Reply #117: Your post is very interesting in that it probably represents the majority

[abester]

opinion of the democratic and republican voters alike. But it is fundamentally flawed. You basically say until someone is actually convicted (or incriminated) there is no crime, no offense, and no wrong-doing, and since that has not happened (or you are aware of), there simply is no large-scale election fraud.

You are correct that the democratic campaign could be better, and that Kerry himself severly bodged it, but despite that there is overwhelming evidence that Kerry won nonetheless. It has been proven, mathematically and in many facets, in fact. Every conspiracy theory, wether correct or not, has a smoking gun. Take the moon hoaxers, for example. The single thing that disproves their thesis we didn't land on the moon are the laser reflectors the astronauts left there which allows earth-based lasers to bounce off a laser beam to measure the distance.

Now the elections. There were tens of thausends of reported glitches and anomalies, all neatly documented and registered. Virtually all of those glitches favoured Bush, which statistically implies faul play over random quirks.

Why it hasn't been covered? The reason is obvious!