Should vote fraud and tampering be classified as Treason

[Spinzonner]

since proper administration and counting of votes is fundamental to the very validity of a democratic society.

Might dissuade those inclined to contemplate or engage in it.

Don't think a Constitutional amendment is necessary, probably only a law.

[Joanne98]

1. Yes Vote fraud should be punishable by DEATH!!!!!!!

[Tsiyu]

52. HELL YES

This is goverment BY the people, FOR the people, and OF the people. Anyone tampering with the PEOPLE is a traitor and should be drawn and quartered in the public square.

[codegreen]

2. yes. (though i disagree with that whole death penalty thing)

[bowens43]

3. No.

Treason is clearly spelled out in the Constitution. Vote fraud doesn't meet the criteria.

[Spinzonner]

4. That is an argument as to whether a law is sufficient

but it doesnt state whether it ought to or not, although it suggests you are against it.

Specific reasons ? Are you concerned that it would dilute the significance of the crime and/or open the door to overuse of it ?

[mongo]

5. Katherine Harris should have been prosecuted

for what she did with the voter rolls in the 2000 election. Instead, she gets elected to congress!

WTF is wrong with this country?

[w4rma]

27. big media. (nt)

[loudsue]

49. The bush family mafia n/t

:kick:

[Zorra]

6. Either treason, or it should carry a mandatory sentence of 30 yrs hard

time without parole or possibility of pardon by an elected official.

[Spinzonner]

7. Don't think you can exclude Presidential Pardon

it's an unqualified power of the Presidency in the Constitution. That would require an Amendment.

However, you could exclude parole before the end of the term of incarceration.

[Fair Elections]

8. I wanted to start my own thread

but am unable to do so since this is my first post.

I am very concerned with voter fraud, tampering, and frankly election results that neither side can trust. I will be right up front and let you know that I am a partisan Republican supporter of George W. Bush. I know that I do not belong here and am breaking the rules but I need to reach people like yourselves that are politically involved and passionate about this election. I have no intention of ever posting on any other issue as I respect this as a Democratic forum and have no desire to be a troll.

I, like the vast majority here, have little faith that our elections are fair. The fact that you think that we cheat and we think that you cheat is not the issue. What I believe that we all desire is for all eligible voters to be able to vote once and have those votes counted, and for all ineligible votes to not be allowed to cast a fraudulent vote. I want to be confident that if my side wins we do so fairly and the same if we lose. Right now I do not have faith in that as I know you do not either.

Your concerns include the purging of eligible voters from "felon" lists, intimidation from voting, confusing ballots, duplicate voting, so called "black box" voting etc.

My concerns include ineligible illegal aliens voting, felons voting where prohibited (whether you agree or not this should be up to the states), legitimate military votes not counting because of postmarks that are not reliable, duplicate voting, recounts of chads performed by partisan Democrats, and also "black box" voting. I also want a paper trail. These computers can be hacked by either side and I don't trust them either.

You might dismiss my concerns and I might dismiss yours. The fact is that for a fair election only eligible votes should count once. And nobody who is eligible should be prevented from voting and having it count. And no one who is not an eligible citizen should be able to participate regardless of whose side their on.

Voter fraud is not taken seriously enough in this country. Anyone who votes more then once should be convicted of a crime. As should anyone that casts an illegal vote. There should be no obstacles for eligible voters to vote. Vote counting should be fair. We should all be able to TRUST the results. As it is now no side does.

Can we all agree on these points and perhaps get together? All fair concerns on both sides should be addressed. I want to win or lose fairly and I know you all do too.

[Fair Elections]

9. Vote Fraud

Bump to my own post. I'd love to form an alliance with Democrats for fair elections.

[jmowreader]

25. The biggest voter fraud in American history...

was the 2000 presidential election in Florida.

Over on http://www.democrats.com there is a very detailed list of the seventeen felony-level violations of federal elections law committed by the Republican Party. Let's look at a few:

1. Katherine Harris was the Secretary of State of Florida in November 2000. In this position one must remain officially nonpartisan. Obviously that will never be the case--you'll vote for one candidate or the other--but ideally you're supposed to remain nonpartisan. Katherine Harris was the Florida chair of the Bush campaign during the same election.

2. An organization called ChoicePoint, Inc., was hired to purge the Florida voter rolls of felons who had not had their right to vote reinstated. By some counts as many as 85 percent of the 57,000 names on that list were people who had the same name as a felon, or a name close to that of a felon, and who were not felons at all. However, 90 percent of the names on that list belong to African-Americans--who are very likely to be Democrats.

3. When the Bush campaign had found that it was in vote-count trouble, they sent out an alert to naval vessels at sea: make sure personnel who live in Florida have voted even if it's after the election. These ballots were not postmarked. I am completely in favor of military personnel's votes counting--I voted absentee in five elections. However, I am also adamant that military personnel obey the elections law. If you mark your ballot the day after the election, it should not count.

4. The University of Chicago's school of journalism traveled to Florida after the election was over and exercised their rights under Florida's sunshine law to count the ballots. Their findings: under every scenario in which every legally cast ballot is counted, Gore wins the election. This includes dropping all of the questionable ballots from Palm Beach County and does not mix in potential votes from the ChoicePoint-excluded eligible voters.

I believe Bush is frightened by the possibility of a clean election; he has done so little good for America (and a whole lot of bad) that a clean election will send him back to Texas. That's the problem.

[Fair Elections]

10. Desperate for a response

BUMP

I want to trust the elections results. We need to listen to each others concerns for this to happen!

[951]

11. You should add a poll for this! n/t

[Fair Elections]

14. How do I add a poll?

I'm not even able to start my own thread! Can you do this or are you to "new" too?

Thanks for responding. This is one of the most important issues in my mind.

[Eloriel]

12. Thanks for joining us

That's an amazing post, actually. I hope you get some good responses. And I doubt you'll be evicted (tombstoned) unless you swerve off the straight and narrow on your issue -- altho, your accusations about Democrats cheating won't exactly endear you to folks here. :evilgrin:

[Fair Elections]

16. Thanks!

:hi: I know that my accusations about Democrats cheating will make people mad, but I have to be honest. The fact is we believe you cheat and you believe we cheat. That is why neither side trusts the results.

If we all sit in our separate corners and only address the issues that we think the other side exploits (cheats), we will never solve this problem. The fact is we all must be as concerned with the irregularities that help our side as we are with the ones that hurt us.

I promise to stay on the straight and narrow!

[Eloriel]

23. Yes, both sides cheat

But I'm really persuaded that Dems' cheating occurs more at the local level by local people, small time crooks, as it were. Our concern about Republicans is that theirs is wholesale, and in fact, FL 2000 is a perfect example, as is the story of Chuck Hagel and how he won his Senate seat at least twice on the machines built by a company he'd been CEO of just before his first run, and in which he still has a major financial interest (unless he recently divested, which is unlikely but possible).

However, that whole discussion is probably better left unaddressed here, so we don't trigger you into never never land.

We CAN agree that the cheating must stop, that we MUST HAVE a paper trail, and probably that we need much stronger state laws so that anyone caught and convicted gets more than a slap on the wrist AND that the courts have more to work with to make this happen in the first place.

[Fair Elections]

26. Chuck Hagel!!!

that he may be a cheater for his own election doesn't surprise me. That he employs wholesale cheating on behalf of the Republican party is so laughable to me to a degree that I doubt you could understand. Hagel is the epitome of a disloyal RINO, second only to John McCain (R-Media). I can assure you that I personally distrust any machine owned by a company where Hagel is the CEO just as much, if not more, then you do. He would not lift a finger to help Bush, I'd bet anything he will vote for Kerry.

I've heard the Hagel connection mentioned here before and I've always wanted to respond. Any Hagel connection makes me more uncertain and leery. He is not to be trusted by either side.

We must have a paper trail, and stronger state and federal laws. Every illegal vote cancels out a true legal one. This is a serious crime and should be treated as such. No matter who the benefactor is.

[Eloriel]

31. Uh, winning a U.S. Senate seat that way IS "wholesale cheating"

on behalf of the Republican party -- and his own ass, of course.

[Fair Elections]

38. Not on behalf of my party

but on behalf of himself. Winning a Republican Senate seat in Nebraska is not that difficult.This guy is out for himself only and I despise him, as you can tell. I refuse to take any blame for any benefit this guy might have received through fraud. He's not on my side.

[Eloriel]

42. Sorry, hon

He votes with the Republicans. He sits on that side of the aisle and caucuses with them. His presence on that side of the aisle helps the number count which gives control of the Senate to the Republicans.

I refuse to take any blame for any benefit this guy might have received through fraud.

There was no blame of you personally involved, but even so, you have no choice in one sense. If you're a Republican, you benefit. And beyond that, see my first paragraph.

[Fair Elections]

48. Come on now

There is really no proof that he won by fraud. He is quite popular in NE. I'm sure if it wasn't Hagel a real Republican would hold his seat. Ben Nelson is a DINO fluke.

[Eloriel]

54. Oh, so it's okay since some OTHER Repug would have won

fair and square. I see.

No, of course there's no "proof," but the circumstantial evidence is utterly amazing -- have you looked at it? He won by some 80% including among African Americans? Look it up.

[pinniped]

13. Banishment.

n/t

[Eloriel]

15. No, of course not, for reasons already explained. What IS needed

though are state laws with MUCH more teeth -- or (and I am in favor of this) a Constitutional Amendment granting the Right to Vote.

Again and again the courts are throwing out cases that they shouldn't. Again and again those who ARE found guilty of vote tampering or outright fraud get not much more than a slap on the wrist. So look to your state laws -- I honestly believe that's the NEXT thing we all need to concern ourselves with (and maybe we shouldn't make it "next" but concomitant since we haven't solved the electronic voting issue yet).

[Fair Elections]

17. Not sure about the amendment

Who would it grant the right to vote to? Only citizens I hope. I don't have a problem with convicted felons losing that right just as I believe that most here are not concerned with the other rights they may lose, such as the right to own a firearm (or to fair employment that we all probably care about). I'd prefer to leave that up to the states providing a fair process where they are easily able to petition the right to vote back. Of course if there is such a state law that prevents convicted felons from voting there needs to be a reliable database that does not purge non felons.

I totally agree that convicted vote tamperers are treated with a slap on the wrist. This is wrong. However, as much as I believe we need to address the issue of electronic voting, I do not believe that one is more important then the other. We need to equally emphasize both. Tampering is tampering and we can not ignore any example of it. Let's tackle all of these problems with equal vigor!!

[Eloriel]

24. Are you against practices or laws that disproportionately

disenfranchise certain segments of the population, e.g., races or ethnicities? That's what the felons can't vote law does. One in 4 black men are in prison. Republicans say that's because blacks are more prone to law-breaking (racist on its face), completely ignoring (and camouflaging, distracting from) the fact that our justice system itself is biased against minorities.

People who have served their time USED TO BE CONSIDERED to have fulfilled their responsibility to society. Why do you wish to continue to punish them? Do you not believe people can be rehabilitated? Many aren't (because our approach to incarceration sucks and doesn't promote rehabilitation much any more), but why would those who care enough to actually exercise their franchise be penalized long AFTER they've fulfilled their responsibility to society? (That's one of the things we dislike so much about Republicans -- their penchant for the authoritarian and the punitive.)

[Fair Elections]

30. Good post

I am against any law that disenfranchises poeple based on race, gender, or ethnicity. It is my view that any law that prevents felons from voting is based soley on behavior. I do not believe that our criminal justice system is biased against minorities. The only people that it is biased in favor of is the wealthy. Regardless of race.

Unfortunately there are proportionately more felons in the African-American community. I believe that this is due to issues of class and the breakdown of the family structure then due to race. I do not believe that African-Americans are inherently more prone to law-breaking, which would be racist as you say. I believe that people of all races are humans and equally capable of good and evil. Currently there is a breakdown in some African-American communities where a lack of role models has contributed to more societal disorder.

That is just my conservative unpopular here opinion. Are you as concerned that felons lose their 2nd amendment rights? How about trying to get a good job with a felony on your record? Shouldn't we be as concerned with keeping young African-Americans off the felon roles to begin with and out of the criminal justice system all together?

I do understand your outrage that 1 in 4 Black males are in prison. I do agree that we should look at drug laws. Why is crack worse than coke? That's crazy.

Most felons do not even serve jail time. They simply get probation. The right to vote is lost in only a handful of states. Like I said before even though they have "fulfilled their debt to society" technically, I do not have a problem with the permanent loss of their rights, such as to own a firearm. Do you?

As allows what we are concerned with is what affects us. You care more about felons being disenfranchised because they are more likely to vote your way, I care more about illegals voting twice because they hurt my side.

I want felons who have served their sentences in states that prohibit their voting to be provided with easy and free, fair access to reinstate their rights. Again, this right to vote is only prohibited in a few states and should be up to them. I also want voters to be required to show some sort of reliable ID when they cast a vote to ensure that the dead don't vote and the living only vote once.

I also do not want any electronic voting machines with no paper trail, especially those owned by Chuck Hagel to determine elections. I also do not want confusing butterfly ballots or recounts of chads determined by partisans in partisan voting counties.

We need to understand that all our concerns are of equal importance and should be addresses as such.

[Eloriel]

35. Uh, no.

We need to understand that all our concerns are of equal importance and should be addresses as such.

I disagree primarily because:

You care more about felons being disenfranchised because they are more likely to vote your way, I care more about illegals voting twice because they hurt my side.


I don't believe these problems are equivalent -- I don't believe there are that many "illegals" voting, and certainly not voting twice. I also don't believe that that's purely a Dem "problem," to the extent it's a problem at all. FL has had its share of, shall we say, interesting voting patterns among immigrants, and in fact some of the Cuban population are FAMOUS for vote fraud.

And how dare you accuse me of caring about voting rights of only those who vote "my" way. But I'll take YOUR word for why you're concerned that ex-felons not vote any more than they absolutely have to.

Are you as concerned that felons lose their 2nd amendment rights?

Tell ya what. I promise to be just as outraged as you'd like next time an ex-felon tries to hold up a convenience store at the end of a ballot. 'Kay?

How about trying to get a good job with a felony on your record?

What about it?

Shouldn't we be as concerned with keeping young African-Americans off the felon roles to begin with and out of the criminal justice system all together?

What makes you think I'm/we're not? Speaking of which:
Unfortunately there are proportionately more felons in the African-American community. I believe that this is due to issues of class and the breakdown of the family structure then due to race.

IOW, their fault. Poverty and several hundred years of institutional racism has NOTHING to do with it. I see.

Currently there is a breakdown in some African-American communities where a lack of role models has contributed to more societal disorder.

Oh, you mean like those 1 in 4 black males in prison? No doubt the lack of role models is a contributing factor but I worry that you overstate the case for this one in your own mind. Put another way: decent education and job opportunities (so crime doesn't seem like the best choice for a career? and moms and dads don't have to work 3 jobs so they're never there?)

Most felons do not even serve jail time. They simply get probation.

MOST? You got some stats for that? I'd especially like to see them broken down into race and ethnicity. I can NOT believe over 50% of convicted felons get ONLY probation. And I'm about 110% sure the lucky probationers aren't black or Hispanic or Native American.

I want felons who have served their sentences in states that prohibit their voting to be provided with easy and free, fair access to reinstate their rights.

Well, now we're talking. Why didn't you say so? That's the LEAST that should happen, but I'd be satisfied with that as a start in those states that don't have automatic re-enfranchisement.

[Fair Elections]

44. OK, I see you're mad at me

As we are on different sides of the political spectrum it's unlikely that we would ever agree on what the most important issue regarding voter fraud is. Can we at least agree that whether felons can vote should be up to the individual states? I disagree but at the same time do understand your feelings. How about your side lobbying the respective state legislatures for a change in the law and at the same time respecting the law as it currently stands? If the law in a state such as Florida prohibits felons from voting can you accept that their votes are illegal and just as unworthy of being counted as the Republican fat cat that votes twice? Can we agree to abide by the current laws, whether we like them or not, to the same degree?

Yes it is my contention that illegal aliens, dead people, and duplicate voters are casting far more ineligible Democratic votes then are so called "disenfranchised" Democrats being prevented from voting. Obviously, you believe the opposite.

All I want is FAIR elections that follow the letter of the law. If you believe the law is unfair then you can work to change it. All I want is for all eligible voters to be able to easily vote and have their votes counted once. All ineligible voters under the law, regardless of whether we agree, should be prohibited from voting. All violators should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Can we find common ground here???

[Eloriel]

55. How insulting

For one, AFAIC we've already found common ground. Second, I'm not "mad" at you -- but I'm not going to allow junk to be posted here without addressing it.

Third:

Can we agree to abide by the current laws, whether we like them or not, to the same degree?

What on earth would make you imply that I would be for anything BUT following current law?

Yes it is my contention that illegal aliens, dead people, and duplicate voters are casting far more ineligible Democratic votes then are so called "disenfranchised" Democrats being prevented from voting. Obviously, you believe the opposite.

Tell ya what. You come up with something approximating 90,000 votes IN A SINGLE BATTLEGROUND STATE of people who fit those categories and you might get my attention -- that's the number of people thrown off the roles in FL in 2000, mostly African Americans (and very few Hispancis, btw), most of whom were NOT felons, and Katherine Harris and others knew that going in. They were specifically advised by ChoicePoint that their selection parameters would catch many, many people who were NOT felons, and Katherine Harris said, in effect, Oh, goodie, full speed ahead.

How about your side lobbying the respective state legislatures for a change in the law and at the same time respecting the law as it currently stands?

That's insulting too, or perhaps just deluded. What makes you think I have any control over the petty crooks in the Democratic party? (If I did, Howard Dean would be our nominee.) OR that I would be against such a thing and thus your need to ask? OR that said lobbying isn't happening in various places?

I can't imagine continuing this conversation with you. And it's not that I'm "mad" at you, far from it. It's not personal at all. Just that so much of what you are saying reminds me far too much about everything I dislike about Republicans.

[partygirl]

18. It is all computerized now.

People who vote in multiple places or multiple times are going to get caught. People who are not citizens or are felons and stuff like that are going to get caught. People who register folks who are not qualified to vote are going to get caught.

Hopefully they will be federally prosecuted. I certainly would vote for stiffer penalties. This should be a good issue for Democrats to get behind.

[Fair Elections]

19. It may be computerized

But it's not yet computerized everywhere. Where I live we still have punch cards. And if you think that computerized voting is going to be fair and catch multiple voters, non citizens, felons, etc., no offense intended but I believe you are living in a fantasy world. Do not have so much faith in computers. They are programmed and controlled by fallible, sometimes partisan humans.

I agree with stiff penalties. Unfortunately, it is those already in power that want to keep power that control elections. Both parties are willing to go along in order to keep what they have. Witness congressional gerrymandering.

We all need to rise up and demand fairness in our elections.

[partygirl]

20. I don't mean computerized on the voting

I have always voted on a punch card and will be doing so in November too. This has nothing whatsoever to do with how your voting is mechanically done--by scantron, punchcard, computer--completely and totally different topic all together from what I am talking about.

I am talking about fraud on the voter rolls. Everything is computerized now. So it is going to be caught if people are registered in mutliple locations, or fraudulently registered etc. They are checking right now (there have been several articles about it) and they ARE going to be prosecuting people who are doing deliberate fraud.

And I say thank goodness! I want dishonest people out of the process.

[partygirl]

21. Starting from this year on people who vote in

multiple locations (usually by absentee ballot) and going to be prosectuted and go to federal prison.

Also people who leave dead relatives or pets on the rolls and vote for them....caught!

Oh yes--there are all kinds of tricks but now individual counties and states are sharing their records with each other. Also--computerized records have made it VERY simple to id the people who are casting multiple votes. I think this may be the last year people try to do that.

And I am really glad too. I am straight arrow. We don't need to cheat. I want the cheaters to be caught and punished severely.

[Fair Elections]

22. I hope you are right

but recently there was an article that exposed the enormous number of people registered to vote in FL and NY. There was no follow up or mention of any prosecution. Just because the data is available does not mean that it is treated with the concern or prosecution it demands.

I also recall reading something in I think Missouri where people who voted twice in the last election were exposed and interviewed. The typical comment was something like "well, I live in one area and work in another so I thought that voting in both areas was my right, I'm not in trouble am I?, Ha, ha, ha." I never saw any follow up or arrests. The whole thing was treated like a joke.

Just because it can now be more easily exposed does not equal serious action. Straight arrows like ourselves on both sides need to band together to DEMAND fair elections!!!!!

[partygirl]

28. yes that is true---

but they are definitely looking into it. My parents are very prominent people and they know the attorney general of our state. Apparently in our state, a list has been compiled of people who are on multiple voter rolls. Nothing can be done until they try to vote more than once---but he claims that if they do try to vote more than once they will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

The problem for those who did it in 2000 is that there is a statute of limitations of I think a year on prosecuting it. so even though they knew--no one could do anything. Now--the trap is set.

I am looking forward to some of these sleazy cheaters being caught. I cannot stand cheats.

[rumguy]

29. Disenfranchising voters should be considered a SERIOUS CRIME

What happened in Florida in 2000 was a disgusting display of the repig disdain for democracy.

They privatized the felon list - put a corporation run by repigs in charge of it - and then 'accidently' got it wrong - cheating people out of their vote.

This is WELL DOCUMENTED. The state of Florida settled the NAACP lawsuit.

I've never heard a repig dispute this - and god knows they tried to dispute everything else in F911.

Repigs have no respect for democracy - in fact they HATE democracy. They CAN'T STAND IT when ordinary Americans try and make important public decisions. In fact, this is why they HATE JURIES - they can't stand ordinary Americas having a voice. In their CORRUPTED AND REPTILE minds the only forces who should have a say are corporations and those who fall in line with the corporate agenda.

Is it any wonder they are FAILING SO MISERABLY in trying to bring democracy to Iraq? What the fuck do these scumbags know about democracy?

[Fair Elections]

32. I am a Republican

and I can assure you that I do have respect for Democracy. I do not have a CORRUPTED AND REPTILE mind and I have no love for corporations since they have personally screwed me plenty. I do have a distrust for the jury system simply because of jury consultants and ridiculous questionnaires that seek to disqualify the well read and informed jurors in favor of the most ignorant prone to manipulation ones. If they simply picked the first twelve citizens I'd feel better about the whole system.

I really only wanted to discuss the issue of fair elections here. I was hoping to find some common ground in this most important subject. Let states define who is legal to vote, and let every legal voter have easy and fair access to a vote that counts. At the same time, all those that are ineligible to vote, as defined by that state's legislature, should be barred from voting. All legal voters should only have ONE vote. If they vote twice or try to vote illegally they should be prosecuted with more then a slap on the wrist. That is Democracy to me.

[rumguy]

33. Repig = right wing Republicans

If you're a Republican with a conscience you would condemn what your party did in Florida in 2000.

[Fair Elections]

36. We will never agree on 2000

How would you feel if Republican election officials in Republican counties were holding chads up to the light to determine if they were dimpled so they could be counted for Bush? I cannot even begin to go there with anyone here. We will never agree.

Can we at least agree that 2000 and our whole election system is a travesty that needs to be reformed? Neither side trusts each other which is a good indication that the whole thing stinks.

Can we get beyond the past and work together to wards a system where all eligible voters can vote and have their votes count ONCE, and all ineligible;e voters (determined by the duly elected state legislatures) cannot vote. All those that attempt fraud will be prosecuted as severely as the crime deserves.

Can we agree that electronic voting without a paper trail is untrustworthy and should be outlawed?

I want fair elections too. I speak for the vast majority of Republicans when I say that I love and respect this democracy. Stop demonizing us and let's find common ground to fair elections. May the best ideas, and not cheaters, win!

[rumguy]

37. We can agree on the electronic voting but

I find it interesting that no Republican will come right out and admit that the felon list was a sham...

That felon list...the way it was 'outsourced' to a private company filled with Republicans - and then how they got it SO wrong....

That alone calls into question the validity of the Florida vote - even if you somehow think that it was just an 'accident' (yeah right) - it proves that people got disenfranchised - this has been extensively documented in testimony before congress. If you want an incredibly detailed and damning account of what occurred go read the article about it in the current Vanity Fair.

The Flordia repigs put our democracy in the hands of a shaky, partisan company and the whole country suffered for it. And they would do it again if they could. They'll find other ways to do it.

[Fair Elections]

39. The felon list was so flawed

that not only were non felons disenfranchised, but true ineligible felons were not on the list and did vote. Most of which were registered Democrats that one can only assume voted for Gore. After the election many of these ineligible voters were quoted as voting but I have yet to see the evidence of equal numbers of non voters that it has been determined were not able to vote. Where are the testimonies of these eligible people that were barred from voting? Let's see some actual testimony and names. I never have.

Again, can we please go forward and ensure that future elections are honest and fair and stop arguing about 2000? How about some proof of ID at the polls?

[rumguy]

40. I've never seen any evidence of that

That real felons were not on the list, and that they voted for Gore.

In fact, this is the first time I've ever heard anyone say that.

I would say that most felons knew by law that they couldn't vote, and therefore wouldn't even bother showing up - afterall they wouldn't have known that the list was screwed up beforehand.

[Fair Elections]

45. It was in the newspaper

I believe, but am not positive, that it was the Miami Herald. Anyway, one of the Florida papers published interviews with ineligible felons that had voted in 2000. All that were quoted voted for Gore. They did not know that by law they were ineligible to vote, most anyway. At the time the paper estimated approx numbers of ineligible felons that voted throughout Florida with a percentage upwards of 64 that were Democrats. The number of non felons on the widely quoted list that were prevented from voting stands at zero since I have never seen any testimony of such. I have heard of stories where people where wrongly put on the felon list and given a hard time, but in the end they were all able to vote. I watched all the hearings that the Civil Rights Commission had after the election and they were a joke. People had legitimate gripes but were ALL able to vote in the end.

[Fair Elections]

47. Here's your evidence

The best I could do was find a reprint of the Miami Herald article posted on a conservative website. Here you go:



Hundreds of felons cast votes illegally
BY DAVID KIDWELL, PHIL LONG AND GEOFF DOUGHERTY
[e-mail]

At least 445 Florida felons voted illegally on Nov. 7, casting another cloud over a disputed presidential election already mired in legal challenges, a Herald investigation has found.

The tainted votes -- found in a review of nearly half a million votes cast in 12 Florida counties -- provide evidence that the presidential race was influenced by thousands of ineligible voters. Nearly six million voters in Florida's 67 counties cast ballots.

They also point out the failure of Florida's multimillion-dollar effort to prevent election fraud by eliminating dead and illegal voters from the registration rolls.

``This just goes to show that the most expensive voting equipment in the world is worthless when the voting rolls are that filthy,'' said Deborah Phillips, president of the nonprofit Voting Integrity Project in Arlington, Va. ``It's just an invitation to lower the integrity of the election.''

TWO KEY COUNTIES

The majority of the illegal votes -- 330 -- were cast in Palm Beach and Duval counties, which decided not to participate in the statewide effort this year to purge felons, dead people and double registrants from the rolls.

Elections supervisors in those counties argue the state database compiled by the Florida Division of Elections, at a price of $4 million, was peppered with errors and mismatches.

Even so, most other counties -- including Miami-Dade and Broward -- used it to scrub thousands of ineligible voters from the rolls, as required by state law.


LEGAL CHALLENGES

The lapses in Palm Beach and Duval counties could become significant if Democrats win any of their legal challenges and take the narrow lead away from Republican Texas Gov. George W. Bush. Nearly 75 percent of the illegal ballots discovered by The Herald were cast by registered Democrats.

The votes could be seized upon by the Bush campaign to argue that a large number of illegal votes were probably cast for his opponent, outweighing the effect of any recount.

``It's a very powerful argument,'' said Robert Jarvis, a law professor at Nova Southeastern University.

Since 1868, it has been illegal for felons to cast ballots in Florida, one of 14 states with an arduous paperwork process for felons to have their rights restored. The provision has prompted a federal lawsuit by civil rights groups who allege it is discriminatory against blacks.

The Herald found 62 robbers, 56 drug dealers, 45 killers, 16 rapists and seven kidnappers who cast ballots. At least two who voted are pictured on the state's online registry of sexual offenders.


'TON OF US'

``There are a ton of us out there,'' said William Herman, 37, of Lake Worth, sentenced to five years in prison in 1989 for negligent homicide with a motor vehicle. ``It shouldn't be that way, but when they give you a voter registration card, hey, what are you supposed to do?

Clarence Eden Williams, 77, of Pahokee, also voted. His picture is posted on the state registry of sexual offenders for his crimes against children. His son was surprised his father cast a ballot.

``He's got Alzheimer's, and he can't even carry on a conversation anymore,'' said Clarence Williams III.

The Herald review included counties where voter lists could be obtained -- about 8 percent of the 5.9 million votes cast on Nov. 7. It encompassed all votes cast in Palm Beach and Pasco counties, most votes cast in Duval County, and only absentee votes in Miami-Dade, Broward, Lee, Leon, Hillsborough, Clay and the Panhandle counties of Escambia, Okaloosa and Bay.


FINDING FELONS

To find felony voters, The Herald compared a list of voters in those counties with a Department of Corrections database listing felons who had served at least a year in prison. If the pattern found in the study is the same statewide, more than 5,000 felons likely cast illegal ballots.

Duval County had the highest turnout among convicted felons with at least 235 voting illegally.

Elections Supervisor John Stafford, like several other elections officials, said he didn't trust a purge list provided by the state Elections Division in Tallahasse.

``We weren't going to take that chance and delete everybody,'' said John Stafford, Duval's election supervisor. ``We'd have been in a world of trouble. It is almost a joke because there are so many errors in it.''

In fact, one of Stafford's employees found her husband's name on the list of felons by mistake, she said.

Stafford said his office sent out a letter to felons identified on the state database, and were inundated by telephone calls from irate residents -- some who said they had been misidentified as felons and others angry they'd been disenfranchised over decades-old crimes.
```We're talking about a crime when I was 19,'' said Theron McDaniel, of Jacksonville, convicted of dealing in stolen property in 1977. ``I'm 42 years old and they're still holding that over me?

``As a matter of fact I'm a deacon in my church,'' he said. ``I don't know anybody who's perfect in this life.''


PURGE IGNORED

Palm Beach County Elections Supervisor Theresa LePore ignored the state purge list after a well-publicized error that mistakenly identified thousands of Floridians guilty of misdemeanors as having felony convictions. She declined comment for this article.

Herald staff writers William Yardley, Sara Olkon, Jason Grotto and Tina Cummings contributed to this report



Do you find none of this disturbing?

[rumguy]

50. What I find more distrubing is people not being able to vote

The number of disenfranchised black voters is far more than these few felons that were allowed to vote.

At least our counts err on the side of allowing people to vote. Personally I think once someone serves their time they should be allowed to vote. But then again, I'm not a cold heartless fuckface who gets off on punishing people for as long as possible.

And you say that congressional testimony was a joke? Have you even read it - the testimony was compelling and credible. The state of Florida settled the case over this issue - they knew challenging the merits of what was alleged was next to impossible.

[rumguy]

34. As for your jury argument

Most trials have no jury consultants or those extensive questionaries - and in those trials that do employ them - most often both sides use them - in other words - both sides get a say in who gets on that jury.

Trust me - YOU DO NOT WANT THE FIRST TWELVE SITTING ON THAT JURY. Each side gets to question the potential jurors, and each side gets preemptory strikes to remove potentially biased jurors. That's how the system works, and it is the best possible system to arrive at the truth. Is it perfect? No. But it's a hellava a lot better than letting politically-connected judges make these important decisions.

You disparage jurors - that to me indicates to me that you don't give a rat's ass about democracy.

[Fair Elections]

41. I do not disparage jurors

I am leery of biased sides determining who they perceive as potentially biased. I am aware that most trials do not have jury consultants, but are you aware that their tactics are well known and now widely used?

The system is NOT about arriving at the truth. If only it were. You are living on Fantasy Island if you believe that. It is not the "best possible system" and has vast room for improvement.

[rumguy]

43. It's called an adversarial system

Each side gets to question jurors - each side gets preemptory strikes.
The system is fundamentally fair.

The best way to arrive at the truth is to have each side present their arguments and then let the jury sort it out. Is the absolute truth always arrived at? Of course it isn't - but the jury system is the best hope we have of getting closest to the truth.

Letting judges decide these important public issues IS NOT THE ANSWER. After listening to what repigs say about juries I can only surmise they want them completely abolished - I'm sure most wouldn't come right out and say it - but I have no doubt that many would be in favor of doing so if they could.

Repigs HATE JURIES because juries give ordinary people a say in important public decisions.

[Fair Elections]

46. You have no idea what Republicans think

about juries or anything else. You don't listen just call us "Repigs" like we are subhuman idiots incapable of rational thought because we don't agree with you. I can't even have any rational discourse with you because you are determined to put words and thoughts into our minds and label us as evil. You are so wrong in your determinations it is ludicrous. I do not want to abolish the current jury system and let judges decide, I simply do not believe that it is a search for the truth and that no reform is needed.

Stop demonizing your opponents, that is a losing position. There are good and thoughtful people on both sides. We are not evil simply because we disagree. Keep thinking we are and you will be out of political control for decades.

Can we get back to fair elections please?

[rumguy]

51. I know what Repigs think - I can listen to Rush Limbaugh

or go to FR to find out what the repigs are squealing about.

And they HATE juries. They do nothing but heap scorn on the system and deride it. Of course they cherry-pick their cases to publicize - and even those they out and outright lie about. Did you know that the notorious coffee-cup case that repigs squeal about like STUCK PIGS was nothing like they way they portray it? The elderly woman's name was Stella Liebeck - she was a Republican actually, and she got extensive third degree burns on her thighs and even went into shock - scientific evidence, undisputed at trial showed that this happened within a matter of seconds - she spent a lot of time in the hospital, had to get skin grafts - and wracked up a lot of bills.

She tried to write McDonald's to find out why the coffee was so insanely hot - she asked for like $20,000 to help pay her medical bills. McDonald's blew her off. She got a lawyer, they sued. They tried to settle for a small amount several times - McDonald's treated them like shit. Finally it went to court. McDonald's lost because evidence came out from internal memos that they knew the coffee was hot enough to cause severe burns and that it had happened in the past and they had done nothing.

The jury members interviewed afterwards said they were skeptical of the case - but that the evidence was overwhelming that McDonald's had ignored evidence that their coffee was way to hot - and the cups they were handing the coffee in were flimsy. In addition, the lawyers and execs. for McDonald's treated Stella Liebeck like shit in the courtroom - that's another reason they lost.

To compensate Stella and to send a message to McDonald's they jury decided on an amount that was equal to just ONE DAY'S WORTH OF COFFEE PROFITS. And this amount was reduced on appeal.

And in the end McDonald's did end up reducing the temperature of their coffee - and you don't know if you noticed but it is still damn hot - but it at least won't cause third degree burns within seconds.

So when repigs whine about juries I ask them to get specific. All you mentioned were jury consultants, etc...

Well what is the problem - really it comes down to making it harder to get a jury trial - that's what repigs and their corporate whore masters are trying to do with binding arbitration clauses - because THEY HATE JURIES.

And then they want to remove from the jury the ability to send a message to large corporations by removing punitive damages.

That's what this is all about - repigs don't care about truth - they care about protecting their corporate whore-masters.

FUCK REPIGS! THEY LIED ABOUT STELLA LIEBECK AND THEY LIE ABOUT EVERYTHING!

[Maleficus]

53. Yes, I think it should.