Voter fraud - American election vastly corrupted

POSTED BY: Ghoulman
UPDATED: Monday, January 27, 2025 00:47
VIEWED: 29224
PAGE 1 of 2

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 4, 2004 5:28 PM

It's been a few days and George W. Bush has been declared the winner of the 2004 Presidential election... by the media.

Now the media is commited to "healing" instead of doing thier job - checking for fraud.

In an election that has brought out more Americans to punch thier vote since 1968 it is the shame of America that each and every vote wasn't counted, worse, many votes were simply destroyed in a cruel and fascistic campaign by many Republicans to steal an election they feared would go very badly for them.

It's plain the election is a fraud.

The line-ups for voting were a joke.
The Diebold voting machines are a joke.
The police prevented hundreds from voting.
Voters were prevented from voting at the booths.
Fake lists of people were created to prevent voting.
Poor areas were closed to voting.
Minority areas were closed to voting.
University voting booths were "stolen".

The list of stories about fraud go on and on. You might think these are the usual incidents... but voting isn't difficult, it shouldn't have any problems. If there are problems... THAT'S A PROBLEM! But this logic fails American media who are ordered to support thier man George W. Bush.

Worse... there is no controling election body to officially count votes and insure the count, rather like every other democratic government on the planet. Three Republican dominated corporations control over 80% of the vote count in the United States: Sequoia Voting Systems Inc; Electronic Systems & Software Inc. (ES&S); and Diebold" Inc.

... and the stories keep coming out. The number one issue Americans will not see on thier TVs, but the rest of the world will see, is the incredible corruption of the 2004 US Election.

Your vote didn't count.

GEEZER

Thursday, November 4, 2004 6:01 PM

Ghoul. I wish you'd change your avatar. I'm getting an unreasoning negative reaction to pictures of Ron Glass. And I like Ron Glass. I'd like to be able to watch the BDM without flinching every time Book speaks.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

JASONZZZ

Thursday, November 4, 2004 6:05 PM

Watch out! The computer you are typing on, that phone line you are using, the stuff that you eat, you wear, your medicine, your mouthwash, that TV set, and your underpants are all controlled by American corporate goons.

You must resist!

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

JAYNEZTOWN

Thursday, November 4, 2004 6:21 PM

That DIEBOLD is somethings else

Quote:
...

The ballots are replaced with Diebold electronic voting machines which leave no paper trails
CEO of Diebold INC., “attended a strategy pow-wow with wealthy Bush benefactors known as Rangers and Pioneers at the president’s Crawford, Texas, ranch earlier this month.” The next week, he invited guests to a $1,000-a-plate fundraiser for the Ohio GOP at his mansion in the Cleveland suburbs. This is the man whose machines have no paper trail and will be used by at least 8 million voters in the upcoming election. Ohio voters got a jolt when Walden O'Dell, CEO of Texas-based electronic voting-machine maker Diebold Inc. (and a big Bush fund-raiser), pledged "to deliver Ohio's electoral votes to the president." California authorities have said they plan to sue Diebold. Attorney General Bill Lockyer last month said he would sue Diebold, alleging that it defrauded the state with false claims.

Who wants to cast using an E-vote ?
The E vote was thought to speed thinsg up. Linda Schade, a member of TrueVoteMD and the Green Party, begs to differ. While the group failed to block e-voting in Maryland, it is now fighting in court for the right to send monitors into polling precincts around the state.
"The use of paperless electronic voting in Maryland has been marred by serious problems," Schade said. "It is clear these machines need to be watched closely. We now know that in the last election, people received incomplete ballots missing candidates, machines failed to boot, technicians without identification worked on machines making undocumented alterations. The State Board of Elections told the media and the public that the machines worked flawlessly, but since then local boards of elections have reported widespread problems."
Recall this : San Diego County officials were dismayed after the primary to learn that Diebold vote-tabulation software had misawarded thousands of absentee votes for Sen. John Kerry to Rep. Dick Gephardt, who had dropped out of the race.
Vote misshaps-A second location, 1901 W. Girard Ave., Berean Institute, Philadelphia, Pa, had 300+ votes already on 2 machines at start of day before elections began... INCIDENT: 292 votes on machine at start of day; WARD/DIVISION: 7/7: ADDRESS: 122 W. Erie Ave., Roberto Clemente School, Philadelphia, Pa.; INCIDENT: 456 votes on machine at start of day;
Iowa - machines broken down , secretary of state reports malfunctions and computer fatigue.
Exit Polls have NEVER been out of synch with final results, as they were in Florida, and Ohio. It was universal- go to CNN.com, and look at the county-by-county results, as opposed to the exit polls, in the counties that DID use the machines, compared with counties that didn't. And the beauty of it? THERE'S NO PAPER TRAIL- just as folks warned. There's absolutely NO WAY to challenge these results- the opposition has NO recourse.
It's elegant, clean, ingenous

No paper - no evidence

Kerry and Edward's biggest mistake was going against the invisible E-vote Machines without a paper trail - he had no choice but to admit defeat

As predicted:
4 more years for Bush and Cheney ( Mr Apartheid )

JASONZZZ

Thursday, November 4, 2004 6:44 PM

You can't win with E-Voting. There has to be a way to do it better and still have automation.

1. keep results, paper trail, audit trail. Now the government can track what votes you did, who voted, who didn't, what sides you take. Create some sort of profile so that you can be targeted or marginalized.

2. don't keep audit trail in order to maintain privacy. What now, we can't audit? double voting, vote erasing, vote miscounting.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

ZEEK

Thursday, November 4, 2004 7:26 PM

Sorry but I'm a non-believer. Conspiracy theories have never done it for me. I'm a the simplest answer is probably the correct one type of guy.

Besides the media has been extremly anti-bush for a while now. Do you really believe they would cover up a voter scandal if it really existed? Or are they in on it too. Is there a way we can fit the aligators in the sewers of new york into the theory cause that would just be cool.

JASONZZZ

Thursday, November 4, 2004 7:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
Sorry but I'm a non-believer. Conspiracy theories have never done it for me. I'm a the simplest answer is probably the correct one type of guy.

Besides the media has been extremly anti-bush for a while now. Do you really believe they would cover up a voter scandal if it really existed? Or are they in on it too. Is there a way we can fit the aligators in the sewers of new york into the theory cause that would just be cool.

I read that it was actually a black-hat cybernetic hacker alligator. Actually working for OBL and seeking to further destablize our public utilities.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

RUXTON

Thursday, November 4, 2004 7:34 PM

Something like an independent group of citizens, perhaps selected at random like jury members, could be in charge of all U.S. elections. There HAS to be a paper trail, and NO electronic voting, ever.

I well remember hordes of older women tending voting booths in Ohio several decades ago. One would not DARE try to cheat with them on guard.

EMBERS

Thursday, November 4, 2004 7:45 PM

actually I am more worried about the huge push that was made for people to 'pre-vote' this year.

Half of my small town in Iowa (a swing state) voted by absentee ballot...
which won't be counted for several days...

I heard that 9,000 absentee ballots in Florida (a swing state) were 'lost'

I think there were record numbers of absentee ballots mailed in this year which will never be counted at all, because we have already crowned a king

JASONZZZ

Thursday, November 4, 2004 7:57 PM

hmmm... which would take us back to hordes of random people with who knows what affiliations touching and retouching the ballots. If not introducing hordes of errors, then same problems with possibilities of fraud.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
Something like an independent group of citizens, perhaps selected at random like jury members, could be in charge of all U.S. elections. There HAS to be a paper trail, and NO electronic voting, ever.

I well remember hordes of older women tending voting booths in Ohio several decades ago. One would not DARE try to cheat with them on guard.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 4, 2004 8:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
hmmm... which would take us back to hordes of random people with who knows what affiliations touching and retouching the ballots. If not introducing hordes of errors, then same problems with possibilities of fraud.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
Something like an independent group of citizens, perhaps selected at random like jury members, could be in charge of all U.S. elections. There HAS to be a paper trail, and NO electronic voting, ever.

I well remember hordes of older women tending voting booths in Ohio several decades ago. One would not DARE try to cheat with them on guard.

I tend to agree with JasonZZZ here (Goddess help me)... in Canada we have an independant body whos soul purpose is to manage elections - Elections Canada, which is Gov funded but staffed with Civil Servants who have no party influence or Minister bosses. Completely independant of party or corporate influence.

Here: we vote with paper and pen. Then we count them. It's not rocket science.

Of course, there are volenteers from all the parties who watch the voting but thier hands only ever touch a ballot before one takes it into the little booth to vote. After that it's hands off and only Elections Canada people may touch 'em. These votes are kept, locked away, for recounts if needed.

Which is why the fraud in the USA is obvious. And hey, this is the second time an American election was won by fraud. 2000 went to Gore after all.

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 4, 2004 8:35 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
Sorry but I'm a non-believer. Conspiracy theories have never done it for me. I'm a the simplest answer is probably the correct one type of guy.

Besides the media has been extremly anti-bush for a while now. Do you really believe they would cover up a voter scandal if it really existed? Or are they in on it too. Is there a way we can fit the aligators in the sewers of new york into the theory cause that would just be cool.

The media is owned by three monsterous multinational Corproations. Each one a Bush supporter.

Anti-Bush media isn't on TV at least.

Let me muse a little on this concept of so called "liberal media".... shall I?

The "liberal media" charge comes only out of the Republican camp. And it's a lie. This sentement has been used by right wing liars since Nixon. The purpose is to imply a bias on the part of a media that, *pfft*, just parrots whatever belief the Government wants the public to believe anyho'.

Walter Cronkite once said that journalists often report stories from the point of view of the poor and disinfranchiased to offset government excess and pork barrel elite greed. This often brought a charge of "liberal media" from the right wing ... this is the real "liberal media".

So basically, the charge of "liberal media" is based on Republicans skewing the truth about people doing thier job.

Nixon!

RADHIL

Thursday, November 4, 2004 8:37 PM

Ghoul, I'm very much with Geezer here. Ron Glass is becoming an angry ranting young man in my head. Please stop it.

Voting - by itself - is a very simple thing. Voting across thousands of districts and millions of citizens when both sides are lining up lawyers to challenge everything is not. There will always be problems in any "simple" system scaled to a size that friggin' large with all the checks and balances necessary to get it close to reasonable.

I've watched the election closely. If fraud was as rampant as you say, certain people would be ringing alarm bells very loudly. All I saw was complaints of certain tactics that probably did amount to attempts to slant the election. Some were turned around, some were not. In the end though, none of it amounted to enough to tip the scales - as it could have in the 2000 election.

Diebold Machines certainly are a problem (I'm a techie, I know), but weren't widespread enough - nor could they have slanted and edited every last vote. I've heard the exit poll story - I don't buy it without more proof.

Stop ranting. Start digging. Come back with more than rhetoric you got off a blog.

Radhil Trebors
Persona Under Construction

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 4, 2004 8:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Radhil:
Ghoul, I'm very much with Geezer here. Ron Glass is becoming an angry ranting young man in my head. Please stop it.

Voting - by itself - is a very simple thing. Voting across thousands of districts and millions of citizens when both sides are lining up lawyers to challenge everything is not. There will always be problems in any "simple" system scaled to a size that friggin' large with all the checks and balances necessary to get it close to reasonable.

Funny, we in Canada never have a problem. Ever. What's Americas problem? hmmmm. Let's imagine...

Look - this is easy. Saying voting is too complex is, frankly, silly. The whole world manages to have votes without any corruption at all every day.

Quote:
I've watched the election closely. If fraud was as rampant as you say, certain people would be ringing alarm bells very loudly.

Who? I've already pointed out that three PRIVATE companies are in charge. That's wrong and frankly - fascistic. It's like giving all your money to a loan shark and hopeing he will be fair with you.

Quote:
All I saw was complaints of certain tactics that probably did amount to attempts to slant the election. Some were turned around, some were not. In the end though, none of it amounted to enough to tip the scales - as it could have in the 2000 election.

There are lots of reports and stories. Just look around the Net. And it's early yet!

Quote:
Diebold Machines certainly are a problem (I'm a techie, I know), but weren't widespread enough - nor could they have slanted and edited every last vote. I've heard the exit poll story - I don't buy it without more proof.

Techie are ya? Well, you might want to come around to the fact that those machines never worked. Were found not to work by a Senate Commitee. Were never believed to be proper by anyone.

Quote:
Stop ranting. Start digging. Come back with more than rhetoric you got off a blog.

This was my opinion, I never copy stuff.

Some people care about what's happening in the US. If you disagree fine but please don't misrepresent what people say just because you don't like it. Unless your looking for a seat on CNNs CrossFire... lol!

JASONZZZ

Thursday, November 4, 2004 9:00 PM

Sigh! Here is the supposedly problem with exit poll disparity as clearly explained.

there isn't any exit poll disparity... The only problem is with media people (sigh) getting early data and stupidly reporting on them as real figures without understanding the reasoning of their inaccuracies.

read the article excerpts that points it out here:

Quote:

To compound the problem further, a server at Edison/Mitofsky malfunctioned shortly before 11 p.m. The glitch prevented access to any exit poll results until technicians got a backup system operational at 1:33 a.m. yesterday.

The crash occurred barely minutes before the consortium was to update its exit polling with the results of later interviewing that found Bush with a one-point lead. Instead, journalists were left relying on preliminary exit poll results released at 8:15 p.m., which still showed Kerry ahead by three percentage points.

It was only after the polls had closed in most states and the vote count was well underway in the East that it became clear that Bush was in a stronger position in several key battlegrounds, including Ohio, than early exit polls suggested.

Some problems are inevitable. A total of 12,047 randomly selected voters were interviewed Tuesday as they left their polling places, and those results were fed into computers. The accumulated results were reported several times over the course of Election Day.

Results based on the first few rounds of interviewing are usually only approximations of the final vote. Printouts warn that estimates of each candidate's support are unreliable and not for on-air use. Those estimates are untrustworthy because people who vote earlier in the day tend to be different from those who vote in the middle of the day or the evening. For instance, the early national sample Tuesday that was 59 percent female probably reflected that more women vote in the day than the evening.

That is why the early leaks anger Lenski. "The basic issue here is the leaking of this information without any sophisticated understanding or analysis, in a way that makes it look inaccurate," he said.

The article is here, but you need registration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23580-2004Nov3.html

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

RADHIL

Thursday, November 4, 2004 9:38 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Funny, we in Canada never have a problem. Ever. What's Americas problem? hmmmm. Let's imagine...

Look - this is easy. Saying voting is too complex is, frankly, silly. The whole world manages to have votes without any corruption at all every day.

Without any corruption? Without a single mangled vote? Without one politician trying to edge things their way? You're crazy. Claim it's better off if you like - don't claim the entire world's perfect like that.

I'm not denying we have corruption either. I'm just saying - in this case - it wouldn't have been enough to make a difference.

Quote:
Who? I've already pointed out that three PRIVATE companies are in charge. That's wrong and frankly - fascistic. It's like giving all your money to a loan shark and hopeing he will be fair with you.

In charge of what, exactly? "Voting" is a broad category, you know. The elections and counting themselves are handled and organized state by state, down to the local level. Beyond those levels you have the voting methods themselves. There's no federal overruling mandate to do such and such - the states run their elections, an official from each state reports the results to the feds. The TV stations guess and/or make up crap as they go along. So where exactly do these companies come in and rewrite the entire tree of results?

(fine job they're doin' too, when one state held the whole of the result)

Quote:
There are lots of reports and stories. Just look around the Net. And it's early yet!

Early? It's over. I've seen the reports, as I've said. They amount to stupid people pulling off stupid crap. Not a grand conspiracy. Certainly not a successful one.

Quote:
Techie are ya? Well, you might want to come around to the fact that those machines never worked. Were found not to work by a Senate Commitee. Were never believed to be proper by anyone.

So were punch holes and hanging chads. They still got used. As the saying goes "close enough for government work". I don't like it. I want the Diebold machines outta there too. I've heard all about the studies, thought I don't have figures and facts here in front of me. But then, I'm not making the accusation that everything is rigged.

Quote:
This was my opinion, I never copy stuff.

If it's your opinion, it's awfully familiar.

Quote:
Some people care about what's happening in the US. If you disagree fine but please don't misrepresent what people say just because you don't like it. Unless your looking for a seat on CNNs CrossFire... lol!

*rolls eyes* You don't know me son. You don't know how much I care. You don't know who I've argued, shouted at, screamed at, for a different result to this election. You seem to be misrepresenting what *I* say quite well.

Radhil Trebors
Persona Under Construction

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 4, 2004 9:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
Sigh! Here is the supposedly problem with exit poll disparity as clearly explained.

there isn't any exit poll disparity... The only problem is with media people (sigh) getting early data and stupidly reporting on them as real figures without understanding the reasoning of their inaccuracies.

read the article excerpts that points it out here:

Quote:
SNIP!

The article is here, but you need registration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23580-2004Nov3.html

... that's a good point, exit polls aren't an accurate measure of voting results.

However...

The discrepincy is rather large. Not even an exit poll should be THAT off. Still, it's no basis for an arguement that there was election fraud.

Jebus, I'm agreeing with JasonZZZ again. Maybe I should put a large obnoxious graphic in my signature too?

Sorry Jason, I just dislike those things. As an old tech support BOFH they make me think of those poor people with modems who will have a hard time downloading that. Get it down to only 15K at least please. Right now it's 40, that's too much. And thanx for a making a real contribution to this thread!

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 4, 2004 9:58 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Radhil:
... SNIP! ...
Quote:
This was my opinion, I never copy stuff.

If it's your opinion, it's awfully familiar.

Quote:
Some people care about what's happening in the US. If you disagree fine but please don't misrepresent what people say just because you don't like it. Unless your looking for a seat on CNNs CrossFire... lol!

*rolls eyes* You don't know me son. You don't know how much I care. You don't know who I've argued, shouted at, screamed at, for a different result to this election. You seem to be misrepresenting what *I* say quite well.

Um. You seemed to say I'd stolen my "opinion" from some blog somewhere. I was just defending myself. Sorry if you misunderstood. No, I don't know you and I didn't imply you don't care about America.

Is there something you want to show me that sounds like what I wrote? Please, feel free to post it. Remember - finding a blog that sounds like the rantings of some dumb ass Canuck on some island somewhere isn't going to be easy.

And it's true... there isn't corruption in our elections. No messing with the votes. This is not difficult to accomplish yet you insist it is.

It isn't.

Not just in my opinion, but the opinion of Canadians. And Elections Canada is a federal body that covers the entire nation, this keeps provincial politics out of the mix.

And it's far, far, from over. Just because the Media declares it's over doesn't mean the people who voted are satisfied with the whole fiasco. I predict you WILL hear a lot about this in the months to come. And fraud will be what you hear.

And the Diebold "voting" machines were incredibably rigged (at least some showed up with hundreds of Bush votes already programmed into them!). Surely as a "techie" you know this is easy to accomplish with those travesties of technology. Right? I've seen the tech info myself but feel free to post it if your into that.

Is Ghoulman ever wrong about these things? Ask around.

AURAPTOR

Thursday, November 4, 2004 10:37 PM

Just keep doing what you're doing. Lying, making absurdly ficticious, baseless stories and mindless propaganda is EXACTLY what helped Kerry lose. The Michael Moore, conspiracy nut case folks are going to have to be hog tied and shut away in a closet before the Dems will EVER challenge for either the White House or any real power in Congress.

First it was the Butterfly ballots, and y'all bitched and moaned till a change was made.
Now it's urban legends about the NEW machines. My god, you folks sound like spoiled brats who don't get their way.

Bush won. Kerry lost.

Get over it. Nobody likes a sore loser.

Sore loser.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

RADHIL

Thursday, November 4, 2004 10:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:

Um. You seemed to say I'd stolen my "opinion" from some blog somewhere. I was just defending myself. Sorry if you misunderstood. No, I don't know you and I didn't imply you don't care about America.

Is there something you want to show me that sounds like what I wrote? Please, feel free to post it. Remember - finding a blog that sounds like the rantings of some dumb ass Canuck on some island somewhere isn't going to be easy.

Probably not. I *did* say you'd stolen your opinion from somewhere, but only because it seems to be the fashionable thing to do these days - to read something, and then parade it about as true. If the Internet says it, it must be true, after all.

I don't have some example for you - I've simply seen quite a lot of conspiracy theories. And only theories. Yours is certainly a bit more colorful, better written, but still that. A rant with not much more than it's loudness to carry it. A few facts and name drops to spice it up. Not meaning to be offensive there, but that's what I see.

Quote:
And it's true... there isn't corruption in our elections. No messing with the votes. This is not difficult to accomplish yet you insist it is.

It isn't.

Not just in my opinion, but the opinion of Canadians. And Elections Canada is a federal body that covers the entire nation, this keeps provincial politics out of the mix.

You seem to have a healthy fear of three corporate companies controlling... "something" about our elections... and yet there's only one entity that controls yours. Interesting.

All right. I bite. How exactly does this Elections Canada control things? What's the trick to eliminating biases? Who heads it up?

Quote:
And it's far, far, from over. Just because the Media declares it's over doesn't mean the people who voted are satisfied with the whole fiasco. I predict you WILL hear a lot about this in the months to come. And fraud will be what you hear.

Kerry declared it over. The media then when nuts reporting it. They were reporting "Bush's confidence" all morning (and that sure grated my teeth) but that wasn't a finish line. Ohio wasn't even officially called by the news outlets until at least an hour later, when they got better and confirmable info on the provisional ballot question. Call me crazy, but I tend to think Kerry'd be the one to trust on whether or not he lost.

I don't believe the official count has been submitted yet, but there's only so much math you can do.

Quote:
Is Ghoulman ever wrong about these things? Ask around.

Is Radhil ever less than friggin' stubborn when there's not a good arguement? Ask around. ;)

Radhil Trebors
Persona Under Construction

SCORPIUSTOTA

Thursday, November 4, 2004 10:47 PM

When you can come up with some hard evidence of ANYTHING Ghoul, get back to us. Sheesh.

I can tell you one true story though, I was harrassed at a poll in Cedar Rapids, Iowa by Moveon.org for having a Bush/Cheney sticker on my car. AT THE DAMN POLL. That is against the law, by the way.

Cops called, moveon movedout.

-Scorp

PIRATEJENNY

Thursday, November 4, 2004 10:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Zeek:
Sorry but I'm a non-believer. Conspiracy theories have never done it for me. I'm a the simplest answer is probably the correct one type of guy.

Besides the media has been extremly anti-bush for a while now. Do you really believe they would cover up a voter scandal if it really existed? Or are they in on it too. Is there a way we can fit the aligators in the sewers of new york into the theory cause that would just be cool.

what conspircy theory???

the Diebold Machines do exsit they were use they don't leave any paper trails and they are owned by 4 corporations that are really one and the same and they have direct ties to the Bush administration

the maker of one of the machines in Ohio said that he was going to personally deliver the 20 votes Bush needed to win...

the fraud is not made up... it was even on t.v where most people get their news where this woman kept selecting Kerry and it would choose Bush

so their is no conspiracy theories..its very real and very factual!!

why do you think they insisted that the machines didn't leave a paper trail..

I understand its very hard for some people to believe that their governmant espeically one they supported is deceiving them and turning facist, but if you turn a blind eye your carving out your on path to hell!!

at least check into it..

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 4, 2004 11:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Radhil:
Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:

Um. You seemed to say I'd stolen my "opinion" from some blog somewhere. I was just defending myself. Sorry if you misunderstood. No, I don't know you and I didn't imply you don't care about America.

Is there something you want to show me that sounds like what I wrote? Please, feel free to post it. Remember - finding a blog that sounds like the rantings of some dumb ass Canuck on some island somewhere isn't going to be easy.

Probably not. I *did* say you'd stolen your opinion from somewhere, but only because it seems to be the fashionable thing to do these days - to read something, and then parade it about as true. If the Internet says it, it must be true, after all.

I'm tired of posting links noone reads. You're completely right, it's merely my humble opinion here.

Quote:
I don't have some example for you - I've simply seen quite a lot of conspiracy theories. And only theories. Yours is certainly a bit more colorful, better written, but still that. A rant with not much more than it's loudness to carry it. A few facts and name drops to spice it up. Not meaning to be offensive there, but that's what I see.

Quote:
And it's true... there isn't corruption in our elections. No messing with the votes. This is not difficult to accomplish yet you insist it is.

It isn't.

Not just in my opinion, but the opinion of Canadians. And Elections Canada is a federal body that covers the entire nation, this keeps provincial politics out of the mix.

You seem to have a healthy fear of three corporate companies controlling... "something" about our elections... and yet there's only one entity that controls yours. Interesting.

All right. I bite. How exactly does this Elections Canada control things? What's the trick to eliminating biases? Who heads it up?

Elections Canada - http://www.elections.ca/home.asp?textonly=false

They are autonomous.

Quote:
And it's far, far, from over. Just because the Media declares it's over doesn't mean the people who voted are satisfied with the whole fiasco. I predict you WILL hear a lot about this in the months to come. And fraud will be what you hear.

Kerry declared it over. The media then when nuts reporting it.

Oh? Seems to me Kerry got his information from the media. I could be wrong.

Quote:
They were reporting "Bush's confidence" all morning (and that sure grated my teeth) but that wasn't a finish line. Ohio wasn't even officially called by the news outlets until at least an hour later, when they got better and confirmable info on the provisional ballot question. Call me crazy, but I tend to think Kerry'd be the one to trust on whether or not he lost.

I don't believe the official count has been submitted yet, but there's only so much math you can do.

Quote:
Is Ghoulman ever wrong about these things? Ask around.

Is Radhil ever less than friggin' stubborn when there's not a good arguement? Ask around. ;)

lol! Good for you.

GWENHARKER

Thursday, November 4, 2004 11:04 PM

You're not even American, so why are you critisizing what goes on in our country? Its like the European people who gripe about our elections and stuff. Pointless and useless.

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 4, 2004 11:05 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ScorpiusTOTA:
When you can come up with some hard evidence of ANYTHING Ghoul, get back to us. Sheesh.

I'm not gonna bore people with links they never read. But there are lots of articles around the Net... you don't need me to find the hundreds of stories out there. And it's the volume of stories that prompted my accusation.

After all, vote counting isn't difficult!

Quote:
I can tell you one true story though, I was harrassed at a poll in Cedar Rapids, Iowa by Moveon.org for having a Bush/Cheney sticker on my car. AT THE DAMN POLL. That is against the law, by the way.

Cops called, moveon movedout.

-Scorp

GOOD for you!

A real American!

RADHIL

Friday, November 5, 2004 2:41 AM

Quote:

Elections Canada - http://www.elections.ca/home.asp?textonly=false

They are autonomous.

Reading up. Gracias.

Quote:

Oh? Seems to me Kerry got his information from the media. I could be wrong.

Kerry's campaign HQ in Ohio would have had a bunch of people side-by-side with local election boards to try and get their own estimates on all votes counted. Their very own system of exit polls, as it were. Not to mention pestering the state office - on phone and likely even in person and on site for real accuracy - for full information on the provisional ballot situation. Not to mention the army of lawyers prepared to unleash all hell if there was a reason to.

Kerry's main HQ would've sucked every factual detail dry from that Ohio office (and they in turn every other person down the food chain) before he made that concession call.

No serious US politician relies on media reports. They find out up front.

This of course highlights it's own problems - namely the US's massive bullshit production and all the crap necessary to avoid it - that you may point out as you like.

Radhil Trebors
Persona Under Construction

JENDANDY

Friday, November 5, 2004 2:45 AM

A question for Ghoulman, not to offend, just out of curiousity (plus you can't get angry at someone who knows bugger all about politics, am I right?):

If you're in Canada why do you care so much about what's going on in the U.S.? No country is perfect, not even yours, surely so if you feel so strongly about politics -forgive me if you have before- why don't you start some threads on what's wrong with where you live?

Sig Rebel

INEVITABLEBETRAYAL

Friday, November 5, 2004 2:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JenDandy:
A question for Ghoulman, not to offend, just out of curiousity (plus you can't get angry at someone who knows bugger all about politics, am I right?):
Sig Rebel

ROFLMFAO!!

_______________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

INEVITABLEBETRAYAL

Friday, November 5, 2004 2:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
It's plain the election is a fraud.

Your vote didn't count.

Ghoul, the more I see of you, the more profoundly grateful I am that you are not an American.

_______________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.

RUE

Friday, November 5, 2004 3:25 AM

I'm still curious about what may come out of this.

In 2000 when the news orgs 'called' Florida for Gore (based on exit polls) and the vote very publicly didn't go that way, it couldn't be swept under the rug. So the news orgs got together, went over their polls and data during the next couple of days, and decided that they hadn't actually made any mistakes. It was the discrepancy itself between the exits and the votes that uncovered the problems with the voting. Thousands more people in Florida thought they had voted for Gore. (Somewhere on my computer is the actual data from the study commissioned by the consortium, but that link doesn't work anymore. However, I did find a link to a news article: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html "According to the study, 5,277 voters made a clean punch for Gore and a clean punch for Reform Party nominee Pat Buchanan. An additional 1,650 voters made clean punches for Bush and Buchanan. ... a CNN analysis found that Gore could have netted thousands of additional votes as compared with Bush. Eighteen other counties used another confusing ballot design. .... Gore would have netted thousands of additional votes as compared with Bush.)

This time around even the pollsters like Zogby, who were trying to be technically cautious, got blind-sided. The exit-poll v tally discrepancy was not so public this time around, but it was still a problem. Will it be pursued to ultimately determine the cause as was done in 2000?

I suspect the pollsters, whose job IS doing polls, will have an avid financial interest in exonerating (or quietly fixing) the business. But whether they have the clout and money to pursue the issue is another matter.

Have exits become unreliable? Were there other problems? I'm interested in finding out the ultimate answer. The problem is that even if the answers are pursued, they might not be in the public arena.

JASONZZZ

Friday, November 5, 2004 4:25 AM

Err... there isn't any exit poll disparity... The only problem is with people (sigh) getting early data and stupidly reporting on them as real figures without understanding the reasoning of their inaccuracies.

read the article excerpts that points it out here:

Quote:

To compound the problem further, a server at Edison/Mitofsky malfunctioned shortly before 11 p.m. The glitch prevented access to any exit poll results until technicians got a backup system operational at 1:33 a.m. yesterday.

The crash occurred barely minutes before the consortium was to update its exit polling with the results of later interviewing that found Bush with a one-point lead. Instead, journalists were left relying on preliminary exit poll results released at 8:15 p.m., which still showed Kerry ahead by three percentage points.

It was only after the polls had closed in most states and the vote count was well underway in the East that it became clear that Bush was in a stronger position in several key battlegrounds, including Ohio, than early exit polls suggested.

The article is here, but now you need registration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23580-2004Nov3.html

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 1:18 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by JenDandy:
A question for Ghoulman, not to offend, just out of curiousity (plus you can't get angry at someone who knows bugger all about politics, am I right?):

If you're in Canada why do you care so much about what's going on in the U.S.? No country is perfect, not even yours, surely so if you feel so strongly about politics -forgive me if you have before- why don't you start some threads on what's wrong with where you live?

Let's remember - most Canadians prolly know more about the USA than most Americans. We live right on the border as if we truely desire to be as exciting as the USA... and that's true. We get all your media and crap as well as our own. We also pay attention to world news more than Americans. Just saying we are more informed just because we have the best of both worlds.

Canadians are very political by nature. We are a nation of people who talk about two things constantly - the weather and politics.

And I could go on about balless Canadian chrome suckers who bend over for corporate monopolies and the theiving of the resources by Ottawa or the fact Canada is nothing more than "Mexico North".

George W. Bush represents not just a massive shift to the Right Wing, Ronald Reagan did that, but a shift towards open fascism.

Just because FOX doesn't report the beatings, the jailings, and the fraud doesn't mean the USA isn't in a state of fear and repression.

And Canadians care about the USA, we call it "sleeping with the elephant". So don't role over!

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 1:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
read the article excerpts that points it out here:

The article is here, but now you need registration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23580-2004Nov3.html

Hey, I could go and get some article too.
"Is there a connection between VNS closing its doors, the increase use of computerized voting machines, and the growing disparity between pre-election polling predictions and election results - a disparity that appears to heavily favor Republican candidates? Are we witnessing election fraud on a massive scale and is VNS involved?

http://www.rense.com/general33/suspicionsurroundsVNS.htm

It's not like there aren't other opinions out there.

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 4:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Radhil:
Kerry's campaign HQ in Ohio would have had a bunch of people side-by-side with local election boards to try and get their own estimates on all votes counted. Their very own system of exit polls, as it were. Not to mention pestering the state office - on phone and likely even in person and on site for real accuracy - for full information on the provisional ballot situation. Not to mention the army of lawyers prepared to unleash all hell if there was a reason to.

Kerry's main HQ would've sucked every factual detail dry from that Ohio office (and they in turn every other person down the food chain) before he made that concession call.

No serious US politician relies on media reports. They find out up front.

This of course highlights it's own problems - namely the US's massive bullshit production and all the crap necessary to avoid it - that you may point out as you like.

Great stuff - I wish I could find an insider view of the methods used as you lay them out. If anything it seems a real mess to me. Besides, who actually does the counting? As far as I know, it's the three private companies I mention in my first post.

Thanks for the info. If I find more I'll append to your info. You're the best. Nice work.

JASONZZZ

Friday, November 5, 2004 4:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
read the article excerpts that points it out here:

The article is here, but now you need registration.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A23580-2004Nov3.html

Hey, I could go and get some article too.
"Is there a connection between VNS closing its doors, the increase use of computerized voting machines, and the growing disparity between pre-election polling predictions and election results - a disparity that appears to heavily favor Republican candidates? Are we witnessing election fraud on a massive scale and is VNS involved?

http://www.rense.com/general33/suspicionsurroundsVNS.htm

It's not like there aren't other opinions out there.

No, there isn't a shortage of opinions or badpress out there. In this specific case, they got (and used) the first batch of data. Preliminary data, together with misunderstanding and bad interpretation, which didn't result in a whole lot of anything. The point is, you can cut the exit poll about 16 different ways along the day, and the instaneous projections would be different at various times of the day depending on weather, voting patterns, school hours, work hours, etc. I wouldn't disagree that at some point in the day, Kerry was in the lead, then another point Bush was, then Kerry, then Bush. We can have a field day talking and arguing about this, and all the while, the papers and the reporters are laughing their heads off.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 5:15 PM

Well... more and more this is looking like the largest voter fraud in American history.

Remember, it's far from over.

The Ultimate Felony Against Democracy
By Thom Hartmann
CommonDreams.org
Thusday 4 November 2004
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/110604Z.shtml

Maybe Florida went for Kerry, maybe for Bush. Over time - and through the efforts of some very motivated investigative reporters - we may well find out (Bev Harris of www.blackboxvoting.org just filed what may be the largest Freedom of Information Act [FOIA} filing in history), and bloggers and investigative reporters are discovering an odd discrepancy in exit polls being largely accurate in paper-ballot states and oddly inaccurate in touch-screen electronic voting states Even raw voter analyses are showing extreme oddities in touch-screen-run Florida, and eagle-eyed bloggers are finding that news organizations are retroactively altering their exit polls to coincide with what the machines ultimately said.

...

Most important, though, the rallying cry of the emerging "honest vote" movement must become: Get Corporations Out Of Our Vote!

Why have we let corporations into our polling places, locations so sacred to democracy that in many states even international election monitors and reporters are banned? Why are we allowing corporations to exclusively handle our vote, in a secret and totally invisible way? Particularly a private corporation founded, in one case, by a family that believes the Bible should replace the Constitution; in another case run by one of Ohio's top Republicans; and in another case partly owned by Saudi investors?

Of all the violations of the commons - all of the crimes against We The People and against democracy in our great and historic republic - this is the greatest. Our vote is too important to outsource to private corporations.

SO it's clear everything I've said has indeed become the centre of American discourse. And now I see why I sound like some Blogger *chuckle*, I'd no idea... really. The only blog I go near is Tom Tomorrow and that's mostly for the cartoons.

BOJESPHOB

Friday, November 5, 2004 6:43 PM

Quote:
the fraud is not made up... it was even on t.v where most people get their news where this woman kept selecting Kerry and it would choose Bush

You know, for some reason this doesn't jive with me. I think it's because there were SEVERAL web sites that had jokes about this. The Bush button would stay in one spot and the Kerry would move around if you tried to click it. Then, you'd finally get to click on it and it would count it as a Bush vote..... Yeah, ok. Anyhow, one lone lady has a problem voting where it would do that. If that did it to me, I would walk to the people running the polling place and tell them to give me another machine. If it still didn't work, I would ask for a paper ballot. If she were stupid enough not to pursue getting it corrected while she was there, then her vote doesn't count. I have no pity for those too lazy to do anything when it matters the most. But, if it did have issues and they didn't listen to her, THEN there would be a problem, but, for some reason I have the feeling that she kept hitting the wrong button.

And Ghoulman, in reference to your "Americans are repressed" comment, 70% of the people in the US are happy. 20% bitch too much, and, yes, there is about 10% who have been screwed with, messed up, or repressed. Now, that being said, considering back before the Unions started, women AND CHILDREN were FORCED to work in factories with little or no pay!!! Ok, do we have that, now? No! Are things here perfect, by no means! Just like up in the land of the maple leaf, we have issues. But, since we are the center of attention for a lot of things, we are under a whole hell of a lot more scrutiny. Canada can (and probably is) as corrupt as the US, if not more so! You cannot be autonomous, you cannot be unbiased to at least some degree. To be human is to be biased.

I agree with you, there probably is corruption. But you should never count something as maliciousness that which you can attribute to stupidity. Whether it be the polling places that are at fault, or the voters themselves (my personal theory), "Never underestimate stupid people in large groups".

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 7:27 PM

^^^ 70% are happy? lol! What reality are you on?

Anyho' ...

Watch how fast all the trolls come out to complain that I'm complaining.

KERRY WON. HERE ARE THE FACTS.
TomPaine.com
Friday Nov 5, 2004
by Greg Palast
http://www.gregpalast.com
LINK - http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=392&row=0

I know you don't want to hear it. You can't face one more hung chad. But I don't have a choice. As a journalist examining that messy sausage called American democracy, it's my job to tell you who got the most votes in the deciding states. Tuesday, in Ohio and New Mexico, it was John Kerry.
... ...
So what's going on here? Answer: the exit polls are accurate. Pollsters ask, "Who did you vote for?" Unfortunately, they don't ask the crucial, question, "Was your vote counted?" The voters don't know.

GO TO THIS ARTICLE FOR YOUR FACTS ... for once, read the damn thing America.

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 7:31 PM

And here is a link to a list of stories... there are lots.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/november2004/031104votefraud.htm

I finally found a comment from an international elections observer about this pathetic election. You prolly will not hear this on US TV transmitions since the Corporate Media have supressed what the rest of the world has already determined is, by definition, a coupe in the USA... again!

Russian Observer Shocked by U.S. Election Procedures

MosNews | November 3 2004
A Russian parliamentarian taking part in international monitoring of the U.S. presidential elections has said that the elections were held in violation of U.S. law and that that he was shocked after seeing how the elections were held.

The Interfax news agency cited State Duma deputy Aleksei Ostrovsky of the Liberal Democratic Party as saying that he was shocked by the way the elections were held in the U.S.

“In my opinion there are possibilities to forge the elections results and these possibilities are caused by serious, as we see it, violations of the electoral law,” the MP said in a telephone interview.

The parliamentarian noted that primarily he was shocked by the fact that U.S. citizens do not produce any ID as they come to polling stations. “It is enough to say ’I am Mr. Smith,’ and he is allowed to vote; the same person can exit one polling station and go to another and vote again using the same procedure,” the Russian MP said.

Ostrovsky also noted that all Americans who he talked to had said they did not like voting by computer. “Often people simply do not understand how to vote and nobody really tries to explain it to them,” the observer said.

Apart from Aleksei Ostrovsky two more Russian parliamentarians are observing the U.S. presidential elections under the aegis of the OSCE. They are the deputy chief of State Duma’s International Affairs Committee Aleksandr Kozlovsky of the United Russia faction and a member of the Committee for Affairs of Federation and Regional Policy, Leonid Ivanchenko of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation.

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 7:42 PM

Since more is what you want.

Foreign monitors barred from some US polling stations: OSCE observer
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20041102/pl_afp/us_vote_o
bservers_osce_041102225157
Tue Nov 2, 5:51 PM ET
COPENHAGEN (AFP) - Some observers from the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE (news - web sites)), a Europe-wide security and rights forum, were barred from entering some polling stations in the United States, one of them said.

... SNIP! ...

... and three other delegation members had been well received by local representatives of the Democrat Party who had ensured their access to polling stations.

But Republicans were less welcoming. "We were denied entry to a local Republican office in Orlando," she told Ritzau: "They called the police, saying they had received guidelines from Washington to do so."

The OSCE team was invited by the State Department.

JASONZZZ

Friday, November 5, 2004 7:43 PM

Wasn't there bitching about people who were "forced" to produce ID?

Now there is bitching about people who were free not to show them?

Which way do you want it?

Here where I vote, you have to show proof that you are registered & eligible to vote, also that you are who you say you are. Then they check your name off the roster and you can't vote again (that is more than once).

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

BOJESPHOB

Friday, November 5, 2004 7:48 PM

What am I on? It's called reality. I live in the heartland of America, in that great state that that reporter said "voted for Kerry", Ohio. I am surprised that Kerry got as many votes as he did. I have relatives and friends across the state, and no where (except Cleveland) were there anywhere near as many Kerry signs as there were Bush signs. I have a whopping total of 12 people that I personally can vouch for that I know voted for Kerry. EVERY single person I know otherwise voted for Bush (or like myself, for somebody other than those two). So, if the rest of the state were like all of the people I know, Bush would have won the state with more than 80% of the votes.

Quote:
The parliamentarian noted that primarily he was shocked by the fact that U.S. citizens do not produce any ID as they come to polling stations. “It is enough to say ’I am Mr. Smith,’ and he is allowed to vote; the same person can exit one polling station and go to another and vote again using the same procedure,” the Russian MP said.

This is not exactly true. You have to be registered in a precinct to be able to vote. You cannot just walk in and be able to do so. Also, they have your signature on file, and if your signature does not match, then they ask for an ID. This process is not just one night! To register, you actually have to physically live in the precinct that you live in. There are times when there are issues with that process, but it really is difficult to get away with voter fraud (from the voters prospective) here.

Quote:
“Often people simply do not understand how to vote and nobody really tries to explain it to them,” the observer said.

Now, honestly, who's fault is this? There are pamphlets, papers, websites, TV commercials and you can even call the local election board to figure out how to vote. I think I said it earlier, if you don't care enough to understand what you are doing, why should anyone care if you don't do it correctly?

GEEZER

Friday, November 5, 2004 7:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
The parliamentarian noted that primarily he was shocked by the fact that U.S. citizens do not produce any ID as they come to polling stations. “It is enough to say ’I am Mr. Smith,’ and he is allowed to vote; the same person can exit one polling station and go to another and vote again using the same procedure,” the Russian MP said.

Not where I voted, in Virginia. Picture ID required and name checked against the registered voter list. Also had to tell them your address, which they checked against the list. A Republican and a Democratic poll watcher were sitting behind every table closely monitoring the entire process.

Anybody run into this anywhere else?

Also note the wikipedia info on the Liberal Democratic Party.

Quote:
The Liberal Democratic Party of Russia is an extreme right-wing political party in Russia. It has been led by Vladimir Zhirinovsky since its founding in 1990, as the Liberal Democratic Party of the Soviet Union. Policies include the re-annexation of the Soviet Republics, defaulting on all external loans, and the abolition of Russia's federal system in place of 15 provinces with appointed governors.

Guess even Dubya isn't right-wing enough for them.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 7:54 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:

Wasn't there bitching about people who were "forced" to produce ID?

Now there is bitching about people who were free not to show them?

Which way do you want it?

If people are bitching about that they are simpletons. Also, I found no story like that one so it's news to me. Feel free to post any stories you find though.

Of course, I've been known to take on articles posted here more than once and easily demonstrate thier lies. So choose carefully.

BOJESPHOB

Friday, November 5, 2004 8:03 PM

Ghouly, you take our media WAY too seriously. Who cares about articles about what people pretend to know?? There are no articles about people bitching about having to show ID, but there are people who WERE bitching about having to show ID! Just because it wasn't in an article doesn't mean it didn't happen. I live right in the thick of it, and it happened. You only see what the media WANTS you to see, not necessarily what happens. I stood in line for 45 minutes to vote, because the polling people were ensuring that the people who were coming through the line were who they said that they were! Why go to the media, you have a LOT of REAL people who actually EXPERIENCED this process and we are telling you it's not as bad as it's made out to be!

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 8:04 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
SNIP!!!
Also note the wikipedia info on the Liberal Democratic Party.

The Liberal Democratic Party of Russia is an extreme right-wing political party in Russia. It has been led by Vladimir Zhirinovsky since its founding in 1990, as the Liberal Democratic Party of the Soviet Union. Policies include the re-annexation of the Soviet Republics, defaulting on all external loans, and the abolition of Russia's federal system in place of 15 provinces with appointed governors.

Guess even Dubya isn't right-wing enough for them.

That Wikipedia is crap, I won't accept information from a website created by submissions. Where is the profesional? The Editor? There ain't none!

Having said that, the Russian Liberal Democratic Party is a nutty bunch. Geezer is quite right.

It's the only comment from an international observer of the US election I could find! Can't even find the Canadian observers comments anywhere. Guess the Right Wing Corporate propoganda in Canada is still working (*looks over shoulder*) .... yep, still there.

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 8:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bojesphob:
Ghouly, you take our media WAY too seriously. Who cares about articles about what people pretend to know?? There are no articles about people bitching about having to show ID, but there are people who WERE bitching about having to show ID! Just because it wasn't in an article doesn't mean it didn't happen. I live right in the thick of it, and it happened. You only see what the media WANTS you to see, not necessarily what happens. I stood in line for 45 minutes to vote, because the polling people were ensuring that the people who were coming through the line were who they said that they were! Why go to the media, you have a LOT of REAL people who actually EXPERIENCED this process and we are telling you it's not as bad as it's made out to be!

Actually - it's the English media. Who you may take more seriously than the American "Corporate Media".

Anyho'...

A lot of really respected and well researched articles and essays are written. It's true it's difficult to determine which ones are "truthful" and which ones are not.

You can never know 100% of the time, but you can decide for yourself if the information is true. There are sources of news that are trustworthy and they are called journalists.

Check who the writer is - Is the writer a flake or a respected professional?

Check footnotes/sources - if the article doesn't quote people or show the origin of facts and just spews an opinion you can bet it's a lie or, at least, merely an opinion.

It isn't popular in the USA, but around the world actual JOURNALISM is taken very seriously. There are people commited to the pursuit of the truth. This should be in stark contrast to the trend in the USA for people to simply sit in front of a camera all day spitting out the Republican morning "fact sheet".

Someone like Robert Novak (Washington Post) who not only refuses to speak even the smallest truth about Bush/Cheney but is a traitor who recently revealed the identity of a CIA agent in a fascistic effort to support Bush.

SO I can reject everything from Novak as he has proved himself to be a sleazy liar. Same for Christopher Hitchens.

So it's a matter of figuring who the information comes from, do you trust them, are thier sources reasonable, and do they have quotes from people who actually know/were there. Once you have these you can safely go on to form an opinion. I also recommend not forming a complete opinion on a subject unless you have seen this information/story confirmed from at least three different independant sources.

Such as Micheal Moores F9/11 - I can say it's truthful because Mike has not lied to me before and has impressed me with his work. F9/11 won the most prestigious prize a film can win - Cannes Palm D'Ore. And most importantly, Moores accusations about the Saudi/Bush connections I've seen on Canadian TV, European docs, and those before I saw F9/11. So when I finally saw F9/11 I wasn't surprised and I was comfortable believing it to be accurate.

Thanks for asking.

BARNSTORMER

Friday, November 5, 2004 8:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Quote:
Originally posted by Geezer:
SNIP!!!
Also note the wikipedia info on the Liberal Democratic Party.

The Liberal Democratic Party of Russia is an extreme right-wing political party in Russia. It has been led by Vladimir Zhirinovsky since its founding in 1990, as the Liberal Democratic Party of the Soviet Union. Policies include the re-annexation of the Soviet Republics, defaulting on all external loans, and the abolition of Russia's federal system in place of 15 provinces with appointed governors.

Guess even Dubya isn't right-wing enough for them.

That Wikipedia is crap, I won't accept information from a website created by submissions. Where is the profesional? The Editor? There ain't none!

Having said that, the Russian Liberal Democratic Party is a nutty bunch. Geezer is quite right.

It's the only comment from an international observer of the US election I could find! Can't even find the Canadian observers comments anywhere. Guess the Right Wing Corporate propoganda in Canada is still working (*looks over shoulder*) .... yep, still there.

Jesus Christ, what a bunch of left wing wack job whiners.

Bush won the f*cking election.
No conspiracy
No Evil Empire

GET OVER IT!!!!!!!

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

RUXTON

Friday, November 5, 2004 8:38 PM

You want proof of voting fraud, that would, indeed, swing the election? Go here, NOW:

whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/exit_poll.gif

(Sorry. Don't know how to post a link.)

Just add a "www" to that, or paste it into your bar. Most browsers automatically add the needed stuff.

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 8:53 PM

^^^ What the? Edit please?

BOJESPHOB

Friday, November 5, 2004 8:58 PM

Quote:
You want proof of voting fraud, that would, indeed, swing the election? Go here, NOW:

If I read this correctly, there is no proof, right?

RUXTON

Friday, November 5, 2004 9:03 PM

Let's try this:
[Proof link removed 26 Nov. 2004 at thread-starter's polite request.]

If you don't know what's going on by now, I can't help you.

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 9:09 PM

^^^ great post Ruxton! THANX!!!

But it's a little big, though it's a nice low Kilo size it's large for even a high rez screen setting. Can you Photoshop that a bit? I can if you don't have.

Thanx again. :)

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
Watch out! The computer you are typing on, that phone line you are using, the stuff that you eat, you wear, your medicine, your mouthwash, that TV set, and your underpants are all controlled by American corporate goons.

You must resist!

You know... that's all true! Resist!

CONNORFLYNN

Friday, November 5, 2004 9:19 PM

Actually, the pollsters admit there were some issues with the exit polls and some issues with how they were being used. Unfortunately the Media tends to use them as the end all be all.

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 5, 2004 9:25 PM

^^^ not this time 'round I think. Seems the media ignored the Exit Polls and spent a lot of time explaining how inaccurate they supposidly are. Which is bizarre considering Exit Polls are all the press has to report with during an election. So what about the exit polls the press used years ago? Were media pundits wrong to even report those polls for the last 50 frellin' years? No, of course not.

But THIS election was different.

BOJESPHOB

Friday, November 5, 2004 9:36 PM

Actually, the polls don't show anything. You can set the polls up at places you know will sway one way or the other and only take partial polls. I know that in the three prez elections I have taken part of, in two differant precincts, in two differant cities, in two differant counties in Ohio, there have NEVER been polls taken. Just the "I voted today" stickers and ballots. So, basically, it's like the Gallop poll, you can make it say anything you want, especially when you aren't polling EVERYONE. (incomplete) Polls are just that, polls. If the prez could be decided by polls, they would use polls instead of ballots.

And, if things were bad for this election, than that means that both of Clinton's elections are suspect, cause we all know that no one wanted him in office. *please note sarcasm*. If we had republican presidents for the last 50 years (like some communist countries seem to do) then methinks there is a problem.

AND, the Ohio electronic voting was NOT the entire state, mind you. MOST of the state still uses paper ballots, so that statistic might be correct for the electronic votes, but not the WHOLE state.

CONNORFLYNN

Friday, November 5, 2004 9:42 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
^^^ not this time 'round I think. Seems the media ignored the Exit Polls and spent a lot of time explaining how inaccurate they supposidly are. Which is bizarre considering Exit Polls are all the press has to report with during an election. So what about the exit polls the press used years ago? Were media pundits wrong to even report those polls for the last 50 frellin' years? No, of course not.

But THIS election was different.

Well.. this isn't the first election the media has gotten burned on by the exit polls. Part of the problem wasn't so much in the polls themselves as it was the way the media used them.

The 2000 election and the 2002 elections and the way the media used the polls really got screwed up. The misuse of exit polls created enough of a stir to cause a congressional investigation. To no avail.

I think in the future Exit polls won't be the tool of choice by the media. I rather liked the fact that all the media had to resort to, was the best and most accurate information - RAW DATA. Go figure..LOL

BARNSTORMER

Friday, November 5, 2004 9:50 PM

I was watching an interview with Tom Brokaw on
Nov 3. He said during the election they got a
a copy of the poll data showing kerry ahead, but
then noticed that the people they selected were heavily skewed towards left demographic.

When they saw this, they tossed the poll data in
the trash, and decided not to report the data which they were sure did not reflect the actual vote counts.

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

JASONZZZ

Friday, November 5, 2004 9:54 PM

What's the data behind the charts? They need some double checking. I looked and the one for Ohio is way off. The exit poll and final results posted at CNN for Ohio is:

Bush Kerry
Exit Poll 50.94% 48.59%
Tally 51% 49%

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

BOJESPHOB

Friday, November 5, 2004 10:18 PM

Jason, it could have been because they were only using the "electronic voting" machine votes. There are a number of counties that actually used the electronic voting, but by no means a majority. It probably discounted the votes that people cast using the old "hanging chad" ballots.

JASONZZZ

Friday, November 5, 2004 11:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bojesphob:
Jason, it could have been because they were only using the "electronic voting" machine votes. There are a number of counties that actually used the electronic voting, but by no means a majority. It probably discounted the votes that people cast using the old "hanging chad" ballots.

huh? no? What I am saying is that the exit poll figures in Ohio completely jives with the real tally.

If I get you correctly, what you are saying is that people who voted thru the computers were exitpolled to be overwhelmingly voted for Kerry. Which doesn't jive.

In either case, it leaves the charts suspect if there are these kinds of questions, and we don't have the data to look at it. The charts don't have legends to explain what the scales mean and how they are interpreted. There isn't anything to see what sort of data they used or where it's from. It would be best if I can see the data itself.

As it is, at best, it's suspect and not meaningful at all.

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

WADDLEDOODLE

Saturday, November 6, 2004 2:43 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
hmmm... which would take us back to hordes of random people with who knows what affiliations touching and retouching the ballots. If not introducing hordes of errors, then same problems with possibilities of fraud.

Quote:
Originally posted by Ruxton:
Something like an independent group of citizens, perhaps selected at random like jury members, could be in charge of all U.S. elections. There HAS to be a paper trail, and NO electronic voting, ever.

I well remember hordes of older women tending voting booths in Ohio several decades ago. One would not DARE try to cheat with them on guard.

I tend to agree with JasonZZZ here (Goddess help me)... in Canada we have an independant body whos soul purpose is to manage elections - Elections Canada, which is Gov funded but staffed with Civil Servants who have no party influence or Minister bosses. Completely independant of party or corporate influence.

Here: we vote with paper and pen. Then we count them. It's not rocket science.

Of course, there are volenteers from all the parties who watch the voting but thier hands only ever touch a ballot before one takes it into the little booth to vote. After that it's hands off and only Elections Canada people may touch 'em. These votes are kept, locked away, for recounts if needed.

Which is why the fraud in the USA is obvious. And hey, this is the second time an American election was won by fraud. 2000 went to Gore after all.

Civil servants starring as Independant Pollsters. Riiiiiiggghhht. They have no self interest.

As to your election methods, it's just like your vaunted Health Care system, you only have 32 Million citizens. The United States is almost at 300 Million. Not to mention you can't even defend your own shores since your navy is undeployable. So who covers that slack?

As to your CRAZY notion of fraud...you don't think that the Democratic party would be SCREAMING BLOODY MURDER if they even suspected fraud??? You don't think there are thousands of people combing the results? Ha! Even in 2000 the New York Times, The LA Times, and many other left wing papers concluded that their was NO FRAUD! So wake up and move on.

You're simply uninformed...so please stay in Canada...Please, do it for the children.

WADDLEDOODLE

Saturday, November 6, 2004 2:55 AM

Exit polling isn't scientific, it depends on someone to ask questions. Proper polling requires consistancy. Exit polling is anything but controlled and consistant.

Furthermore, exit polling was NEVER intended to be used to compare the possible results the DAY OF AN ELECTION. It was supposed to be used AFTER.

However, maybe you're right. Maybe your cute little bar charts are correct....Since the lawyers aren't suing and no recount is in effect, maybe you folks are the only ones who have this priceless secret knowledge! You better share it with the recently deceased Kerry campaign before the CIA shows up and pulls your tin foil hats over your eyes and shove you off the roof.

Please....smarter and more ruthless people than you lot have conceded that it was an old fashioned election with a winner and a loser.

Move on move on.org!

WADDLEDOODLE

Saturday, November 6, 2004 2:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Just keep doing what you're doing. Lying, making absurdly ficticious, baseless stories and mindless propaganda is EXACTLY what helped Kerry lose. The Michael Moore, conspiracy nut case folks are going to have to be hog tied and shut away in a closet before the Dems will EVER challenge for either the White House or any real power in Congress.

First it was the Butterfly ballots, and y'all bitched and moaned till a change was made.
Now it's urban legends about the NEW machines. My god, you folks sound like spoiled brats who don't get their way.

Bush won. Kerry lost.

Get over it. Nobody likes a sore loser.

Sore loser.

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

Thank-you! Well said.

RUE

Saturday, November 6, 2004 4:29 AM

I wonder about the difference between the exits and the tallies. If it were truly statistical slop, it would go both ways. There is a BIAS (a type of error) and it still would be good to see it definitively explained. Six separate polling services reported this problem across the nation. They didn't all make the same mistakes or end up under the same weird measuring regime. The isolated expl'n here or there isn't enough for me. I'd really like to see this studied.

WADDLEDOODLE

Saturday, November 6, 2004 1:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
I wonder about the difference between the exits and the tallies. If it were truly statistical slop, it would go both ways. There is a BIAS (a type of error) and it still would be good to see it definitively explained. Six separate polling services reported this problem across the nation. They didn't all make the same mistakes or end up under the same weird measuring regime. The isolated expl'n here or there isn't enough for me. I'd really like to see this studied.

I just want to point out that if the Kerry camp thought for one split second that they were robbed, they would have deployed the lawyers and forced an investigation.

Remember the VoterNewsService in 2000? They got it wrong too. Very much so. Was that due to scandle?

Exit polling was never intended for this. It was to be used AFTER an election to gauge who cast votes for what. I for one think exit polling should be illegal. Let the people vote and we'll find out with in a few hours.

CONNORFLYNN

Saturday, November 6, 2004 2:54 PM

The news services as I understand it all get their exit poll data from the same polling source, so as to be on equal ground. This polling service is actually paid by the networks combined to provide that service. Unfortunately, there were a number of issues that arose due to when the polls were taken and the demographics of the folks being polled.

GHOULMAN

Saturday, November 6, 2004 3:31 PM

^^^ Thanks for bringing some info Connerflynn.

Exit Polls are just that, polls. If there is a demographic discrepincy it should be notable before the polling. If that's true it's a stupid mistake.

When there are reports of foul play it's the job of the media to report it. But more importantly, it's the job of the Government to assure the public thier country isn't being run by a bunch of lieing chimpanzees.

There are lot's of reports of fraud and where there is smoke...

Still the American government has not acknowledged there is even any problem (sort of like when GWB was asked if he ever made a mistake in his last 4 years... he insisted he did not!) as if the American system of one vote for every person is intact.

The revolution will NOT be televised.

Vote Fraud 2004 Round Up
http://www.libertyforum.org/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=news_crime&Number=
293078189

Broward Machines Count Backwards
Excerpt (Palm Beach Post): Why a voting system would be designed to count backward was a mystery to Broward County Mayor Ilene Lieberman. She was on the phone late Wednesday with Omaha-based Elections Systems and Software. ... Late Thursday, ES&S issued a statement reiterating that it learned of the problems in 2002 and said the software upgrades would be submitted to Hood's office next year. The company was working with the counties it serves to make sure ballots don't exceed capacity and said no other counties reported similar problems. ...

In one precinct, Bush’s tally was supersized by a computer glitch
Excerpt (Columbus Dispatch): A computer error involving one voting-machine cartridge gave President Bush 3,893 extra votes in a Gahanna precinct.

Franklin County’s unofficial results gave Bush 4,258 votes to Democratic challenger John Kerry’s 260 votes in Precinct 1B, which votes at New Life Church on Stygler Road. Records show only 638 voters cast ballots in that precinct. ... Damschroder said he received some calls yesterday from people who saw the error when reading the list of poll results on the election board’s Web site.

Glitches Mar San Francisco Balloting
Excerpt (NY Times): SAN FRANCISCO, Nov. 4 - San Francisco's new municipal election system, which relies on an optical scan machine and software that ranks the voters' choice of candidate, failed to work as expected because of a software problem, officials said on Thursday.

The city's election department learned of the problem on Wednesday, when the maker of the new software, ES&S, alerted the authorities that the software "didn't tabulate and combine the data as it was supposed to," one election official said. Because of the problem, candidates were not ranked.

Sender, Berl & Sons
Excerpt: THE REPUBLICANS ON CABLE ARE CROWING ABOUT THEIR WIN. THIS DISGUSTS US. THEY DIDN'T WIN. THEY LOST LIKE THE REST OF US. THEY LOST THIS COUNTRY, OUR RIGHT TO VOTE, OUR RIGHT TO CHOOSE OUR LEADERS AND OUR POLICIES. IF BEING OCCUPIED AND CONTROLLED IS THEIR IDEA OF DEMOCRACY AND AMERICA, THEY CAN JOIN TOMMY FRANKS WHO DARED DECLARE THAT DEMOCRACY HAS BEEN A NOBLE EXPERIMENT (IMPLYING WHOSE TIME HAS COME AND GONE).
Comment: I can't add much to the above. Feel free to discount them if you will but SenderBerl has a Blue Chip record of calling World Events Correctly. Lots of other interesting data and analysis on this site as well.

Some observations of the 2004 election.
Excerpt: Examining the results of this election reveals some striking details that should make everyone who opposed Bush very concerned. In 2000 Al Gore received 51.00 million votes, in 2004 Kerry only received 55.7 million. The 2.5 million Nader voters who left him did not simply evaporate. Nader supporters are intelligent progressives who oppose corporate rule and the two-party system, but knowing the stakes this time around, it was very predictable they would abandon him. This 2.5 million went to John Kerry. Exit polls show that Kerry also picked up a small 1 in 10 fraction of 2000 Bush

GHOULMAN

Saturday, November 6, 2004 4:19 PM

This is just a terrific post from a clear minded person. RUE, you're the shabazz.

rue wrote:
Thursday, November 04, 2004 17:25
I'm still curious about what may come out of this.

In 2000 when the news orgs 'called' Florida for Gore (based on exit polls) and the vote very publicly didn't go that way, it couldn't be swept under the rug. So the news orgs got together, went over their polls and data during the next couple of days, and decided that they hadn't actually made any mistakes. It was the discrepancy itself between the exits and the votes that uncovered the problems with the voting. Thousands more people in Florida thought they had voted for Gore. (Somewhere on my computer is the actual data from the study commissioned by the consortium, but that link doesn't work anymore. However, I did find a link to a news article: http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/florida.ballots/stories/main.html
"According to the study, 5,277 voters made a clean punch for Gore and a clean punch for Reform Party nominee Pat Buchanan. An additional 1,650 voters made clean punches for Bush and Buchanan. ... a CNN analysis found that Gore could have netted thousands of additional votes as compared with Bush. Eighteen other counties used another confusing ballot design. .... Gore would have netted thousands of additional votes as compared with Bush.)

This time around even the pollsters like Zogby, who were trying to be technically cautious, got blind-sided. The exit-poll v tally discrepancy was not so public this time around, but it was still a problem. Will it be pursued to ultimately determine the cause as was done in 2000?

I suspect the pollsters, whose job IS doing polls, will have an avid financial interest in exonerating (or quietly fixing) the business. But whether they have the clout and money to pursue the issue is another matter.

Have exits become unreliable? Were there other problems? I'm interested in finding out the ultimate answer. The problem is that even if the answers are pursued, they might not be in the public arena.

RUE

Saturday, November 6, 2004 8:08 PM

Quote:
The news services as I understand it all get their exit poll data from the same polling source.

There were independent pollsters doing their own polling, who were not part of the news service exit poll system. They were also not part of the private polling by Republicans and Democrats. I'd have to go find the article to get the list, but Zogby was one of them.

PIRATEJENNY

Saturday, November 6, 2004 10:35 PM

Quote:

You know, for some reason this doesn't jive with me. I think it's because there were SEVERAL web sites that had jokes about this. The Bush button would stay in one spot and the Kerry would move around if you tried to click it. Then, you'd finally get to click on it and it would count it as a Bush vote..... Yeah, ok. Anyhow, one lone lady has a problem voting where it would do that. If that did it to me, I would walk to the people running the polling place and tell them to give me another machine. If it still didn't work, I would ask for a paper ballot. If she were stupid enough not to pursue getting it corrected while she was there, then her vote doesn't count. I have no pity for those too lazy to do anything when it matters the most. But, if it did have issues and they didn't listen to her, THEN there would be a problem, but, for some reason I have the feeling that she kept hitting the wrong button.

do you really think it was just one lady who this happened to, I used her as an example because I saw it with my own eyes.. Please before you speak on these topics and call people lazy..at least do a little research ..its not that hard the fraud was rampant..the machines were built by (crackers)
No she didn't hit the wrong button

the machines are designed to eat the Democratic vote..and it wasn't just this election..

Once again Ignorance is running rampant..please even if you still choose to stay ingnorant..at least know of what your talking about before you post!!

ask yourself this question ask yourself is having Bush win the election even by fradulant means more important then democracy

if winning no matter what the cost even your own freedoms is more important to you..then by all means continue to spout ingnorance

if you love corporations and don't mind them controlling your government then continue to do what you do!!

even if you don't believe that the election was stolen and the fact that this is even an issue should concern you as a freedom loving American

BOJESPHOB

Sunday, November 7, 2004 12:09 AM

I really don't think that I was being ignorant, and I didn't call her lazy. I said that if she accepted it without doing anything about it, THEN she was lazy. You saw it, ok, then first hand witness is a little differant. From how you stated what you said, it sounded more like you HEARD of a lady that had the problem, and I am more inclined to say that if you didn't see it that it is possible that she was at fault. Anyhow, machines do have issues, and software programs do have bugs. Now, there is a chance that there was an issue there, but have you done anything about it? Did she? I'm not saying I don't care, I am trying to make sure that IF there was an issue, that someone did something to cause votes not to be counted, then someone needs to do something ABOUT it. Not just sit here and type and bash people because they didn't follow what you typed. I was only saying she was lazy IF she didn't do anything about it (which, you have to admit that you didn't say if she had or not). And, to

Quote:
ask yourself this question ask yourself is having Bush win the election even by fradulant means more important then democracy

I didn't vote for Bush. Nor did I vote for Kerry. I voted for somebody whom I thought was good for the job, not the boob in office or the puppet that challenged him. That being said, I still haven't seen anything that would say that Bush didn't win because he got the most votes. Were there issues with how the votes were counted and some voter fraud? Of course. But was it enough to change the outcome of the election? Not from where I am standing, and I'm not on either side.

As an informed voter, you have a right, and a responsibility, to make sure that your vote was counted correctly. If the machine was not taking votes correctly, it should have been taken off of the floor and not used. Period. If ANYONE used that machine after that lady couldn't enter her vote, she IS lazy because she didn't force the issue. I know that if the other 200 people in line at the time would have known that they couldn't vote correctly from that polling station, they would not have agreed to voting with it! They would have made a fuss over it and they would have HAD to take paper votes. Call the voter hotline thing, throw a fit, do SOMETHING. That was what I was saying. If she did that, GOOD FOR HER!!! If not, SHAME ON HER!!!!

GHOULMAN

Monday, November 8, 2004 9:12 PM

^^^ ? It's not some old ladies responsibility to make sure American voter laws aren't corrupted. Really. Sheesh, you are ignorant. Shut up!

Anyho'

The news is getting out. Ghoulman is right again... of course.

Slashdot.org has created a thread with some terrific links about this latest stolen US election. I'd like to use this opportunity to say I TOLD YA SO MORONS! lol!

2004 Election Weirdness Continues
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/11/08/1910250&tid=103&t
id=219

Posted by CmdrTaco on Monday November 08, @02:59PM
from the stuff-to-think-about dept.
I've read dozens of submissions about election anomolies in the last week and they show no sign of slowing so I've decided to post a few of the main ones here to let you all discuss them. The first is the Common Dreams report that shows that optically scanned votes have a strange anomoly in florida: the Diebold counties roughly matched up to party registration numbers, but optically scanned paper ballot counties showed strangeness like one county where 69.3% registered democrat, but only 28% of them voted for Kerry. Palm Beach County, Florida logged 88,000 more votes than there were voters; that machines in LaPorte, Michigan discounted 50,000 voters; in Columbus, Ohio voting machines gave Bush an extra 4,000 votes; in Broward County, Florida voting machines were counting backwards; Lastly, precincts in New Mexico gave provisional ballots that will never be counted to as many as 10% of all their voters.

FIREFLOOZYSUZIE

Tuesday, November 9, 2004 1:00 PM

Truthout.org picked up that Florida "optical scan"
voting fraud story. Go there to get a complete
run-down of WHY optical-scan voting systems are
likely to have been "hacked."

An excerpt:

The State of Florida, for example, publishes a county-by-county record of votes cast and people registered to vote by party affiliation. Net denizen Kathy Dopp compiled the official state information into a table, available at http://ustogether.org/Florida_Election.htm, and noticed something startling.

While the heavily scrutinized touch-screen voting machines seemed to produce results in which the registered Democrat/Republican ratios largely matched the Kerry/Bush vote, in Florida's counties using results from optically scanned paper ballots - fed into a central tabulator PC and thus vulnerable to hacking - the results seem to contain substantial anomalies.

In Baker County, for example, with 12,887 registered voters, 69.3% of them Democrats and 24.3% of them Republicans, the vote was only 2,180 for Kerry and 7,738 for Bush, the opposite of what is seen everywhere else in the country where registered Democrats largely voted for Kerry.

In Dixie County, with 4,988 registered voters, 77.5% of them Democrats and a mere 15% registered as Republicans, only 1,959 people voted for Kerry, but 4,433 voted for Bush.

The pattern repeats over and over again - but only in the counties where optical scanners were used. Franklin County, 77.3% registered Democrats, went 58.5% for Bush. Holmes County, 72.7% registered Democrats, went 77.25% for Bush.

Yet in the touch-screen counties, where investigators may have been more vigorously looking for such anomalies, high percentages of registered Democrats generally equaled high percentages of votes for Kerry. (I had earlier reported that county size was a variable - this turns out not to be the case. Just the use of touch-screens versus optical scanners.)

More visual analysis of the results can be seen at http://us together.org/election04/FloridaDataStats.htm, and www.rubberbug.com/temp/Florida2004chart.htm. Note the trend line - the only variable that determines a swing toward Bush was the use of optical scan machines.

One possible explanation for this is the "Dixiecrat" theory, that in Florida white voters (particularly the rural ones) have been registered as Democrats for years, but voting Republican since Reagan. Looking at the 2000 statistics, also available on Dopp's site, there are similar anomalies, although the trends are not as strong as in 2004. But some suggest the 2000 election may have been questionable in Florida, too.

One of the people involved in Dopp's analysis noted that it may be possible to determine the validity of the "rural Democrat" theory by comparing Florida's white rural counties to those of Pennsylvania, another swing state but one that went for Kerry, as the exit polls there predicted. Interestingly, the Pennsylvania analysis, available at http://ustogether.org/election04/PA_vote_patt.htm, doesn't show the same kind of swings as does Florida, lending credence to the possibility of problems in Florida.

Even more significantly, Dopp had first run the analysis while filtering out smaller (rural) counties, and still found that the only variable that accounted for a swing toward Republican voting was the use of optical-scan machines, whereas counties with touch-screen machines generally didn't swing - regardless of size.

NEUTRINOLAD

Tuesday, November 9, 2004 10:28 PM

Quote:
Besides the media has been extremly anti-bush for a while now.

Why do people believe this?
(It's a rhetorical question, I'll answer it.)
Because it's their ox being gored. That's why.
Anyone who thinks the media is anti-Bush probably had the gut reaction that the media was also pro-Clinton.
Which is a viewpoint so deluded as to impinge on insanity. Which shouldn't surprise me, as the notion of voting for Clinton or Bush is also, in my opinion, quite mad.

BARNSTORMER

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 7:54 PM

does this article sway any of the conspiracy theorists here???

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=239735&page=1

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

JRC

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 8:19 PM

You Americans blah-blah-blah there's fraud yadda-yadda-yadda, because Kerry yak-yak-yak but Bush is blah-blah-blah we here in Canada whine-whine-whine to go with our cheese yadda-yadda-yadda bunch of facsists badda-bing-badda-bang but in Canada bitch-bitch-bitch.
Bush won, Kerry didn't (unless conspiracy theories are right blah-blah-blah). Deal with it. Get on with your real lives, if you have one yadda-yadda-yadda.

By the way, when's Serenity premiering again? :-P

Everyone dies alone.

GHOULMAN

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 8:23 PM

lol!

GHOULMAN

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 8:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BarnStormer:
does this article sway any of the conspiracy theorists here???

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=239735&page=1

Brill post! Nice work and it's a perfect counter point to the discussion here! You rock, really.

I'm aware that the mainstream media is scared, such as last night when Tom Brokaw refered to the stories about election fraud as "conspiracy theories" as if he wasn't reading from a script.

Let's keep in mind the mainstream media is the centre arm of the Corporate support for Bush/Cheney.

Last night Tom quoted this guy as this article does...
Doug Chapin, a nonpartisan election analyst, finds the claims to be baseless. "There were no problems that would lead me to believe that there were stolen elections or widespread fraud," he said.

Doug Chapin runs electiononline.org which is independant and run thanks to a grant at Richmond University.

But even Doug's website has a list of stories coming out about voter fraud. Now, how many stories must there be before it's a problem?

One! Stupid!

And that's why it's obvious there is corruption regarding the election. There should not be any story because under the law of the United States of America EACH VOTE IS COUNTED... or else.

So where is the "or else"?

Not on Tom Brokaws' show. Which is his job btw.

BARNSTORMER

Wednesday, November 10, 2004 9:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Quote:
Originally posted by BarnStormer:
does this article sway any of the conspiracy theorists here???

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=239735&page=1

Brill post! Nice work and it's a perfect counter point to the discussion here! You rock, really.

I'm aware that the mainstream media is scared, such as last night when Tom Brokaw refered to the stories about election fraud as "conspiracy theories" as if he wasn't reading from a script.

Let's keep in mind the mainstream media is the centre arm of the Corporate support for Bush/Cheney.

Last night Tom quoted this guy as this article does...
Doug Chapin, a nonpartisan election analyst, finds the claims to be baseless. "There were no problems that would lead me to believe that there were stolen elections or widespread fraud," he said.

Doug Chapin runs electiononline.org which is independant and run thanks to a grant at Richmond University.

But even Doug's website has a list of stories coming out about voter fraud. Now, how many stories must there be before it's a problem?

One! Stupid!

And that's why it's obvious there is corruption regarding the election. There should not be any story because under the law of the United States of America EACH VOTE IS COUNTED... or else.

So where is the "or else"?

Not on Tom Brokaws' show. Which is his job btw.

ROFLOL

Yep....Spoken like a true conspiracy theorist (aka Nut Job).

Ghoulboy, you are sooooo predictable. You are one of four posters on this board who I just knew would respond to this post in just this way.

Any new source or analyst you don't quote yourself is obviously on the take from the right wing republican bushie stormtroopers.

And then you of course have to throw in the obligatory insult (ie One! Stupid!)

I posted this just to bait you Ghoulboy. Had fun doing it to. It's kind of funny to read your responses that get more and more indignant and angry as time goes on.

You and your ridiculous conspiracy theories make it kind of like watching unaired episodes of the X-files right here on my PC!!!!!

Fun, Fun, Fun.

Am I a Lion?... No, I think I'ma tellin' the truth.

BarnStormer

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 11, 2004 1:43 PM

^^^ I didn't mean to say you were stupid. I ment to point out that if there is even one story of voting fraud it should be on the news... but it isn't.

And you're right, I've been declared a "conspiracy theory". The election was won by Bush, Tom Browkaw said so.

HA! If you believe that...

A Stolen Election?
editorial | Posted November 9, 2004
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041129&s=corn
Then there's the issue of who is running the show. Only a few companies manufacture electronic voting machines. They are not transparent. They do not use open-source code.

Last year, Walden O'Dell, the head of Diebold, a leading manufacturer of touch-screen machines, declared in a fundraising letter for the Ohio Republican Party that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."

That hardly inspired confidence.

And across the country, oversight of voting is conducted by partisan officials. In Ohio, Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican and conservative activist, oversaw the voting. On his watch, the polling place for Kenyon College was equipped with only two voting machines. Yet about 1,100 people--mostly students--wanted to vote there. These voters (and you can guess whom they preferred) had to wait up to nine hours. It doesn't require much cynicism to suspect that this was no accident.

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 11, 2004 3:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by NeutrinoLad:
Quote:
Besides the media has been extremly anti-bush for a while now.

Why do people believe this?
(It's a rhetorical question, I'll answer it.)
Because it's their ox being gored. That's why.
Anyone who thinks the media is anti-Bush probably had the gut reaction that the media was also pro-Clinton.
Which is a viewpoint so deluded as to impinge on insanity. Which shouldn't surprise me, as the notion of voting for Clinton or Bush is also, in my opinion, quite mad.

Great point.

It's a switcheroo. Basically, since what the Bush/Cheney White House is doing is insane and illegal they have to attack they who will point out the obvious - journalists. Notice the Republicans attack "liberals" instead of simply the position of other parties. They attack peoples beliefs and people themselves (like all the childish jerks attacking me on this thread without one mention of the thread topic)... which is facile and frankly remenicent of the sort of rhetoric heard in 1930s Germeny.

Unluckily, each news outlet in the USA is a right wing Repulican supporter. Each form of news Americans see is owned by one of three massive corporations. And corporations are insane too, so they make great bed fellows for Bush/Cheney.

But something new is in the mix, the Internet, which is why the rhetoric has gone from attacking the news as "liberal media" to the Internet. Specifically Bloggers.

But it isn't bloggers who scare the Republicans it's the Internet itself as it can present information unfiltered through corporate teeth. It takes away the control of the corporation and government to "manufacture concent" on issues like the useless Iraq Invasion, Bushs' fundementalism, 100000 dead women and children in Iraq, and yet another stolen election in what used to be the worlds symbol of freedom and a bright future.

CONNORFLYNN

Thursday, November 11, 2004 3:25 PM

The OSCE Preliminary report contradicts the suggestion that The American election was strife with fraud.

http://www.osce.org/documents/odihr/2004/11/3779_en.pdf

In general it appears that the largest difficulty was the number of voters (10 million + more then any previous election) and their ability to vote in a timely fashion.

CONNORFLYNN

Thursday, November 11, 2004 3:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:

But something new is in the mix, the Internet, which is why the rhetoric has gone from attacking the news as "liberal media" to the Internet. Specifically Bloggers.

But it isn't bloggers who scare the Republicans it's the Internet itself as it can present information unfiltered through corporate teeth. It takes away the control of the corporation and government to "manufacture concent" on issues like the useless Iraq Invasion, Bushs' fundementalism, 100000 dead women and children in Iraq, and yet another stolen election in what used to be the worlds symbol of freedom and a bright future.

Actually Bloggers scare the elite media period. Dan Rather and his media cronies lamented the fact that bloggers were quick to point out the fallacy of the "Forged" documents. I am researching this aspect. As I understand it, there have been calls by the media to limit bloggers. There are very few media sources that are pro-conservative or rather unbiased (In that they allow the conservative side to be heard at all). Fox tends to be conservative leaning and becaiuse of it, they are blowing CNN and MSNBC out of the water in ratings. What bothers me about this is that media in general SHOULD be unbiased. They SHOULD be required to pose only facts and figures, not opinion (unless it is specifically characterized as opinion).

The majority of the American media outlets are very much pro-fringe liberalism and partisan towards the democratic party in terms of opinion and donation. Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Chris Matthews, Katie Couric, Walter Cronkite, Judy Woodruff (Still on suicide watch I believe), Wolf Blitzer..Not to mention all the News Outlets that endorsed Kerry and the Democrats publicly..shall I go on hehe.. (It's frightening really).

Then you have the Sean Hannitys, Rush Limbaughs (I still can't believe this guy is on the air), Michael Savages etc.. who though very conservative are vastly outnumbered.

What is most interesting to me is the effect that bloggers in general are having on the political process as well as the effect they are having on the media figureheads. It also makes me wonder to what effect did Media play a part in directing previous elections and administrations.

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 11, 2004 4:01 PM

It's not the bloggers specifically Connerflynn... the medium is the message!

Originally posted by Ghoulman earlier...
The media is owned by three (well, 5) monsterous multinational Corproations. Each one a Bush supporter.

Anti-Bush media isn't on TV at least.

Let me muse a little on this concept of so called "liberal media".... shall I?

The "liberal media" charge comes only out of the Republican camp. And it's a lie. This sentement has been used by right wing liars since Nixon. The purpose is to imply a bias on the part of a media that, *pfft*, just parrots whatever belief the Government wants the public to believe anyho'.

Walter Cronkite once said that journalists often report stories from the point of view of the poor and disinfranchiased to offset government excess and pork barrel elite greed. This often brought a charge of "liberal media" from the right wing ... this is the real "liberal media".

So basically, the charge of "liberal media" is based on Republicans skewing the truth about people doing thier job.

Nixon!

SLACKMASTERACTUAL

Thursday, November 11, 2004 4:26 PM

Liberals are just delusional, there was no fraud, they can not stand how irrelevant they have become.

The Truth

[img] http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v377/dsmith540/untitled.bmp [/img]

RUE

Thursday, November 11, 2004 7:47 PM

In every single instance I could find, in every state and by every polling operation, Bush went up in the tally as compared to the exits, while Kerry went down. Nothing is statistically impossible, but that was d*mn unlikely. It's not one particular instance or another that begs for an explination, it's the confluence of instances.
BTW the person who was first crying about it was an apparently conservative blogger who was saying it was a conspiracy by the liberal media to suppress the conservative vote. But between the time I saw it and went back for it (15minutes) it had disappeared. I suspect someone had written saying SSHHHH !! You FOOL! Bush WON! What are you trying to do ??
And the independent pollsters are chagrined to say the least. Polling is their only business. Have the tools suddenly broken?
I would certainly like to see a comprehensive AND UNBIASED study of what happened, with of course all outcomes up for consideration - there was a perfect statistical polling storm, a connecting influence, a previously unknown source of bias, or something wrong with the voting process itself. Surely you couldn't object to that, could you?

GHOULMAN

Thursday, November 11, 2004 8:00 PM

Thanks RUE.

And the FACT that the US election was a fraud is still an issue no matter how much the neofascists want to attack me.

Ask Ralph. My hero!

Nader wants every ballot legally verified
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?art_id=qw1100186102957U213&set_id=1&cli
ck_id=3&sf=
November 11 2004 at 05:32PM
Washington - Ralph Nader, an independent presidential candidate this year, has called for recounts of the November 2 voting results, saying that amid allegations of irregularities, he wanted to ensure every ballot was counted.

Nader, who this year drew about one percent of the vote nationally, told a press conference on Wednesday that he was speaking out for the "thousands" of American voters asking for recounts and not on his own behalf.

"Over 2 000 citizens, including voting rights advocates, are urging in writing the Nader Camejo campaign to help make sure every vote is counted and counted accurately. The Nader Camejo campaign does not view the election to be over merely because concession speeches, which have no legal effect, have been given. Rather they are over when every vote is counted and legally certified," Nader said

GHOULMAN

Monday, November 15, 2004 7:58 PM

Fuck Tom Browkaw!

Media ignoring election fraud
Gayle Rogalski
Delray Beach
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/opinion/letters/sfl-pbmail979xnov15,0
,4998399.story?coll=sfla-news-letters
I would like to thank the authors of two Nov. 9 letters, regarding the real results of the Nov. 2 election. These letters are the only mention I have seen in the media about the fraudulent election we just had.

Obviously, the mainstream media has been unable to print the truth about this election. For those of us who thought we voted for the candidates of our choice, our votes very well may not have been counted that way. For instance, in Baker County, where 69.3 percent of 12,887 registered voters are Democrats and 24.3 percent are Republicans, the supposed Democratic vote count was 2,180 for Kerry and 7,738 for Bush. Does anyone believe that is correct?

Apparently this was repeated in enough places to shift just enough votes from one candidate to the other. Manipulation of the main computers compiling the total votes can be very easily and quickly accomplished as we have just seen.

Of course everyone knew Ohio would be manipulated after a major Republican and CEO of a voting machine company vowed to do anything he had to to get Bush re-elected.

This is the tip of a very crooked iceberg. This election (as well as the 2000 election) and this country were hijacked by the people with the most power in this country. Of course, the paper trail addition to voting machines that was fought so hard for and at every turn denied in this state alone allowed for this fiasco to be.

Obviously voting in this country is no longer a means to elect our public servants. It is quite obvious many of these people are not serving us but their own agendas. Please call your congressional representatives and demand an investigation of this fiasco. The future necessitates people waking up and taking responsiblity for their government before it's too late if it isn't already.

Learn what is really going on from alternative sources because you are not being told the truth by anyone else. Learn what is going on and what you can do to help change it and take back our country. The future of your children and grandchildren depend

GHOULMAN

Monday, November 15, 2004 9:06 PM

Fuck the New York Times! ... oh wait...

MAKING VOTES COUNT

About Those Election Results
EDITORIAL...
Published: November 14, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/14/opinion/14sun1.html?oref=login
I'd like to quote this paragraph in particular as it points out just how insane the American election has become...
The outrageous decision by Warren County, Ohio, to lock down the building where votes were being counted is an extreme example of another serious problem with the elections: a lack of transparency. In some states, reporters are barred from polling places. The wild rumors about Cuyahoga County, Ohio, where the official results appeared to include an extra 90,000 votes, were a result of its bizarrely complicated method of posting election results, which is different in even- and odd-numbered years. The nation needs to develop an election culture in which officials in every part of the country automatically keep things as open - and as simple - as humanly possible.

... different in even and odd years???

WHAT THE FFFFFFF...

Sorry... loosing it here!

LEXIBLOCK

Monday, November 15, 2004 11:36 PM

Give it up GHOULMAN you can't win. You have to let it run its course, it is unlikely that Canada is next on the invasion list. But when you start hearing talk about changing the law so bush can say on for another 4 years (to finish his "war on terror") then worry - then start to prepare for WWIII

RUE

Tuesday, November 16, 2004 5:29 AM

Anyway, I did find this file about the recent election by Steven Freeman PhD:
http://truthout.org/unexplainedexitpoll.pdf

Before it gets categorized as just another whack-job manifesto, I did look up his bona fides on the internet:
http://www.getcited.org/mbrz/11068805
http://center.grad.upenn.edu/center/nav.cgi?page=freeman

Since I'm not sure how long the links will be active, here is some information from the paper:

"Exit polls showed him (Kerry) ahead in nearly every battleground state, in many cases by sizeable margins. ... But then in key state after key state, counts were showing very different numbers than the polls predicted, and the differentials were all in the same direction. ... in every one, the shift favors Bush."
"The media has largely ignored this discrepancy, suggesting that the polls were flawed, within normal sampling error, or that it was a statistical anomaly. In this paper, I examine the likelihood of each of these assumptions: validity of exit polls, sampling error, and the possibility of statistical anomaly."
He then goes on to briefly discuss who did the media exit polls for the election. He then addresses the history and overall reliability of exit polls around the world (excellent predictive power.)
He then analyzes the exit polls of Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania, and concludes that the likelihood Kerry received only 48.5% of the vote in Ohio (as counted) when the exit poll indicated 52.1% of the vote was less than 1/1,000; for Florida the chances of a count of 47.1% of the vote as compared to the exit poll of 49.7% was less than 3/1,000; and for Pennsylvania the chance of a count of 50.8% as compared to a poll of 54.1% was less than 2/1,000. Any two together were 1/ 1 million, three together were 1/ 250 million.
He then examines several factors that may (or may not) have affected the exit polls.
He then concludes: "I have tried to demonstrate that exit poll data is fundamentally sound, that deviations between exit poll predictions and vote tallies in the three critical battleground states could not have occurred strictly by chance or random error, and that no solid explanations have as yet been provided to explain this discrepancy. ...
Systematic fraud or mistabulation is a premature conclusion, but the unexplained exit poll discrepancies make it an unavoidable hypothesis ..."

Finally, from Government Computing News:
http://www.gcn.com/vol1_no1/daily-updates/27882-1.html
11/11/04

GAO investigation of e-voting problems requested
By William Jackson
GCN Staff
"Half-a-dozen Democratic congressmen have asked the Government Accountability Office to investigate reports of voting irregularities in the Nov. 2 election, many of them involving electronic touch-screen voting machines.
A Nov. 5 letter to comptroller general David M. Walker cited news reports of problems in California, Florida, North Carolina and Ohio in which thousands of votes were erroneously recorded, deleted or added."

Whether or not these items get pursued is to be seen.

HKCAVALIER

Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:18 AM

Criminals learn from the mistakes of criminals before them. Nixon made some very instructive mistakes, as did Reagan. This new bunch seems to have it down, but they all have relied upon plausible deniability for their success. As long as there is any chance, any chance at all that their criminal actions could be the result of an astronomical fluke, Americans have shown that they will swallow any coincidence theory.

Folks on this board have likened our country to a disfunctional family. As long as the family is focused on an external threat they will close ranks and protect their father's good name, even when their father is a criminal.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

ALUCARD

Tuesday, November 16, 2004 7:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JenDandy:
A question for Ghoulman, not to offend, just out of curiousity (plus you can't get angry at someone who knows bugger all about politics, am I right?):

If you're in Canada why do you care so much about what's going on in the U.S.? No country is perfect, not even yours, surely so if you feel so strongly about politics -forgive me if you have before- why don't you start some threads on what's wrong with where you live?

Sig Rebel

amen

RUE

Thursday, November 18, 2004 4:22 AM

Regrettably I was only a short-term resident of Canada (6mos). But I lived there long enough to know it may not be Camelot, but it's a sight better than the US*. So, out of curiosity, do either one of you know much about Canada?

* http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/us_poverty
WASHINGTON (AFP) - The United States ranks 27th in a study of social progress worldwide due to social service budget cuts and chronic poverty plaguing major US cities, a University of Pennyslvania report found.
"The United States has gone from 18th in the world to 27th. We are now at the same level as Poland and Slovenia," said professor Richard Estes, author of the 2004 Report Card on World Social Progress, a quality of life ranking.
The ranking, based on data governments relay to the United Nations, and the World Bank, measures countries' capacity to meet citizens' needs in terms of health care, education, human rights, and cultural diversity and other factors.

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 26, 2004 1:09 PM

The Ghoulman is right again. Tom Browkaw is a liar!

Why do you doubt the Ghoulman? How long o' Lord?

GAO to Investigate Voting Irregularies
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4636340,00.html
Thursday November 25, 2004 1:31 AM
By LARRY MARGASAK
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Congress' investigative agency, responding to complaints from around the country, has begun to look into the Nov. 2 vote count, including the handling of provisional ballots and malfunctions of voting machines.

The presidential results won't change, but the studies could lead to changes.

The Government Accountability Office usually begins investigations in response to specific requests from Congress, but the agency's head, Comptroller General David Walker, said the GAO acted on its own because of the many comments it received about ballot counting.

GAO officials said the investigation was not triggered by a request from several House Democrats, who wrote the agency this month seeking an investigation. The effort, led by senior Judiciary Committee Democrat John Conyers of Michigan, was not joined by any Republicans.
CLICK THE LINK FOR THE ARTICLE

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 26, 2004 1:52 PM

The most recent example of Republican manipulation is notorious. After the Bush-Gore race for the presidency in 2000, it later emerged that, under the governorship of George W's brother Jeb in Florida, around 30,000 black voters (overwhelmingly Democratic) had been illegally excluded from the voting rolls. When a stop was put to the recounts in the state, Bush was declared the winner by fewer than 540 votes.
http://www.newstatesman.com

GHOULMAN

Friday, November 26, 2004 3:57 PM

Special Report
Saudis, Enron money helped pay for US rigged election
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/112504Madsen/112504madsen
.html
By Wayne Madsen
Online Journal Contributing Writer

November 25, 2004—According to informed sources in Washington and Houston, the Bush campaign spent some $29 million to pay polling place operatives around the country to rig the election for Bush. The operatives were posing as Homeland Security and FBI agents but were actually technicians familiar with Diebold, Sequoia, ES&S, Triad, Unilect, and Danaher Controls voting machines. These technicians reportedly hacked the systems to skew the results in favor of Bush.

The leak about the money and the rigged election apparently came from technicians who were promised to be paid a certain amount for their work but the Bush campaign interlocutors reneged and some of the technicians are revealing the nature of the vote rigging program.

There have been media reports from around the country concerning the locking down of precincts while votes were being tallied. In one unprecedented action in Warren County, Ohio, election officials locked down the facility where votes were being counted. The officials said this was in response to a Level 10 high-threat terrorist warning being issued by the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI for Warren County. George Bush won 72 percent of the vote in Warren County, much larger than his percentage of victory statewide.

The money to rig the election in favor of Bush reportedly came from an entity called Five Star Trust, largely based in Houston but a worldwide entity that is directly tied to the Saudi Royal Family. Five Star Trust was termed "a well-protected vehicle" that has been used to support both Bush and Osama bin Laden in the US and around the world.

Other money used to fund the election rigging was from siphoned Enron money stored away in accounts in the Cook Islands, which was once the base of one of the more questionable and Saudi-linked BCCI subsidiaries. Cook Islands banks also handled some of the weapons smuggling financing of the Iran-Contra scandal. A former Justice Department attorney who helped prosecute the BCCI case said the use of the Cook Islands by the Bush reelection team indicates they wanted the bank arrangements to be a "quick folding tent" operation that would cease to exist when the election was over. He said the Cook Islands was notorious for not requiring any documentation for such operations
Wayne Madsen
Senior Fellow, Electronic Privacy Information Center

Mr. Madsen is a Senior Fellow of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), a non-partisan privacy public advocacy group in Washington, DC. He works with member of Congress and congressional committees on legislation and hearings of common interest.
http://iml.dartmouth.edu/ists/madsen.html

BOJESPHOB

Tuesday, November 30, 2004 10:55 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ghoulman:
^^^ ? It's not some old ladies responsibility to make sure American voter laws aren't corrupted. Really. Sheesh, you are ignorant. Shut up!

So I'm ignorant because I expect her to be responsible and make sure that her vote counts?? How is that ignorant? It's called taking responsibility for the things that one can control. If you cannot place your vote, then it IS your responsibility to bring it up when you are voting, NOT AFTERWARDS. Plain and simple. Basically, because she (and others) did not make a scene when it happened, it allowed other people to vote on that faulty (tampered with) machine, and essentially allowed it to misinterpret their votes. If it was a paper ballot and that ballot was "lost", then of course it would not be her fault that she couldn't do anything about it. This is like if it only said "Bush" on a paper ballot and you couldn't even vote for Kerry on it. If you know you cannot vote for a person that you know you should be able to vote for, there is an expectation that you bring it up immediately to the officials, then if they don't do anything, you call the voting hotline, or your local representative. Voting is a right AND a responsibility, not JUST a right. We were not given the right to vote, we had to fight for it. We have that right because people stood up and fought against oppression to get it. They didn't just say "Oh well, it doesn't count, so I guess I'll just complain about it" and get it. It wasn't the laws that caused the problems with the election, it was people. The law didn't force her to not say anything when that machine didn't work, she decided it wasn't worthwhile to do so, or she was afraid to. Every person here in the US, if they are eligible, have the right to vote and the responsibility to make sure that they did everything they could to make sure it counted, old or no, minority or no, blind or no, deaf or no, low-IQ or no, and if they cannot themselves, find someone who can for them. The people who are willing to bend election laws and corrupt an otherwise good election system count on these people, because they know that they will not cause a fuss when they actually try to vote. Who is easier to fool, a person who knows their rights and will stand up for them, or someone who will let anything happen and just bitch about it afterwards? If there was corruption in this election (which I am not convinced of, even though I didn't vote for Bush nor Kerry, I voted for someone else) then they need to stand trial for it and be thrown in prison. But, that still doesn't take that lady off of the hook for not doing anything about it.

If it is ignorant to expect people to do their part, then I guess I am. I'd rather be ignorant and know 100% that I did everything to make sure my vote counted that I could than to be pissing and moaning because I was too lazy to do anything about it when I did vote. I guess it's too much to expect people to actually know their rights and stand up for them. And people wonder why we have so many problems in this country......

HARDWARE

Wednesday, December 1, 2004 6:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:

...Folks on this board have likened our country to a disfunctional family. As long as the family is focused on an external threat they will close ranks and protect their father's good name, even when their father is a criminal...

You know, reading this makes me reflect that we had an external enemy for over 45 years in the Soviet Union. With the fall of the Warsaw pact someone may have found it in their best interest to manufacture another one.

Oh, and since I happen to be an American and a technical professional let me say that the voting machines are amazingly easy to hack. One was hacked on national TV in about 90 seconds. I can dig up a link if anyone is interested.

I'd prefer paper and pencils deposited in a locked ballot box. Keep it simple and stupid.

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

1 2 NEXT PAGE LAST PAGE