Keith Olberman on MSNBC's Countdown keeps the Ohio vote "mess" (or is it fraud?) alive in his daily blog today:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6210240/

At least somebody's doing it!!

By the way, if Kerry won Ohio would he have won the presidency?

Thanks Keith...

and yes Aronnax... he would be President-elect Kerry.

It is soooo frustrating that these are not among the top news stories of the day, that these are not the headlines of the newspapers

Thank God for Keith!

And Randi Rhodes!

Once again Thanks KEITH!

Wild stuff...

You are so right - it is noted in a small section of the local newspaper yesterday that there would be a recount in Ohio for the presidential election...

If kerry had asked for it it would be across the healdines of all major papers - but since its a Green Party candidate its not - and the wildest thing is - it has the potentially same meaning as if Kerry had asked...

Attaboy, Mr. Olbermann!!!

I just checked and it looks like Kerry is behind Bush by about 100,000 votes in the current Ohio tally. Could there be enough incorrect votes to put Kerry ahead? You guys are right - this has the potential to be a nail biter, and nobody's covering it!

Show your support for Keith by emailing him (it's on his page on the MSNBC web site) and watching Countdown!

"A UC Berkeley sociology professor, director of his school’s survey research center, is scheduled to conduct a news conference at 1 PM ET today at which his “research team” will report that “irregularities associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000-260,000 or more excess votes” to President Bush in Florida."

Do your part. When you become aware of newsworty events, alert CSPAN.

Suggest Events: Submit a public event that you think C-SPAN should cover -
events@c-span.org

Main Number: (202) 737-3220
Viewer Services: (765) 464-3080 (for programming questions)

This contributor seems to think there is a very good chance - its not in the bag - but its a good chance...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/14/144941/51

[UPDATE] This Election is Not Over -- With Exciting New Math Calculations!
by jsmdlawyer
Sun Nov 14th, 2004 at 11:49:40 PST

Since 11/2, there have been various stages of dealing with what happened. Anger, denial, claims of fraud, etc., etc. Blaming Kerry for "quitting." More recently, talk has shifted to procedural issues like how to fix the voting system (didn't we DO this four years ago? Apparently not.)
What has become clear to me, reading between the lines and ignoring a lot of {expletive deleted] (sorry) is that THIS ELECTION IS NOT OVER. Floating around in various threads is the notion that several states are still counting votes (Ohio and New Mexico principally, but also Iowa and Nevada).

Diaries :: jsmdlawyer's diary ::

I made a comment here this morning about the 155,000 provisional ballots in Ohio, and the critical importance of the requested recount, so as to get to the 93,000 undervotes.

Folks, it's not over. I don't think the Kerry folks think it's over either. If I'm right, and if it comes out the way I think it might, it will be the greatest stealth campaign in the history of the world, quite frankly.

Let's pull it together. Right now, it's 286-252 in favor of Bush. Ohio has not even begun to count the provisional ballots. There are 155,000 or so. Ohio has a history of provisional ballots, based on state law. In 2000, 90% of the ballots counted, and of those I understand that 90% were for Gore. Applying that standard to the 155,000 would give Kerry 125,550 additional votes, and Bush 13,950. That would narrow the margin from 132,000 (the 136,000 figure includes the now-infamous Gahanna 4,000 vote error in Franklin County) down to about 24,600. Originally, this was why Kerry conceded; he just couldn't get it done on the provisional ballots alone.

Ahh, but now there's a new development. A recount (or an "audit," as one diary called it). Fine. Whatever, call it what you want. But Kerry couldn't ask for it, because he'd be called a sore loser, Al Gore with a Brahmin accent. The lawyers are there, they're sniffing around, they're ready to deal with the shenanigans. But (here's the great part) it's not Kerry's recount. The media is treating the Cobb/Badnarik recount request as a joke, but it's not. If the recount is held, the first thing elections officials have to do is dust off the 93,000 undervotes on punch cards (dear God, not again). And yes, Ohio has a uniform state standard: 0 or 1 corners attached, vote counts. 2 or 3, no dice. So the recount won't be shut down -- and Blackwell can't change the rules. God, I love Bush v. Gore (never thought I'd write those words).

Again, look at the history. Traditionally, 90% count, and the split is about 4-1 for Democrats -- undervotes are almost exclusively from poor and/or minority areas. Take 93,000, 90% is 83,700. 80% of that is 66,960 for Kerry, with 16,740 for Bush. That 24,600 vote Bush lead after the provisionals now goes to . . . . fanfare, please . . . . ladies and gentlemen, I give you the 44th President of the United States, John Kerry, by a 25,660 vote margin in Ohio.

Now the margins could change, most likely on the undervotes. Let's say Kerry only gets 70%, rather than 80, of the undervotes. He still wins, this time by about 9,000 votes.

Obviously, it would help if we could turn around New Mexico, Iowa and/or Nevada as well, to create a cushion for legal challenges and to create more legitimacy to this process.

OHIO HAS NOT EVEN BEGUN THIS PROCESS OF COUNTING PROVISIONAL BALLOTS, OR THE RECOUNT THAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED BY COBB AND BADNARIK.

Since 11/2, Blackwell has been trying to make rule changes, like the one where he tried to say that if you left your birthday off the provisional ballot, it didn't count. Sorry, Ken, there's a prior rule about that, and it says that the absence of the birthday is not enough to disqualify a provisional ballot. Privately, I suspect they are absolutely freaking out, because Bush v. Gore limits their ability to pull post-election shenanigans like changing the rules.

I think that one of the reasons that Bush has been accepting a lot of Cabinet resignations now, rather than in January, is to create an inevitability in the minds of the public and the media that this is a done deal. No one in the media is dealing with the analysis I set forth herein, which is not my own analysis, but simply a mathematical exercise gleaned from what little public information is out there. The media went home on 11/3, and other than a few smirking
"conspiracy" stories since, has not really addressed the final counting of votes in Ohio or elsewhere. Bush's lead in New Mexico has been cut from 14,000 to less than 6,000, and they're still counting.

Repeat after me: it ain't over til they count the votes. Which means it ain't over. Will Kerry win? No idea. Can he win? Yes.

[quote=Aronnax,Nov 18 2004, 10:51 AM]
I just checked and it looks like Kerry is behind Bush by about 100,000 votes in the current Ohio tally.


Everybody remember if Bush is ahead by 100,000 votes, we only need 50,001 votes to flip from Bush to Kerry to win. So we are closer than you think!!

A long time watcher.................... Keith is tongue in cheek.

[quote=pkess50,Nov 18 2004, 10:21 AM]
[quote=Aronnax,Nov 18 2004, 10:51 AM]
I just checked and it looks like Kerry is behind Bush by about 100,000 votes in the current Ohio tally.
Everybody remember if Bush is ahead by 100,000 votes, we only need 50,001 votes to flip from Bush to Kerry to win. So we are closer than you think!!

[/quote]

That's from a recount...

I think we are talking still provisional ballots which do nto include votes flipping and undervotes - which also do not include votes flipping...

I am trying not to get excited I am trying not to get excited I am trying not to get excited.....

A kerry prsidency is my dream of decades, but would the institutions that allowed the takeover these years allow for a Kerry presidency?

However the popular was gotten, if untrue and fraudulent, it hasn't been proven. I am sure it was a close election due to factors nothing to do with Kerry's performance. Newsweek is doing a hatchet job, and so are the Dems, as usual. All kinds of blame while they reposition for head of the DNC.

M - we're not talking fraud here - we're talking a recount honestly giving the election to Kerry - you do not need evidence of anything to give Kerry the election if he has more votes than Bush...

The above coment from the Daily Kos explains how it might occur...

The provsional ballots will reduce Bush's lead to about 30,000 votes - and the undervotes will give Kerry a 60,000 vote lead...

No fraud has to be proven - though we know it exists - and Bush loses...

Ditto!

Thank goodness for Keith!

We need more like him in the media. Go Keith!

Let's give Keith some more support, conservatives are leaning hard on him.


Conservatives rail against MSNBC's Olbermann for reporting election irregularities

Media conservatives have labeled MSNBC anchor Keith Olbermann a "voice of paranoia" and accused him of perpetuating "idiotic conspiracy theories" for his sustained spotlight on the numerous local news reports of voting irregularities during the November 2 presidential election. Olbermann's emphasis during Countdown with Keith Olbermann on voting irregularities has been part of a critique of what he has called the "Rube Goldberg voting process of ours" -- as well as a criticism of the major media outlets' failure to report on the irregularities.

In her November 11 nationally syndicated column, right-wing pundit Ann Coulter falsely asserted that Olbermann has been "peddling the theory that Bush stole the election" and referred to "Olbermann's idiotic conspiracy theory." A November 14 column by associate editor Bill Steigerwald in the conservative Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (owned by right-wing financier Richard Mellon Scaife) claimed Olbermann "really made a Dan Rather of himself" by focusing a segment of MSNBC's Countdown with Keith Olbermann on allegations of voter fraud. And in his November 10 "Inside Politics" column, Washington Times columnist Greg Pierce quoted the conservative Media Research Center's analysis of Olbermann's coverage:

"With 'Did Your Vote Count? The Plot Thickens' as his on-screen header, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann on Monday night led his 'Countdown' program with more than 15 straight minutes of paranoid and meaningless claims about voting irregularities in states won by President Bush," the Media Research Center reports at www.mediaresearch.org.

But Olbermann has not suggested that the election was stolen. Discussing the possible causes of the bevy of reported voting irregularities from around the country, Olbermann offered this analysis on the November 10 edition of Countdown:

There are really only three possible explanations for all of this. The first is hoped for virtually unanimously by supporters of every candidate and every party -- namely, that all those elected last Tuesday got in because that's the way the people voted. The second is that some of them got in through manipulation of a series of insufficiently sophisticated, insufficiently secure computer voting machines that might be hacked into by the nearest 9-year-old. But the third possibility is actually more heart-stopping still, one that threatens the democracy in the way 100 terrorist rings could not -- that the president or the District 90 dog catcher or other Republicans or other Democrats were elected because a series of insufficiently sophisticated, insufficiently secure computer voting machines was affected by bad design, bad use, damp ballots, power surges, and/or static cling.

Olbermann's commitment to addressing voting irregularities has been coupled with commentary on the lack of media coverage they have received, which Media Matters for America has also noted. "Even assuming there's nothing nefarious about the national election," Olbermann asked Newsweek senior editor and columnist Jonathan Alter, "why has the cascade of irregularities around this country occurred virtually in a news blackout?" Alter responded by saying that "I'm not justifying this, but by way of explanation, I think it is that there's no sense that, with a three-and-a-half-million vote difference [between President George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry], that this would affect the outcome, even if there were widespread irregularities found." On the November 11 edition of Countdown, Congressional Quarterly columnist and MSNBC political analyst Craig Crawford offered another perspective: "The glib answer, which is part of the truth, is I think everybody was tired after that election. ... [W]e're often wimps in the media. And we wait for other people to make charges, one political party or another, and then we investigate it."

In a November 14 entry on his MSNBC.com weblog, Olbermann responded to the attacks on him by citing the gradual increase in attention the voting irregularities issue is receiving among the mainstream press:

On Friday, [NBC News correspondent] David Shuster, who has already done some excellent research at Hardblogger [the MSNBC.com weblog associated with MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews], did a piece on the mess for Hardball, and Chris followed up with a discussion with Joe Trippi and Susan Molinari. There was a cogent, reasoned, unexcited piece about the mechanics of possible tampering and/or machine failure on CNN's "Next" yesterday, and Saturday alone there were serious news pieces in the Cincinnati Enquirer, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Los Angeles Times, Salt Lake Tribune, and Seattle Post-Intelligencer. NPR did a segment of its "On The Media" on the topic (with said blogger as the guest).

And today the New York Times continues its series of "Making Vote Counts" editorials with a pretty solid stance on the necessity of journalistic and governmental proof that the elections weren't tampered with. ... I suspect the coverage is going to go through the roof as the news spreads that [presidential candidate Ralph] Nader has gotten his recount in New Hampshire, and that the Greens and Libertarians are actually going to get their Ohio recount. When reporters discover what Jonathan Turley pointed out to us on Tuesday's show, namely that 70% of Ohio's votes were done with punch cards and as Florida proved in 2000, in court, a lot of those punch cards -- as Jon put it -- "turn over," I suspect there will be long-form television on the process.

Keith is my new hero. A small beacon of light in a very dark time...a seeker of the truth.

Plus, I think he just likes to piss of all those O'Reilly-esque neocons.

Go, Keith! Kick 'em where it counts!!!

Just sent my e-mail message of support. Help him out, everyone!

me neither...

WHERE DID THOSE NEW NUMBERS COME FROM? :D

We need to verify those numbers. Remember John Kerry said we were 50,000 vote difference? He knows something.

PaineInTheArse, I'd post this as a separate topic.

A UC Berkeley sociology professor, director of his school’s Survey Research Center, is scheduled to conduct a news conference at 1 p.m. ET today at which his “research team” will report that “irregularities associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000-260,000 or more excess votes” to President Bush in Florida.

Did anybody see this?