What if?

[Tab]

John Zogby (pollster) says he hasn't seen such turnover numbers ever. 70% disapprove of what's going on. The Republicans are due for a rout. http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artikkel?Avis=C4&Dato=20060602&Kategori=NEWS11&Lopenr=60602016&Ref=AR&template=printart

At the same time, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., is going public with what many of us have suspected - what could kindly be called "shenanigans", or perhaps more accurately called "voter fraud" was the main instrument for Bush securing office for a second term (if not the first as well). http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

If 70% truly disapprove, and we are looking at a rout, what will happen if Republicans "magically" win over the voters? Will we accept the results? Will we contend?

Because I fear if we roll over on the next one, there's no coming back.

[villager]

1. "We don't roll over"-- Karl Rove

n/t

[driver8]

6. Then why don't you "bend over"?

Make it easy on yourself, KKKarl...

Sorry excuse for a human being.

[villager]

7. him, maybe. Not us. Let's be as willing to fight as the dark side is...

n/t

[KaryninMiami]

2. And they would rig it again in a heartbeat. Without question.

Read "Fooled Again" by Mark Crispin Miller. That's why we all need to demand a change. Robert Kennedy's piece is remarkable because it's the first piece that puts it all together and because of who he is, it has made it in less then 24 hours. to the corporate mainstream media- MSNBC and CNN. I pray that we have begun to turn a corner here. Otherwise, you are correct. There's no coming back if we let them do this again in 06.

[fooj]

3. I was just talking about this today...

it'll be interesting to see how the American public will react to it all if they steal it AGAIN. With these types of numbers, how will the Repubs be able to explain it? Stay tuned......

[SheilaT]

4. Already a lot of people who ought to know better

have been bamboozled into thinking that all polls are very unreliable, especially exit polls. And in a way they're right, because recent elections have turned out rather differently from what polls, including exit polls, said would be the results.

I don't recall John Zogby ever really explaining why he apparently got it so wrong in '04, other than some lame excuse about the margin of error.

Two years ago I ran for the Kansas State House, a Democrat (the wrong party here) against a popular moderate incumbent Republican. I lost, no surprise, and there's nothing at all suspicious about the ultimate results. I got 34%, just about exactly what would be expected. However, I had observers in all of my precincts at the close of polling, so I could get the results immediately -- to help soften the blow, quite honestly. In this part of Kansas we have Diebold machines, and approximately half of them could not be read at the polling stations. Half. That's astonishing. The results I did get quite closely matched the final results, and I have no reason whatsoever to believe that the votes in my race were in any way tampered with. There was no need to do so, quite frankly. And I don't believe that thee was any reason to steal votes for Bush, not here in Kansas. But the essential point, that the machines were quite unreliable and couldn't give results when they were supposed to remains quite troublesome.

Indeed, all it's going to take is stealing a few votes in a small number of key precincts to do the job. And one of these days they'll figure that out, and not do the kind of crude things they did in 2004. With no good outside observers, with public confidence in exit polls almost non-existent, we'll be treated to many more years' later analysis (like the RFK one or the Mark Crispin Miller book) showing once again how the election was stolen. Only maybe no one will care any more.

[FantasticFlan]

5. No

If we roll over in your hypothetical, revolution would be the only way left to set America right again.