http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1118-11.htm
Published on Thursday, November 18, 2004 by Inter Press Service
US Election: Democracy in Question
by Ritt Goldstein
STOCKHOLM - John Zogby, president of the polling firm Zogby International, told IPS he has been calling it "the Armageddon election" for about a year. Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader believes the Republican Party was able to "steal it before election day."
Facts suggest something went very wrong on Nov. 2.
Speculation focuses upon a number of questions -- purposeful miscounts, anomalies surrounding electronic voting (e-voting) machines, particularly the optical scan types; and numerous reports of voting "irregularities" in heavily Democratic areas.
"What they 'do' is minorities," Nader said, highlighting the thrust of Republican efforts, "and make sure that there aren't enough voting machines for the minority areas. They have to wait in line ... for hours, and most of them don't. There are all kinds of ways, and that's why I was quoted as saying, "this election was hijacked from A to Z," Nader told IPS.
Zogby was concerned about the difference between some of the exit polls (surveys of individuals who have just cast ballots) and the official vote counts. "We're talking about the Free World here," he pointedly noted.
On Nov. 10, University of Pennsylvania Professor Steven F Freeman, whose expertise includes "research methods," compiled an analysis entitled 'The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy'. The document was prepared in view of the unusually large differences between what exit polls had predicted and the recorded vote tallies.
His findings suggest Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry should have received far more votes than he did.
In three of the key battleground states -- Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania -- Freeman's analysis states the odds of Kerry receiving the percentage of votes recorded, given the exit poll findings, were less than three in one thousand, per state.
Freeman also determined that the odds of any two of these states simultaneously reaching their stated vote tallies were "on the order of one-in-a-million," and the odds of all three states arriving at the vote counts they did "are 250 million to one."
"Something is definitely wrong," said Zogby.
Highlighting both the expected accuracy of exit polls and the significant disparity that Kerry's defeat illustrated, Republican consultant, commentator and Fox-TV News regular Dick Morris wrote an article, 'Those Faulty Exit Polls Were Sabotage', suggesting a pollster conspiracy to swing the election for Kerry.
In doing so he, perhaps inadvertently, provided ammunition for arguments from the opposite side -- that the exit polls were correct but the final results were fudged. "Exit polls are almost never wrong," argued Morris, and in 10 of the 11 key states they had predicted significantly fewer votes for Republican President George W Bush than he was eventually credited with.
In New Hampshire, Bush tallied a surprising 9.5 percent more votes than predicted, the most significant difference in any of the key states.
Morris observed that outside the United States, exit polls are often used to provide a check on official vote counts, in his words, "to foreclose the possibility of finagling with the returns."
Among the most cited exit polls were those conducted by Mitofsky International, whose founder, Warren Mitofsky, is widely credited with having invented exit polling. Zogby, whose firm was not among those that provided network TV coverage of the Nov. 2 election, described the possibility of either incompetence or fraud causing the controversial deviation as "impossible."
According to Zogby, it would have required "wrong sampling in wrong areas throughout the country," or the purposeful manipulation of data to obtain exit poll results so significantly different from the official totals. He viewed neither as a possibility.
When asked what exactly had happened then, Zogby replied, "a problem, but I don't know where it is ... something's wrong here, though."
On Nov. 5, Nader requested a hand recount of New Hampshire ballots, subsequently telling IPS he had "reports of irregularities there, and we have the cooperation of the state government ... the state attorney-general and secretary of state."
Nader also said his headquarters had been flooded with requests for assistance from a number of states.
On Thursday, five of the 11 New Hampshire voting wards where Nader requested a recount will undertake new tallies. According to his staff, all 11 wards had their votes counted with optical scan machines, primarily the AccuVote models made by Diebold.
"If there are irregularities, it may have broader applications in other states," Nader said, adding that the current recount -- a 45,000-vote sample -- is expected to be completed within a week.
Allegations regarding optical scan machines' potentially allowing the manipulation of Florida's vote have been widely reported. In Ohio, the Green and Libertarian parties are pursuing a recount, numerous instances of voting irregularities having been reported there.
"As far as I'm concerned, this election was clearly stolen. What they did in Ohio was systematically deny thousands of African Americans, and other suspected Democrats, the vote," charged progressive author, commentator and activist Harvey Wasserman of Franklin County, Ohio.
"It was like Mississippi in the fifties, and it was deliberate ... had there been enough (voting) machines, and had people equal access to the polls with a reliable vote count, there is no doubt that John Kerry would have carried Ohio," he told IPS.
The Nov. 14 'Cleveland Plain Dealer', one of the country's top 50 broadsheets, reported a Nov. 13 voter hearing where: "For three hours, burdened voters, one after another, offered sworn testimony about election day voter suppression and irregularities that they believe are threatening democracy."
"People are deeply concerned that this is the end of American democracy, that we cannot get a fair election," Wasserman said, poignantly adding, "there was no question of apathy in this election -- we had more volunteers than could be used ... thousands and thousands of grass-roots volunteers."
If Kerry had taken Ohio, he would have taken the presidency.
"In the end, what Nader is doing in New Hampshire is the best answer. And if there's a recount in Ohio," that is also important, said Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientist who specializes in statistical methods, elections and public opinion.
Somewhat concerned about the possible manipulation of e-voting machines, Franklin was more concerned over "the ordinary administration of elections," citing the simple logistical problems that had plagued voters.
He pointedly noted that the last two presidential elections highlighted "how the decisions of local people (officials) ... can have a considerable influence over who gets to vote, what rules govern."
When asked if he was aware of any parallels to the present election, Zogby replied, "I'm certainly aware of the election of 1960."
"It's been discussed, overtly, the roll that Richard Daley, and the roll that Lyndon Johnson played, separately," Zogby said, referring to an episode where the John F Kennedy campaign had supposedly asked, "How many votes do you have?", the reply allegedly being, "How many votes do you need?"
Of course, such examples also serve to highlight the influence "local people" can exert on an election's outcome.
In the end, many people speculated that the 1960 incidents were not part of a grand conspiracy per se, but the cumulative effects of the actions of a number of individuals who shared a similar perspective, acted semi-independently, and did whatever it took to win.
Political "dirty tricks" culminated in the Watergate scandal, forcing then President Richard Nixon (1969-1974) to resign, ushering in a long era without similar illicit activity, until questions raised by the election of 2000.
With American democracy, until now, providing an effective model for many, as Zogby said, "we're talking about the Free World here."
© 2004 IPS - Inter Press Service
Full Version: Zogby checks in on the Election
Common Ground Common Sense > Issues that Affect Our Lives > Civil Rights and Civil Liberties > Civil Rights and Civil Liberties Archive
A good article. Why isn't this the lead story on CNN or the nightly news???? I feel I owe Ralph Nader a big apology. I was furious at him during the campaign because I was afraid we would have an election like 2000. As it turns out, the 2004 election is even worse, but Mr. Nader has become a knight in shining armor. I'm going to send him some money to atone.
I Google News'd the headline and got the story but not from IPS (the source), rather from Common Dreams.
IPS - http://www.ips.org/ - is "IPS, civil society's leading news agency, is an independent voice from the South (? mine) and for development, delving into globalisation for the stories underneath. Another communication is possible..."
The Headquarters are located at:
IPS-Inter Press Service International Association
Via Panisperna, 207
00184 Rome
Italy
Email: headquarters@ips.org
Tel: +3906 485692
Fax: +3906 4817877
I'll "suggest" to Google that they add IPS to its list of news sites searched.
IPS - http://www.ips.org/ - is "IPS, civil society's leading news agency, is an independent voice from the South (? mine) and for development, delving into globalisation for the stories underneath. Another communication is possible..."
The Headquarters are located at:
IPS-Inter Press Service International Association
Via Panisperna, 207
00184 Rome
Italy
Email: headquarters@ips.org
Tel: +3906 485692
Fax: +3906 4817877
I'll "suggest" to Google that they add IPS to its list of news sites searched.
Excellent article. I read an article this morning abot NH Democrats charging a Republican with calling voters telling them not to bother coming out to the polls because John Kery was well ahead.
And who are those 200,000 voters in California that voted for Boxer but bypassed Kerry. Boxer got 2.6 million votes to crush her opponent. I guess these voters decided that they want her to represent them, but decided to tie her hands by keeping Bush in the White House. Or, they voted for Boxer and skipped a vote for president. Yeah right.
Ohio and Florida have attracted the most attention because they can swing the election, but I still question the 3.5 million extra votes that went to Bush.
And who are those 200,000 voters in California that voted for Boxer but bypassed Kerry. Boxer got 2.6 million votes to crush her opponent. I guess these voters decided that they want her to represent them, but decided to tie her hands by keeping Bush in the White House. Or, they voted for Boxer and skipped a vote for president. Yeah right.
Ohio and Florida have attracted the most attention because they can swing the election, but I still question the 3.5 million extra votes that went to Bush.
QUOTE(periwinkle @ Nov 20 2004, 09:49 AM)
A good article. Why isn't this the lead story on CNN or the nightly news???? I feel I owe Ralph Nader a big apology. I was furious at him during the campaign because I was afraid we would have an election like 2000. As it turns out, the 2004 election is even worse, but Mr. Nader has become a knight in shining armor. I'm going to send him some money to atone.
I know what you mean........... I feel the same way.
I'm from PA. and even though Kerry won the state, there were problems that I saw and heard of in my area. I'm not suggesting fraud or anything was purposely done to swing the vote one way or another, but here are some examples of problems:
In some precincts, lines were so long that people had to wait 4 or more hours to vote. I don't know how many people didn't vote because of the wait, but I personally know of two FIRST time voters who could not wait in line so they didn't vote.
My area has voting booths, and some were breaking down making the wait even longer.
Obviously, our nation is not yet prepared to hold elections that will actually allow every eligible person to vote and have their vote accurately counted.
Now that the election is over and my volunteer work is done until the next election, I'm focusing my attention on doing what I can do to strongly encourage Congress to simplify and unify our voting systems, voter registration requirements, ID requirements,etc. Americans should also be allowed to take time off from work to vote or have Election Day declared a national holiday. It is essential that Americans feel confident that they can vote in a reasonable time period and that their vote is accurately cast and counted. This needs to be done before the next Presidential elections, but I have little confidence that this will happen.
However, I have signed petitions and will be writing my Congressional Reps. expressing my views.
My concern is that if these voting problems are not rectified before the next election, too many people will just not vote, and will distance themselves even further from our election process.
In some precincts, lines were so long that people had to wait 4 or more hours to vote. I don't know how many people didn't vote because of the wait, but I personally know of two FIRST time voters who could not wait in line so they didn't vote.
My area has voting booths, and some were breaking down making the wait even longer.
Obviously, our nation is not yet prepared to hold elections that will actually allow every eligible person to vote and have their vote accurately counted.
Now that the election is over and my volunteer work is done until the next election, I'm focusing my attention on doing what I can do to strongly encourage Congress to simplify and unify our voting systems, voter registration requirements, ID requirements,etc. Americans should also be allowed to take time off from work to vote or have Election Day declared a national holiday. It is essential that Americans feel confident that they can vote in a reasonable time period and that their vote is accurately cast and counted. This needs to be done before the next Presidential elections, but I have little confidence that this will happen.
However, I have signed petitions and will be writing my Congressional Reps. expressing my views.
My concern is that if these voting problems are not rectified before the next election, too many people will just not vote, and will distance themselves even further from our election process.
QUOTE(MrJim @ Nov 20 2004, 08:42 AM)
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1118-11.htm
Published on Thursday, November 18, 2004 by Inter Press Service
US Election: Democracy in Question
by Ritt Goldstein
STOCKHOLM - John Zogby, president of the polling firm Zogby International, told IPS he has been calling it "the Armageddon election" for about a year. Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader believes the Republican Party was able to "steal it before election day."
Facts suggest something went very wrong on Nov. 2.
Speculation focuses upon a number of questions -- purposeful miscounts, anomalies surrounding electronic voting (e-voting) machines, particularly the optical scan types; and numerous reports of voting "irregularities" in heavily Democratic areas.
"What they 'do' is minorities," Nader said, highlighting the thrust of Republican efforts, "and make sure that there aren't enough voting machines for the minority areas. They have to wait in line ... for hours, and most of them don't. There are all kinds of ways, and that's why I was quoted as saying, "this election was hijacked from A to Z," Nader told IPS.
Zogby was concerned about the difference between some of the exit polls (surveys of individuals who have just cast ballots) and the official vote counts. "We're talking about the Free World here," he pointedly noted.
On Nov. 10, University of Pennsylvania Professor Steven F Freeman, whose expertise includes "research methods," compiled an analysis entitled 'The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy'. The document was prepared in view of the unusually large differences between what exit polls had predicted and the recorded vote tallies.
His findings suggest Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry should have received far more votes than he did.
In three of the key battleground states -- Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania -- Freeman's analysis states the odds of Kerry receiving the percentage of votes recorded, given the exit poll findings, were less than three in one thousand, per state.
Freeman also determined that the odds of any two of these states simultaneously reaching their stated vote tallies were "on the order of one-in-a-million," and the odds of all three states arriving at the vote counts they did "are 250 million to one."
"Something is definitely wrong," said Zogby.
Highlighting both the expected accuracy of exit polls and the significant disparity that Kerry's defeat illustrated, Republican consultant, commentator and Fox-TV News regular Dick Morris wrote an article, 'Those Faulty Exit Polls Were Sabotage', suggesting a pollster conspiracy to swing the election for Kerry.
In doing so he, perhaps inadvertently, provided ammunition for arguments from the opposite side -- that the exit polls were correct but the final results were fudged. "Exit polls are almost never wrong," argued Morris, and in 10 of the 11 key states they had predicted significantly fewer votes for Republican President George W Bush than he was eventually credited with.
In New Hampshire, Bush tallied a surprising 9.5 percent more votes than predicted, the most significant difference in any of the key states.
Morris observed that outside the United States, exit polls are often used to provide a check on official vote counts, in his words, "to foreclose the possibility of finagling with the returns."
Among the most cited exit polls were those conducted by Mitofsky International, whose founder, Warren Mitofsky, is widely credited with having invented exit polling. Zogby, whose firm was not among those that provided network TV coverage of the Nov. 2 election, described the possibility of either incompetence or fraud causing the controversial deviation as "impossible."
According to Zogby, it would have required "wrong sampling in wrong areas throughout the country," or the purposeful manipulation of data to obtain exit poll results so significantly different from the official totals. He viewed neither as a possibility.
When asked what exactly had happened then, Zogby replied, "a problem, but I don't know where it is ... something's wrong here, though."
On Nov. 5, Nader requested a hand recount of New Hampshire ballots, subsequently telling IPS he had "reports of irregularities there, and we have the cooperation of the state government ... the state attorney-general and secretary of state."
Nader also said his headquarters had been flooded with requests for assistance from a number of states.
On Thursday, five of the 11 New Hampshire voting wards where Nader requested a recount will undertake new tallies. According to his staff, all 11 wards had their votes counted with optical scan machines, primarily the AccuVote models made by Diebold.
"If there are irregularities, it may have broader applications in other states," Nader said, adding that the current recount -- a 45,000-vote sample -- is expected to be completed within a week.
Allegations regarding optical scan machines' potentially allowing the manipulation of Florida's vote have been widely reported. In Ohio, the Green and Libertarian parties are pursuing a recount, numerous instances of voting irregularities having been reported there.
"As far as I'm concerned, this election was clearly stolen. What they did in Ohio was systematically deny thousands of African Americans, and other suspected Democrats, the vote," charged progressive author, commentator and activist Harvey Wasserman of Franklin County, Ohio.
"It was like Mississippi in the fifties, and it was deliberate ... had there been enough (voting) machines, and had people equal access to the polls with a reliable vote count, there is no doubt that John Kerry would have carried Ohio," he told IPS.
The Nov. 14 'Cleveland Plain Dealer', one of the country's top 50 broadsheets, reported a Nov. 13 voter hearing where: "For three hours, burdened voters, one after another, offered sworn testimony about election day voter suppression and irregularities that they believe are threatening democracy."
"People are deeply concerned that this is the end of American democracy, that we cannot get a fair election," Wasserman said, poignantly adding, "there was no question of apathy in this election -- we had more volunteers than could be used ... thousands and thousands of grass-roots volunteers."
If Kerry had taken Ohio, he would have taken the presidency.
"In the end, what Nader is doing in New Hampshire is the best answer. And if there's a recount in Ohio," that is also important, said Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientist who specializes in statistical methods, elections and public opinion.
Somewhat concerned about the possible manipulation of e-voting machines, Franklin was more concerned over "the ordinary administration of elections," citing the simple logistical problems that had plagued voters.
He pointedly noted that the last two presidential elections highlighted "how the decisions of local people (officials) ... can have a considerable influence over who gets to vote, what rules govern."
When asked if he was aware of any parallels to the present election, Zogby replied, "I'm certainly aware of the election of 1960."
"It's been discussed, overtly, the roll that Richard Daley, and the roll that Lyndon Johnson played, separately," Zogby said, referring to an episode where the John F Kennedy campaign had supposedly asked, "How many votes do you have?", the reply allegedly being, "How many votes do you need?"
Of course, such examples also serve to highlight the influence "local people" can exert on an election's outcome.
In the end, many people speculated that the 1960 incidents were not part of a grand conspiracy per se, but the cumulative effects of the actions of a number of individuals who shared a similar perspective, acted semi-independently, and did whatever it took to win.
Political "dirty tricks" culminated in the Watergate scandal, forcing then President Richard Nixon (1969-1974) to resign, ushering in a long era without similar illicit activity, until questions raised by the election of 2000.
With American democracy, until now, providing an effective model for many, as Zogby said, "we're talking about the Free World here."
© 2004 IPS - Inter Press Service
Published on Thursday, November 18, 2004 by Inter Press Service
US Election: Democracy in Question
by Ritt Goldstein
STOCKHOLM - John Zogby, president of the polling firm Zogby International, told IPS he has been calling it "the Armageddon election" for about a year. Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader believes the Republican Party was able to "steal it before election day."
Facts suggest something went very wrong on Nov. 2.
Speculation focuses upon a number of questions -- purposeful miscounts, anomalies surrounding electronic voting (e-voting) machines, particularly the optical scan types; and numerous reports of voting "irregularities" in heavily Democratic areas.
"What they 'do' is minorities," Nader said, highlighting the thrust of Republican efforts, "and make sure that there aren't enough voting machines for the minority areas. They have to wait in line ... for hours, and most of them don't. There are all kinds of ways, and that's why I was quoted as saying, "this election was hijacked from A to Z," Nader told IPS.
Zogby was concerned about the difference between some of the exit polls (surveys of individuals who have just cast ballots) and the official vote counts. "We're talking about the Free World here," he pointedly noted.
On Nov. 10, University of Pennsylvania Professor Steven F Freeman, whose expertise includes "research methods," compiled an analysis entitled 'The Unexplained Exit Poll Discrepancy'. The document was prepared in view of the unusually large differences between what exit polls had predicted and the recorded vote tallies.
His findings suggest Democratic challenger Senator John Kerry should have received far more votes than he did.
In three of the key battleground states -- Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania -- Freeman's analysis states the odds of Kerry receiving the percentage of votes recorded, given the exit poll findings, were less than three in one thousand, per state.
Freeman also determined that the odds of any two of these states simultaneously reaching their stated vote tallies were "on the order of one-in-a-million," and the odds of all three states arriving at the vote counts they did "are 250 million to one."
"Something is definitely wrong," said Zogby.
Highlighting both the expected accuracy of exit polls and the significant disparity that Kerry's defeat illustrated, Republican consultant, commentator and Fox-TV News regular Dick Morris wrote an article, 'Those Faulty Exit Polls Were Sabotage', suggesting a pollster conspiracy to swing the election for Kerry.
In doing so he, perhaps inadvertently, provided ammunition for arguments from the opposite side -- that the exit polls were correct but the final results were fudged. "Exit polls are almost never wrong," argued Morris, and in 10 of the 11 key states they had predicted significantly fewer votes for Republican President George W Bush than he was eventually credited with.
In New Hampshire, Bush tallied a surprising 9.5 percent more votes than predicted, the most significant difference in any of the key states.
Morris observed that outside the United States, exit polls are often used to provide a check on official vote counts, in his words, "to foreclose the possibility of finagling with the returns."
Among the most cited exit polls were those conducted by Mitofsky International, whose founder, Warren Mitofsky, is widely credited with having invented exit polling. Zogby, whose firm was not among those that provided network TV coverage of the Nov. 2 election, described the possibility of either incompetence or fraud causing the controversial deviation as "impossible."
According to Zogby, it would have required "wrong sampling in wrong areas throughout the country," or the purposeful manipulation of data to obtain exit poll results so significantly different from the official totals. He viewed neither as a possibility.
When asked what exactly had happened then, Zogby replied, "a problem, but I don't know where it is ... something's wrong here, though."
On Nov. 5, Nader requested a hand recount of New Hampshire ballots, subsequently telling IPS he had "reports of irregularities there, and we have the cooperation of the state government ... the state attorney-general and secretary of state."
Nader also said his headquarters had been flooded with requests for assistance from a number of states.
On Thursday, five of the 11 New Hampshire voting wards where Nader requested a recount will undertake new tallies. According to his staff, all 11 wards had their votes counted with optical scan machines, primarily the AccuVote models made by Diebold.
"If there are irregularities, it may have broader applications in other states," Nader said, adding that the current recount -- a 45,000-vote sample -- is expected to be completed within a week.
Allegations regarding optical scan machines' potentially allowing the manipulation of Florida's vote have been widely reported. In Ohio, the Green and Libertarian parties are pursuing a recount, numerous instances of voting irregularities having been reported there.
"As far as I'm concerned, this election was clearly stolen. What they did in Ohio was systematically deny thousands of African Americans, and other suspected Democrats, the vote," charged progressive author, commentator and activist Harvey Wasserman of Franklin County, Ohio.
"It was like Mississippi in the fifties, and it was deliberate ... had there been enough (voting) machines, and had people equal access to the polls with a reliable vote count, there is no doubt that John Kerry would have carried Ohio," he told IPS.
The Nov. 14 'Cleveland Plain Dealer', one of the country's top 50 broadsheets, reported a Nov. 13 voter hearing where: "For three hours, burdened voters, one after another, offered sworn testimony about election day voter suppression and irregularities that they believe are threatening democracy."
"People are deeply concerned that this is the end of American democracy, that we cannot get a fair election," Wasserman said, poignantly adding, "there was no question of apathy in this election -- we had more volunteers than could be used ... thousands and thousands of grass-roots volunteers."
If Kerry had taken Ohio, he would have taken the presidency.
"In the end, what Nader is doing in New Hampshire is the best answer. And if there's a recount in Ohio," that is also important, said Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin-Madison political scientist who specializes in statistical methods, elections and public opinion.
Somewhat concerned about the possible manipulation of e-voting machines, Franklin was more concerned over "the ordinary administration of elections," citing the simple logistical problems that had plagued voters.
He pointedly noted that the last two presidential elections highlighted "how the decisions of local people (officials) ... can have a considerable influence over who gets to vote, what rules govern."
When asked if he was aware of any parallels to the present election, Zogby replied, "I'm certainly aware of the election of 1960."
"It's been discussed, overtly, the roll that Richard Daley, and the roll that Lyndon Johnson played, separately," Zogby said, referring to an episode where the John F Kennedy campaign had supposedly asked, "How many votes do you have?", the reply allegedly being, "How many votes do you need?"
Of course, such examples also serve to highlight the influence "local people" can exert on an election's outcome.
In the end, many people speculated that the 1960 incidents were not part of a grand conspiracy per se, but the cumulative effects of the actions of a number of individuals who shared a similar perspective, acted semi-independently, and did whatever it took to win.
Political "dirty tricks" culminated in the Watergate scandal, forcing then President Richard Nixon (1969-1974) to resign, ushering in a long era without similar illicit activity, until questions raised by the election of 2000.
With American democracy, until now, providing an effective model for many, as Zogby said, "we're talking about the Free World here."
© 2004 IPS - Inter Press Service
We need to find out what went wrong here. It's a damn shame the media is going to let that scumbag Karl Rove get away with stealing another election.
What do you do when even in Pennsylvania some voters felt that they couldn't stand in a line that long.... especially when most likely their actual vote wouldn't give their politician more electoral votes???? Why would the individual care???
The lines are not being disputed but even that part of the election is being IGNORED!! The media has no reason to worry about individual voters. Some democracy we have going!
PROPORTIONAL ELECTORAL VOTING. Every millionth of us counted towards whoever we want. This is how to make people MAD. This is how to make them care about their vote. This is how to keep elections honest and clean up the system. Why worry about the vote if you are in a state with a 10% minority vote for the challenger? Well, you millionth might be the one vote to put your candidate over the top!!
The lines are not being disputed but even that part of the election is being IGNORED!! The media has no reason to worry about individual voters. Some democracy we have going!
PROPORTIONAL ELECTORAL VOTING. Every millionth of us counted towards whoever we want. This is how to make people MAD. This is how to make them care about their vote. This is how to keep elections honest and clean up the system. Why worry about the vote if you are in a state with a 10% minority vote for the challenger? Well, you millionth might be the one vote to put your candidate over the top!!
QUOTE(prettyflower1976 @ Nov 20 2004, 10:08 AM)
We need to find out what went wrong here. It's a damn shame the media is going to let that scumbag Karl Rove get away with stealing another election.
i have posted the sig many times can i copy your sig hope you don't mind
we have to speak up for our wrights are we will loose them
Good article, thanks for posting. Something IS wrong!
There were a lot of things wrong with the counts and fair voting issues. I'm sure there was more voter suppression than we will ever know about. I even had a guy behind me say inappropriate things. I was wearing my 'Bush, not fine by me' shirt which listed out facts about Bush on the back, and he leaned in and said, "you can't wear that shirt in there to vote!" This dude was a big, burly, white redneck and I replied, 'BS, have you ever heard of freedom of speech? You are confused about the laws regarding buffer zones and your remarks could be considered voter intimidation.' He replied with, "I've heard all over the radio this am that voters cannot wear their buttons and campaign shirts in to vote." I said, "well you either heard wrong or your redneck radio station is putting out false info." What a prick this guy was, very hostile.
THEN, he had the audicity to ask me where I live, I said, "well OBVIOUSLY close to here since this is my precinct!" Shortly thereafter, the election judge walked by, I looked at her to be sure she saw my shirt and she did not even pause to question it and by this point, I was within the buffer zone. Campaigning within the buffer zone is one thing, a voter wearing a button or shirt for a candidate is FREEDOM OF SPEECH! I am a white suburban typical looking mom, I can only imagine what blacks encounter
This guy really pissed me off so as I was putting my ballot in the counter, I looked right at him standing a few voters behind me as if, 'oh really big guy?' God, it felt good to cast my ballot straight Democratic ticket!
There were a lot of things wrong with the counts and fair voting issues. I'm sure there was more voter suppression than we will ever know about. I even had a guy behind me say inappropriate things. I was wearing my 'Bush, not fine by me' shirt which listed out facts about Bush on the back, and he leaned in and said, "you can't wear that shirt in there to vote!" This dude was a big, burly, white redneck and I replied, 'BS, have you ever heard of freedom of speech? You are confused about the laws regarding buffer zones and your remarks could be considered voter intimidation.' He replied with, "I've heard all over the radio this am that voters cannot wear their buttons and campaign shirts in to vote." I said, "well you either heard wrong or your redneck radio station is putting out false info." What a prick this guy was, very hostile.
THEN, he had the audicity to ask me where I live, I said, "well OBVIOUSLY close to here since this is my precinct!" Shortly thereafter, the election judge walked by, I looked at her to be sure she saw my shirt and she did not even pause to question it and by this point, I was within the buffer zone. Campaigning within the buffer zone is one thing, a voter wearing a button or shirt for a candidate is FREEDOM OF SPEECH! I am a white suburban typical looking mom, I can only imagine what blacks encounter
This guy really pissed me off so as I was putting my ballot in the counter, I looked right at him standing a few voters behind me as if, 'oh really big guy?' God, it felt good to cast my ballot straight Democratic ticket!
Lets put zogby in control of the exit polls next time lets make it law like in some countries to stop fraud if the machines don't add up its a bozo no no.
QUOTE(periwinkle @ Nov 20 2004, 02:49 PM)
A good article. Why isn't this the lead story on CNN or the nightly news???? I feel I owe Ralph Nader a big apology. I was furious at him during the campaign because I was afraid we would have an election like 2000. As it turns out, the 2004 election is even worse, but Mr. Nader has become a knight in shining armor. I'm going to send him some money to atone.
The DLC promulgated the myth that Nader spoiled the 2000 election for Gore, and the Democratic rank and file (voters) bought this propaganda hook line and sinker, when in actual fact - GORE WON the 2000 election - there were reports of massive fraud not just in Florida but in other states, that did not make the mainstream media - NO THANKS TO GORE AND THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY LEADERSHIP. They would point to the number of votes that Nader won, that would have gone to Gore - that analysis is based on the false premise that Green party members were all Democrats. That isn't the case, although many Green party members were former Democrats, far many are independent and some are moderate conservatives, foremer Republicans.
And the DLC never reports on how many registered Democrats voted for Bush in 2000. Maybe those reports are erroneous too, and the DLC wanted to skew the analysis to put the blame on Nader.
Nader was never a real factor in that election except in the minds of people who did not understand that the Blame it on Nader game was a Smoke and Mirrors operation perpetrated by our own party - for reasons we can only speculate, but we're witnessing the same deafening silence from our party leadership and a "rolling over" on action.
Why is our party doing this?
Why aren't they front and center making this the absolute highest priority as if all of our lives are at stake (which it is) ?
I do not buy the theory that Democrats are afraid of being labled tin hat wackos - although it's probably true in some cases - i think they don't want to go down that road, because one never knows what might ultimately get uncovered.
But if we as a party, as a citizenry, as a nation are ever to restore faith in our elections process - our most powerful means of choosing our leadership - we cannot allow the party to roll over and play dead - no matter what is discovered in the process when our democracy is at stake.
Nader was always a principled fighter working on behalf of the the PEOPLE and FOR the people, in OPPOSITION to the STATUS QUO CORRUPTION that we see in both parties and that he warned us for so many years.
We have some good leadership, but not enough. And too few with the kind of backbone to step up and fight against the tyranny of this regime that was fraudulently installed in 2000, 2002 and now firmly sealed in place in 2004.
QUOTE(vet65/69 @ Nov 20 2004, 10:16 AM)
i have posted the sig many times can i copy your sig hope you don't mind
we have to speak up for our wrights are we will loose them
we have to speak up for our wrights are we will loose them
By all means go ahead. It contains a VERY important message
QUOTE(amy @ Nov 20 2004, 10:03 AM)
I'm from PA. and even though Kerry won the state, there were problems that I saw and heard of in my area. I'm not suggesting fraud or anything was purposely done to swing the vote one way or another, but here are some examples of problems:
In some precincts, lines were so long that people had to wait 4 or more hours to vote. I don't know how many people didn't vote because of the wait, but I personally know of two FIRST time voters who could not wait in line so they didn't vote.
My area has voting booths, and some were breaking down making the wait even longer.
Obviously, our nation is not yet prepared to hold elections that will actually allow every eligible person to vote and have their vote accurately counted.
Now that the election is over and my volunteer work is done until the next election, I'm focusing my attention on doing what I can do to strongly encourage Congress to simplify and unify our voting systems, voter registration requirements, ID requirements,etc. Americans should also be allowed to take time off from work to vote or have Election Day declared a national holiday. It is essential that Americans feel confident that they can vote in a reasonable time period and that their vote is accurately cast and counted. This needs to be done before the next Presidential elections, but I have little confidence that this will happen.
However, I have signed petitions and will be writing my Congressional Reps. expressing my views.
My concern is that if these voting problems are not rectified before the next election, too many people will just not vote, and will distance themselves even further from our election process.
In some precincts, lines were so long that people had to wait 4 or more hours to vote. I don't know how many people didn't vote because of the wait, but I personally know of two FIRST time voters who could not wait in line so they didn't vote.
My area has voting booths, and some were breaking down making the wait even longer.
Obviously, our nation is not yet prepared to hold elections that will actually allow every eligible person to vote and have their vote accurately counted.
Now that the election is over and my volunteer work is done until the next election, I'm focusing my attention on doing what I can do to strongly encourage Congress to simplify and unify our voting systems, voter registration requirements, ID requirements,etc. Americans should also be allowed to take time off from work to vote or have Election Day declared a national holiday. It is essential that Americans feel confident that they can vote in a reasonable time period and that their vote is accurately cast and counted. This needs to be done before the next Presidential elections, but I have little confidence that this will happen.
However, I have signed petitions and will be writing my Congressional Reps. expressing my views.
My concern is that if these voting problems are not rectified before the next election, too many people will just not vote, and will distance themselves even further from our election process.
I have heard speculation several times that too few voting machines were put in minority or other heavily Democratic areas, or malfunctioning machines, etc.
The question I would have to ask is: were the Republicans in control of all of these areas? How were 'they' able to do this?
I don't know how this works, honestly, if a state has a Republican governor, does he appoint ALL heads of election boards?
QUOTE(brossignol @ Nov 20 2004, 02:04 PM)
I have heard speculation several times that too few voting machines were put in minority or other heavily Democratic areas, or malfunctioning machines, etc.
The question I would have to ask is: were the Republicans in control of all of these areas? How were 'they' able to do this?
I don't know how this works, honestly, if a state has a Republican governor, does he appoint ALL heads of election boards?
The question I would have to ask is: were the Republicans in control of all of these areas? How were 'they' able to do this?
I don't know how this works, honestly, if a state has a Republican governor, does he appoint ALL heads of election boards?
In Ohio, it was Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwells orders that were implemented in order to carry out the prejudicial allocation of voting resources and he was also the one who ordered have unequal and prejudicial enforcement under the election laws.
In both cases, Blackwell can be shown to have subverted the law oh Ohio, by his prejudicial orders and acts as Secretary of state.
He should be made to pay the cost for his actions. Let him be the first person to find out that one should not perform illegal acts on behalf of others, because in the end one will accept the penalty for those others on their behalf when one is caught.
Blackwell prejudicially pre-empted the intent of Ohio's Election Laws and the responsibilities of the office of Ohio Secretary of State, by allocating the states resources in such a way as to direct the outcome of the states election process in order to elect the candidates of HIS choice as opposed to the candidates of the peoples' choice!
He is guilty, and must be charged.
He is guilty, and must be charged.
QUOTE(The Judged @ Nov 20 2004, 12:15 PM)
In Ohio, it was Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwells orders that were implemented in order to carry out the prejudicial allocation of voting resources and he was also the one who ordered have unequal and prejudicial enforcement under the election laws.
In both cases, Blackwell can be shown to have subverted the law oh Ohio, by his prejudicial orders and acts as Secretary of state.
He should be made to pay the cost for his actions. Let him be the first person to find out that one should not perform illegal acts on behalf of others, because in the end one will accept the penalty for those others on their behalf when one is caught.
In both cases, Blackwell can be shown to have subverted the law oh Ohio, by his prejudicial orders and acts as Secretary of state.
He should be made to pay the cost for his actions. Let him be the first person to find out that one should not perform illegal acts on behalf of others, because in the end one will accept the penalty for those others on their behalf when one is caught.
Where did you see this? I am just curious as to who controls this in states. It is the SoS then? And he/she would control the allocation of resources across the entire state? I mean, does the state have a big warehouse of equipment and every year they pull out all of the machines and send them to each precinct? How does this work?
I believe these questions need to be asked, rather than just assuming that 'THEY' controlled where every machine went in every state, every precinct.
QUOTE(brossignol @ Nov 20 2004, 01:52 PM)
Where did you see this? I am just curious as to who controls this in states. It is the SoS then? And he/she would control the allocation of resources across the entire state? I mean, does the state have a big warehouse of equipment and every year they pull out all of the machines and send them to each precinct? How does this work?
I believe these questions need to be asked, rather than just assuming that 'THEY' controlled where every machine went in every state, every precinct.
I believe these questions need to be asked, rather than just assuming that 'THEY' controlled where every machine went in every state, every precinct.
The CORPORATIONS own the e-machines,...the optical scanners and touch screens.
They store them and maintain them for the states who lease them. The states place an order, and the companies distrubute the machines. The States DO NOT OWN these machines, and judges have ruled them proprietary so WE THE PEOPLE cannot even look in them to see how they work. Beginning to see how Fraud is suspected yet? Still skeptical?
In one state there were 2,000 machines that were not allocated...even though some African American precints that had 4 or 6 machines in 2000 were only allocated 2 machines this year. That was a decision made by the top election official in that state. Even though turnout was predicted to be huge, they got less machines on order of the State, than they did in 2000. The localities may have requested more, but the State sent less. (Compare this to Rich Suburban districts in the same state that had MORE machines than were needed.) I believe it was Ohio, sorry, this was all over the web a few weeks ago; you may try Greg Palast's site of blackboxvoting.org for the links.
One of the biggest problems is that YES, in some States the official who controls the Vote was also the Co-Chair for the Bush Campaign (notably Ohio in 2004 and Florida in 2000). This is too much for me...even if there was no actual conflict of interest, the mere appearance of a conflict throws the results of the election into doubt. This practice must be stopped.
QUOTE(Tommymac @ Nov 20 2004, 01:07 PM)
The CORPORATIONS own the e-machines,...the optical scanners and touch screens.
They store them and maintain them for the states who lease them. The states place an order, and the companies distrubute the machines. The States DO NOT OWN these machines, and judges have ruled them proprietary so WE THE PEOPLE cannot even look in them to see how they work. Beginning to see how Fraud is suspected yet? Still skeptical?
In one state there were 2,000 machines that were not allocated...even though some African American precints that had 4 or 6 machines in 2000 were only allocated 2 machines this year. That was a decision made by the top election official in that state. Even though turnout was predicted to be huge, they got less machines on order of the State, than they did in 2000. The localities may have requested more, but the State sent less. (Compare this to Rich Suburban districts in the same state that had MORE machines than were needed.) I believe it was Ohio, sorry, this was all over the web a few weeks ago; you may try Greg Palast's site of blackboxvoting.org for the links.
One of the biggest problems is that YES, in some States the official who controls the Vote was also the Co-Chair for the Bush Campaign (notably Ohio in 2004 and Florida in 2000). This is too much for me...even if there was no actual conflict of interest, the mere appearance of a conflict throws the results of the election into doubt. This practice must be stopped.
They store them and maintain them for the states who lease them. The states place an order, and the companies distrubute the machines. The States DO NOT OWN these machines, and judges have ruled them proprietary so WE THE PEOPLE cannot even look in them to see how they work. Beginning to see how Fraud is suspected yet? Still skeptical?
In one state there were 2,000 machines that were not allocated...even though some African American precints that had 4 or 6 machines in 2000 were only allocated 2 machines this year. That was a decision made by the top election official in that state. Even though turnout was predicted to be huge, they got less machines on order of the State, than they did in 2000. The localities may have requested more, but the State sent less. (Compare this to Rich Suburban districts in the same state that had MORE machines than were needed.) I believe it was Ohio, sorry, this was all over the web a few weeks ago; you may try Greg Palast's site of blackboxvoting.org for the links.
One of the biggest problems is that YES, in some States the official who controls the Vote was also the Co-Chair for the Bush Campaign (notably Ohio in 2004 and Florida in 2000). This is too much for me...even if there was no actual conflict of interest, the mere appearance of a conflict throws the results of the election into doubt. This practice must be stopped.
But does the SoS decide which machines go where?
And, you are saying that every year the machines are shipped back to the corporations and not stored by each election board?
I am just trying to figure out exactly who decides which precincts get which machines and how many....
QUOTE(The Judged @ Nov 20 2004, 12:31 PM)
Blackwell prejudicially pre-empted the intent of Ohio's Election Laws and the responsibilities of the office of Ohio Secretary of State, by allocating the states resources in such a way as to direct the outcome of the states election process in order to elect the candidates of HIS choice as opposed to the candidates of the peoples' choice!
He is guilty, and must be charged.
He is guilty, and must be charged.
Even a Columbus Republican supreme court justice knows the law of that......
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.