2006 will not be our salvation - they CONTROL the voting machines

[debbierlus]

I truly don't get it. We have had TWO Presidential elections STOLEN. Rigged. Fixed. How many congressional race & senate races? Who knows?

Why on earth would anyone believe that the Republicans won't fix the elections, AGAIN? They stand to not only lose power, but face CRIMINAL charges. Why would they stop now? Bush stands to face impeachment and criminal prosecution.

People say - The American people wouldn't tolerate it. B.S. What are the American people going to do. The majority of the population doesn't even believe election fraud EXISTS! 2006 may serve as a wake-up call, but don't expect mass protests in the streets. Fascist dictatorships don't ALLOW the people to choose their leaders. I think people here need to wake up that we still have some kind of legitimate voting system. We don't.

I have suggested several times organizing on this board to form local education groups on the problem of voter fraud & push for a national campaign through Move On, but I received very little interest and feedback on the idea.

This is not a problem that will be resolved with e-mails or on-line petitions. This is a problem that needs local grass roots education stemming from a national movement. This is going to be a very long journey to wrench power away from these tyrants. 2006, at best, will be an education.

[pola]

1. you are so right

I thought Conyers and other national voting groups were working overtime on election reform.. I don't understand how so many voters groups could be working on election reform, and nothing happens ?????

[Trevelyan]

26. Because Conyers and the others can't do it alone -- they need our help

Brad has an excellent article on the Alaska voting fraud and the beginning of coverage by the MSM on DU front page and on Bradblog front page.

"Kicking like a Rockette." "Diebold waived proprietary rights"

http://www.bradblog.com/ "...The complete letters from Alaska's Division of Elections Director Whitney Brewster and Chief Security Officer Darrell Davis are both available in full here .

The earlier twists in this strange tale occurred first in January and then in early February.

In late January, we reported that the state had refused to release the Election Data Files on the grounds that their contract with Diebold disallowed the release of the files. Their contract, apparently, recognizes the voter information to be a "company secret" and thus the proprietary property of the company which could not be released to the voters of Alaska.

A week or so later, in early Februrary we reported that the state and Diebold had capitulated. Sort of. After conferring with Diebold, the state relented and agreed to release the files. However, they reserved the right to -- sit down for this -- "manipulate the data" in consultation with Diebold before releasing them!...No word yet on whether the Alaska Democratic Party will take the matter to court to seek resolution.

The American War on Democracy continues..."

AP: 100,000 ERRORS REPORTED ON SEQUOIA VOTING MACHINES IN PALM BEACH, FL 2004 ELECTION! Audit Shows Electronic Voting in Disarray, Thousands of Re-boots, Re-Calibrations Required Throughout Election
PLUS: 'Butterfly' LePore is Back!

[barbaraann]

2. I searched for "voting machines" on the DNC website.

http://dnc.org/cgi-bin/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=1&search=voting+machines&x=0&y=0

Should we just give up? :-(

[nofoil]

61. no, check out VoteTrustUSA

www.votetrustusa.org

Reassuring stuff!

[barbaraann]

111. Thank you.

:hi:

[cali]

3. We'll see.

I believe 2000 was stolen- by the SC. There was undoubtedly repub machine fixing in 2004. Whether it was enough to change results, I just don't know. I think you're wrong about this year. If dems don't blow it, I think we'll win back Senate and House seats.

[bpilgrim]

5. keep your fingers crossed

hasn't gotten us very far

peace

[EFerrari]

19. It doesn't matter if the Dems blow it because the Thugs own

the machines.

The only way for the Dems to "blow it" is in continuing to ignore this situation.

[Talismom]

58. I totally agree and can't think of what to do about it until more people

believe it and get angry enough to organize and demand the necessary changes.

[EFerrari]

70. The Thugs are in a rush to put in machines because they know

that the longer we have to scrutinize them, the more and more obvious problems will be found.

There is a lot going on right now, a lot of people working hard, and every day more people really are "getting it". :)

[femrap]

78. Yep..

There's some good news in Ohio (of all places) though....We have a new Chair of the ODP and a new Vice Chair.....and they get it! They believe that the elections in Ohio in the past have been DIRTY! And they plan to combat this.

Also, Jennifer Brunner, who is running for Ohio SOS realizes it as well....she is an EXPERT in Election Law...she will be helping us to set up safeguards.

That's half the battle.....getting people to realize the Truth.

So I am encouraged.

I just wonder what states Rove has decided to focus on in '06....any ideas?

[xxqqqzme]

85. we have a smart woman running

for SoS here in California as well but steroid boy and his hand-picked rethug SoS have control of the machines...Debra Bowen along w/ Ohio's Brunner have 2 B elected first which I don't C happening as long as the gov & SoS control the machines.

[EFerrari]

134. Time for good news for and from OHIO!

:toast:

[mzmolly]

45. I agree fully.

:hi:

[ladjf]

4. I believe that you are 100 percent correct. However, I can't

get a "handle" on how the masses are going to be able to achieve enough leadership roles to be able to take over the election process at the county level. The fact that most people don't even believe that election fraud is the primary problems clearly shows the level of denial. I can't help but be pessimistic about the chances of rectifying the terrible problem.

Several Latin American Countries are making real progress in establishing governments that favor the majority of the people. How did they do it? They had the crooked election problem.

President Carter said that the 2004 election in the U.S. could not have been verified by any reasonable standards of open voting process.

The bottom line is the too many Americans have gone into some sort of psychiatric or pathological "trance" rendering them incapable of objective thinking. What has happened to our people?

[EFerrari]

20. Election fraud doesn't have to be proven. Transparency does.

This is an issue that most people can get behind if it's put to them clearly.

Arguing the stolen elections doesn't get us far.

Arguing that our elections should be clean, transparent and recountable does.

[SmokingJacket]

55. Well put. nt

[RagingInMiami]

6. I agree

It's an issue that is barely being addressed right now. Diebold is getting certified in states throughout the country as we speak. We will wake up to a rude awakening after Election Day this year.

So why does anybody bother getting their hopes up?

What was it that Bush said, "fool me once .....won't get fooled again?"

IT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED NOW.

[bobbieinok]

108. AND isn't fed govt threatening big $$ penalties if states don't have

machines by a certain date??????

[shanti]

7. you must not have been on DU

when the black box voting issue was being hotly discussed. many of us feel that this was and still is a huge issue. however, after bev smith left here, it seems the ball was dropped.....or was it?

[mopinko]

10. it's bev harris, and

she did more harm to the movement than good.

[shanti]

43. my bad

harris, smith, wth;) and yes i know all about her hijinks, just saying......we HAVE researched this issue in depth previously.

peace

[Virginian]

105. Sign up to work the polls

At least that way, you will be one of the officials and be able to keep an eye on the process.

[phusion]

8. K&R

Thank you.

[goodboy]

9. Voter Verified Paper Ballots. Voter Verified Paper Ballots

Voter Verified Paper Ballots. Voter Verified Paper Ballots
Voter Verified Paper Ballots. Voter Verified Paper Ballots
Voter Verified Paper Ballots. Voter Verified Paper Ballots
Voter Verified Paper Ballots. Voter Verified Paper Ballots
Voter Verified Paper Ballots. Voter Verified Paper Ballots
Voter Verified Paper Ballots. Voter Verified Paper Ballots
Voter Verified Paper Ballots. Voter Verified Paper Ballots
Voter Verified Paper Ballots. Voter Verified Paper Ballots

Doesn't matter what machine, Doesn't matter how they're counted.

[phusion]

13. Seems like a simple request, doesn't it?

:(

[goodboy]

44. that's why I ALWAYS vote with an absentee ballot. then you know for sure

[Talismom]

60. I said the same thing to someone recently and he asked if I believed that

it would be certain to be counted. I just said no, not necessarily, but it would be a lot harder to make huge stacks of votes on paper disappear than votes sent out into the ether.

[goodboy]

73. it'd be easy to tell who mishandled the ballots, rather than the votes

"disappearing" into the ether of the internets thanks to DIEBOLD.

[magellan]

77. FALSE, it depends on how absentee ballots are counted

In my county, all ballots including absentee go through Diebold's Accuvote machine and GEMS tabulator. I know nothing for sure about how my vote is counted or even if it is, no matter how I vote....

[goodboy]

106. and if they are counted by hand....? I spent hours and hours with Andy

on this./

[magellan]

107. Ours were not counted by hand. (nt)

[bobbieinok]

109. there were BIG problems with absentee ballots in 2004

--in FL thousands were 'lost by the post office', so 'twas said

--in IA there were many complaints that ballots weren't counted if they were not sent 'correctly', ie following some standard that had not been made clear when voters requested the ballots.......they just found out about the 'rule' after they'd already sent their ballots in

[nicknameless]

112. Yes. In Broward County, FL, 58 thousand absentee ballots went "missing".

Malicious mischief from these crooks at every turn.

[troubleinwinter]

23. VOTER VERIFIED PAPER BALLOTS. Simple.

[xxqqqzme]

87. not so simple

CA has VVPB as of 1/1/06 but only 1% are counted 2 ascertain if the machines are rigged or not. 1% doesn't seem like enough 2 test the machine results. I'd be more comfortable w/ 8 or 10%.

[KnowerOfLogic]

42. Must have hand counting or open source software; VVPB doesn't mean anythin

anything without that. Simply having the theoretical possibility of having a recount is useless when repukes or dem imbeciles (sp?) control the access to and implementation of said recounts. Witness Ohio reount 2004.

[IsItJustMe]

11. criticism of the Dems, they are not taking care of their business.

Kerry should have never conceded in 2004.
Gore 'could have' and 'should have' fought the 2000 election all of the way.

I don't understand it.

[cali]

16. Sure

"Gore 'could have' and 'should have' fought the 2000 election all of the way."

He fought it all the way up to the SC. Now, I don't think it belonged there, and you could make the point that he Boies and the Gore team should have made a different argument re vote counting in FLA, but to suggest that Gore didn't fight it all the way is just odd. What else would you have had him do? Arm his lawyers and campaign staff and have them shoot their way into the West Wing?

[IsItJustMe]

22. The process did not end with the SC.

He could of bitched and bitched and kept on bitching. He could have devoted himself to making sure that the 2004 election wasn't stolen.

Election reform, the Voting Rights Act, electronic voting, and on and on.

Not trying to be odd. Just my opinion.

[mzmolly]

27. Puleeze.

:eyes:

Gore did fight, and Kerry lost by over a million votes according to the official record. Kerry's concession did not decide the election.

[debbierlus]

33. Kerry did NOT lose by over a million votes

The official record is NOT accurate.

Read Fooled Again-

Then, talk to me.

Kerry abandoned his supporters. Even, if he still would have had the election stolen, fighting would have EXPOSED what went on. If people here on DU are quoting the official 'record', we are truly lost.

[mzmolly]

37. Perhaps.

Perhaps not.

Kerry "abandon his supporters!?" If the election was STOLEN, he was a victim like the rest of us. However, exit polls are only a part of the puzzle and I'm not convinced it was stolen - personally. Bush supporters were rightfully embarrassed and not as likely to take part in polls. I know, I knocked on doors and polled people for actforchange. I always knew who supported Bush because they were not interested in talking about their rationale - yet they dawned bumper stickers indicating their idiocy.

Look at an average of national polls in 04: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry.html

As for fooled again, I won't be reading it, Mr. Miller lost credibility with me when he mis-characterized his conversation with John Kerry regarding the "stolen election."

BTW, Are you planning to vote in 2006?

[SoCalDem]

66. "victim"? He still HAS his "day job", and most of the money he spent

was donated money..

Politicians prefer to "play nice", and live to fight another day...and damned be the consequences..

No One (except a republican) is willing to grab on, make a fuss and never let go.. That's why they win..

Except for the rare occasion when a pol is turned out of office, they have little to lose, really, so whichever way it ends up, is ok with them.. It's a game!

Even if they end up out of office, there are think tanks out there waiting to hire them for MORE than they used to make, so they can lobby their former colleagues..

Win or lose..they always "win"..

WE are the only losers.

[mzmolly]

67. Kerry wasn't playing nice, he believed he lost the election by over a

million votes. People concede when they lose elections. See the link I posted above.

Also, I don't think Kerry took things as lightly as you assert he did. I wouldn't have voted for him had I felt he wasn't interested in actually SERVING the people. Also note, John Edwards does NOT have his day job.

[OnTheOtherHand]

74. over 3 million, actually, although

the margin in Ohio was the one that mattered. I agree with you that at the very least, Kerry thought he had lost beyond possibility of reversal -- and so far, that looks like a reasonable judgment.

I truly don't get how people are certain that Kerry won in 2004, and that they can prove it, and that Kerry should have realized it, etc. etc. (I did read Fooled Again -- it has some good material, but I don't know why anyone thinks it proves that Kerry won.) It's just one of those things. If Dems don't do the political work to win in 2006, then why would anyone even bother to try to fix the elections?

[mzmolly]

126. Thanks for the correction.

I thought it was 1.5 million, but I think that was the number Kerry surpassed any other Democratic Presidential candidate by?

You may be interested in this website www.verifiedvoting.org we are making progress. And, voting in 2006 is essential.

[OnTheOtherHand]

130. FWIW, perhaps 1.5 million is just 3 million divided by 2

as in, "if 1.5 million Bush votes had gone to Kerry instead, the popular vote would have been tied."

Kerry got just over 59 million votes; Gore got just over 51 million. That was a record, too -- in fact, it looks as if Clinton broke LBJ's 1964 record in 1992 and then his own record in 1996. (Of course, this is not because Clinton was more popular than LBJ: the electorate grew a lot!) Kerry and Bush both smashed records in 2004.

Yeah, I like verifiedvoting.org a lot. And I agree that voting in 2006 is essential.

[mzmolly]

131. Perhaps I just stopped paying attention at 1.5 million

as it was too depressing? ;)

I found this upon more research I have found contrary information about the number of votes in the end:

http://www.ahherald.com/bishop/2004/gb041104_bush_win.htm

President George W. Bush made history on Nov. 2. He became the first President of the United States to win over 59 million votes.

John Kerry collected some 55.4 million votes.

...

According to msnbc: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6509870/

President Bush received 60.5 million votes to Kerry’s 57.1 million. ..

And wikpedia has the final results you note:

George W. Bush Republican(a) Texas 62,040,610 50.7%
John F. Kerry Democratic(b) Massachusetts 59,028,111 48.3%

:crazy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2004

An interesting aside, it looks like Nader spent the most $ per vote LOL.

George W. Bush (R) $367,228,801 / 62,040,610 = $5.92 / vote
John Kerry (D) $326,236,288 / 59,028,111 = $5.52
Ralph Nader (i) $4,566,037 / 463,653 = $9.85
Michael Badnarik (L) $1,093,013 / 397,265 = $2.75
Michael Peroutka (C) $709,087 / 144,498 = $4.91

:hi:

I can't believe Republicans were as motivated as they appear to have been in 2004? I think the bigot card helped get their blind asses to the polls? Sad really.

[Chi]

132. This may help...or not.

Heya OTOH
"I truly don't get how people are certain that Kerry won in 2004, and that they can prove it, and that Kerry should have realized it, etc. etc. "

Maybe it was all those illegally purged voters....130k+ in Cuyahoga county alone
(Ohio has 88 counties for those who don't know).
Or maybe the 20k new registrations that were left unregistered in Lucas county.
Or maybe it was all those precincts that were combined in Dem areas that led to a
pile of 92k uncounted ballots.
Or maybe it was those crazy long lines in precincts that ended up posting poor voter
turnout numbers.

But you're right, Kerry shouldn't have been expected to realize it in such a short time.

I truly don't get how people, who see this information, can go around saying there was
no fraud that led to Bush getting elected.

[OnTheOtherHand]

136. winning, fraud, etc.

With respect to Kerry's plight, his only likely recourse was a recount, but one can't recount votes that were never cast in the first place. Some more of the provisionals might have gotten counted, but that might be about it. Of course, if there was vote count fraud, then that is a whole different ball game.

I could explain why I'm not convinced that Kerry would have won Ohio even without the things you mention, but it is sort of moot. We are still trying to get better info on some of them, and it is not as if denying people the right to vote is OK unless someone can prove that it actually altered the outcome.

Notice that the OP on this thread is about how "they CONTROL the voting machines." My comments about winning and fraud were really framed in that context. IMHO sometimes people get too hung up on suspicions about voting machines, and skate right past problems like the ones you mention. We need to be able to think about more than one thing at a time.

BTW, it doesn't trouble me that some folks are viscerally certain that Kerry would have won if it weren't for vote miscount. The dangerous thing is when they assume that it is obvious, and that it should be obvious to anyone who looks. I think that is a mistake that often leads to other mistakes, such as clobbering Kerry (not that he is beyond criticism!), spinning weird psychological stories about some progressives' failure to agree, arguing that 'this just proves there is no real difference between the Dems and the Reps,' and purveying defeatism about the 2006 election. I'm not equating all these things. Different people believe differently, and I wouldn't expect someone to pretend not to believe that the election was stolen just to prove that he or she isn't "defeatist." Nor will I pretend to be convinced that the election was stolen just to prove that I am a real, courageous progressive, or whatever.

[Chi]

138. Those who propagate the 'nothing to see' attitude.

'We' wouldn't have to 'get better info' on these crimes if there were
honest people in charge of the elections in Ohio, or even a legal recount.
Is an official investigation too much to ask.

I think the dangerous people, are the ones who continuously say there is no evidence
of election fraud in Ohio sufficient enough to change the outcome.
Those are the ones who propagate an attitude of 'there's nothing to see here'.

Complacency is a far, far greater enemy than overconfidence.

[OnTheOtherHand]

139. well...

So far I'm not convinced that a legal recount would make any difference -- although it would be good to know.

Complacency in dealing with officials is always a bad idea.

I have yet to encounter anyone who "continuously" says there is no evidence that fraud in Ohio altered the outcome. But I do believe that, and I don't think that the belief breeds complacency. I can easily believe that some rhetorical deployments of the belief do.

[Chi]

140. Now you're talking 8)

"I can easily believe that some rhetorical deployments of the belief do."

Agreed!

[OnTheOtherHand]

143. oh, and oops, I misquoted myself

I think "there is no evidence that fraud in Ohio altered the outcome" is, at best, way too confusing. What I meant was, more or less, that I can't find a preponderance of evidence that it did (unless one follows the estimable Febble's lead and argues that Bush committed fraud throughout his first term).

[Chi]

145. Out of curiosity

The way you re-phrased, brought to mind this question...

Do you believe it was likely, or unlikely there was sufficient election fraud/suppression
in the 2004 Ohio presidential election to change the winner?

[OnTheOtherHand]

146. it isn't really a matter of "likely" and "unlikely"

It's sort of like asking someone who doesn't know, after the fact, whether it is likely that Pittsburgh won the Super Bowl. And the ambiguity of "suppression" makes it even harder to answer.

So far, I can't say I consider it likely, because my attempts to quantify the stuff we know about come up well short of a 120,000-vote swing. There are many wild cards, including purges that are (naturally) not entirely documented or understood. So, "unlikely" isn't right.

[_dynamicdems]

80. WE are the only losers.

Ah, speak for yourself, please.

[Talismom]

64. I agree! I went all the way to Cleveland to work on getting the vote

out and wasn't even able to get home to NYC before he conceded! I was and still am furious at being played for such a sucker and fool by that skull-and-bonesman! With Gore it was so shocking and unpresidented and he did hold out til the SC was bought out. Kerry should have known from 2000 and the 2002 mid-term with Diebold and Max Cleland that there was gonna be hanky-panky and been ready to make good on his promise that he "had our backs"! I feel so little hope for our "democracy" these days that I'm really just going through the motions of trying to fight the good fight. I'm afraid it's gonna take a lot more planning and thinking thru and stealth. I just don't know where it's gonna come from...

[zonmoy]

118. of course

you are assuming that both major parties arent in on the whole scam. It is entirely possible and in fact probable that at minimum the democratic canidates deliberately threw the elections.

[baby_bear]

32. Not a single Dem. senator would sign on to contest the 2000 election

Remember the opening scene in Fahrenheit 2000?

Not a single senator...it was the biggest shame of our party.

WE - the voters - should have turned each one of them out of office
at the first opportunity. It was an unforgivable sin, and in the
end, it's our own fault.

b_b

[mzmolly]

38. LOL.

What happened in 04 when a senator did sign a contest?
Now, share why the solution in your mind is more Repubicans in office?

[baby_bear]

103. That didn't excuse the apathy of 2000

I realize that there was the Boxer/Jones contest, but why didn't Boxer (and many,many others) contest the much more blatantly rigged election of 2000?

b_b

On edit: I believe Boxer apologized for not doing so in 2001. But I don't believe any other Democrat has so apologized.

[mzmolly]

122. 2000 was decided by 500 votes and went all the way to the supreme court.

Signing XYZ - contesting that election would not have changed the outcome. Democrats don't have anything to apologize for. THEY didn't steal an election. I tire of blaming victims.

[mopinko]

12. i hear you. you are 100% correct.

it is much discussed, and i think more is happening than you think. many lawsuits are working their way through the system.
we do need more grassroots tools, tho. i will be a poll watcher in the march illinois primary, and i am not that certain what i can be watching for.

[Twist_U_Up]

14. Solar Bus has a free Interactive CD

http://www.solarbus.org/election/cd/

[Jemmons]

25. Could someone put up a torrent of that CD for download?

An image file that could be burned to any number of CDs by downloader would go a long way to ensure distribution!

[AndyA]

15. Where to go for accurate information?

Is there anyplace where we can go that breaks down by state and/or local level what type of machines are in use? Which areas are considering a change? Which areas have contested results?

I think we need a reference to send people to when we start discussing this issue.

[EFerrari]

18. DUers fished in my Sec of State's website and were able

to tell me what kind of machines I vote on.

The ER forum has tons of information in it. You might start with the Daily Thread there. :)

[nofoil]

63. Ok, I'm repeating myself,

But it's www.votetrustusa.org. My mother is involved with this. A tremendous group!

[EstimatedProphet]

17. Thank you!

People talk about how the polls have to be close, but they can skew polls too. Face it, if they do have control of the voting machines they have total control. An election could be 100% for a candidate and still have the other candidate win. Who's to say what actually happened if they have control and they keep it secret? Even if everyone you know votes against a candidate that "wins", so what? There's no way to prove anything without examining the votes, and if they rig the system to not examine the votes, then everything is meaningless.

[bobbieinok]

110. in OH they BLATANTLY did NOT follow the law in precincts to be recounted

and Blackwell and the republicans got away with it

ALSO there've been a few DU threads that some republican controlled state legislatures are trying to pass laws making it illegal to contest federal elections!?!?!?!?!?!?

[EstimatedProphet]

147. That's right

They are trying to do that here in OH

[Vektor]

21. I agree 100% - that's my greatest fear and biggest worry.

I also am totally convinced that the majority in both houses of congress was totally manufactured by fraud also. It's even easier to steal a handful of House and Senate seats than it is to steal the Presidency which they clearly did. And it makes perfect sense, too - what good would it do, reinstalling the highly unpopular and completely corrupt chimp, without a Repuke majority in congress to protect his sorry ass every time he screwed up?

I'm willing to do whatever it takes to bring this to light, but the Bush crime family and all their cronies are a far-reaching, heavily monied group who have been planning the hostile takeover of this country for a LONG time. This didn't just start with the 2000 election. It was in the making years prior.

I am a convinced that Democracy is dead, but I'll do what I can anyway.

[Starfury]

62. Yes, this has been in the works a VERY long time -

One last comment on Pat Robertson. On November 3, 1986, the 700 Club ran a piece on the use of computers in counting votes. Robertson ended his Perspective by saying there should be some kind of control on computer voting to assure an honest count. How prescient this man is! And how worrisome his prescience is.

http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/TheDespoilingOfAmerica.htm

Well, we now know how that turned out...

[mzmolly]

24. I am hopeful because we are gradually getting states to require

a paper trail.


For the record the past election shook out in the following manner:



Verified voting legend shows progress in states who require paper trails:



http://verifiedvoting.org/

Legislation / Regulation Requiring Paper Ballots (26)

Mixed Requirement (1)

Proposed, Not Yet Enacted (13+DC)

Not Yet Proposed (10)

Everyone needs to Get Busy!!

[Trevelyan]

29. MzMolly - Tried your link to "Get Busy" but it "Could Not Be Displayed"

Please check linky. Sounds like a good activist site.

[mzmolly]

35. Thanks! I fixed the error.

Please try again. :hi:

[Vektor]

31. That top map's got "fraud" written all over it, mzmolly!

The more you look at it, the more bullshit it really is, huh?

How neatly they arranged the few "fringe blue states" they so generously let Kerry "have" and just programmed the machines you eat up all the states clustered in the center. How odd that the colors are all in clumps - no blue states in between the red, no red states in between the blue. More like a Repuke's soggy dream, but no sort of reality that could have ever actually happened, especially since Bush was and still is the most hated President ever.

It looks WAY too manufactured, and totally unrealistic when you look at it in red and blue.

[mzmolly]

36. Hopefully we will see that paper makes a difference in their ability

to screw the nation.

:hi:

[Vektor]

40. I hope so too!

This has gone on far too long!

:hi:

[annabanana]

47. That map is misleading and discouraging

and is the result of our antiquated electoral college system...Here's a map that is per county and ..(Much more accurate)

[Vektor]

52. Looks more accurate...

But ick, look at some of those middle states. Frightening. And sad, that some of the poorer, rural areas would vote against their own best interests to support the politics of greed.

[Pacifist Patriot]

72. I've thought that odd too.

[rockymountaindem]

50. That's good progress.

Of the states where it is not yet enacted, RI is in our column (for the Presidency anyway) and I don't think we have or had a chance in hell of winning in the others. It's nice to see so many places have or are working on paper ballot regulations.

[Talismom]

68. Good golly mzmolly, what a great addition to this thread! Thank you! n/t

[mzmolly]

71. Your welcome.

It is heartening to see the progress that our elected officials and "we the people" are making. :hi:

[titoresque]

28. BINGO! K&R!

Thank you, Thank you! I keep saying this.
You're right, 2006 will be an education at best!
I just hope people will finally see this clearly and take to the streets. If not, we wait to die.

[mikeybabe125]

30. has anybody been keeping up...

with this? They keep making progress.

http://www.verifiedvoting.org/

[Gregorian]

34. Electronic voting is meaningless without their media.

Electronic voting only works when elections are close enough to steal. With a lying media, the people are uninformed. Inform the voters, and there wouldn't be a chance in hell.

Just one example is Bush being AWOL. That was huge. He should never have even been governor. He should have been just another employee at Wendy's, flipping burgers.

[robbedvoter]

39. The 2002 Senate races were also fixed - Georgia, Minnesotta, maybe

more....Glad people start realizing.

[sofa king]

41. We have another duty as well: monitoring and documentation.

I have a further suggestion, which is a few million dollars short of what I have in the couch and might not be legal, but here it is:

Publicly offer a few million dollars to the first GOP informants providing information leading to conviction in federal court for vote fraud in 2006. Do it right now, in hopes of catching '04 riggers on the downswing. Use that information to identify the criminal network, and put public observers on them in advance of the elections. Demand to document their every move on election day. Be ready to film the goons when they strike back with violence and intimidation. Have an army of pro bono lawyers willing to fight every single case in court, in hopes that the criminals can at least be corralled by 2008. And be prepared to go to jail for it yourself, because even if what you're doing is legal, your government is not.

[Talismom]

69. Wow! I really like the spirit and attitude of your suggestions. Very

can do and constructive. I'd love to work with a network that takes such an approach! It would be worth any fight that ensued-legal or otherwise!

[Balbus]

46. I guess there's no point of even voting then.

:crazy:

[blue cat]

48. The corporate media had not done even one story

on Diebold. I have no faith that this will even be an issue until more elections are stolen, and the other side finally gets some morals and fight against Diebold as well.

[titoresque]

49. Yeah and George Bush REALLY

won two elections!
Back at ya... :crazy:

[Rocknrule]

51. I know, and I am so ANGRY and FRUSTRATED right now!

To me, Diebold represents, among other things, pure ARROGANCE. The Republicans have the nerve to think that they should decide FOR US who runs this country and believe they have a mandate from God to force their will on the rest of the nation and the world.

[jus_the_facts]

53. it's gonna take a REVOLUTION to make any real change.....

....as long as the PENTAGON runs the world...don't expect any REAL change....in hindsight the 90's was a set up and as usual we the people believed we really accomplished something...when in reality we only furthered their agenda for them financially. :think:

[poverlay]

54. All I can do is agree. Sadly. n/t

[tex-wyo-dem]

56. Not only do they have control of the voting machines....

but they have a distinct advantage in other ways that, according to bushco's reasoning, comes with having ultimate power. They can listen in (i.e. wiretap, intercept phone calls, email traffic, VoIP calls, etc.) on anyone...including their political enemies.

[pat_k]

57. ++++ Reject suspect results & go after officials PERSONALLY +++++

We have been proceeding from the erroneous premise that the burden of proof is on us to prove results wrong. We must challenge this fascist view of the law in the 2006 elections by unequivocally rejecting the results of ANY suspicious election, and by going after INDIVIDUAL election officials who fail to ensure a free, fair, open, and accurate election. Sue them. Seek criminal prosecution. Call them names. Go after their jobs. Use every means at our disposal.

Fascist thieves only respond to force and threats of force -- e.g., accusation and threats of punishment. They could care less if we end up overturning their fraudulent results. As long as believe they face no personal risk, they will steal every vote they can. And right now they have NO FEAR for themselves because Democrats rarely (if ever) go after wrong-doers personally. We "investigate" and pledge to "make sure it doesn't happen again" (and the Republicans chuckle, “Gee, for a minute there, I though they were actually going to do something.”)

No more. It is up to us to make sure that election officials in EVERY jurisdiction know that their neighbors are watching and that we will hold them PERSONALLY responsible if they betray our trust in 2006.

From a post on Friday

The first place to tackle their fascist view of the law is in the 2006 elections. We must unequivocally reject the results of suspect elections and demand our right to have confidence that the results of our elections are an accurate measure of our will.

We must never again proceed from the erroneous premise that the burden is on us to prove "official" (o-fishy) results to be wrong. The Burden is NOT on us. The burden is on the state to prove it conducted a free and fair election that accurately measured our will. (see Burden of Proof in an Election)

In 2000 and again in 2004, too few questioned those who invoked "legal authority" to deceive us and violate our will. Had more of us rejected the results of their cynical misuse of the courts and legal technicality, they could not have stolen our last two presidential elections.

Within days of the 2000 election, it was well-known that more Floridians went to the polls to vote for Gore than Bush. Simple extrapolation of the mysteriously uncounted ballots conclusively demonstrated that Florida elected Gore by tens of thousands of voters (if not counted votes).

For anyone with any amount of morality or decency, that should have been the end of it. The fascists did not even bother to deny that more people in Florida went to the polls to vote for Gore. Instead, they invoked the erroneous premise that the burden was on us to prove their reported results were wrong. They invoked complexity and legal technicality as cudgels to bash through their rationalizations for throwing out valid votes and ignoring evidence of fraud.

An election is not a sporting event or contest of any kind. It is a survey of the will of the electorate. In 2000, the result of that survey had been demonstrated to a level of certitude that would be acceptable in any court that enforced the intent of our laws.

The consent of the governed is the sole moral principle on which this nation was founded. While there are certainly areas of law and cases in which our intent is not clear, our election laws are clearly intended to enforce the principles embodied in our Constitution, and that is to make sure we do not put candidates into office who have failed to obtain our consent in free and fair elections.

In 2006, we must challenge any citizen or so-called "authority" who asserts that we have no choice but to accept fraudent and suspect elections because our courts are failing to right the wrongs. We must accuse them and call them what they are: Immoral and Un-American. (It is surprising how effective name-calling can be, particularly when the labels are accurate.)

[Mythsaje]

59. No Surrender! No retreat!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x525135

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x524341

[mod mom]

65. Look at it this way, if they turn over power to the Dems :SUBPOENAs

and investigations will result in probable jail time to the thugs. In Ohio, does anyone really think Blackwell who is both counting the votes, and running for Gov would be willing to both lose and serve time. WHY AREN'T THE DEMS SCREAMING THIS ISSUE???? They have the non-partisan GAO Report to back them up. I don't get it people, but if they won't, it's up to us!

[fooj]

75. People are starting to "get it"...

Look here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x521016

Peace.

[mtnsnake]

76. If both elections were rigged, then why aren't people in jail by now?

Surely by now someone would've slipped up and incriminated someone after all this time.

I'm not doubting the possibility of election fraud, but my God, this stumping around like it's a foregone conclusion that election fraud is the ONLY reason we lost is a little out of hand.

Gore lost because the Supreme Court took it away from him, and Kerry lost because the campaign was pathetic. In each election, I'm not denying that there may or may not have been fraud involved, but in the 2004 election, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out we lost it all on our own either. It's amazing the extreme that some poeple will go to in order to cover up a pathetic campaign with the Diebold excuse.

[Name removed]

79. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mass]

82. How did a pathetic campaign get more votes than the great candidate

that you say (or rather have said in previous posts) Clinton was.

All campaigns have their issues and the Kerry campaign had its, but it was not what you described, far from it.

[mtnsnake]

89. Sorry if my opinion that the campaign was pathetically run bothers

people, but I stand by that opinion. My opinion of Kerry as a good man, a legitimate war hero, and a fine Senator hasn't changed because of my opinion about his poor campaign, though.

[Vektor]

94. Then why didn't you just say that?

Because that sounds so much more civil than busting in here saying that Diebold was an excuse, and criticizing everyone who sees the evidence that 2004 was stolen and was concerned about it.

Also, Kerry's campaign was hardly as pathetic as the media coverage of it.

It had its flaws, but the doesn't mean it was "pathetic."

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Vektor]

99. "As always"???

What the hell??!?!

Um, it's pretty obvious who looks silly here, what with the whole ranting and raving about Kerry whom the thread wasn't even about.

I didn't really need to attempt to humiliate your post, since it was totally ridiculous on its own.

I was merely laughing at the absurd, as a few others are doing right now at your same post.

I can handle any opinion. It's ridiculous, baseless bashing that is totally unrelated to the thread which I have no use for.

But nice try at twisting the truth. It failed, miserably, but nice try.

[mtnsnake]

100. That would be correct

You prove my point even further by implying that I was: "ranting and raving about Kerry whom the thread wasn't even about."

I never ranted or raved about Kerry. You're the one who started ranting and raving when I posted my initial post, post #76 where I said nothing negative about Kerry himself. I knocked his campaign. I said "Gore lost because the Supreme Court took it away from him, and Kerry lost because the campaign was pathetic."

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[debbierlus]

84. Evidence is EVERYWHERE - they ARE incriminated

Read the Conyers Report. You probably didn't see the footage of the hearing. The Republicans forced them into a BASEMENT room, wouldn't allow them to call the investigation proceedings 'hearings'. Read Fooled Again.

Amazing that all cases of vote flipping on machines were FROM Kerry TO Bush. Amazing that one Ohio District reported a fake terrorist threat so that no one could supervise the vote count (there was, of course, no terror threat - it was a lie). Amazing that vote machines were shorted in democratic counties. The list goes ON & ON & ON & ON & ON & ON & ON & ON & ON...

And, it goes WAY beyond die-bold. People like you are are biggest obstacle. Still can't quite seem to get out of reality being conspiracy theory...This isn't theory. This is mountains of evidence being IGNORED.

Spend a little time reading my above suggestions, and then talk to me.

[Vektor]

86. I've tried.

Hating Kerry is more important than addressing the issues at hand.

It's really sad that the OP wasn't even ABOUT Kerry in particular, but there are some who totally miss the big picture just to drop in and hurl a few insults.

Forest for the trees, ya know?

[Name removed]

92. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Balbus]

88. Because it was the PERFECT CRIME!!!!

Oh, except for these poor schlups...

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/metroeast/story/4BF95EE1A8A7CF618625710D0060A26B?OpenDocument&highlight=2%2C%22kelvin%22

But we're supposed to ignore the fraud in our own ranks..

:crazy:

[Leopolds Ghost]

91. Your point is...?

There's an order of magnitude difference between vote-buying and central tabulation fraud. So what are you implying?

[Balbus]

93. That election fraud is bullshit.

I thought that was evident.

[TayTay]

90. A pathetic campaign? How so?

That 'pathetic campaign' netted 10 million more votes than any other Democrat in any other Presidential campaign in history. Hmmmmm, maybe we need to build on that and not disparage it.

Or we could just midlessly bash others without resort to facts or any real backup.

[Name removed]

95. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[autorank]

115. It was a winning campaign. Kerry won, get used to it;)

We've demonstrated that six ways from Sunday here on DU and elsewhere on the net.

There is rally no doubt now. The statistical analysis, the clear evidence of machine "bias," and election irregularities gains superb strength from the confirming pattern of lies and pure tyranny represented by wars on false premises, abandonment of Katrina survivors, the port deal, etc. etc.

KERRY WON, PERIOD. Next question. And he was an excellent candidate...beat a sitting president.

[abester]

117. Your post is very interesting in that it probably represents the majority

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!

[skipos]

81. VA, CA and NJ 05. It may be an uphill battle, but we can win elections.nt

[earthside]

83. And--They Control the MONEY!

Democrats need to STOP playing the radical Republican game ... as long as they keep playing by the rules formulated by the right wing, they're going to lose.

ALL Dems need to be in favor of public finance of elections -- ALL of them. Then need to STOP taking big contributions from "friendly" corporate PACs. They need to renew their alliance with labor unions. And, they need to stop taking any and all gifts, trips, meals, etc. from lobbyists.

Then they need to campaign as genuine reformers with the interests of ALL the American people put first.

That is how they STOP playing on the radical Republican's campaign field ... and start a new game in a new arena.

Until they ALL find the guts and courage to do that, the radical Republicans will always have so much money and the insider's track to cheat and steal elections through rigged voting machines.

To repeat: ALL Dems need to be in favor of public finance of elections -- that is the only solution

[JCMach1]

96. Also, computer gerrymandering keeps Congress in Repug

hands

[mnhtnbb]

98. If this country is going to survive the nightmare

of two Bush Administrations, the Democrats HAVE to stop acting like
the elections of 2000 and 2004 weren't stolen. Otherwise, it will be business as usual for the R's--and more stolen elections.

[upi402]

104. DINOs *are* Republicans and will do nothing

Even people here don't see that glaring truth.
We're sunk with no TV news.

[linazelle]

101. Starting a new thread because it is THE most important issue we face. nt

Edit to add link: http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x527287

[father_of_hope]

113. I've been saying this since 2002!

But you're only half right. This is NOT a problem that needs local grass roots education stemming from a national movement. This would take decades anyway. And what good is it if the elections will be stolen anyway?

The only solution is a GENERAL STRIKE. No more workforce.

Got it?

All the other solutions are BULLSHIT.

[autorank]

114. But have you heard even ONE national Democrat take this on...

Let me remind everybody that the massive infusion of money into states and localities under the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) has enabled a buying frenzy of VOTING MACHINES.

Billions of our tax dollars subsidized this fiasco. Louisiana got $24.0 million for voting machines the same year it lost $26.0 million for levee maintenance, 2004.

Who sponsored HAVA? Senators Mitch McConnell, R, KY and Christopher Dodd, D, CT.

Dodd likes voting machines. He's the Senate's resident expert on voting machines and electronic elections.

WHAT DO YOU EXPECT.

It's all about grassroots now and expose. There is enough out there to raise a story past the horizon of the CM (corporate media). We have no choice but to keep pushing.

Excellent post. Recommended.

[mzmolly]

125. Do Hilary Clinton and John Kerry count?

Both of (along with many others) put forward legislation to demand paper ballots after election 2004.

Verified voting also shows progress in many states due to the actions of Democrats.



Regulation Requiring Paper Ballots (26)

Mixed Requirement (1)

Proposed, Not Yet Enacted (13+DC)

Not Yet Proposed (10)

:hi:

www.verifiedvoting.org < keep up with legislation here.

[autorank]

141. Paper ballots are a small part of the problem...

First, a paper ballot is just that, something the machines prints out. The very same machine can record your vote, put it to the total, of your opponent. Why, because we vote on touch screens which are computers. Those computers can do just what I say.

Second, we have larger issues of election integrity that include audit trails, checking machines with paper ballots on a large scale, opening up "software and methods" used by machine vendors to public inspection, opening up source code, and the end of oursourced elections to Diebold, etc.

Third, we can aggregate all the paper ballots we want but the state recount policies are virtual safeguards that the ballots would ever be counted. Absent audit requirements, these are useless.

We are being led down the garden path if we accept paper ballots as a solution. They are part of a much broader set of solutions to fraudulent elections.

I don't here one Democrat in the Senate calling for real election integrity, not one. There are many Democrats in the Senate who I like a great but I'm dissatisfied on this issue, a painful one since we're guaranteed losers until we address it. But that would mean actually pointing to HAVA as a fraud and ripoff and that would be very embarrassing.

btw, I voted for Kerry, worked for him, gave to him, and I'm convinced that the election was stolen from him. Let me know when anyone says anything about two successive stolen elections.

[mzmolly]

144. We have optiscan machines where I live and the paper ballots

can be recounted if need be. Additionally, I would love to see "spot audits" across the country.

As for "not one Democrat in the senate calling for x..." I disagree. There are MANY things in the works and much legislation under consideration.

I am personally not convinced that the election was *stolen* from Kerry. However, I feel that voter confidence is key, and I think that Republicans did manage to disenfranchise voters all over the nation.

[donheld]

116. Until we get this message across and take real action

Our elections are just for show. Until we have a real revolution to take our elections back we'll be losers.

[trogdor]

119. Call it by number.

This must be the 15,000th thread on the same subject. I don't see one new thing here. At all.

You want to know what would make change happen? Angry people with pitchforks and torches, storming the gates at wherever it is they keep the voting machines while not in use. If the fire department has to be called, it will get on the news.

There. I've suggested a solution. It's kind of a radical solution, but a solution nonetheless.

[debbierlus]

120. No. We need to get organized. Educate. And, then develop solutions.

What would it take? Moveon has a national list of people who could give local talks on the subject. I have suggested that the DU people set up the curriculum. We have many very intelligent, creative, and resourceful people who could pull a educational seminar together.

Moveon puts out the word that they are looking for volunteers across the nation to do the education. Fund raise to bring the volunteers together for a training so that we are all on the same page.

And, then go out into the communities.

This approach could work for a number of issues the main stream press refuses to cover.

[mzmolly]

127. We are organized.

http://www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/

Sign on to help, donate ... whatever your comfortable with.

Moveon and actforchange also did poll watching in 04, but without a paper ballot, doing so is an exercise in futility.

[iconoclastNYC]

121. Hopefully 2006 is the year we catch them red-handed.

I was hoping 2004 would be that year, but NOPE.

[Turn CO Blue]

123. Once again, it's NOT the machines, it's the GERRYMANDERING

that is the root-cause that Dems lose in elections where the polls say we are even or better. The Repubs go in with a 4-6% advantage in almost every district across the country due to their criminal redistricting and dilution of the minority vote since the 1990's.

Here are some sources:

Carving up the Vote
<http://americanradioworks.publicradio.org/features/gerrymandering/transcript.html>

Off Center: The Republican Revolution and the Erosion of American Democracy. In the book, Hacker and Pierson examine the tactics of far-right Republicans -- and how they've changed the system for years to come. (I should note that this book is very scholarly, which is a nice way of saying that it is dry and filled with studies and statistics -- but their arguments are convincing, back by scientific analysis and very well laid out.)

Here is a snip of an interview of the authors from NPR, that explains the statistical advantage the Repubs have. <http://prairieweather.typepad.com/the_scribe/2005/12/12105_npr_paul_.html>

(snip)
I think you really have to focus on both sides of the story, in terms of elections. One side is the electoral battlefield, or the geographic map. And as we point out in the book, Republicans just have a big edge on the electoral battlefield, right out of the starting block. For example, in the Senate, over the last three Senate elections, Democrats have actually picked up 2.5M more votes in the last three elections in total than Republicans. But right now, they're holding 44 seats in the Senate to Republicans' 55. So there's a really dramatic bias on the Senate side in favor of generally Republican-leaning smaller states. On the House side, we've heard a lot about redistricting and gerrymandering, and that's certainly part of the story. In fact, in the most recent election of 2004, Bush won about 52% of the vote. He won in about 59% of Congressional districts. So that suggests Republicans do have an edge there.

[rman]

128. It's the rigging of the system; machines, districts, election laws,

etc - all contributing to the same goal.

[In Truth We Trust]

124. Paper ballots and Hand counts NOW!!! Democracy NOW!!!

[wiggs]

129. Almost as importantly, they control the stories

They have the ability to shape stories for political impact. They control terror alerts, victories in Iraq, when terror attacks are thwarted and announced, and probably even finding OBL or Zarqawi. There will very likely be events leading up to november 06 that will bring back a chunk of GOP defectors into the fold. Of course, media helps too.

That's why, along with election control, low approvals for this administration don't matter. They are temporary. B*sh's approval ratings have always been trending downward, punctuated by sharp increases based on events (9/11, war on Afganistan, fall of Baghdad, capture of Hussein, etc).

Election reform and media reform are both key.

[skibunny4dean]

133. Well, I don't know about all THAT

I, for one, don't believe that we as a nation are a victim of election fraud. We just elected a bad president. Twice. Bush can be a legitimate President AND a bad President at the same time. I get into this argument all the time. I am a Democrat and I don't like Bush, but I have come to terms with the fact that despite the popular vote, we lost Florida and ultimately the electoral vote, which is the only thing that matters. Sad, I know, but true. In 2002 we lost because we just lost. In 2004, we lost Ohio not because of any voter fraud, but just because we lost Ohio. And that fact that Kerry wasn't the best candidate didn't help much either. I still stand by my assertion that we should have nominated Howard Dean, but I digress. What I'm saying is that we just lost to Bush. Doesn't mean I'm happy about it, but we need to focus more on how we get back on message and actually getting people out there who can inspire enough moderates and convert enough Republicans to actually vote Democrat. Believe it or not, we can't win elections if we can't do that. Am I making any sense here, or am I just rambling?

[Mass]

135. Gore won - If only for that, this does not stand.

We lost for many reasons, from electoral fraud to the fact that the Democrats did not do the best job in mobilizing their voters (where was the DNC in 2001-2002-2003-2004). May be Dean can do something there, like making people understand that, even in blue and red states, it is important for the Democrats to go out and vote. I know too many people in CA and MA that stayed home while the GOP was having people out. Building the grassroot organizations which will do the local GOTV effort is the role of the DNC and of the local organizations, and I hope Dean is going to be great on that.

I dont think we lost to Bush, I think we lost because their machine paradoxally has cultivated the grassroots for years while the Clinton Democrats have forgotten they needed the grassroots and have only focused on big money (and have been doing a good job on that, but it is not enough). And of course, electoral fraud did a lot too, not only Diebold, but all that is done to make sure than poor working people cannot go to vote (long lines, hours, ...).

[Vektor]

137. Kerry won, too.

Both elections were stolen flat out lock, stock, and barrel - there's way too much evidence.

What did it for me (besides the mountain of evidence that has been discussed and introduced on DU for over a year now) was when Walden O'Dell, chair of the Bush re-election committee for the state of Ohio, and former owner of Diebold (resigned suddenly when fraud investigations began) publicly promised at a fundraiser - on tape, with a snicker - to "deliver Ohio's electoral votes to George W. Bush" then proceeded to do just that.

Also a co-chair in Bush's Ohio re-election committee? Corrupt SOS, Ken Blackwell.

When a recount was ordered, Blackwell hand picked the counties that were "allowed to be recounted."

Totally illegal, since it is supposed to be a random selection.

Hell, no. Bush did not win '04. Wally O'Dell and Kenny Blackwell selected him.

Take a look around the Election Reform forum for mountains of supporting data to comb through.

And check out the Government Accountability Office's report on the fraudulent election of 2004. A legitimate government office declared the election result unreliable, suppression and systematic disenfranchisement widespread, and the machines totally hackable.

http://searching.gao.gov/query.html?qt=election+machines&charset=iso-8859-1&col=audprod&col=legal&amo=2&ady=27&ayr=2005&bmo=2&bdy=28&byr=2006

Articles 1&3 are particularly interesting.

[wisteria]

142. Kerry was a very good candidate, Dean left a lot to be desired.

I am also surprised you do not consider the situation in Ohio with the disenfranchisement alone as playing a factor in Kerry's loss. I may not be absolutely certain that major fraud took place, but I can say comfortably that the many red flags during the last election are enough to make you question our whole voting system and ask what if.

[go west young man]

148. Too true. People are so blind to this fact. The Crooks and thieves

who stole the election multi times already are not gonna go to jail by letting Dems get control of the Congress. They will do twice as much thievery this time to cover their asses. They have to make it look legit so we can hopefully expect them to make some major mistakes when they rig it as they will have to do it on a much larger scale this time. The best we can all do is be vigilant and try to get it on film any way we can.