Don't blame the Obama supporters for whining about rigged elections

[Atman]

(By popular demand, I'm re-posting a response to another thread)



OP by info being: The immaturity of a lot of Obama supporters is showing

Immediately after Iowa, so many naive, giddy voices started popping up at DU. Now he loses one by a few points and so many whiny voices start talking about the vote being rigged? You do see the humor in that, right?

I'm just saying, it's kind of embarrassing. What about winning and losing graciously?

-----------

My response: It is not the Obama supporters fault.

After all, how are they to know? Don't you see the larger issue here? This is going to continue happening -- and it will get worse -- as long as these goddamn proprietary secret privatized voting machines are allowed to exist. Would many/any of these people have spoken up twenty years ago? No, because there was always a way to go back and trace the results. Even in regard to stories of dead people showing up on voter rolls, at least that could be easily traced to a paper record, too. Now, we can't do jack about anything. Can't ask for a recount -- hell, can't even do one if you asked. Can't do any sort of audit. And we're told to simply trust a couple of large corporations who happen to be in bed with one of the parties.

And you dare call Obama supporters whiners? There is no gracious win in a rigged game. And no loss should be taken graciously when there are questions hanging over it.

Thank Bush and e-voting.



.

[sunonmars]

1. Guys this is not helping Democrats at all.

[Atman]

2. What isn't "helping democrats?"

The concern is with helping the entire country overcome the fraud being perpetrated against it via e-voting. "Helping Democrats" means nothing if the Republicans are left equally suspicious every time THEY lose, which they will probably be doing a lot in the near future...unless...

.

[havocmom]

14. No, recommending people sit and take what is decreed, without question is not helping

When you literally stand up for your candidate (Iowa) there is not much chance of fudging the numbers.

When some secret machine, owned by private corporations who have invested in particular pols do the counting and then announce the winner, there is PLENTY of room for things to be manipulated. ESPECIALLY when those machines have modems and/or parts that program actions and can be removed/replaced!

What a load of shit "Guys this is not helping Democrats at all." is in the real world as it is today!

QUESTION EVERYTHING, especially that which is hidden!

[winter999]

15. Doesn't that make the losers look like whiners?

I know I have no respect for someone who REPEATEDLY cries fowl every time they loose. Sometimes a loss is an honest loss. If there's evidence, that's one thing, but to scream EVERY time things don't go your way puts you in a bad light. See how far bitching gets you at a Vegas card table. Take a lesson from Peter Wolf.

[havocmom]

17. Why let the status quo define us? That is just giving up and laying down to die!

Check this one out, if you really want to understand why skepticism is healthy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2642431&mesg_id=2642431

[Clintonista2]

3. You're right. Edwards supporters are claiming fraud too.

[helderheid]

10. Where have you been since 2000? I'm calling concern, not fraud. I posted a few days ago concern

about the machines.

[Clintonista2]

12. Why were the exit polls 100% accurate then?

[helderheid]

13. You're missing the point entirely. We cannot know who really won when votes are counted by

secret computer software that is unverifiable.

[winter999]

16. Yet you can trust eCommerce, online shopping, etc. and it's all secret software.

[helderheid]

18. Not so sure I do. Why are slot machines more secure than the evote machines?

[Moochy]

19. Stupidest PRO Electoral Fraud Post.... Ever

[cascadiance]

26. I can trust an ecommerce transaction because I don't need to know about others transactions!

If you are taking money out of an ATM, or if you are buying something online, all you need to know is how much money you are spending, which account you are taking it from, and who you are paying. You KNOW all of the variables to verify that it is done properly.

With voting, the only thing you can verify, IF they let you, is your own vote. You don't know how your vote counts amongst all of the other votes, since you don't know how others voted. So unless you can be relatively sure that you know how your vote is being counted, and that there is a physical record that YOU CAN SEE (aka a PAPER BALLOT!) then you have really NO confidence that it is being counted properly, other than the words "Trust me!" coming from those who are supposed to be counting it.

That is why you really do need as much as possible to have the process make it so that those voting feel confident that there's no one person who can alter how you voted. Paper trails and Diebold machines just don't cut it!

[Blarch]

4. Oh please.

The Edwards supporters blamed the media when things didn't go well.

The Hillary supporters blamed it on a fairy tale


Whats more likely ? ..The media picked the winners ? ..or we are in a fairy tale...

Or Diebold stole it ? ..for the record, I don't think it was stolen, it looks legit. Just look in the mirror before pointing the finger.

[Atman]

7. I'm not sure what to make of your response

For the record, I've seen perfectly plausible explanations for the dramatic variance in the polls and the actual results last night, so I hope you're not misunderstanding the nature of my post. I'm not an Obama supporter. I'm not a Hillary supporter. For the first time in my life I can honestly say I'm undecided about a candidate. My point is to the larger issue of e-voting, and how it will continue to taint every election, every time, unless something is done. E-voting undermines the entire system by heaping warranted distrust into the tabulations.

This is bigger than any candidate, D, R or otherwise.

.

[William769]

5. I'm not blaming any one group.

I'm blaming ignorant people that are blinded by hatred.

[Joe Chi Minh]

6. Nope. The only invariable victim has been Edwards.

[WinkyDink]

8. Why aren't Republicans complaining? McCain's win wasn't expected.

[Atman]

11. Because to them, it doesn't make a difference who wins.

Because none of them stand a chance in hell, and they're all equal parts war-mongering religious fanatic corporate whore anyway. Except Huckabee...he's got an extra heapin' helpin' o' nutball. So the GOP could give a rat's ass. It's like worrying about the paint job on your old car before sending it off to the junk yard. What's the point?

.

[helderheid]

9. Rec 2! THANK YOU!

[AtomicKitten]

20. K&R

I'm a multitasker: I'm an Obama supporter AND am worried about election fraud.

[AtomicKitten]

21. oops - dupe

[Atman]

22. Evening kicker

:kick:

.

[Pastiche423]

23. I am stunned

at some of the comments on this thread.

Where have these posters been since 2002 when it was 1st learned the e-voting can and has been rigged, w/no way to audit?

This OP has nothing to do w/the three top tier candidates. It has to do w/our democratic right to transparent voting!

[ananda]

24. The question is..

How do we know that any election here
in the USA isn't fraud?

[rudy23]

25. You're using the same talking points as '00--that wanting verification of an election tallied by

a private, far right-wing company is paranoid, immature pouting.

Maybe I'd forgive those who've forgotten if they didn't do it again in '02, '04, '06, and '08.

[tom_paine]

27. Yep. And it guarantees it will be done again.

All that's missing from these sneer and smearers is calling everyone "Sore Losermen!"