General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI Ended Up Sounding Like Such An Idiot Back In 2004
I spent hours doing research, trying to figure out what happened in Ohio. I ended up convinced that something was not right.
I was not alone, and there were plenty of others, especially here on DU, who thought the same. The name escapes me at the moment, but one in particular, he has since passed, had post after post challenging the results, and attempting to prove the machines were hacked.
Barbara Boxer and Stephanie Tubbs Jones became the first from each house of Congress to contest the results of the election. Of course, it went nowhere, and W was officially declared the winner.
Nobody else of any official capacity really made an effort to launch an investigation. We rolled over, and were rewarded with a 2nd term of Shrub & Cheney.
I remember how I told people that the election was stolen, but without anybody of prominence to back me up, I was looked upon by friends and family as a nutcase. I guess that's because I wasn't a repub, because they seem to embrace such conspiracies, and welcome skeptics with open arms, even when no evidence exists to support the conclusion.
The same seems to be happening here. Even to the point of several on DU basically shutting down any talk about rigging of the election. After all, repubs Never cheat, so accusing them of such is fantasy and wishful thinking.
And we wouldn't want to act like T has the past 4 years, lest we be punished by the public of being sore losers, and having it taken out on our party in the next election, just like it was taken out on T in this one. Oh wait.......
I am not going to go out on any limb again, only to have the leaders in my party cut it off, and make me appear like an idiot. I also don't sense any real desire to pursue an investigation, a recount or an audit. Just like the Justice Department didn't really appear to have a desire to go after T on January 21, 2021. It's almost like what George Carlin used to say, may he rest in peace. It's a club, and you ain't part of it.
Aside from the fact T made dramatic gains in Solid BLUE states like CA, is the fact he WON EVERY SINGLE SWING STATE, and most were not even close. We were told that results might take days to come in, yet by 1:30 AM EST that night, he was declared the winner. The odds of either candidate winning ALL 7 STATES was immense. I remember looking at a betting site a few days prior to the election, and that was available to bet on. I remember thinking, the odds are so high, that clearly such an outcome isn't a realistic possibility. Neither was going to run the table on all 7.
I wish I were the slightest bit optimistic that this anomaly will ever be looked into, and so this time, I'll keep any suspicions to myself outside of here, because the Democratic Party is basically signalling to me that I'm NUTSO for even thinking it, because they've seemingly already moved on. Perhaps in a couple of years, when they ask me to donate to a campaign, I will tell them that I too have moved on, and tell them to get funds elsewhere. Because I don't trust elections in America, and Zero effort was made to convince me otherwise.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Blue Full Moon
(3,069 posts)
cachukis
(3,592 posts)to testify but he crashed his plane.
Never understood why the followup died.
The whistleblowers on the other side are few and far between. Skull and Bones Omerta.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/republican-it-guru-dies-in-plane-crash/
c-rational
(3,118 posts)
Aldo Leopold
(687 posts)after the election. Couldn't believe W got re-elected fair and square. It's not unreasonable to be suspicious.
I appreciate your post. Well said.
Jose Garcia
(3,400 posts)Think. Again.
(22,456 posts)...I understand how intimidating it can be to be told you should not believe your lying eyes.
IbogaProject
(5,505 posts)Bomb threats only at blue precints in crucial swing states. Yes maybe it was just to disrupt the lines, but it also affected tabulation.
notroot
(267 posts)What about the Dominion accusation?
Republicans now own the entire narrative on election tampering or hacking, of any kind. No Democrat will touch it with a 10-foot pole.
Mission accomplished?
As they say... Just asking questions.
Meowmee
(9,212 posts)He was anointed by the sc. G should have done a full recount but he got bad legal advice and gave up.
pat_k
(12,617 posts)I was part of the effort to lobby to get a member of the Senate to join in the objection. Even staffers in Conyers' office sort of chuckled at our naivete -- we would never get a Senator. Never. So they said.
But we did. And that is meaningful. And every time it comes up as a comparison to the phony attempt that man and his minions made on 1/6/2021, we have the real data to discuss how the election in Ohio, and the presidency, was stolen, not just in 2001 by SCOTUS, but in 2004.
If you were in DC January 3-6 you know. The number of citizen lobbyists that descended on senate offices was incredible. They had never seen anything like it They were a bit shell-shocked frankly.
Do not belittle the power that was demonstrated that day. Legitimate people-power. It was an example of standing up, come what may. It challenged the Democratic Party's, "If we can't win, don't fight" mantra of the time.
And for those who want a little look back, here are a few photos form 1/3 to 1/6/04 including DU'ers who are no longer with us, WilliamPitt, Andy_Stephenson and Senator.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/uiEVpmJa9dVRnkvd6
SoCalDavidS
(10,599 posts)Do you think if something nefarious did happen on 11/5/24, there will be any significant effort to investigate? For Recounts or Audits?
We don't have 2 years for a Garland 4th dimensional game of checkers. More like 2 weeks.
Defeat isn't an option. Perhaps they don't want to risk a Civil War. Or don't want to erode confidence in voting. If it was stolen, AGAIN, and it's allowed to stand, then this country is still even more PATHETIC than I already thought it was.
At the very least I'd like piece of mind, and so far, it doesn't seem to be a concern shared by the Democratic Party. Hopefully that's by design, rather than capitulation.
Supposedly there are more voters against us than for us, so how much worse could it be if we come across as sore losers? IT DIDN'T SEEM TO HURT THE OTHER PARTY THIS YEAR. In fact, they were rewarded.
pat_k
(12,617 posts)... the campaign and countless legal organizations and observer organizations were poised to take on the flood of election denial actions expected if Harris won. I don't think they all just stopped their work and went home on 11/5.
I assume part of that effort included ground operations tracking counting and anomalies. As part of the effort, they necessarily have data analysts engaged who are staying on top of the canvass process and are on the look out for issues.
In Ohio 2004, estimates of the number of suppressed votes, as well as counts of wrongfully rejected votes, were documented, but it took a bit of time. It seems to me that we had/have a more extensive infrastructure in place this year for detecting and exposing problems.
Depending on the type of challenge, action may require certification before a challenge can be made. That is, for certain types of challenges, you can't challenge the rejection of votes (or failure to count votes) until those votes have been, or have not been, included in the official tally. Some challenges can take place before certification, but I am not really up on the law.
FWIW, Here are the certification dates. I believe county canvases may need to be completed prior to the state dates:
AZ 11/25
GA 11/22
MI 11/25
NV 11/26
NC 12/2
PA 11/25
WI 12/1
I am guessing that the campaign is poised, and has money to pay for, recounts in selected counties, e.g., places like Philadelphia County PA, were I am guessing a questionable number of mail ballots an provisional ballots have been rejected.
I don't think anyone has thrown in the towel without an appropriate level of investigation and/or legal action. But then again, they are not keen to kick off a shit storm before it is completely clear that it is necessary to ensure people have confidence in the election results.
.
oasis
(53,257 posts)election. He was Ohio’s Sec. of State, Blackwell pulled some ridiculous shit to reject mail in ballots.
Hekate
(100,130 posts)But now — I am exhausted and I no longer know what the next step should be.
Jit423
(1,568 posts)Are the paper ballots accessible in all the state? I really have problems with PA and WI.
Fiendish Thingy
(21,778 posts)SoCalDavidS
(10,599 posts)I wonder if this year will even merit a book.
pat_k
(12,617 posts)executive summary
Representative John Conyers, Jr., the Ranking Democrat on
the House Judiciary Committee, asked the Democratic staff to
conduct an investigation into irregularities reported in the
Ohio presidential election and to prepare a Status Report
concerning the same prior to the Joint Meeting of Congress
scheduled for January 6, 2005, to receive and consider the
votes of the electoral college for president. The following
Report includes a brief chronology of the events; summarizes
the relevant background law; provides detailed findings
(including factual findings and legal analysis); and
describes various recommendations for acting on this Report
going forward.
We have found numerous, serious election irregularities in
the Ohio presidential election, which resulted in a
significant disenfranchisement of voters. Cumulatively, these
irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousands of votes
and voters in Ohio, raise grave doubts regarding whether it
can be said the Ohio electors selected on December 13, 2004,
were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone
federal requirements and constitutional standards.
This report, therefore, makes three recommendations: (1)
consistent with the requirements of the United States
Constitution concerning the counting of electoral votes by
Congress and Federal law implementing these requirements,
there are ample grounds for challenging the electors from the
State of Ohio; (2) Congress should engage in further hearings
into the widespread irregularities reported in Ohio; we
believe the problems are serious enough to warrant the
appointment of a joint select Committee of the House and
Senate to investigate and report back to the Members; and (3)
Congress needs to enact election reform to restore our
people's trust in our democracy. These changes should include
putting in place more specific federal protections for
federal elections, particularly in the areas of audit
capability for electronic voting machines and casting and
counting of provisional ballots, as well as other needed
changes to federal and state election laws.
With regards to our factual finding, in brief, we find that
there were massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and
anomalies in Ohio. In many cases these irregularities were
caused by intentional misconduct and illegal behavior, much
of it involving Secretary of State J. Kenneth Blackwell, the
co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign in Ohio.
First, in the run up to election day, the following actions
by Mr. Blackwell, the Republican Party and election officials
disenfranchised hundreds of thousands of Ohio citizens,
predominantly minority and Democratic voters:
The misallocation of voting machines led to unprecedented
long lines that disenfranchised scores, if not hundreds of
thousands, of predominantly minority and Democratic voters.
This was illustrated by the fact that the Washington Post
reported that in Franklin County, ``27 of the 30 wards with
the most machines per registered voter showed majorities for
Bush. At the other end of the spectrum, six of the seven
wards with the fewest machines delivered large margins for
Kerry.'' Among other things, the conscious failure to
provide sufficient voting machinery violates the Ohio
Revised Code which requires the Boards of Elections to
``provide adequate facilities at each polling place for
conducting the election.''
Mr. Blackwell's decision to restrict provisional ballots
resulted in the disenfranchisement of tens, if not hundreds,
of thousands of voters, again predominantly minority and
Democratic voters. Mr. Blackwell's decision departed from
past Ohio law on provisional ballots, and there is no
evidence that a broader construction would have led to any
significant disruption at the polling places, and did not do
so in other states.
Mr. Blackwell's widely reviled decision to reject voter
registration applications based on paper weight may have
resulted in thousands of new voters not being registered in
time for the 2004 election.
The Ohio Republican Party's decision to engage in
preelection ``caging'' tactics, selectively targeting 35,000
predominantly minority voters for intimidation had a negative
impact on voter turnout. The Third Circuit
[[Page H88]]
found these activities to be illegal and in direct violation
of consent decrees barring the Republican Party from
targeting minority voters for poll challenges.
The Ohio Republican Party's decision to utilize thousands
of partisan challengers concentrated in minority and
Democratic areas likely disenfranchised tens of thousands of
legal voters, who were not only intimidated, but became
discouraged the long lines. Shockingly, these disruptions
were publicly predicted and acknowledged by Republican
officials: Mark Weaver, a lawyer for the Ohio Republican
Party, admitted the challenges ``can't help but create chaos,
longer lines and frustration.''
Mr. Blackwell's decision to prevent voters who requested
absentee ballots but did not receive them on a timely basis
from being able to receive provisional ballots likely
disenfranchised thousands, if not tens of thousands, of
voters, particularly seniors. A federal court found Mr.
Blackwell's order to be illegal and in violation of HAVA.
Second, on election day, there were numerous unexplained
anomalies and irregularities involving hundreds of thousands
of votes that have yet to be accounted for:
There were widespread instances of intimidation and
misinformation in violation of the Voting Rights Act, the
Civil Rights Act of 1968, Equal Protection, Due Process and
the Ohio right to vote. Mr. Blackwell's apparent failure to
institute a single investigation into these many serious
allegations represents a violation of his statutory duty
under Ohio law to investigate election irregularities.
We learned of improper purging and other registration
errors by election officials that likely disenfranchised tens
of thousands of voters statewide. The Greater Cleveland Voter
Registration Coalition projects that in Cuyahoga County alone
over 10,000 Ohio citizens lost their right to vote as a
result of official registration errors.
There were 93,000 spoiled ballots where no vote was cast
for president, the vast majority of which have yet to be
inspected. The problem was particularly acute in two
precincts in Montgomery County which had an undervote rate of
over 25% each--accounting for nearly 6,000 voters who stood
in line to vote, but purportedly declined to vote for
president.
There were numerous, significant unexplained irregularities
in other counties throughout the state: (i) In Mahoning
county at least 25 electronic machines transferred an unknown
number of Kerry votes to the Bush column; (ii) Warren County
locked out public observers from vote counting citing an FBI
warning about a potential terrorist threat, yet the FBI
states that it issued no such warning; (iii) the voting
records of Perry county show significantly more votes than
voters in some precincts, significantly less ballots than
voters in other precincts, and voters casting more than one
ballot; (iv) in Butler county a down ballot and underfunded
Democratic State Supreme Court candidate implausibly received
more votes than the best funded Democratic Presidential
candidate in history; (v) in Cuyahoga county, poll worker
error may have led to little known third party candidates
receiving twenty times more votes than such candidates had
ever received in otherwise reliably Democratic leaning areas;
(vi) in Miami county, voter turnout was an improbable and
highly suspect 98.55 percent, and after 100 percent of the
precincts were reported, an additional 19,000 extra votes
were recorded for President Bush.
Third, in the post-election period we learned of numerous
irregularities in tallying provisional ballots and conducting
and completing the recount that disenfranchised thousands of
voters and call the entire recount procedure into question
(as of this date the recount is still not complete):
Mr. Blackwell's failure to articulate clear and consistent
standards for the counting of provisional ballots resulted in
the loss of thousands of predominantly minority votes. In
Cuyahoga County alone, the lack of guidance and the
ultimate narrow and arbitrary review standards
significantly contributed to the fact that 8,099 out of
24,472 provisional ballots were ruled invalid, the highest
proportion in the state.
Mr. Blackwell's failure to issue specific standards for the
recount contributed to a lack of uniformity in violation of
both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clauses.
We found innumerable irregularities in the recount in
violation of Ohio law, including (i) counties which did not
randomly select the precinct samples; (ii) counties which did
not conduct a full hand court after the 3% hand and machine
counts did not match; (iii) counties which allowed for
irregular marking of ballots and failed to secure and store
ballots and machinery; and (iv) counties which prevented
witnesses for candidates from observing the various aspects
of the recount.
The voting computer company Triad has essentially admitted
that it engaged in a course of behavior during the recount in
numerous counties to provide ``cheat sheets'' to those
counting the ballots. The cheat sheets informed election
officials how many votes they should find for each candidate,
and how many over and under votes they should calculate to
match the machine count. In that way, they could avoid doing
a full county-wide hand recount mandated by state law.
Chronology of Events
. . .
summer_in_TX
(3,973 posts)Don't let GOPers and Never Trumpers silence you!
Dean Obeidallah
Nov 10, 2024
That is what election denying looks like. It’s knowingly peddling lies to mislead people about an election that Trump’s own top officials, recounts and the courts had confirmed was accurate.
In contrast, asking questions in good faith in the days after the election is not election denying. It’s called critical thinking. It’s what intelligent, patriotic Americans do. Indeed, the facts surrounding the 2024 election and who Trump is himself demand questions be asked.
For starters, Trump cheated and attempted to cheat in both the 2016 and 2020 election. He was convicted by a jury of 34 felonies for cheating in the 2016 election. As Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg repeatedly made clear, Trump was not being prosecuted for paying “hush money” to cover up an affair. Rather, as Bragg stated before the trial, Trump was charged for “conspiring to corrupt a presidential election and then lying in New York business records to cover it up.”
I find it logical to wonder and to look for discrepancies in the election results. Trump is known to be a liar and a cheat.
pat_k
(12,617 posts)From link below:
I assume part of that effort included ground operations tracking counting and anomalies. As part of the effort, they necessarily have data analysts engaged who are staying on top of the canvass process and are on the look out for issues.
In Ohio 2004, estimates of the number of suppressed votes, as well as counts of wrongfully rejected votes, were documented, but it took a bit of time. It seems to me that we had/have a more extensive infrastructure in place this year for detecting and exposing problems.
Depending on the type of challenge, action may require certification before a challenge can be made. That is, for certain types of challenges, you can't challenge the rejection of votes (or failure to count votes) until those votes have been, or have not been, included in the official tally. Some challenges can take place before certification, but I am not really up on the law.
FWIW, Here are the certification dates. I believe county canvases may need to be completed prior to the state dates:
AZ 11/25
GA 11/22
MI 11/25
NV 11/26
NC 12/2
PA 11/25
WI 12/1
I am guessing that the campaign is poised, and has money to pay for, recounts in selected counties, e.g., places like Philadelphia County PA, were I am guessing a questionable number of mail ballots an provisional ballots have been rejected.
I don't think anyone has thrown in the towel without an appropriate level of investigation and/or legal action. But then again, they are not keen to kick off a shit storm before it is completely clear that it is necessary to ensure people have confidence in the election results.
.
https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=19707163
Response to SoCalDavidS (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Cha
(316,170 posts)Full of Magat Shit.. Poor thing. 
Response to Cha (Reply #22)
Name removed Message auto-removed