biz.
And it's damned LUCRATIVE.
But you already knew that.
:-(

[ladjf]

10. The cheaters don't want anyone messing up their perfect scam.