I know there are so many Kennedys it’s hard to keep them straight – but so far as I can tell from here, the Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., whose firm brought this lawsuit has never held or run for public office and is not running for office now.
If he were – well, if I were running for office and suspected any slightest chance of funny business in the vote count, I’m sure I would want to bring a suit like this to forestall the possibility; and good for me and better for the people!
Well, a flier that says Republicans should vote on election day and Democrats the day after won’t affect the turn out of gullible Republicans, but will of gullible democrats, won’t it? Fliers targeted to democratic precincts will also. Bet none of this stuff was mailed to low income republican neighborhoods.
I assume he meant in support of democrats running in midterm elections, not in support of his own race.
But I do love the attitude of “you want a fair election? What are you up to anyhow?” around here.
I’m not saying the voter gets a receipt. The printed copy goes into a lockbox (we can borrow Gore’s) which can only be opened by a state election official in the capital. The local yokels couldn’t get into it and alter anything. The voter looks at the paper, it says yep I voted for Kerry, that goes into the box and becomes the official ballot.
Since they were telling only Democrats to vote on the wrong day, yes I am.
I read your cite BrainGlutton. YAWN Same old shit. Lots of alligations, lots of crying “I’m the victim”, not a lot of proof. And why don’t you try giving cites from something aproaching the mainstream press? Most of the time when asked for cites, you furnish links to some blog or a group like PFW that’s so biased that British motorists look at it through their drivers side window. And I include the NAACP in that assesment.
I thought Tobin was going to jail because of his participation in a voter suppression scheme in New Hampshire… No? What about the lawsuit that was settled out of court, NAACP vs Harris, with the result that the NAACP are now monitoring Florida elections due to the shennaigans in 2000. Does that count?
How about the public statement by the Michigan lawmaker, John whathisname, Something along the lines of “we will have trouble this election unless we suppress the Democrat vote” in 2004. Not voter suppression per se, but definately eyebrow raising, yes?
Then there have been many allegations that I have not been able to find resolution for. The Arizona firm hired by the GOP to do voter drives that was tearing up the voter registration forms of democrats. There was a lawsuit filed in 04 or 05, but I can’t find out the results… There were also a bunch of partisan “poll watchers” that tried to intimidate voters in heavily democratic districs in Arkansas, Ohio and Michigan in 04. Some of these people were actually on the staff of elected Republican officials. Some of these people were also taken away by law enforcement agencies, but I have not heard if they were charged, or more importantly, if they were organized…
Anyway, by and large you are pretty much correct, lots of allegations and few actual convictions (at least that I can find). Regardless, the whole thing smells bad to me and I, personally, distrust the current party in power.
Regarding diebold, the reluctance to create a paper trail is fishy and I don’t buy most of the arguments against it. Too technically challenging, will fail often: Bullshit, atms have had pretty much full proof printers for more than two decade now. Won’t stop hackers, if some wants to cheat someone will find way: Yes, but why not make it more challenging. Not needed, software is 99.9% fullproof and people must be on site to hack in: Please. This is a reason not to make something more fullproof? - Can you imagine this type of argument used with airport security or some other battleground in the war on terror?
Oh, and if you want cites regarding Tobin and NAACP vs Harris, or for that matter, any of the other allegations in this post, request it and I will track them down and provide them tomorrow…
Since the elections will not be overturned in any case, It can be seen that the suit and statements we terrible losers ask for is simply to have a proper count next time.That is the point nothing more.
If the repubs are in the voying majority they will win. if not they should lose.
The bradblog has shown voting areas where 100 % of vote went to Bush. And \where more votes went to Bush than were registerered.
Lets get a fair count. The fact that elections have been suspicious in the past is no reason not to fix it properly.
Can you provide a reputable cite that shows voting areas that went 100% to Bush, or that Bush got more votes in an area than are registered? Far be it from me to question so fine a source as something called bradblog, but before getting all hot and bothered about it I’d kind of like to see this backed up by a more mainstream source.
-XT
ttp://news.google.com/news?q=diebold+election+machines&hl=en&hs=B4k&lr=&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official_s&sa=X&oi=news&ct=title
This is a site. If you type in Diebod election problems you will find many. Something called the Bradblog can be dismissed out of hand. However there is tons of information and several ststes have had problems with cirtification.
Um…thats not exactly what I asked you for there chief. Re-read what I asked you for (the key word being ‘you’ there…not up to me to do your research for you. After all, YOU made the claim). Try again or just let it go…
-XT
Let me chime in with xtisme’s request - cite? A cite is not a link to Google and an invitation to browse. A cite is a link to a reputable source that confirms the information you’re hawking.
And since Brickerblog says that Bradblog is full of it, I guess that cancels out Bradblog, eh?
By the way – when the credulous right was accepting things like Kerry’s self-inflicted wounds to win his Purple Heart, or Vince Foster’s death at the hands of the Clinton Cabal, folks here rightly railed at the uncritical acceptance of those kinds of off-the-wall accusations. People floating them here would be piled-on, and hounded mercilessly for citation, as well they should have been.
But on THIS subject… we see a post claiming that there were areas where 100 % of vote went to Bush… and where is the pile-on?
Ask and ye shall receive. From the House Judiciary Report: (warning PDF)
from page 57:
The House Report cites these references for this section:
Jim Woods, In One Precinct, Bush’s Tally Was Supersized by a Computer Glitch,
Columbus Dispatch, Nov. 5, 2004
Glitch Gave Bush Extra Votes in Ohio, ASSOC PRESS, Nov. 5, 2004.
My answer matches the question exactly.
Only to a partisan who had decided ahead of time what I thought. Or rather, how my response could be characterized in the most perjorative manner possible.
So you realize the list was limited and inflammatory - so you decide to try it again?
I’ll answer again, then - the recognition that most of the motivation behind the endless complaints frome Democrats about fraud, and concerning “fraud” that allegedly disadvantages Democrats only - in the absence of solid evidence - is not “being against fair and secure voting machines”. That’s a clumsy smear.
I am not a Clinton supporter.
That’s not quite the attitude around here. It’s more like “why do you assume that any election won by Bush is suspect? And why is it that the Dems only seem to care about fraud when they lose?”
Why is it that virtually 100% of the kvetching about these repeated, unfounded, unproven allegations concerns Ohio and Florida? Might it have something to do with who won those states?
Why, when it comes to equally likely (or unlikely) cases of vote fraud in states that Democrats won, is the silence so absolute? If you care so much about fair and open elections, why do you only talk about, think about, rant about, care about only some of them? And why do the ones you care about always seem to be the ones you lost?
We’ve gone around and around on this before. I’m sure all the Democrat partisans on this board will agree with you - in theory. But I am equally sure that a good proportion of them will simply assume that the Republican votes have to be suspect. And also sure that one of the key events that triggers suspicion among the partisans here is when Dems lose. When they win, somehow or other that subject doesn’t seem to receive the same level of attention.
Feel free to disprove this if you like. I am welcome to links to threads on this board discussing the possibility of voter fraud committed by Democrats. Might be a good thing to find. We could determine what level of evidence is proper before we start jiggering the voting machines again.
Nah, this is just more bullshit. A request for proof is not a claim that Republicans are as pure as dawn’s dewy fingers.
I have trouble with the word “probable” in the above, given the one-sidedness of the examination of the circumstances of the last couple Presidential elections. Accusations are not proof. And one-sided accusations based on a highly selective standard of “proof” that varies with the affiliation of the accused are worth less still.
Methinks the problem is how easily you detect smoke. If you don’t seem to notice when Democrats light up, but go into a repeated tizzy of accusations that people are dying of cancer because of Republican smoking, but can’t seem to come up with any X-rays or death certificates or much beyond a blog who says that he met someone whose brother died after going to a Republican smoker, I will be less likely to believe that it is fire in general to which you object.
Regards,
Shodan
Why War? There are a lot of sites available that deal with Diebold probs. The bradblog is the most inclusive and its archives go from the start which was started by a whistleblower.
Actually, I think we were hoping for something a little more specific, i.e. that actually establishes what you claimed.
Here’s your claim -
So far you have provided two rather general links to some blogs and told us to do your work for you.
I said before, accusations aren’t evidence.
Try again, or withdraw the allegation.
Regards,
Shodan
Do you have BobLibDem on your ignore list or is his link to the Report by the House Judiciary Democrats not good enough?
Um…I can’t read a PDF where I am atm, but from the quote you cited:
Note the bolded/underlined section. This SEEMS to say that it was a compute glitch, that was found and the totals adjusted…i.e. it had no bearing on the election at all and certainly doesn’t constitute the claim made. Perhaps I’m missing something in the PDF that wasn’t put in your post Bob…or perhaps Least Original User Name Ever was talking about something else and needs to actual cite for his/her own claims?
-XT
Eyer8, I don’t believe I’m on Shodan’s ignore list. He has been kind enough to reply to me several times in the past, including today on another topic.
XT- gotta get yourself the Acrobat reader. There is also an html version.
Anyway, yes, they fixed those votes. From the very next page of the pdf file:
And later in that page:
We really don’t know the extent of the election fraud in the Ohio 2004 election. There certainly seems to be enough smoke to make one think that there is fire somewhere.
That’s just the incident we know about. How many other “glitches” went uncaught?