I'm against the death penalty...unless it's election fraud. Amybe tar and feathers? Maybe forfeiture of all properties?
Where the hell has the MSM been?
Posted by phidpides at June 1, 2006 08:37 AMAs far as the Rolling Stone piece...a cursory look at the polling irregularities in Ohio in 04, just like Florida in 00, should have had the Dems, in particular Gore and Kerry, screaming loud and clear from election day on that they were robbed. But they did not. They should have been so loud and clear that the Media simply could not ignore them. But they chose not to.
By the way, whatever happened to the indictment of Karl Rove by Fitz?
That died a quiet death.
Countdown should pick it up today as Keith vested more time into election fraud than all the rest combined.
Posted by mainsailset at June 1, 2006 08:52 AMRemember how the media kept repeating that all the exit polling was wrong?
.
.
Yeah.
.
.
Wanna buy a bridge?
I will have it tonight at 10:30PM.
Haven't bought a Rolling Stones mag in ages, so I'm excited.
Posted by Christopher at June 1, 2006 09:32 AMLet's get rid of the Republican voting machines and vote by mail. Oregon does it and it works!
Lee
Posted by Lee at June 1, 2006 09:36 AMRegardless, what can be done about it now? The damage has been done!
We can only hope that it never happens again.
Regardless, what can be done about it now?
Restitution. RNC pays $4 trillion dollars in damages and $2 trillion dollars in fines. Hey, it's fair, and I can dream. Besides, the NSA can get us every Republi-cons bank account numbers. We'll just take the money.
Posted by phidipides at June 1, 2006 10:29 AMWe've got to make sure it doesn't happen again. We need a transparent voting process (no black-box voting) with reliable methods of verification. In my opinion, the two parties who are running in the election cannot be the ones who control how the election is held and the votes tallied.
Posted by Musmanno at June 1, 2006 10:49 AMWill the MSM pick this story up? Or leave Rolling Stone holding the bag?
Posted by Kevin at June 1, 2006 10:51 AMElection reform, Seven. By calling the 2004 election what it appears to be, we can intitiate a drive for eletion reform.
One avenue of attack are the machines, the electronic Diebold and Seqouia tablet PCs that give Bev Harris fits, are in place already. Short of an act of God, Congress handing out real funds for HAVA all over again, or such numerous convictions by Secretaries of State and Voting Machine executives that we associate them with Enron and TYCO, those machines are going to stay there for at least several years.
I think the real threat is not the machine, but the polling status of the states in the weeks coming up to the election, and the secretaries of states in marginal states. The real threat are GOP Secretary of States in large EV states that are almost evenly divided purple but leaning to the Democrat. Based on current information and some coarse data crunching, guess which states jump to the top of the list: Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Minnesota.
It may all be moot by 2008 - either we'll have Genaralismo Cheney or the whole nation will be so pissed off at the GOP that they won't have chance to fraud their way to a win.
Posted by idiosynchronic at June 1, 2006 10:56 AMIn my opinion, the two parties who are running in the election cannot be the ones who control how the election is held and the votes tallied.
*smooches* MMMMMMMMMMWWAAAAAAA!
Have I told you lately that I love you?
:)
Posted by idiosynchronic at June 1, 2006 11:00 AMlol Idiosynchronic. Not lately, but thanks anyway :)
There needs to be a great deal of election reform, and the control of that reform needs to be wrested from the vested political powers. In Missouri, for example, there is some impetus for reform after the conviction of three people for voter fraud in St. Louis in the 2004 election. Only problem is these people were Democrats and the Republicans control Missouri, so is the state going to get real reform or is it going to get changes that benefit the GOP. The answer is the latter.
If the Ohio story leads to support for voting reform, which it ought to, then we need to be vigilant, because in States where the GOP is in control, the GOP is likely to take any public push for voting reform and turn it to their advantage by enacting "reforms" that further benefit the GOP under the guise of addressing the problems in the process.
So if voting reform becomes a reality, the next job of the watchdog is to make sure we get real reform and not juggling of the current system to better benefit the party making the changes.
Posted by Musmanno at June 1, 2006 11:13 AMYou guys havn't even read the story and already you are declaring it the truth?
This will all be about voting machines, disenfranchisement, and the same old whines and moans that these losers have been babbling about since 2000.
Oh and the everpopular liberal belief that you should ignore every poll leading into the election and the actual counting of ballots... both correlated almost to a "T" - election projection cites like mine were accurate based on the numerous polls that were available. I got 49 out of 50 states correct. Wisconsin only turning incorrect at about 9:00 the night before.
Instead... you should count on 'exit polling' that was 'leaked'. Raw Exit polling numbers that those conducting will state is not even supposed to be an accurate determination of the full election results. Raw Exit polling that is not supposed to be leaked, because it is mainly used for various cross tabs (which by nature under poll whites males).
Posted by CH Truth at June 1, 2006 11:26 AMI guess you have already read it CH Truth...No??
oh yeah, I thought so...hypocrit
Isn't voting reform after 2000 what gave us these wonderful Diebold machines? It is incomprehensible to me that 6 years after 2000, with all those recounts, so many districts have black-box voting that makes recounts impossible. I saw an article in Newsweek--I should dig up the link because it was so unbelievable--where Diebold said that there machines are fine. The fact that someone can break into them and change vote counts in a way that no one would know only matters if someone is up to no-good and is breaking the law! I'm speechless.
Posted by CG at June 1, 2006 11:30 AMThe Newsweek article: "If it so happens that someone not supposed to use the machine—or an election official who wants to put his or her thumb on the scale of democracy—takes advantage of this fast track to fraud, that's not Diebold's problem."
Posted by Sharon at June 1, 2006 11:57 AMCH Truthless,
Why don't YOU stop "whining and moaning" about your ideas of 'liberal beliefs', and supposed 'exit poll leaks'? Your incesent 'babbling' is beyond annoying, apologist.
Posted by oppressmenot at June 1, 2006 12:06 PMCommon Dreams has the complete article. And it great.
Posted by hal at June 1, 2006 03:26 PMWell, Missouri will not only use Diebold this year, but will require state photo identification for voting. Of course, there are no funds to assist people in obtaining state photo IDs if they do not have a driver's license. It's another way for the GOP to disenfranchise the poor and black who vote Democratic. Blunt will be a one term Governor.
Posted by Judith at June 1, 2006 06:13 PMJudith:
That's not entirely accurate. The ID cards for people without driver's licenses are available free of charge - the State is required to pick up the charges. So the people getting the IDs don't need funds to assist them in getting one. The issue of funding comes up in regard to the fact that the State hasn't allocated monies to the State Departments who are going to be issuing the cards and carrying out the other requirements of the new law. Basically, these additional costs are going to be absorbed into these entities. They want money to cover it.
Posted by Musmanno at June 2, 2006 10:53 AM