PDA

View Full Version : John Kerry and his dead horse



jmcclain19
01-17-2005, 07:31 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=419407&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312
Sad thing is, Kerry, if he really truly had a passion and desire for change on this issue, could be the focal point for a badly needed social reform on the voting front.

America needs voter reform, as the last two elections (Washington/Florida) have shown.

Kerry could take the ball, and his next term in Congress and make a lasting impression and push for change. But instead he'll continue to wrap up the idea with his attacks on President Bush and Iraq, meaning it will never be taken seriously in Congress, coming from his mouth.

I know such an issue could get bi-partisan support. But keep throwing those campaign commerical attacks in there and you ensure that nothing will happen out ot spite. And the country will suffer.

Just shows what his true feelings on the issue are. IMO.


Kerry Criticizes Election Outcome

Kerry Criticizes Election Outcome, Alleges Voter Disenfranchisement at MLK Breakfast

BOSTON Jan 17, 2005 — Sen. John Kerry, in some of his most pointed public comments yet about the presidential election, invoked Martin Luther King Jr.'s legacy on Monday as he criticized President Bush and decried reports of voter disenfranchisement.

The Massachusetts Democrat, Bush's challenger in November, spoke at Boston's annual Martin Luther King Day Breakfast. He reiterated that he decided not to challenge the election results, but "thousands of people were suppressed in the effort to vote."

"Voting machines were distributed in uneven ways. In Democratic districts, it took people four, five, eleven hours to vote, while Republicans (went) through in 10 minutes same voting machines, same process, our America," he said.

In his comments, Kerry also compared the democracy-building efforts in Iraq with voting in the U.S., saying that Americans had their names purged from voting lists and were kept from casting ballots.


"In a nation which is willing to spend several hundred million dollars in Iraq to bring them democracy, we cannot tolerate that too many people here in America were denied that democracy," Kerry said.

Voting irregularities in Ohio drove primarily Democratic challenges to the Nov. 2 election, but Congress eventually affirmed President Bush the winner by a slim electoral vote count of 286-251 plus a single vote cast by a Minnesota elector for Kerry's running mate, former Sen. John Edwards.

RBA
01-17-2005, 07:48 PM
I think you are in denial.



America needs voter reform, as the last two elections (Washington/Florida) have shown.



Washington? How about Ohio? You don't think everything went peachy keen there? do you?

jmcclain19
01-17-2005, 08:45 PM
I think you are in denial.

Make sure you read the whole sentence you quoted.

Unassisted
01-17-2005, 08:54 PM
Partisan pandering to lay groundwork for a run in 2008.

Telling an audience what it wants to hear is an accepted (and effective) practice for candidates seeking votes or money. Kerry maintains all the outward appearance of a candidate. It is an unusually quick turnaround to start the next campaign, though.

GAC
01-17-2005, 09:04 PM
And of course it is only Dems who get disenfranchised. :rolleyes:

In Ohio, in heavily Repub districts (Hamilton Co for example), alot of people also waited hours to vote. How do you explain that? It happened all over this country and in both both Repub and Dem districts.

Personally, I don't think alot of states, voting districts, were properly prepared for such a large voter turn-out during this election. It's had more to do with limited finances, and the bureaucracy of the federal government and state legislatures trying to set forth/implement changes to improve the system, and some of the regulations they passed (that are not uniform among all the states) that caused some of the problems.

Do improvements need to be made? Yes. But voters are "disenfranchised" in every election for various and legitimate reasons. And I'd say a vast majority of the time it's due to their own fault, not some Republican conspiracy.

But it's so much easier though for guys like Jesse and Johnny to throw out generalized and ubsubstantiated charges. They had a recount here in Ohio. It was a bi-partisan effort that went through every voter district. And guess what? Both the Democratic and Republican representatives involved in coordinating and monitoring that recount, not someone standing on the "outside" like Jesse screaming "FIRE!", stated that all went very well. And Kerry still lost by somewhere around 114,000 votes.

Dems need to quit whining and get over it. It's nothing but sour grapes, and doesn't project well on Kerry and the Democratic Party.

RBA
01-17-2005, 09:09 PM
The recount in Ohio was a sham. If you believe letting the manufacture of the machine tamper with them to get the right "recount" than I really don't have any more to say.

GAC
01-17-2005, 09:17 PM
The recount in Ohio was a sham. If you believe letting the manufacture of the machine tamper with them to get the right "recount" than I really don't have any more to say.

I doubt you'll not have any more to say. :lol:

You ever try listening to yourself? It's simply laughable.

You live in Ohio RBA?

More unfounded and ridiculous accusations by the left.

Just throw something out there and see if it sticks.

Give solid evidence it was a sham when even the Dems involved in the recount/verification process approved of the final tally and the procedure used?

You can't. ;)

pedro
01-17-2005, 09:23 PM
The lines are only one issue, and not the main one IMO.

The bigger issue to me is the security and procedures regarding the electronic voting machines. I'm not saying that the vote total was altered, but it very clear that the security of the machines/system is poor and the laws regarding the handling of them post election were not adhered to by local officials in numerous voting districts. While I don't believe there is proof of fraud, there is certainly vast evidence of negligence, intentional or otherwise, and it is important that the proper reforms be made and that the laws are followed in future elections.

SandyD
01-17-2005, 09:24 PM
This debate is exactly why Kerry cannot be the one to lead the charge for election reform.

RBA
01-17-2005, 09:26 PM
I noticed you don't live in Florida, but that didn't stop you from becoming an "expert" on the vote there in 2000.

KYRedsFan
01-17-2005, 10:37 PM
I am a GOP voter who moved something like 4 months before the election. I attempted to register twice in my new state, and both time was denied due to clerical reasons. Had to call my old state and tell them I moved. Then was able to register in my new state. Oh yeah, my new state has a Dem governor. It's obviously his fault, and it's obviously a conspiracy. Please, we can't move on from 2004, cause many can't move on from 2000. Keep trying fellas.

KYRedsFan
01-17-2005, 10:39 PM
The recount in Ohio was a sham. If you believe letting the manufacture of the machine tamper with them to get the right "recount" than I really don't have any more to say.

Oh now that is just beautiful. Evidence, please. I know this is a message board, but cmon and please give us something credible, besides just whatever makes you feel better about your position.

RBA
01-17-2005, 10:43 PM
As you point out KYRedsFan, there are problems with voting and getting to vote in this country and sweeping them under the rug is not going to fix anything.

I'm glad you were able to rectify your problem with registering to vote, others weren't so lucky.

RBA
01-17-2005, 10:47 PM
Oh now that is just beautiful. Evidence, please. I know this is a message board, but cmon and please give us something credible, besides just whatever makes you feel better about your position.

Evidence? You say. You can't tell me this is the first time you ever heard of this?

I didn't start this topic, obviously it's the same old pick every little quote from a Democrat and bash the hell of it and see if I can piss off the liberals on this board type of post.

pedro
01-17-2005, 10:54 PM
Oh now that is just beautiful. Evidence, please. I know this is a message board, but cmon and please give us something credible, besides just whatever makes you feel better about your position.

Here's a link (http://www.pdamerica.org/field/final%20status%20report.pdf) to the congressional report

RBA
01-17-2005, 11:07 PM
Here's a link (http://www.pdamerica.org/field/final%20status%20report.pdf) to the congressional report

Fox News, Rush, CNN, MSNBC (exception Olbermann) and the rest of the right wing main stream media didn't report it so it doesn't exist.

the allegations against triad were first raised by Green Party candidate David Cobb, who testified at a hearing held in Columbus, Ohio by Rep. John Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee. In his testimony (http://www.votecobb.org/press/2004/dec/pr2004-12-13b.php), Cobb stated:


Mr. Chairman, though our time is limited, I must bring to the committee's attention the most recent and perhaps most troubling incident that was related to my campaign on Sunday, December 12, about a shocking event that occurred last Friday, December 10.

A representative from Triad Systems came into a county board of elections office un-announced. He said he was just stopping by to see if they had any questions about the up-coming recount. He then headed into the back room where the Triad supplied Tabulator (a card reader and older PC with custom software) is kept. He told them there was a problem and the system had a bad battery and had "lost all of its data". He then took the computer apart and started swapping parts in and out of it and another "spare" tower type PC also in the room. He may have had spare parts in his coat as one of the BOE people moved it and remarked as to how very heavy it was. He finally re-assembled everything and said it was working but to not turn it off.

He then asked which precinct would be counted for the 3% recount test, and the one which had been selected as it had the right number of votes, was relayed to him. He then went back and did something else to the tabulator computer.

The Triad Systems representative suggested that since the hand count had to match the machine count exactly, and since it would be hard to memorize the several numbers which would be needed to get the count to come out exactly right, that they should post this series of numbers on the wall where they would not be noticed by observers. He suggested making them look like employee information or something similar. The people doing the hand count could then just report these numbers no matter what the actual count of the ballots revealed. This would then "match" the tabulator report for this precinct exactly. The numbers were apparently the final certified counts for the selected precinct.

Triad is contracted to do much of the elections work in this county and elsewhere in Ohio. This included programming the candidates into the tabulator, and coming up with the rotation of candidates in the various precincts (that is, the order of which candidate is first changes between precincts). They also have a technician in the office on election night to actually run the tabulator itself.

Triad also supplies the network computers on which all of the voter registration information and processing is kept for the county.

It was unusual for the computers to be taken apart. At least one member of the Board of Elections was told the tabulator was in pieces when he called to check on the office.

The source of this report believes that the Triad representative was "making the rounds" of visiting other counties also before the recount. This person also stated they would not pass on the suggestion of the "posted" hidden totals, and would refuse to go along with it if it were suggested by the others in the office at the time.

The source of this information believes they could lose their job if they come forward.

The source of this information is named Sherole Eaton, Hocking County deputy director of elections. She has since written and signed an affidavit describing her experience with the Triad representative, the text of which is here:



Go to Original (http://www.truthout.org/mm_01/5.121004.Robersondep.pdf)

AFFIDAVIT
December 13, 2004
Sherole Eaton
Re: General Election 2004 - Hocking County, TriAd
Dell Computer about 14 years old - No tower

On Friday, December 10 2004, Michael from TriAd called in the AM to inform us that he would be in our office in the PM on the same day. I asked him why he was visiting us. He said, "to check out your tabulator, computer, and that the attorneys will be asking some tricky questions and he wanted to go over some of the questions they maybe ask." He also added that there would be no charge for this service.

He arrived at about 12:30PM. I hung his coat up and it was very heavy. I made a comment about it being so heavy. He, Lisa Schwartze and I chatted for a few minutes. He proceeded to go to the room where our computer and tabulation machine is kept. I followed him into the room. I had my back to him when he turned the computer on. He stated that the computer was not coming up. I did see some commands at the lower left hand of the screen but no menu. He said that the battery in the computer was dead and that the stored information was gone. He said that he could put a patch on it and fix it. My main concern was - what if this happened when we were ready to do the recount. He proceeded to take the computer apart and call his offices to get information to input into our computer. Our computer is fourteen years old and as far as I know had always worked in the past. I asked him if the older computer, that is in the same room. could be used for the recount. I don't remember exactly what he said but I did relay to him that the computer was old and a spare. At some point he asked if he could take the spare computer apart and I said "yes". He took both computers apart. I don't remember seeing any tools and he asked Sue Wallace, Clerk, for a screwdriver. She got it for him. At this point I was frustrated about the computer not performing and feared that it wouldn't work for the recount. I called Gerald Robinette, board chairman, to inform him regarding the computer problem and asked him if we could have Tri Ad come to our offices to run the program and tabulator for the recount. Gerald talked on the phone with Michael and Michael assured Gerald that he could fix our computer. He worked on the computer until about 3:00 PM and then asked me which precinct and the number of the precinct we were going to count. I told him, Good Hope 1 # 17. He went back into the tabulation room. Shortly after that he (illegible) stated that the computer was ready for the recount and told us not to turn the computer off so it would charge up.

Before Lisa ran the tests, Michael said to turn the computer off. Lisa said, " I thought you said we weren't supposed to turn it off." He said turn it off and right back on and it should come up. It did come up and Lisa ran the tests. Michael gave us instructions on how to explain the rotarien, what the tests mean, etc. No advice on how to handle the attorneys but to have our Prosecuting Attorney at the recount to answer any of their legal questions. He said not to turn the computer off until after the recount.

He advised Lisa and I on how to post a "cheat sheet" on the wall so that only the board members and staff would know about it and and what the codes meant so the count would come out perfect and we wouldn't have to do a full hand recount of the county. He left about 5:00 PM.

My faith in Tri Ad and the Xenia staff has been nothing but good. The realization that this company and staff would do anything to dishonor or disrupt the voting process is distressing to me and hard to believe. I'm being completely objective about the above statements and the reason I'm bringing this forward is to, hopefully, rule out any wrongdoing.

Further buttressing Eaton’s claim is an addendum to a previous affidavit filed by Evelyn Roberson who, you may recall, was involved in the Greene County recount action that was summarily shut down by Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell. Her addendum reads as follows:

<B>Addendum to Declaration of Evelyn Roberson dated December 12, 2004
Re: Incidents of December 10, 2004



This is to add to the approximately 1 :15 p.m. portion of the visit with the Deputy Director of Elections Lyn McCoy with respect to the following comment:
"She said they would have their computer technician check over their computers on Monday in case they has been tampered with."


the addition is that Lyn McCoy also mentioned to me at the same time that her computer technician was with Triad.

I declare under penalty of perjury the forgoing is true and correct.

Dated: December 14, 2004 Evelyn Roberson</B>




Original versions of these documents should be available later on Wednesday on the website of Rep. Conyers.

Conyers, upon hearing these allegations, sent a letter to both the FBI Special Agent in Charge in Ohio and the Hocking County Prosecutor. The text of that letter is as follows:

December 15, 2004

As part of the Democratic staff's investigation into irregularities in the 2004 election and following up on a lead provided to me by Green Party Presidential Candidate, David Cobb, I have learned that Sherole Eaton, a Deputy Director of Board of Elections in Hocking County, Ohio, has first hand knowledge of inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering in the Ohio presidential election in violation of federal and state law.

I have information that similar actions of this nature may be occurring in other counties in Ohio. I am therefore asking that you immediately investigate this alleged misconduct and that, among other things, you consider the immediate impoundment of election machinery to prevent any further tampering.

On December 13, my staff met with Ms. Eaton who explained to them that last Friday, December 10, Michael Barbian, Jr., a representative of Triad GSI unilaterally sought and obtained access to the voting machinery and records in Hocking County, Ohio, modified the computer tabulator, learned which precinct was planned to be the subject of the initial test recount and made further alterations based on that information, and advised the election officials how to manipulate the machinery so that the preliminary hand recount matched the machine count. Ms. Eaton first relayed this information to Green Party representatives, and then completed, signed and notarized an affidavit describing this course of events, a copy of which is attached.

The Triad official sought access to the voting machinery based on the apparent pretext that he wanted to review some "legal questions" the officials might receive as part of the recount process. At several times during this visit, Mr. Barbian telephoned into Triad's offices to obtain programming information relating to the machinery and the precinct in question. I have subsequently learned that Triad officials have been, or are in the process of intervening in several other counties in Ohio - Greene and Monroe, and perhaps others (see attached).

There are several important considerations you should be aware of with respect to this matter. First, this course of conduct would appear to violate several provisions of federal law, in addition to the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. 42 U.S.C. §1973 provides for criminal penalties against any person who, in any election for federal office, "knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by . . . the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held." 42 U.S.C. § 1974 also requires the retention and preservation, for a period of twenty-two months from the date of a federal election, of all voting records and papers and makes it a felony for any person to "willfully steal, destroy, conceal, mutilate, or alter" any such record. Further, any tampering with ballots and/or election machinery would violate the constitutional rights of all citizens to vote and have their votes properly counted, as guaranteed by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Second, the course of conduct would also appear to violate several provisions of Ohio law. No less than 4 provisions of the Ohio Revised Code make it a felony to tamper with or destroy election records or machines.1 Clearly, modifying election equipment in order to make sure that the hand count matches the machine count would appear to fall within these proscriptions.

Moreover, bringing in Triad officials into other Ohio Counties would also appear to violate Ohio Revised Code § 3505.32 which provides that during a period of official canvassing, all interaction with ballots must be "in the presence of all of the members of the board and any other persons who are entitled to witness the official canvass," given that last Friday, the Ohio Secretary of State has issued orders to the effect that election officials are to treat all election materials as if they were in a period of canvassing,2 and that "Teams of one Democrat and one Republican must be present with ballots at all times of processing."

Third, it is important to recognize that the companies implicated in the wrongdoing, Triad and its affiliates, are the leading suppliers of voting machines involving the counting of paper ballots and punch cards in the critical states of Ohio and Florida. Triad is controlled by the Rapp family, and its founder Tod A. Rapp has been a consistent contributor to Republican causes.4 A Triad affiliate, Psephos corporation, supplied the notorious butterfly ballot used in Palm Beach County, Florida, in the 2000 presidential election.

Sincerely,

John Conyers, Jr.

KYRedsFan
01-18-2005, 09:22 PM
First came Deep Throat. Now we have Heavy Coat.

tom browning
01-19-2005, 01:29 AM
Scary stuff here.

http://nightweed.com/usavotefacts.html

Did you know....
1. 80% of all votes in America are counted by only two companies: Diebold and ES&S.
http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diebold



2. There is no federal agency with regulatory authority or oversight of the U.S. voting machine industry.
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0916-04.htm

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html



3. The vice-president of Diebold and the president of ES&S are brothers.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/private_company.html

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html



4. The chairman and CEO of Diebold is a major Bush campaign organizer and donor who wrote in 2003 that he was "committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes to the president next year."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml

http://www.wishtv.com/Global/story.asp?S=1647886



5. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel used to be chairman of ES&S. He became Senator based on votes counted by ES&S machines.
http://www.motherjones.com/commentary/columns/2004/03/03_200.html

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/031004Fitrakis/031004fitrakis.html



6. Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, long-connected with the Bush family, was recently caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee.
http://www.blackboxvoting.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=26

http://www.hillnews.com/news/012903/hagel.aspx

http://www.onlisareinsradar.com/archives/000896.php



7. Senator Chuck Hagel was on a short list of George W. Bush's vice-presidential candidates.
http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_28/b3689130.htm

http://theindependent.com/stories/052700/new_hagel27.html



8. ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S. and counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.
http://www.essvote.com/HTML/about/about.html

http://www.onlinejournal.com/evoting/042804Landes/042804landes.html



9. Diebold's new touch screen voting machines have no paper trail of any votes. In other words, there is no way to verify that the data coming out of the machine is the same as what was legitimately put in by voters.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

http://www.itworld.com/Tech/2987/041020evotestates/pfindex.html



10. Diebold also makes ATMs, checkout scanners, and ticket machines, all of which log each transaction and can generate a paper trail.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0225-05.htm

http://www.diebold.com/solutions/default.htm



11. Diebold is based in Ohio.
http://www.diebold.com/aboutus/ataglance/default.htm



12. Diebold employed 5 convicted felons as consultants and developers to help write the central compiler computer code that counted 50% of the votes in 30 states.
http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,61640,00.html

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/10/301469.shtml



13. Jeff Dean was Senior Vice-President of General Election Systems when it was bought by Diebold. Even though he had been convicted of 23 counts of felony theft in the first degree, Jeff Dean was retained as a consultant by Diebold and was largely responsible for programming the optical scanning software now used in most of the United States.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0312/S00191.htm
http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf



14. Diebold consultant Jeff Dean was convicted of planting back doors in his software and using a "high degree of sophistication" to evade detection over a period of 2 years.
http://www.chuckherrin.com/HackthevoteFAQ.htm#how

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/bbv_chapter-8.pdf



15. None of the international election observers were allowed in the polls in Ohio.
http://www.globalexchange.org/update/press/2638.html

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/10/26/loc_elexoh.html



16. California banned the use of Diebold machines because the security was so bad. Despite Diebold's claims that the audit logs could not be hacked, a chimpanzee was able to do it! (See the movie here: http://blackboxvoting.org/baxter/baxterVPR.mov.)
http://wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,63298,00.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4874190



17. 30% of all U.S. votes are carried out on unverifiable touch screen voting machines with no paper trail.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/07/28/sunday/main632436.shtml



18. All -- not some -- but all the voting machine errors detected and reported in Florida went in favor of Bush or Republican candidates.
http://www.wired.com/news/evote/0,2645,65757,00.html

http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAftermath04/ThreeResearchStudiesBushIsOut.htm

http://www.rise4news.net/extravotes.html

http://www.ilcaonline.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=950

http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00227.htm



19. The governor of the state of Florida, Jeb Bush, is the President's brother.
http://www.tallahassee.com/mld/tallahassee/news/local/7628725.htm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10544-2004Oct29.html



20. Serious voting anomalies in Florida -- again always favoring Bush -- have been mathematically demonstrated and experts are recommending further investigation.
http://www.yuricareport.com/ElectionAftermath04/ThreeResearchStudiesBushIsOut.htm

http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/government/policy/story/0,10801,97614,00.html

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/tens_of_thousands.html

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1106-30.htm

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/110904.html

http://uscountvotes.org/

Ravenlord
01-19-2005, 01:45 AM
edited: not a good decision on my part, and violates two of the rules.

REDREAD
01-19-2005, 10:54 AM
I love a good conspiracy as much as anyone, but there's at least a chance that there was a legitimate computer problem here. If the guy fixed the computre, and then they reran all optical scans or whatever, wouldn't that be fine?

Of course, there's always the chance he did do something sneaky, but it seems to me that there's no way to prove it.

tom browning
01-19-2005, 01:20 PM
I dont know if the election was fixed. I do know that there is a very reasonable chance it was.

That alone should be enough to have a serious reformed, unquestionable as possible, process. There should be paper trails, bi-paritsan audits and inspections of the machines.

How can we say this is the best nation in the world when we cannot even trust our own elections?

Rojo
01-19-2005, 01:28 PM
Of course, there's always the chance he did do something sneaky, but it seems to me that there's no way to prove it.

George W. Bush is going to be sworn in on Thursday (and Rojo will be hitting the Dewars). Nobody is suggesting that we can overturn that. But what about the next election?

This is an issue that screams out for a bipartisan compromise. Confidence in the democratic process is eroding. But if all the republicans can do is scream "sore loser" then I have no choice but to get right back on the "dead horse".

tom browning
01-19-2005, 02:11 PM
This is an issue that screams out for a bipartisan compromise. Confidence in the democratic process is eroding.

This is the point. This is an issue for both parties. If we cannot trust the elections held in this country, then we are ALL in serious trouble.

Rojo
01-19-2005, 03:04 PM
This the thing -- if the GOP doesn't want to clean up the election process then what am I suppose to think? That they like sloppy elections.

RedFanAlways1966
01-19-2005, 03:32 PM
This the thing -- if the GOP doesn't want to clean up the election process then what am I suppose to think? That they like sloppy elections.

With all due respect... speak for yourselves. How come we only need election reform, from one side's perspective, when that side loses two close elections? Could it be that they actually lost those elections fair-and-square? Or when they lose close ones... there must a fix.

However, some people take the words of Conyers, Boxer, Jesse and the lady from Cleveland to heart. And let us not forget the words of writers on the internet and in publications. Was there this much complaining before the election about these Diebold machines? Some will say yes, but I think most know the truth.

I happen to know quite a bit about the Diebold company as a former employer of mine was competitor #1 with Diebold. I probably know more than anyone here who has posted internet blogs that demean and make felonious accusations against the Diebold company. I have always thought they were a straight-laced company. Never had a problem with them or their business practices. Perhaps a few more blogs, written by (doesn't matter), will convince me that they are Bush-zealots who stole the election? Nah... I like to think I am smarter than that. And I do know a lot about Diebold and their businesses. And if you have a problem with Diebold... don't use their ATMs!! Oh... you probably do quite frequently and have never worried about your money/transactions (perhaps did not realize that Diebold may be the producer of your fav ATM). If the shoe fits...

Accusations. Internet articles. Non bi-partisans like Jesse, Boxer, Conyers and the lady from Cleveland. It is all starting to make sense to me... we have a fair system. I thought the same in 1992 & 1996. Kleenex will not have a stock boost due to me. Nope. The system works. The system is fair. And it will be just as fair in 2008... regardless of who wins. Maybe not foolproof, but darn close.

Rojo
01-19-2005, 03:40 PM
What? No Michael Moore mention?

Steve4192
01-19-2005, 03:48 PM
This the thing -- if the GOP doesn't want to clean up the election process then what am I suppose to think? That they like sloppy elections.
Call me a cynic, but I'm sure the GOP will be in favor of cleaning up the election process as soon as they start losing elections. Of course, when that happens the democrats will reverse course and be dead-set against it.

I don't think the opposition to voting reform has anything to do with elephants or donkeys, it has everything to do with winning and losing. No winner EVER wants a recount, and that will include the dems once they start winning again.

Rojo
01-19-2005, 04:02 PM
Of course, when that happens the democrats will reverse course and be dead-set against it.

And that would be wrong.

RedFanAlways1966
01-19-2005, 04:06 PM
What? No Michael Moore mention?

Oh... is he working on "Bowling For Diebold"?!?!? About time to drain the wallets of his all-so-loyal fanbase... again! ;)

Chip R
01-19-2005, 04:11 PM
Call me a cynic, but I'm sure the GOP will be in favor of cleaning up the election process as soon as they start losing elections. Of course, when that happens the democrats will reverse course and be dead-set against it.

I don't think the opposition to voting reform has anything to do with elephants or donkeys, it has everything to do with winning and losing. No winner EVER wants a recount, and that will include the dems once they start winning again.
I wouldn't call you a cynic. I'd call you a realist cause I believe you're 100% right.

On a side note, I noticed last week that Ohio is going to optical scanners in the voting machines now. No more punch cards. :thumbup:

Ravenlord
01-19-2005, 04:12 PM
What? No Michael Moore mention?

Michael Moore is the push over reason i voted for Bush. i thought i was the only person who had that reasoning. but alas, talking to some friends at school today, i discovered there are at least 30 of us just at Urbana who voted Bush because of Moore. that seems like an incredibly high number to me.

i wonder how many votes in Ohio went to Bush as a result of MM's influence, and how many went to Kerry?

Redsfaithful
01-19-2005, 04:13 PM
No winner EVER wants a recount, and that will include the dems once they start winning again.

It's not really the recount part so much as the getting the actual election right.

But I'm sure you're right about the Dems in charge changing their minds, and like Rojo said, that'll be wrong too.

Redsfaithful
01-19-2005, 04:15 PM
Michael Moore is the push over reason i voted for Bush. i thought i was the only person who had that reasoning. but alas, talking to some friends at school today, i discovered there are at least 30 of us just at Urbana who voted Bush because of Moore. that seems like an incredibly high number to me.

i wonder how many votes in Ohio went to Bush as a result of MM's influence, and how many went to Kerry?

It's not many, but I know two people who voted against Bush largely because of Fehrenheit.

I think voting for a candidate because you don't like a filmmaker is a pretty silly way to go about things, but hey, it's your vote.

pedro
01-19-2005, 04:23 PM
Michael Moore is the push over reason i voted for Bush. i thought i was the only person who had that reasoning. but alas, talking to some friends at school today, i discovered there are at least 30 of us just at Urbana who voted Bush because of Moore. that seems like an incredibly high number to me.

i wonder how many votes in Ohio went to Bush as a result of MM's influence, and how many went to Kerry?

RL, did you see the movie? Just wondering. I haven't.

Ravenlord
01-19-2005, 04:36 PM
It's not many, but I know two people who voted against Bush largely because of Fehrenheit.

I think voting for a candidate because you don't like a filmmaker is a pretty silly way to go about things, but hey, it's your vote.
people voted for Clinton because they thought he was cooler than Dole. that's even sillier to me.

you can see my signature for a very good example of what the major problem is with voting.

Ravenlord
01-19-2005, 04:38 PM
RL, did you see the movie? Just wondering. I haven't.
yep. Bowling had an agenda, but it wasn't one i'd call liberal. a MM agenda yes, but not a liberal agenda.

Farenheit was hard to watch (i thought it was poorly done for an MM film, yes i do think he's very good at what he does. also the subject). the few great points he did make were completely over shadowd by the fact he made 30-40 changes of facts, or totally omitted things.

traderumor
01-19-2005, 04:44 PM
I dont know if the election was fixed. I do know that there is a very reasonable chance it was.

That alone should be enough to have a serious reformed, unquestionable as possible, process. There should be paper trails, bi-paritsan audits and inspections of the machines.

How can we say this is the best nation in the world when we cannot even trust our own elections?My dad thinks that there is "the fix of the week" in the NFL, too, because games don't turn out the way he thinks they should or he would like to see them turn out. He could probably even give you some "evidence," like a dropped pass, a key fumble, too loose prevent defense, bad call by an official, easy interception by the QB, etc. Yet, I'm having a real hard time remembering reading in the news of an actual fix being discovered in my memory, spanning back to following the league since 1972. I suppose its possible...

pedro
01-19-2005, 04:51 PM
yep. Bowling had an agenda, but it wasn't one i'd call liberal. a MM agenda yes, but not a liberal agenda.

Farenheit was hard to watch (i thought it was poorly done for an MM film, yes i do think he's very good at what he does. also the subject). the few great points he did make were completely over shadowd by the fact he made 30-40 changes of facts, or totally omitted things.

I'll have to see it myself sometime I guess. I just don't like MM very much. I sure don't think he's helping the dems at all.

WVRed
01-19-2005, 04:57 PM
What? No Michael Moore mention?

Roly Poly
Eatin' corn and taters
Hungry every minute of the day
Roly Poly
Gnawin' on a biscuit
As long as he can chew it it's okay

He can eat an apple pie
And never even bat an eye
He likes anything from soup to hay
Roly Poly
Daddy's little fatty
I bet he's gonna be a man someday

Roly Poly
Scrambled eggs for breakfast
Bread and jelly twenty times a day
Roly Poly
He eats a hearty dinner
He needs lots of strength to sing and play

He's up at dawn to do the chores
And he runs both ways through all the stores
He works up an appetite that way
Roly Poly
Daddy's little fatty
Fatty's gonna be a man someday

Does that about cover it?;)

GAC
01-19-2005, 05:41 PM
It's not many, but I know two people who voted against Bush largely because of Fehrenheit.

I think voting for a candidate because you don't like a filmmaker is a pretty silly way to go about things, but hey, it's your vote.

I really don't know of anyone who voted for Bush because they didn't like Moore, but more because they felt the DNC was allowing him to have too much undue influence/involvement. And many felt the Dems were condoning and agreeing with Moore when they give him so much attention during this election run, and then gave him a seat of prominence at their convention.

And you have to acknowledge that MM's intent with this movie was to influence votes and possibly sway this election, right? He has even acknowledged that. People were swayed, and did vote against Bush because of that movie.

He didn't make this movie for it's solely entertainment value.

He was just as wrong as the Swift Boat vets as far as I'm concerned. It was all biased propaganda with an agenda that played fast and loose with the truth. But like I have heard before... if you want to convince the masses, you always mix a little truth with the lie in order to make it more persuasive.

I think further reform is needed, and even 527's need to be reigned in and controlled.

Ravenlord
01-19-2005, 05:54 PM
I really don't know of anyone who voted for Bush because they didn't like Moore, but more because they felt the DNC was allowing him to have too much undue influence/involvement. And many felt the Dems were condoning and agreeing with Moore when they give him so much attention during this election run, and then gave him a seat of prominence at their convention.
those are for all intents and purposes the same thing.

Mutaman
01-19-2005, 08:43 PM
Michael Moore is the push over reason i voted for Bush. i thought i was the only person who had that reasoning. but alas, talking to some friends at school today, i discovered there are at least 30 of us just at Urbana who voted Bush because of Moore. that seems like an incredibly high number to me.

i wonder how many votes in Ohio went to Bush as a result of MM's influence, and how many went to Kerry?


I'm sittiing here in Manhattan thinking about the many negative ways 9/11 effected my life and knowing sooner or later the other shoe wil drop. And now I read that some guy in Ohio voted for Georege Bush for president because he didn't like Michael Moore. We have met the enemy and he is us.

tom browning
01-19-2005, 11:10 PM
Michael Moore is the push over reason i voted for Bush. i thought i was the only person who had that reasoning. but alas, talking to some friends at school today, i discovered there are at least 30 of us just at Urbana who voted Bush because of Moore. that seems like an incredibly high number to me.

i wonder how many votes in Ohio went to Bush as a result of MM's influence, and how many went to Kerry?


Anyone who voted for Bush OR Kerry and didnt base their vote on the vital issues(economy,health care, ss, enviroment,labor laws, terrorism, etc etc) regarding this country and the where they stood on them, is an idiot who pissed away their vote. Period. :rolleyes: Sometimes I think there should be an intelligence test before your allowed to vote

tom browning
01-19-2005, 11:16 PM
With all due respect... speak for yourselves. How come we only need election reform, from one side's perspective, when that side loses two close elections? Could it be that they actually lost those elections fair-and-square? Or when they lose close ones... there must a fix.

However, some people take the words of Conyers, Boxer, Jesse and the lady from Cleveland to heart. And let us not forget the words of writers on the internet and in publications. Was there this much complaining before the election about these Diebold machines? Some will say yes, but I think most know the truth.

I happen to know quite a bit about the Diebold company as a former employer of mine was competitor #1 with Diebold. I probably know more than anyone here who has posted internet blogs that demean and make felonious accusations against the Diebold company. I have always thought they were a straight-laced company. Never had a problem with them or their business practices. Perhaps a few more blogs, written by (doesn't matter), will convince me that they are Bush-zealots who stole the election? Nah... I like to think I am smarter than that. And I do know a lot about Diebold and their businesses. And if you have a problem with Diebold... don't use their ATMs!! Oh... you probably do quite frequently and have never worried about your money/transactions (perhaps did not realize that Diebold may be the producer of your fav ATM). If the shoe fits...

Accusations. Internet articles. Non bi-partisans like Jesse, Boxer, Conyers and the lady from Cleveland. It is all starting to make sense to me... we have a fair system. I thought the same in 1992 & 1996. Kleenex will not have a stock boost due to me. Nope. The system works. The system is fair. And it will be just as fair in 2008... regardless of who wins. Maybe not foolproof, but darn close.


Well for one, there haasnt been issues with elections like there has been last 2 times. The 2000 election was especially screwed up. Lets face the facts, Bush probably really didnt win. In fact Id bet on it. Regardless, there was enough of a question raised during that election by itself that points out the dire need for this.

Republicans should take the high road and push for election reform as well. Why wait until they lose? I know Id want to have accurate results whether I won or lost. Thats called Honor, Integrity.

Btw, before you say only the dems are crying, you might want to take a look at your own party out in Washington state. Another election that points the need for MAJOR election overhaul.

Steve4192
01-19-2005, 11:55 PM
Sometimes I think there should be an intelligence test before your allowed to vote
That is some mighty tasty irony.

tom browning
01-20-2005, 12:35 AM
That is some mighty tasty irony.


Only if I was stupid enough to vote for whoever because some idiot hollywood person,a church, or some drug using hypocrit radio show host, told me to.

Ravenlord
01-20-2005, 07:40 AM
Anyone who voted for Bush OR Kerry and didnt base their vote on the vital issues(economy,health care, ss, enviroment,labor laws, terrorism, etc etc) regarding this country and the where they stood on them, is an idiot who pissed away their vote. Period. :rolleyes: Sometimes I think there should be an intelligence test before your allowed to vote
i think there should be a test. MM is just easy for me to blame cause i hate Bush. but i would have voted for him anyway. the difference between John Kerry and George Bush to me was/is about the same as the difference between Juan Castro and Tony Womack.

Ravenlord
01-20-2005, 07:42 AM
Only if I was stupid enough to vote for whoever because some idiot hollywood person,a church, or some drug using hypocrit radio show host, told me to.
that's cute...you seem to think i'm a Republican. :)

;)


point of fact, i hate Republicans and Democrats (by party ideals, not the people who make them up) equally. i probably qualify as Libertarian, but in truth, i'm more of an anarchist for lack of a better word.

RedFanAlways1966
01-20-2005, 07:52 AM
Btw, before you say only the dems are crying, you might want to take a look at your own party out in Washington state. Another election that points the need for MAJOR election overhaul.

REALLY? You want to tell RedsZone the difference in votes in Washington's Governor race?? Please also tell us the difference in votes in Ohio for the U.S. president.

I'll let you tell the board. You like to draw comparisons, but I am starting to think that you are uninformed on these topics. Shooting from the hip... I think that is what it is called.

Go ahead... tell us the vote differential in each of these "contested" votes. Then try to use your pot meet kettle comparison. Numbers... just numbers. Right? Over 100,000 vs. about 3,000. Only numbers. Like the difference between an OSU-Mich football crowd (Ohio vote) vs. po-dunk high school attendance (WASH vote). But it is only fact and numbers. But I am more than happy to explain fact and numbers to you, tom browning.

WVRed
01-20-2005, 08:11 AM
Anyone who voted for Bush OR Kerry and didnt base their vote on the vital issues(economy,health care, ss, enviroment,labor laws, terrorism, etc etc) regarding this country and the where they stood on them, is an idiot who pissed away their vote. Period. :rolleyes: Sometimes I think there should be an intelligence test before your allowed to vote

I voted for Bush because of his stance on abortion and gay marriage. I guess that makes me an idiot.:(

GAC
01-20-2005, 09:09 AM
It's funny that there was no one screaming about the voting process/system, no widespread conspiracies being thrown out there, or concern about voter disenfranchisement or fraud prior to the 2000 election.

And someone who really cares about "every vote counts" is gonna have to show me solid evidence that it didn't occur prior to that election, or that it somehow just began then.

Now all of a sudden it is somehow a HUGE problem that needs to be addressed because the Dems have lost two elections in a row, and somehow, in their minds, this is inconceivable, so something must be amiss.

And all I've heard is two basic premises thrown out as to how this could have happened....

#1 - the American people are obviously idiots.

#2 - An "evil" Repub nationwide conspiracy at voter fraud and stealing elections they possibly couldn't have won.


And yet no solid evidence has ever been shown, but simply accusations and wild innuendos without any solid evidence to back it up. I have yet to see one solid piece of evidence presented that points to this "conspiracy" ... not one.

The Ohio Board of Elections, in a bipartisan recount effort that was monitored and regulated by reps from both parties did a recount and it didn't even come close to changing a thing.

Four separate news agencies went into Florida after the 2000 election and did a hand recount, and it didnt change a thing.

That's evidence.

Voters are, and have been, disenfranchised in every election. And if anyone tries to deny that then they are simply fooling themselves. And they are disenfranchised/disqualified not because of some silly conspiracy, but because those voters didn't follow the proper rules and routines when it came to voting and punching out that ballot. For cryin' out loud! Take personal responsibility/accountability when it comes time to register/vote. Don't go blaming someone else.

What I found to be funny is when I see a 75 yr old election board official holding a punch ballot up to the light straining to try and determine voter intent when that intent cannot be determined. Simply ridiculous.

Yes, the system needs to be modernized and standardized nationally. But the "flaws" have hurt both parties, not just one in particular. And that is what has blown me away. I have yet to hear one Democrat complain about the possibility that Repub voters were disenfranchised. Only Democratic voters were disenfranchised.

Even computer screen balloting has it's flaws, and studies have shown that. They just released one here in Ohio. And lets blame some state legislatures also, who pass legislation, such as here in Ohio, that say there must be a solid paper trail in order to prevent fraud and to provide a verifiable avenue in case of a recount, when a vast majority of computer touch screen balloting does not provide such. And then don't appropriate the monies to go to such a system due to financial/budgetary constraints.

Redsfaithful
01-20-2005, 11:36 AM
It's funny that there was no one screaming about the voting process/system, no widespread conspiracies being thrown out there, or concern about voter disenfranchisement or fraud prior to the 2000 election.

There were more than likely problems prior to the 2000 election that went unnoticed because prior elections were not closely contested. The 2000 election was very close, and revealed many flaws in our electoral process.

Redsfaithful
01-20-2005, 11:40 AM
Four separate news agencies went into Florida after the 2000 election and did a hand recount, and it didnt change a thing.

Al Gore would have won in Florida in 2000 if the Supreme Court had allowed the recount.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/112101a.html


A document, revealed by Newsweek, indicates that the Florida recount that was stopped last year by five Republicans on the U.S. Supreme Court would have taken into account so-called “overvotes” that heavily favored Gore.

If those “overvotes” were counted, as now it appears they would have been, Gore would have carried Florida regardless of what standard of chad – dimpled, hanging, punched-through – was used in counting the so-called “undervotes,” according to an examination of those ballots by a group of leading news organizations.
...
The “overvotes” in which voters marked the name of their choice and also wrote in his name would be even more clearly legal votes than the so-called “undervotes” which were kicked out for failing to register a choice that could be read by voting machines.

RedFanAlways1966
01-20-2005, 01:03 PM
Al Gore would have won in Florida in 2000 if the Supreme Court had allowed the recount.

Okay... because Robert Parry says so. Mr. Parry is a writer, ya know. Good enough for some, but not for 59 million voters in this country (that would be election 2004). But Mr. Parry has made a pretty penny off of dissing President Bush and his administration (hate to say it, but just for Rojo, Michael Moore like). More power to 'em! Make a $100 donation to him and you get an autographed copy of his Bush-Family-Bashing book. Sounds fair to me.

I hope Mr. Parry doesn't start telling people to jump off cliffs. I am sure some would. And I would not like to see that. I wonder if Mr. Parry has the following or power to run for President of this great country? Nah...

tom browning
01-20-2005, 01:34 PM
REALLY? You want to tell RedsZone the difference in votes in Washington's Governor race?? Please also tell us the difference in votes in Ohio for the U.S. president.

I'll let you tell the board. You like to draw comparisons, but I am starting to think that you are uninformed on these topics. Shooting from the hip... I think that is what it is called.

Go ahead... tell us the vote differential in each of these "contested" votes. Then try to use your pot meet kettle comparison. Numbers... just numbers. Right? Over 100,000 vs. about 3,000. Only numbers. Like the difference between an OSU-Mich football crowd (Ohio vote) vs. po-dunk high school attendance (WASH vote). But it is only fact and numbers. But I am more than happy to explain fact and numbers to you, tom browning.



LOL. This just proves my point. Who the hell cares what the difference is. The Republican LOST. He had LESS votes. So how about you explain how THAT is different then the presidential election. Cause Id me more then happy to tell you how your wrong and stare at things through partisan colored glasses... Hey pot meet kettle...

Red Thunder
01-20-2005, 02:00 PM
Al Gore would have won in Florida in 2000 if the Supreme Court had allowed the recount.

Amazingly Americans are # 1 when it comes to weapon technology ... on the other hand they are unable to construct a machine which is able to correctly count the votes of an election ;) .

pedro
01-20-2005, 02:18 PM
Amazingly Americans are # 1 when it comes to weapon technology ... on the other hand they are unable to construct a machine which is able to correctly count the votes of an election ;) .

I had a discussion about this with my brother in-law. Basically regarding the fact that diebold makes ATM's and they seem to be secure and accurate and yet it is apparent that the same level of care isn't put into election systems. Basically the conclusion we came to is that banks are in a much better position than state governments to analyze and evaluate technology and as money is involved they have a greater interest in making sure that systems are secure and accurate. Governments, on the other hand, are in the business of doing as little as possible without getting bounced out of office. Therefore if the voting populace doesn't force the government to make sure these systems work right, the governments aren't going to put pressure on the the software/hardware providers either. Systems, by there nature, are only as complex and secure as required by the clients that purchase these systems. If we had good laws regarding how the systems and their secrurity were supposed to work, then the governments wouldn't be able to purchase systems that didn't conform, and the software developers would enact higher standards.

RedFanAlways1966
01-20-2005, 02:52 PM
LOL. This just proves my point. Who the hell cares what the difference is. The Republican LOST. He had LESS votes. So how about you explain how THAT is different then the presidential election. Cause Id me more then happy to tell you how your wrong and stare at things through partisan colored glasses... Hey pot meet kettle...

I am trying to understand your point here. Frankly, REDS fan, I do not give a crap about the WASH Gov. race. Do you live in Washington State? Because I have not argued about that race. It was a close race.... can you admit that? A lot closer than the Presidential race. Can you admit that? If not, then facts must trouble you.

DIFFERENT THAN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION (caps so you can understand)... A 3,000 VOTE DIFF vs. A 130,000 VOTE DIFF.. IS THAT HARD TO UNDERSTAND?? IF NUMBERS ARE NOT YOUR BAG, THEN I WILL TRY TO UNDERSTAND. HOWEVER, I THINKYOUR BAG IS MORE THAN OBVIOUS SINCE YOU HAVE PLEASURED US WITH YOUR POLITICAL VIEWS.

Or are you so wisely trying to say that Sen. Kerry lost, like the Repub in WASH, b/c he had less votes. However, your point in the above post (whatever it might be) is baseless relative to Sen. Kerry and the election (I thought this thread was about Sen. Kerry?!??!). But that is one thing I am starting to understand about you.

Tell us all about rose-colored glasses. That is one thing I actually think you understand.

CougarQuest
01-20-2005, 04:00 PM
THESE SHOULD BE POLITCAL DISCUSSIONS. TRYING TO SLAM ONE ANOTHER SHOULD NOT BE THE GOAL

Chip R
01-20-2005, 04:27 PM
THESE SHOULD BE POLITCAL DISCUSSIONS. TRYING TO SLAM ONE ANOTHER SHOULD NOT BE THE GOAL
Don't worry, Coug. If they don't get it by now, they are never going to get it. And then they won't be posting on here anymore.

Rojo
01-20-2005, 05:47 PM
on the other hand they are unable to construct a machine which is able to correctly count the votes of an election

Not unable, just unwilling.

And this is intransigence is one of the bigger threads in the great unraveling, so I don't expect change anytime soon.

GAC
01-20-2005, 09:13 PM
Al Gore would have won in Florida in 2000 if the Supreme Court had allowed the recount.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2001/112101a.html

A document, revealed by Newsweek, indicates that the Florida recount that was stopped last year by five Republicans on the U.S. Supreme Court would have taken into account so-called “overvotes” that heavily favored Gore.

If those “overvotes” were counted, as now it appears they would have been, Gore would have carried Florida regardless of what standard of chad – dimpled, hanging, punched-through – was used in counting the so-called “undervotes,” according to an examination of those ballots by a group of leading news organizations.
...
The “overvotes” in which voters marked the name of their choice and also wrote in his name would be even more clearly legal votes than the so-called “undervotes” which were kicked out for failing to register a choice that could be read by voting machines.

What is an overvote RF?

Basically, ballots which machines read as having marks for more than one candidate. State law, at least in Florida, says that a vote would be invalidated if a voter marked a ballot more than once in a contest. That meant if a voter punched out a chad for a candidate and then wrote in the candidate's name or circled the name on the ballot, for example, it would be labeled an overvote and rejected -- never to be seen again, even in a manual recount.

That's the law.

Here's examples of Florida ballots from the 2000 election where both candidates may have lost votes due to overvotes....

http://www.sptimes.com/News/111201/photos/bushlostvote.jpg

http://www.sptimes.com/News/111201/photos/gorelostvote.jpg

George W. Bush and Al Gore both lost votes when people put extra marks on their ballots.

The problem could have been avoided if these voters had asked for a new ballot. They have signs/directions right in the polling booths and on the ballots that tell voters this very fact...if you mismark or make an error...return the ballot and get another one from the poll worker... no problem.

And what really astounded me is that the districts in Florida where they hasd these problems were Democratically controlled districts. They said people left the polling place confused and not sure who they voted for? Whose fault is that? How about that local board of elections who chose the type of ballots to be used, and the system implemented?

RF... I'm not denying that there were problems in Florida (or anywhere else for that matter). And as I stated earlier, they need to establish a more uniform and modernized system. Each state is left on their own, and the guidelines are so wide for interpretation. But I don't think any system is gonna be fail proof.

The 2000 election was an abberation IMO. Its not something we experience very often. And in such tight contests, both sides were maneuvering and trying to manipulate the system, as well as the law, in order to give their side an advantage. And there was strong evidence of that in that election.

Repubs did it... and so did Dems. It's sad, and it's wrong. But neither side cares about this "every vote counts" rhetoric when it comes down to their side wining or losing. And that is the bottomline.

And I do not believe that political party can say they take the "high road" when it comes to winning and accruing power.

Now I am no lawyer, so I'll leave it to the lawyers on her to correct me if I am wrong. But didn't the Supreme Court ruling basically say that to only have a recount in certain counties in Florida and not in the entire state was unconstitutional, and when one cannot "divine" voter intent when that intent is not evident?

Some of you lawyers weigh in on this.

Redsfaithful
01-20-2005, 09:47 PM
State law, at least in Florida, says that a vote would be invalidated if a voter marked a ballot more than once in a contest.

Right, but if the supreme court had ruled the opposite way in Bush vs. Gore then the overvotes would have been counted. And from what I've read that would have been a rather large help to Gore.

Redsfaithful
01-20-2005, 09:50 PM
But neither side cares about this "every vote counts" rhetoric when it comes down to their side wining or losing.

They should. That's what the electoral reform crowd is trying to say, but too often we get shouted down by people that just think it's all about sour grapes. I believe the US can do a much better job with it's elections, and hopefully that'll happen. It benefits everyone.

CbusRed
01-20-2005, 09:52 PM
Ive been an advocate of an intelligence test in order to vote, for some time now actually. But I never brought it up for fear of being lambasted by liberals.

RedFanAlways1966
01-20-2005, 10:10 PM
Ive been an advocate of an intelligence test in order to vote, for some time now actually. But I never brought it up for fear of being lambasted by liberals.

I am sure you know by now that I am not liberal, Cbus... and I am not planning on lambasting you!

This country was founded on "all men are created equal". It hasn't always been true in this country since that was written by the founding fathers, but I think all people should be allowed to vote. I don't believe felons can vote, which I am okay with, but I think all others should vote. I firmly believe that the U.S. normally will not have results that are decided by those with less intelligence (I am asking for witty comments w/ that remark!). Now an intelligence test at the Driver's Bureau would be just fine with me... they are operating a deadly machine.

The real "unintelligents" are those who do not vote IMO!

zombie-a-go-go
01-21-2005, 05:31 AM
The real "unintelligents" are those who do not vote IMO!

I think we can all agree with that. :gac:

Steve4192
01-21-2005, 08:59 AM
Ive been an advocate of an intelligence test in order to vote
Good luck getting those folks who don't pass your intelligence test to pay their taxes. Ever hear of 'taxation without representation'?

CbusRed
01-21-2005, 09:03 AM
Good luck getting those folks who don't pass your intelligence test to pay their taxes. Ever hear of 'taxation without representation'?

If they fail the test, then they dont get to vote, AND they have to pay more taxes. It's a stupid tax. And if they dont pay their taxes, then they get their TV's and radios taken away. And then if they dont like that? They can move to Canada. :MandJ: Maybe that will motivate people to get educated on the issues and not piss away their vote because some whale from Michigan (who oddly enough is registered to vote in D.C. also) told them to.





of course, im kidding, you know.

Dan
01-21-2005, 09:12 AM
About the Florida election, I heard it well put thusly:

If every person who went into a polling place that day had correctly expressed his or her desire, Gore would have been elected President.

BTW, there already IS a "stupid tax." It's called the State Lottery.

GAC
01-21-2005, 09:33 AM
Right, but if the supreme court had ruled the opposite way in Bush vs. Gore then the overvotes would have been counted. And from what I've read that would have been a rather large help to Gore.

I've read articles that have gone both ways. Some say Gore would have won, and others say it wouldn't have changed the results.

But the bottomline is that overvotes are invalid according to state law and are disqualified for very legitimate reasons.

So it is really a moot point to say that "so and so" would have won if they had counted overvotes when they are not counted.

Every state had at least 2% of their ballots disqualified as undervotes and overvotes. Some states had as much as 3%. Florida falls into that range.

As was the case in every state, there were numerous ballots in Florida that were disqualified because they were either improperly marked or too ambiguous to be deciphered by normal machine tabulation. 113,820 ballots throughout the entire state were disqualified as overvotes (voting for two Presidents). 61,190 were undervotes (not clearly selecting even one candidate.) The total number of disqualified ballots was 175,010, or 2.9% of the total ballots cast.

Respectfully RF... I don't fault Gore for trying to get manual recounts in only selected counties where it was heavily Democratic, and where his chances of overtaking Bush may have increased. The Repubs would have done the same thing. As I stated previously....when it comes to winning, neither side cares about this "every vote counts". It's basically whatever it takes to pull out a win.

And that is what bothered me when I kept hearing this chant from the Gore camp and Democrats that "every vote counts" and "disenfranchisement", when in fact, they weren't really concerned about every vote being counted or people being disenfranchised. Only those, in those districts that would help them.

And that is the truth.

16 counties had a higher rate of disqualified ballots than Palm Beach County. Even though Palm Beach County (where the butterfly ballot was used) was the primary location of protest and chaos, there were sixteen other counties who had a higher percentage of disqualified ballots. The Florida counties with the highest percentage of disqualified ballots were "Bush counties". Duval County had over 26,000 ballots invalidated, but Gore didn't seek recounts there.

And that is why the Supreme Court had to get involved, and was the basis behind their rendering. Why was the Florida Supreme Court only ordering recounts in certain counties when the counties Gore wanted the manual recounts were no higher (percentage-wise) then the other counties and on a national scale? Why not a recount in all the other counties also?

Ohio just did a manual recount in all of their counties for this election.

RedFanAlways1966
01-21-2005, 09:41 AM
About the Florida election, I heard it well put thusly:

If every person who went into a polling place that day had correctly expressed his or her desire, Gore would have been elected President.

So what you are saying is that someone or something asked every person who voted in Florida in 2000? And this someone or something also received 100% honest answers from all of those voters in Florida. I am curious to see the scientific data on this study.

Not trying to rip on you, Dan. But when comments like this are made by the media or an individual in the public eye and people believe it... where is the proof of such a thing? And how do you find out the true answer from all the voters in a big state like Florida? Or is this just a "comment" from a person or a partisan organization... with no real proof?

WVRed
01-21-2005, 09:42 AM
How many times would the votes have to be "recounted" in order for Gore to win?(insert Republican wink here)