Given the large amount of noise about possible election fraud before the November elections and the rather deafening silence afterwards, can the Democrats reasonably complain about electoral fraud if they lose the next one?
I thought there was/is quite a bit of noise regarding the Florida 13th Congressional District, where 18,000 electronic votes apparently went missing.
Yes, if fraud is involved in the next election.
There may indeed have been some fraud in the 2006 election, but not enough to materially affect the outcome. Alternatively, if there was some, the Democrats have decided not to complain about an election they won in spite of some fraud.
What I would hope is that that the new majority in Congress takes steps to ensure that fraud is less likely in future federal elections, on either side, e.g., by requiring a written record to validate election machines.
I would still like to see all voting machines have auditable paper trails just the same. Those damn Diebold boxes are just too easy to hack, as has been REPEATEDLY demonstrated.
I would like for Dems not to be able to steal votes wholesale, just as much as I would like for Pubbies not to.
And for the records there’s ALL KINDS OF FUCKING EVIDENCE THAT THE 2000 ELECTION WAS STOLEN (see: Choicepoint) so don’t think just because the theft either didn’t work or wasn’t attempted this time, that negates what happened then. It doesn’t, not by a long shot.
How’s that for noise?
What deafening silence? All the folks I know who were concerned about e-voting abuse before the election are still concerned about e-voting abuse after the election.
I sincerely hope the Democratic Congress makes a major overhaul of electronic voting machine standards one of their top priorities come January.
HBO is presently running a movie called “Hacking Democracy” that makes a very convincing case for the ease of hacking into the chips (undetected) that run these things.