Our Election System has been totally compromised!

[cleanhippie]

Big surprise, right?

How is it, with ALL of the protests and shows of solidarity, coupled with RECORD VOTER TURNOUT, does the election come down to a near tie?

What. The. Fuck?


I am a strong advocate for empirical evidence and factual data, but there is NO WAY that HALF the voters in Wisconsin voted for Prosser. NO FUCKING WAY! IMPOSSIBLE.

How can this be? How is this possible? There are only two possible answers.

1. The election was compromised, and the BEST they (conservatives) could do without raising a GIANT red flag, was to make it a dead heat and steal the recount.

2. Half the voters in Wisconsin actually believe that the conservative way is the best way.

I cannot accept #2 as a possible, or even plausible answer, so that leaves #1. Right?

[Blue Owl]

1. Show me the teabags

The real ones, not the Koch-Inc. holographic ones.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

2. "Snatch the pebble from my hand, Grasshopper."

Follow the yellow brick road.

[RZM]

3. Close elections happen all the time. This was one of them. n/t

[ThomWV]

60. Really? I don't recall any major election being very close before Bush/ Gore

That election was clearly stolen, as was the next, and now these "close" elections happen every cycle. How come?

[SDuderstadt]

61. Try the Kennedy-Nixon election...

It was quite close. Your personal incredulity isn't going to carry the day here.

[RZM]

66. That's a really odd thing to say

This November, follow the local elections/ballot initiatives in your own community. You'll find that many are decided by very small margins (when there aren't a whole lot of people voting, it can be just a few votes). There's no reason why wider elections can't have similar margins as well.

[SDuderstadt]

95. "I don't recall any major election being very close before Bush/Gore"

Franken/Coleman

Again, personal incredulity isn't all that persuasive.

[Brickbat]

4. Did you not see the numbers in the governor's race?

I didn't think it would be less than a thousand votes, but this is not a huge surprise.

[onenote]

5. and apart from your emotional investment, what is the basis for your claim

that the electorate couldn't possibly have been divided? I have a lot of family in Wisconsin and based on what I know of them, I would be willing to bet that they split pretty much down the line between Prosser and Kloppenburg. They range from rushbot father-in-law to my Madison attending, strongly progressive sister in law. And pretty much everything in-between.

[cleanhippie]

18. Nothing other than that.

I am just having trouble believing it actually happened like this. I'm sure I'm wrong, but something doesnt pass the smell test.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

37. don't be so sure

These who take issue with you don't have enough inside knowledge to discredit what you believe. I am also skeptical and I stand firm unless someone or something can prove there has been no manipulation of the vote. BRING ON THE RECOUNT! LET's put this to the test. I will be HAPPY to let go of my skepticism if an HONEST recount shows this election was not hacked!!

I want to add - I also know there are MANY republican voters in this state. When you see gigantic rallies in Madison, this does not reflect the politics of the rest of the state by ANY means. Madison has a LONG history of liberal grassroots activism. Many old (and young) farts in the rest of the state resent Madtown for that, and other reasons.

It is awesome that those of us who oppose Walker and corporate thuggery banded together to create a movement. This movement caught fire and brought many other people into the fold --and we were able to win this election. But there is still plenty of resistance around the state.

[SDuderstadt]

40. "unless someone or something can prove there has been no manipulation of the vote"

Check out the logical fallacy known as "trying to shift the burden of proof".

[eowyn_of_rohan]

44. You don't get it.

My statement is in response to the "experts" around here who INSIST there was no tampering while they have NO proof and NO inside knowledge to back it up. They claim to know the reason(s) why this election was so close and refuse to consider any other explanation but their own.

They insult and demean those who believe there is a chance - a CHANCE - that votes could have been tampered with.

They cannot prove they are right, so cannot offer their opinions as FACT anymore than I can.

[Bluenorthwest]

46. But you see, you indulge in characterizations of those who do

not share your opinion, and that does in fact serve as a way to offer yours as the 'serious' opinion. You did not just state your own and disagree with another opinion, oh, no. First you named the other "experts" and state that they INSIST without proof. You say they insult and demean, after you just snarked at with your own aggressive framing. If you had a point to make about the election, why is so much of your post about the people who have an opinion which is different from yours?
To be blunt with you, the Democrat won, so those who are saying it was fixed are claiming our win was fixed. Fuck that noise, daddy-o.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

50. huh? "those who are saying it was fixed are claiming our win was fixed"??

I DO think our win is legitimate = I would not be surprised if we won by more than a few tenths of a percent. I am not claiming anything - I am inquisitive and skeptical. If others here would quit telling people they are wrong, for refusing to believe what they do, I wouldn't have stated what I did. Bye now.

[Bluenorthwest]

55. See, 'belief' is not how I function

Facts are important, assumptions and opinions are just that. If I do not agree with you, that is me not agreeing, you can 'believe' anything you wish. I just read the thread, and I see no one claiming the things you say the "experts" claim. I see you saying 'all states use e-voting' which is not true, although you present the claim with a tone of authority, one that might be used by an expert. I will not agree with a falsehood to please a belief.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

We agree on something! Facts are what are important to me, too

people on this thread and others insist they KNOW precisely why the election was so close, and dismiss even as a PARTIAL reason the possibility of fraud. They base their knowledge on their belief - not on fact.

I was going to also say that the post and sub thread re e-voting has nothing to do with this. But I also was upset about messages from other threads that ticked me off and led me to post on this thread.

And WTF - I posted to the OP and you all are hassling me. I was sticking up for the OP - telling him his skepticism is OK .

[Bluenorthwest]

62. Well the stuff from other threads, that is not this thread

And on this thread, you were claiming false facts, that all states use e-voting, you said it twice. As you have now noted, you were incorrect. So when a person who is using made up 'facts' to support a belief is upset that others do not share the 'belief', well....
Other people can have an opinion different from yours. That is how life is. Expect to be held to the facts when you show up smirking and snarking. I saw no one claiming to be an "expert" here but you, really. You are demanding that your opinion be upheld by others. They are asking you to make a case for your opinion. Using correct facts. The OP is not 'skeptical' the OP is making assumptions and talking about 'smell tests'. As a gay person, I do not much cotton to those who speak of 'belief' based opinion, nor those who speak of smell tests and claim that what they suspect is what they know.

[SDuderstadt]

48. Dude...

how is someone supposed to prove a negative?

I'm not the one who doesn't "get it.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

51. Im not a dude, dude

bye now.

[SDuderstadt]

52. Dude is unisex...

dude.

[hayu_lol]

80. Well...the dictionary says:

DUDE:

1. A Dandy(Fop)

2. Slang/Western U.S. An Eastern or city-bred person

[SDuderstadt]

81. Look up the definition of...

"person".

[markpkessinger]

87. Regardles of whether "dude" means a male or a female . . .

. . . it is a disrespectful way to address someone you don't know.

[Nihil]

89. (No change there for that particular poster)

[SDuderstadt]

96. That's your opinion...

It is commonly used here at DU, dude.

[Taverner]

6. It was a war of GOTV

Both sides got out their voters

What scares me is that I know now that America is REALLY split 50/50

[EFerrari]

7. Ya think?

:)

[SDuderstadt]

8. Wrong...

fallacy of composition.

Lots of elections are close and the demonstrations didn't represent all of Wisconsin. I wish it were different, but it's not.

[dionysus]

21. oh, he was just foolin' about.

[SDuderstadt]

29. Dionysus! You madcap!

Where you going with that shotgun?

[SDuderstadt]

30. My favorite Wyatt Earp line?

"You're not as stupid as you look, Ike".

[dionysus]

32. how lewd.

:rofl:

[SDuderstadt]

72. Why, dionysus!

You're not wearing a bustle!

[dionysus]

73. "Touch that gun I'll burn you down!"

:rofl: :hi:

[SDuderstadt]

74. Go ahead.

Skin that smokewagon and see what happens.

[dionysus]

75. I'm getting tired of your gas, now jerk that pistol and go to work!

:grr:

[SDuderstadt]

76. Why, dionysus!

What an UGLY thing to say! I abhor ugliness. Does this mean we are not friends any more? I don't think I could bear it if we could not be friends.

[dionysus]

77. well...

did you ever notice the guy that plays curly bill is also sy tolliver from Deadwood?

[SDuderstadt]

78. Never saw "Deadwood", but...

I have seen Powers Boothe in many other roles.

[dionysus]

82. you need to see Deadwood

"Sayin’ questions in that tone and pointin’ your finger at me will get you told to fuck yourself."

[SDuderstadt]

83. I'll check it out n/t

[Cal33]

9. Our election system has been OVERTLY COMPROMISED since G.W. BUSH in 2000, and has remained so.

[SDuderstadt]

19. Funny how it worked in...

2008, huh...

[whatchamacallit]

22. 2008 *was* fixed

Once people realize it they'll stop being so confused about how the corporate/bush agenda lives on under Obama.

[SDuderstadt]

23. Yes, dude....

it's 1984 and we're all oppressed.

[Cal33]

90. We are being more oppressed than you apparently realize. Just look

at what is probably happening to the Supreme Court Justice election in Wisconsin. They are
probably trying to "fix" the votes there right now. I can't trust the Neocons even for a
nanosecond out of sight. Their Party is founded on the belief that lying to the masses,
and fraud in general, are to be recommended, if these are of benefit to the Neocon
leadership.

And this is what they have always practiced - and aggressively practiced. Sociopaths can
not change their ways. Neoconism was born in aggressive greed, deceit and corruption --
a criminal type of personality disorder. Sociopaths, by nature, are attracted to such a
philosophy, and they are drawn to it like flies are drawn to feces.

[Cal33]

24. I think it probably was fixed, or Obama would have won by a

much larger margin. If the Neocons had doubled or tripled the number of fraudulent votes,
they could have won. But they probably miscalculated -- and lost.

Even today, 10 years after Gore/Bush, about a-third of the states still use Diebold electronic
voting machines. Most Democrats don't seem to make much of this. Go figure!

[eowyn_of_rohan]

67. +1

[MineralMan]

10. You have no idea how evenly divided Wisconsin and the entire nation

are. This result doesn't surprise me at all. I think you need to get out more and look around. You shouldn't be at all surprised at this vote. Did you see the results for WI governor in 2010?

Just because a bunch of people showed up in Madison is no sign there aren't lots of conservative voters in WI. There are far more voters in the state than people who showed up in Madison. And about half of them are Republicans.

[PeaceNikki]

11. lolz, you from Wisconsin?

As a good friend said just last night:

"I don't think elections here are particularly hackable--sure, anything can be tampered with, even a pen-and-paper ballot that's hand-counted. But it would take a lot of coordination, between uncoordinated entities, with disparate interests, to radically change an election here. "

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[PeaceNikki]

13. Clearly not. A lot of people here aren't grasping how amazing this is.

AT ALL.

[cali]

35. that's because they're ignorant of Wisconsin politics

(not that I'm an expert by any means. In fact, I've looked to you for someone in that capacity)

[eowyn_of_rohan]

38. please stop insulting the intelligence of those who do not see things as you do

thanks. :eyes:

[PeaceNikki]

68. How the hell is *that* insulting?

Wow - hypersensitive much?

[eowyn_of_rohan]

70. ...

I apologize for misunderstanding you, and also for for posting that. I went to delete it but editing time had expired. I AM hypersensitive today - you are right about that. :blush:

[phleshdef]

14. Only 5 incumbent judges have been unseated in the entire HISTORY of Wisconsin politics.

Its not amazing that it was close, its amazing that Prosser didn't win in a landslide.

[slackmaster]

15. 3. cleanhippie's assumptions and perceptions of WI public opinion are imperfect

Just another possibility, no offense meant.

Big surprise, right?

Not to me. I had no preconception of how the election would turn out.

How is it, with ALL of the protests and shows of solidarity, coupled with RECORD VOTER TURNOUT, does the election come down to a near tie?

I suspect that for all the people who were out protesting, there were about as many people who disagreed with them and perhaps a larger group who fell somewhere in the middle.

[cleanhippie]

20. Oh, I am SURE my perceptions are imperfect.

I just find it hard to believe that it was THIS close. Hell, ALL of the elections have been THIS close in the past few cycles.


I guess the hardest button to button is accepting that nearly half the country agrees with the conservative nonsense.

[slackmaster]

26. I gave up on sweating that one a long time ago

Along with other stuff I can't change.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

41. THERE is the rub

I think people just don't want to believe the elections are being or could be hacked. It would mean that our votes have no power. That our democratic system is a complete sham. The problem is out of our control - we are up against powers too great. It is enough to drive us to despair.

[slackmaster]

53. I was referring to "accepting that nearly half the country agrees with the conservative nonsense"

That's what I've learned to accept with dignity.

I think people just don't want to believe the elections are being or could be hacked.

Election fraud is probably almost as old as elections. Any system can be hacked.

[onenote]

27. all of them have been close except for the ones that haven't been

which is most of them.

Here's a tidbit. Measured over the past 45 years, the Democratic candidate for President has averaged 48.5 percent of the vote. The repub candidate has averaged 48.7. The highest vote total a Democratic candidate for president has gotten in the past 45 years is 61.1. The highest a repub candidate has gotten is 60.7 The lowest a Democratic candidate for president has gotten is 35.7. The lowest total for a repub candidate: 35.7.

The electorate is divided. There is a group in the middle that swings back and forth. That's the way it is and making up your own history isn't going to change those facts and it sure as hell won't help win elections.

[cali]

36. here's an idea: inform yourself about Wisconsin politics before making your

pronouncements.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

42. Wisconsin politics and voting systems have a lot in common

with those in the other 49 states. We are all a mixture of Blue and Red. We all use e-voting systems.

[cali]

43. we do not all use e-voting machines.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

45. Sorry - All states have a mix of Red & Blue, and a mix of e-voting and non-e-voting

Some parts of Wisconsin may still use non e-voting equpment. Statewide by county Wisconsin uses ES&S, SeQUOIA, DIEBOLD (the latter 2 I believe have both been absorbed by ES&S) and Votepad, plus Florence and Washburn Counties partially use Populex (Populex 2.3 in Washburn). This was as of 2008, anyway.

[Bluenorthwest]

47. That is not correct at all. No 'e-voting' in Oregon

We vote by mail. You are wrong. 'All states have a mix of e-voting and non e-voting'. Just wrong. Incorrect as can be, a false statement.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

54. Sorry I forgot about Oregon's mail in system - however

Your ballots are still tabulated by computers. For those of us who want our elections to be transparent, secure, and verifiably accurate, e-voting or e-tabulating

Brad Blog (Brad is an Oregon resident, too) posted an article in 2008 re mail ballot elections. He believes they also are a bad idea due to:

•Lack of Transparency - Ballots are mailed in secret and counted in secret on secret software. Ballots are counted at a central location that makes fraud on a large scale easier to accomplish and harder to detect. Privacy Rights Clearinghouse data shows that approximately a third of computer security breaches are done by insiders either intentionally or accidentally.

•Lack of Security - Ballots in hundreds of thousands of locations with no security for two to three weeks. The chain of custody lacks security as the ballots are handled by many anonymous persons throughout the process. Any unmarked contest on a ballot can be marked by someone other than the voter when the ballots are opened for counting.

•Voter Intimidation - Voting can be done as a group at churches or union halls with people looking over the voter's shoulder to make sure they vote "the right way."

•Election Fraud - There is no way to be certain that the person who signed the envelope is the person to whom the ballot was sent. Ballots can be stolen from mail boxes while the voter is at work or away from home on an errand. Other tactics include vote harvesting by persons who show up at your door to "help" you vote. The elderly and those with disabilities are particularly vulnerable.

•Potential for Ballot Mishandling - Post office or contract mailing company illegally forwards ballots, more than one ballot sent to voters, postal workers putting ballots in the trash. (All of these thing have happened in Colorado, 1100 ballots illegally forwarded in Douglas County, 214 voters received two ballots in Boulder County, ballots found in dumpsters at post office in El Paso County.)

•Lack of Secret Ballot - When election judges check in your ballot, they can see how you voted when they match the inventory number on your ballot to the inventory number next to your name on the voter rolls. The Colorado Constitution guarantees your right to a secret ballot.

See "Why Mail Ballots Are a Bad Idea" by Charles E. Corry, Ph.D
http://www.ejfi.org/Voting/Voting-77.htm

[Bluenorthwest]

58. Brad is full of it.

Any and all systems have potential for abuse, it is far less with vote by mail than any other method. It also leads to higher turnout.
And let's face it, you said 'all states use e-voting' and that is just not true. Just not true. And I'd like to point out again that in Oregon, Democrats held our ground, elected a new Governor, retained all of our seats in Congress. I think our elections are honest, well counted, and heavily watched by both sides. Democrats won here. You question those results. I do not.

[Bluenorthwest]

49. Wrong.

Not all states use e-voting systems. That is incorrect, false.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

59. Correction - we do not ALL vote via e-voting systems

But most of us do either vote by them or have our votes tabulated by them. Some parts of the country are using other, sometimes older methods.

I shouldn't have written that so hastily. I do not present myself as an expert on state politics, even my own, but just want to say that Wisconsin politics are not all that different from politics in other states. We are all a mixture of red and blue. We all are subject to potential election fraud - as it has always been.

[Bluenorthwest]

63. When corrected you snarked 'sorry all states use them.

Taking the very expert stance that you chide others for. And I do not agree with you that all States are the same, not at all, not even close. Which was the point of correcting your 'facts'.
I think that people need to look to their own States. There is not an national election system, it is in the hands of the individual States. Each has different methods, each can be changed by the residents of that State, but not by anyone else, including the Federal government to a large extent. State's business.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

64. why don't you back the fuck off

you can't read and I want no more to do with you.

[Quist]

86. Perhaps...

A lot of people don't pay any attention to rallies and protests?

[moondust]

16. How would anybody know?

How would you verify that the precinct counts were correct? How would you know if all the precincts relayed the correct numbers to the election HQ/central tabulator/whatever?

Seriously, I don't know.

[joeunderdog]

79. That's the point. Elections need to be transparent and verifiable.

The fact that someone could ask this and only get hypothetical responses says alot. ALL election results should be completely verifiable.

[quiller4]

17. #2 is actually quite likely . If you've been reading WI

papers online you would have expected Prosser to come close. Although Walker is still in negative territory he now gets support from about 47% of WI voters polled. The pro-collective bargaining forces are in the majority in the state but it is a slim majority.

[Codeine]

25. The same voters who elected a bunch of Republicans less than two years ago?

The echo chamber of DU can lead us to believe there are fewer rightie-tightie wingers than there are. All those Pukes didn't magically come into office, they were voted in.

[Zorra]

28. The number of conservative voters that apparently turned out for a state court election

seems very unusual.

In contrast, the number of progressive voters that turned out is not at all surprising, considering the motivation they had.

I can see your point.

[cleanhippie]

56. Thanks.

There seem to be very few who do.

[PeaceNikki]

31. Prosser won his last election to state SC with 99.5% of the 550k votes cast.

Almost 3 times as many people voted in this race and the number of votes for Prosser only increased by about 33%.

Anyone "shocked" by how close this race was is completely clueless.

[eowyn_of_rohan]

71. Clueless?

I think most people are stunned by how close this election was.

204 votes, or appx .014 of a percent out of nearly 1.5 million votes is pretty amazing.

[melm00se]

33. there have been plenty of

elections decided by <1% of ballots cast.

among them are:

United States Senate election in New Hampshire, 1974 (2 vote differential)
Indiana's 8th congressional district, 1984 (4 votes)
Massachusetts gubernatorial election, 1839 (2 votes)
Washington gubernatorial election, 2004 (133 votes)
Texas Senatorial Democratic Primary Runoff, 1948 (87 votes)
2000 FLorida Presidential election (537 votes)
United States Senate election in Minnesota, 2008 (312 votes)
Connecticut's 2nd congressional district, 1994 (21 votes)

to name just a few.

Source

[eowyn_of_rohan]

39. True. This was a difference of appx .0015%

It is incredible!

[eowyn_of_rohan]

65. added an extra 0-mistake

[cali]

34. your op reads like you're totally unfamiliar with what happened in Wisconsin

in his last election Prosser won with 99.5% of the vote. Yes, he was unopposed, but the point is that it's very rare for a sitting Wisconsin SC justice to be voted out. Just a couple of months ago, polls showed Prosser walloping Joanne.

And for fuck's sake, yes there are a lot of conservatives- and quite a few in Wisconsin.

Your post comes off as ignorant.

[cleanhippie]

57. Maybe I am misinformed

And am willing to accept that, and allow for that possibility.



Your post comes off as arrogant.

[cleanhippie]

98. I guess I wan not so "unfamiliar" after all, huh?

:nuke:

[Orsino]

69. We delegated voter training to corporate broadcasters with limitless corporate financing.

Voters tend to do what the television tells 'em to do.

[Teaser]

84. I apologize

.

[Fuzz]

85. Has been for a long time. Anyone in power who says otherwise knows and is part of the problem.

[CanonRay]

88. It's not wrong if you're doing it for Jesus

if that's your guiding principal, the n all laws are optional. So it's ok to "find" 14,000 votes.

[cleanhippie]

99. Oh, well yeah, if its for jesus its ok!

[cleanhippie]

91. Well, I guess I was right all along!

[PeaceNikki]

92. Have the investigations and recounts been completed and fraud confirmed?

Please link me to that story, dying to see it!

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

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

[cleanhippie]

97. So why does me posting your own words get deleted?

:shrug:

[Hotler]

94. kicking n/t