Stop with Vote Challenge stuff, please

[moggie12]

Okay, granted, maybe some hinky stuff went on in Ohio and we definitely need Election reform (enough voting machines, paper records, etc,), BUT please consider this:

1) Most national polling organizations showed a tight Kerry/Bush contest right up until election day. A majority, though, showed Bush ahead. (Check out Democratic pollster Stanley Greenburg's website for some very interesting exit poll data. A crucial number of last-minute, wavering voters who agreed with Kerry on many issues got cold feet and went with Bush instead -- it wasn't "fraud", it was concerns about Kerry. I don't know how to do "links" so please forgive me for not putting a link.)

2) I think Kerry/Shrum pretty much handed Bush the victory on a silver platter. I'm a lifelong Democrat, but I'm honest enough to admit that Kerry's campaign stunk big-time. Kerry would've won Ohio by 3 million votes if he didn't keep sticking his foot in his mouth and if the Kerry camp had been better able to articulate some semi-coherent message (I would've settled for them at least better explaining what "an intelligent war against terror" meant in practical terms). I think it was Kerry and Shrum, not Diebold, that were responsible for our defeat.

3) My US Senator, Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, got re-elected with 71% of the vote. Kerry only got 58% in NY. Was this vote fraud? Nope, people who voted for Schumer just didn't like Kerry. (I can't find numbers on Internet, but I think Gore won NY with almost 70% of the vote in '00). Kerry was just a weak candidate. I personally voted for Kerry but ONLY because I would've voted for Donald Duck rather than Bush.

4) I first thought that there'd been some shenanigans again in Florida, but then I heard a 527 panel discussion on C-Span that changed my mind. I think it was Bill Zimmerman from MoveOn who said that they'd pulled out of Florida a week or so before Election Day because their internal polling showing Bush too far ahead to catch. (Erik Smith from the Media Fund was also a panelist, but I think it was Zimmerman who said this. Discussion was sponsored by Annenburg Foundation, but I can't find a transcript on C-Span or Annenburg sites. Did anybody else watch this? If you know how to get transcript, please let me know --Republican 527 panel was even more interesting than Democratic panel. Boy, were they "on-message" during the campaign. The Democratic 527 guys said they had trouble figuring out what commercials to run because they couldn't get a good handle in what Kerry's message was. The Republican 527's had no such problem!)

5) And last, but not least, if there was really massive vote fraud, wouldn't Howard Dean be among the first to lead the charge? Of all the Democrats, he's probably the one who'd stick his neck out if there was really something worth sticking it out about, don't you think? Has he called on Senators to challenge the vote? (Really, has he? I haven't heard about it, but maybe I missed it. I will have to eat my words if he has.)

Thank you very much for listening. I'm sorry if I sounded cranky or mean-spirited regarding Kerry, who's truly a good guy, but really -- that was just a wretchedly bad campaign. What a tragedy that we couldn't mount a stronger challenge.

[Taverner]

1. I agree - and once we get the DLC out of the game

We can expect to have coherent messages again

[Taverner]

7. Well except for one point

Kerrys campaign wasnt wretchedly bad - I mean he did manage to run a close campaigne against a sitting war prez. Thats NOT easy.

[Hippo_Tron]

58. Kerry's campaign had many many blunders...

In short, Kerry was 90% there but with the right people running the campaign, he could've won. Nonetheless, you are correct, he did win against a sitting war president who had 9/11 to use. Not easy by any means.

[LittleClarkie]

60. Depends on what a majority of Dems want to do

If the majority agrees then bye bye DLC. But if the majority doesn't agree, what will you do? Vote Green? Hammer your pov through anyway? Suck it up and stay with the Dems anyway?

What if the majority doesn't want change?

[NVMojo]

66. I agree with you about the DLC, Taverner...

[Freddie Stubbs]

75. The DLC isn't going anywhere. Just wait until

the DNC elects its new chairman in February. ;)

[greenohio]

151. Deleted

[greenohio]

152. Whew that was close.

A thread almost went by without a DLC bash. Thanks.

[molly]

2. I think ALL of your bullets are lacking and basically wrong

and Kerry's campaign wasn't "wreetchedly bad" - he got over 50 million votes - remember?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. Kerry Ran A Decent Campaign...

He beat Bush like a drum in all three debates but his patrician aire hurt him...


We are what we are...


Wasn't his fault...

[molly]

6. He should have nailed the Swift Boat Liars, but he

didn't. That is what I see as his major mistake.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hippo_Tron]

59. Kerry made some serious blunders

And worse yet, there was no proper response when the GOP took some of these statements out of context. Like I said, Kerry was 90% of the way there. He and the democratic party had a grassroots organization the likes of which we'd never seen before, explaining why he got more votes than Raygun. If he hadn't made so many blunders and allowed the GOP to smear his image so much, that extra 10% would've been there and the election wouldn't have been close enough to steal (if it was stolen) in Ohio.

[saltpoint]

3. Don't mean to pick a fight, but --

-- I see nothing in your post that disproves allegations of voter fraud against the Bush team.

My guess is that they cheated because they had to, because Kerry-Edwards racked up enough votes to take Ohio, New Mexico, etc.

Blackwell's behavior in Ohio alone is extremely suspicious.

I voted Kerry-Edwards over the Chimp and Dick F. Cheney and in the aftermath I smell a cheatin' rat.

[papau]

23. I agree :-)

:-)

[saltpoint]

27. Hi, Papau.

Nice to meet you.

Also I like the Clinton avatar. We could sure use Bill Clinton right now in the aftermath of the tsumani tragedy. I don't think Dubya is up to the task.

[papau]

120. Nice to meet you too- Bush's "Clinton pretended to feel empathy while I do

feel emphathy" - the line Bush folks sold the media and Colin was selling today (the initial $15 million was not stingy - it was just the part of today's 300 million offer of aid) is grating.

I wonder if the media will continue to try to sell it. I expect they will drop the topic and focus on how generous our 300 million will be when we deliver some of it.

[Botany]

5. Kerry Won!

End of story. I saw and heard voter fraud 1st hand. I live in Ohio and the #s just do not add up.

:kick:

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Merlot]

17. Funny, but the winner in 2000 wasn't the one who

ended up in the Wh for the next 4 years.

[Freddie Stubbs]

77. Have you provided testimony to the proper authorities?

:shrug:

[tuvor]

8. You link by pasting the link.

It really is that simple. So please, where sources support your arguments, post the links.

Thank you.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Merlot]

18. Someone turn on the lights...

and watch them scatter

[moggie12]

44. Not a Freeper

No, honest, I'm not a freeper. I have voted Democratic since I was first old enough to vote (and proudly voted for Jimmy Carter). I wish I hadn't labelled that thing "Stop with the Vote Fraud stuff" because now that I re-read it, it sounds obnoxious. I got a reply that said what I was trying to say better. This person basically said that of Kerry/Shrum had run a better campaign, we'd have won the election by millions of votes and there's no way anybody could have stolen it. My frustration is that we didn't beat an incredible nincompoop like Bush by 10 million votes.

[Merlot]

53. I share that frustration

Yes the dream was that we were going to win the electons by millions of votes and there was no way anyone could steal it. I think there are many more factors involved than just Kerry/Shrum. And who's to say we didn't win the election by millions of votes?

I guess more to the point is that we need to focus on the problems and how we can take action to solve them. Someone who dismisses very serious (and documented) allegations is in my opinion taking away our energy, focus, and spirit.

We don't need to all think the same or have the same opinions, but we do need to focus on solutions.

[Skittles]

62. gawd, I am so sick of it

SO SICK

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[moggie12]

51. I'm not a freeper

Just because I think Kerry/Shrum didn't run a good campaign doesn't make me a freeper. Do you honestly think they ran a good one??

[Skittles]

63. they ran a decent campaign that appealed to intelligent Americans

they have morals and a conscience, something severely lacking in republicans

[Lizzie Borden]

68. That's the key.

Intelligent Americans. I just have to say that I think that Americans are not all that intelligent. A lot of stupid people voted for the bone-head. He has an intellectual level most of these people can deal with. Just so long as they don't have to think too hard. I'm not sure how we deal with this. We need a least some of their votes to win.

[DaedelusNemo]

72. Different strokes for different folks

Some people operate principally in 'rational' mode, others in 'feeling' mode, etc. Instead of complaining about that, know who you're dealing with and act accordingly. Speak to each in the language they understand. Same basic message, expressed several different ways.

I consider myself rational, and i was for Kerry - but it was largely on faith. When it came to arguing with other people, i very frequently found i couldn't tell them what Kerry's position was on an awful lot of important stuff. Somebody above mentioned they would have loved to hear some concrete detail on what an 'intelligent war on terrorism' would look like. EXACTLY. That was the single most important issue and Kerry didn't offer anything that people could really latch onto; just assumed they'd all be running scared from Bush. Well, they ended up running scared from the guy with no apparent plan at all.

It's the age of the internet; there's plenty of room to explain your policies. Give shorthand versions on tv and tell 'em where to get more, for the rational folks, and also put out the mushy stuff with likeable spokesmen on tv for the feeling folks, etc.

[Geek_Girl]

104. I thought that JohnKerry.com

Was a very good site for detailing his policies. I don't think people wanted details they just wanted to like the person they were voting for. It's not about policy for most Americans it's about personality unfortunately.

[Geek_Girl]

103. I agree except

I don't think most Americans are stupid just ignorant. It's like they live in a completely different reality. They want to believe everything the government and the media tells them even if it goes against reason. I'm not sure how to fix that or if we can.

I hate to say this but George W. Bush reflects the ignorance and arrogance of the majority of Americans. And that in a nut shell is why we lost.

[blm]

25. If Kerry was so appalling to you, why use krryedw to feign support?

.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blm]

37. But, you chose krryedw on Jan 2, 2005, well after you "lost respect"????

.

[Zan_of_Texas]

13. hey moggie,

Okay, what do you know exactly about Annenburg?

Go and spend twenty minutes googling on them, and their connections, and come back and tell us what you found.

You might try spelling it correctly. That's a good start.

Annenberg.

Check out Walter Annenberg, the founder.

Tell me what award he won way back when.

(In 1951, Mr. Annenberg became an early awardee of the prestigious Alfred I. DuPont Award for pioneering education via television.)

Then google "DuPont" and "plot" and "FDR".

That ought to be worth at least twenty minutes of fun.

Then come back and tell us that you think the DuPonts and Mr. Annenberg are impartial and neutral, and we should listen to what they sponsor.

[moggie12]

49. Not a good speller, not a freeper either

I'm sorry I diminished my argument by misspelling Annenberg, but it wasn't Walter Annenberg who was talking about the 2004 election on the C-Span forum, it was the guys who head the two largest Democratic-oriented 527's, MoveOn and the Media Fund. You're right, though, they weren't impartial or neutral. They were pro-Kerry!! I think this strengthens the point I was trying to make, which was that the Kerry/Shrum campaign was sorely lacking in terms of focus and message and this was a major reason Kerry lost.

I must be the only person in the world that watches C-Span! The show with the heads of the 527's was one of several excellent post-election roundtable discussions (e.g., one had newspaper reporters, one had Kerry and Bush campaign staffers). Please, if somebody else saw the 527 program, send me a message!!

[DaedelusNemo]

73. I saw it, learned from it... encourage all to check CSPAN regularly /nt

[ChiciB1]

96. I Try to Watch As Much C-Span As Possible

But I must have missed this one. However, they've had other programs on dealing with WHAT the Dems need to Do and HOW the Dems need to Proceed. Having this type of program on simply states that MOST of the Media thinks that we're a bunch of "conspiracy theorists" who are just sore losers.

Just because C-Span covers it, does not mean they're correct. I'm really appalled that Move-On has conceded the fact too!

[moggie12]

109. No, MoveOn guy didn't say that

I just wanted to make sure you didn't get a wrong impression of what the MoveOn guy said since I'm the one that wrote the original post quoting him. HE WAS IN NO WAY SAYING THAT DEMS ARE CONSPIRACY THEORISTS OR SORE LOSERS. He only said that it was hard for his group to come up with campaign commercials that tied into Kerry's strategy (527's by law cannot "coordinate" with political campaigns -- they have to operate separately from them). The difficulty they had was in figuring out what Kerry's "message" was. (Actually, to make this even murkier, I can't remember if it was the MoveOn guy that said this or the Media Fund guy that said it.) Anyway, the Dem-oriented 527 guy said they took their best shot at helping Kerry by trying to figure out on their own what would resonate with voters. (One interesting thing about the Dem-oriented 527's was that they did a ton of polling to try to figure out what would appeal to voters whereas Republican 527's were like robotic message machines, spitting out regurgitated versions of Bush's message.) He also said they pulled out of Florida a week or two before the election because Bush was too far ahead there -- I was writing about that to support my argument that Bush won Florida fair and square.

[ChiciB1]

145. Well, I Can't Agree that Bush Won Florida

Fair & Square, especially since I live here, and also because of what many many others have told me.

I watched the returns that night and things looked very "fishy!" I actually saw vote dumping oflarge amounts a one time. I realize THAT doesn't PROVE anything, but I also know we wanted a PAPER TRAIL and they simply said No Way! And of course ther were dubious write-ups in our local paper before the election ABOUT statements made and actions taken by our Supervisor of Elections.

So I don't think Florida was won fair & square. My sisters in Pinellas County also had problems when they went to the polls to vote, having to punch several times to get their votes to come up for Kerry. They still aren't sure it recorded correctly.

[Merlot]

14. "Some hinky stuff???"

Or maybe voter disenfranchisement on a major scale. And the votes just happened to be Democrats.

Not such minor stuff. And your bullit points, though well meaning, don't offer a strong argument for what you call a "wretchedly bad campaign." Remember, this "truly good guy" almost unseated a war-time prezdent, even if voter fraud isn't considered.

[moggie12]

64. Top Ten "Wretched" Campaign Blunders

Thank you for replying to my posting (especially since you did so civilly and didn't call me a "freeper", or worse).

It's true I didn't offer a strong argument for why I think Kerry campaign was so bad. Here's the top ten, in no particular order:

1) Shrum not using Kerry's 1985 BCCI investigation to buttress the argument that Kerry could fight a more "intelligent war against terror".
2) That horrible "Dick's daughter is a lesbian" remark. I wish he'd raised the gay rights issue in a more thoughtful, less off-handed way.
3) "I actually voted for the $87 billion before I.." (well, you know the rest...) Once he'd said that, why didn't they go for broke and have Kerry make a strong case for voting against it -- i.e., tell Americans that it was disgraceful to give tax cuts to the rich and saddle future generations with the cost of Iraq.
4) Kerry just saying "yes" when reporters asked if he still would have voted for the Iraq resolution even if he knew back then that there weren't any WMD's (the one time he was succinct -- go figure)
5) Kerry looking goofy early on when he said "foreign leaders" supported his candidacy (and then being too embarrassed to say who)
6) The Shrum-written convention acceptance speech. Many Americans were listening!!! Bush was leading the country headlong down the path to destruction!! And Kerry starts talking about how great his Mom was! Who cares whether she was a Cub Scout den leader!! What about Iraq and that enormous deficit??? Arrrggghhh!!!!
7) Kerry/Shrum not focusing the campaign on the two major, burning issues of the day a)Bush's reckless foreign policy b) Bush's reckless tax policies
8) Focusing on stem cell research (like guns, abortion, and gay rights wasn't enough to whip up the values base???)
9) Focusing campaign/convention on a 30+ year old war that is still divisive
10) Kerry/Shrum not striking back against Bush attacks. Didn't they realize campaign was all about "toughness"? Karl was portraying Bush as "strong, steadfast" while painting Kerry as a "flip-flopper" and "weak-kneed". How could they be so clueless?! Arrgghh again!

[Skittles]

67. NONE of these even REMOTELY compare

to the DISASTER that has been Bush Inc. NONE OF THEM.

[DaedelusNemo]

74. Important distinction: reality vs. tv perception /nt

[amjucsc]

92. But that's not the point...

Kerry had to reach out to millions of voters who don't hate W's guts, and he did a lousy job of it.

I'd have voted for a ham sandwich over W--as would most of the other people on this site--but ravenous hard core Bush haters do not a majority make. We needed to go out and give the 20% or so who truly were up for grabs a positive reason to vote Dem–and instead we sent them mixed messages. Result--four more years of W.

[DaedelusNemo]

78. Some agreement, some disagreement

Stem cell research polls very favorably - i think it helped considerably more than it hurt. Those who were against it were already riled up plenty over abortion and gay rights, not to mention believing that Bush was the appointed of God.

The 87 billion remark: i wish Kerry had made that the centerpiece of an ad, after the Bush people had played it over and over again in their ads. Something like:

"Have you seen this?"
*show enough of other ad to recognize, including quote*
"How about this?"
*Show what Kerry immediately went on to say, explaining his remark*
"Is somebody trying to mislead you by not telling you the whole truth?"

Kerry being 'embarrassed' about foreign support - the fact is, to start naming supporters among world leaders who still had to deal with Bush would have been a serious breach of diplomacy - which of course, the Bush people knew and capitalized on. Yes, Kerry probably shouldn't've brought it up in the first place but rather let others outside his campaign do the talking on that score.

Where i agree with you most strongly - the disastrous Shrum approach to the Bush attacks. If there was a blue-state-red-state elitism-cultural problem, this was it. There's a tendency to say that you shouldn't respond to attacks because it legitimates them. This is foolish, tragic nonsense in the red states. There, to not respond is to admit guilt. Most people were convinced that everything that came out of Kerry's head was a lie long before they ever heard him speak. It's the same thing that killed Gore and Dukakis and a whole list of other candidates who had promised to 'fight back.'

[jmatthan]

15. Watching from many thousands of kilometers away,

and not even being an American, the post reeks of a give up mentality!!

Should the Ukrainian opposition have just given up as you suggest?

Please apply the same standards around the globe.

Simple fact - Kerry has been a coward and has let down those who voted for him or turned out to vote for him, not as Kerry, but as the ABB candidate.

It is sad to label Edwards with the same brush, but it has to be so.

If you do not correct this election, kindly say goodbye to democracy in the US ONCE AND FOR ALL - and better get used to it.

Jacob Matthan
Oulu, Finland

[Bridget Burke]

20. There's a small subset of DU newcomers....

Who are valuable in twisted sort of way--the ones who join for the purpose of warning us off certain topics. They'are always so eager to tell us that "we" are hurting the cause. So, we must never mention the totally stolen 2000 election, the questionable 2004 election, the ignored terror warnings pre-9/11 and the total lies that got us into the illegal war in Iraq.

These warnings let us know what questions the other side regards as really dangerous. If they make them so nervous, we shouldn't let up.

Then--there is the more valuable, larger subset of DU newcomers. The ones who will probably stay around. Welcome!

[amjucsc]

97. Believe me...

...the Republicans will be happy if we spend months harping on possible irregularities in the election. It makes us look like sore losers.
While you have every right to advance your view of what happened, IMHO we don't have a snowball's chance in hell of turning this one around, even if the Reps really did commit massive fraud. Molly is correct that this isn't a winning issue for us.

[Jo March]

110. I don't really care how I look to the republicans

I'll harp on ELECTION FRAUD until I go hoarse.

Kerry WON this election.

We will NEVER have a winning election again if we don't continue to fight for our vote. Why is that such a hard thing for people to grasp?

While I appreciate the warning, I think that those of us who want our vote counted will say "Thank you" for the warning and continue to move forward.

For those of you who give a rat's ass about what the right thinks, please feel free to call the rest of us losers or whatever and watch your votes disappear into the air.

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

[andyadkins]

125. A "new ideas" post shared elsewhere

Stop hypothesizing about what is right. Respond to the political world as it responds to you. The recent election cycle has demonstrated some popularized ideas have disadvantaged the cause.
At root, everyone's sexual preference is personal gratification.( Making love is not sexual, it is a series of acts to expand the boundaries of intimacy {familiar comfort}). Take advantage of this sameness to destroy misconceptions of difference. A further step, and one that should be used to establish an open the door for the latter, is to emphasize how alike we all are (taxpayer, family-oriented, community involvement)
__________________
Abortions result from ill-informed pregnancies. The right to decide to become pregnant entails empowerment through informed decision-making. Pregnancies ending with abortion indicate a failure to empower women with the right to decide to become pregnant.

Read it in context
http://www.indigogirls.com/bbs/showthread.php?p=238993#post238993

[robbedvoter]

30. Thank you for the perspective. There's a mixture of arrogance (how

can this happen to US?) and fear to accept such a dark truth at stake. And of course, there are the bushbots posting here too.
You are absolutely right.

[Clarkie1]

19. Thank you for this excellent post; yours is the majority view here

I believe. It's just that we haven't been quite as vocal as the ones screaming Kerry won.

[Helga Scow Stern]

34. Perhaps you should conduct a poll. n/t

[moggie12]

45. Are you talking to me?

Are you saying I should conduct a poll? I've seen polls on other peoples' posts, but am technologically-spastic. How would I do that? I would appreciate your help if you can direct me to something that would show me how to do that. Thank you.

[femme.democratique]

36. Are you a mind reader? Please don't speak for others, thanks. eom

[robbedvoter]

38. Did Gallup decide to oversample you? Who died and made you majority?

[saltpoint]

41. It's the majority view -- says who?

I believe it might not be.

--edit: sp.

[Jo March]

112. That's not my view!

Sorry, but it's exactly the opposite of my view!

:hi:

[Stephanie]

126. Bullshit

How on earth would you know? Bullshit.

[Tinoire]

139. LMAO! And we were all born yesterday!

This kind of shit may work on Fox or CNN but lol, not at DU thank God.

[bowens43]

149. Ridculous.

If you think that it's the majority view you haven''t been paying attention.

Are you by chance a DLCer?

[musette_sf]

150. No, it's not the majority view

I wouldn't be here if it were.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NurseLefty]

54. Oh c'mon, aren't you being a bit harsh?

Because this person raises the issues about shortcomings of the Kerry campaign, with voter fraud issues set aside, that doen't make one a freeper.
I'm all for investigating and reforming our cruddy, disgusting voting system, but DO NOT FORGET that Kerry folded like a house of cards! Is that how a leader ought to respond?

[Helga Scow Stern]

22. No one who looks at the evidence can say

with any seriousness that this election was not riddled with questions plenty big enough to question its integrity.

The ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee will lead the charge in contesting the certification of the electoral votes on January 6. http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/123104W.shtml

This time, unlike in 2001, several Senators, perhaps from both parties, will stand in support of the objection. http://nostolendemocracy.typepad.com/blog/2005/01/action_memo_fro.html


Many well-intentioned people were in cognitive dissonance after the election, and did not see the possibility of fraud. But the truth does not die, and it tends to spread and grow rather than be stamped out.

As a start, here is the 23+ page report compiled by IndyOp that we have been faxing to Senators of the evidence in Ohio.
http://www.bpac.info

Otherwise, I suggest anyone really interested in knowing what happened in other states visit the voting forum and start with the detailed compendiums.

There is no need to flame. The truth speaks for itself.

[femme.democratique]

28. Sorry, replied to the wrong post

oops

[Helga Scow Stern]

31. You meant to reply to the original post, I presume?

:hi:

[femme.democratique]

33. yup, sorry, I HATE it when that happens.... :-) eom

[robbedvoter]

24. "Hinky stuff" was unacceptable in Ukraine, Romania. But US

has a different notion of democracy - we are the country of make-believe. They can make us believe anything possible.
of course, if this were a sports competitions, arbiters would have disqualified the cheater. But since it's only democracy, why bother? A little fraud is good for ya! And they call us "moral relativists"
One more thing: if you think that all that's at stake is 4 years of W, I direct you to the Peanuts strip with Lucy kicking Charlie Brown's footbal.
Why wouldn't they do more "hinky stuff" if they find people like you who think piss is rain? :shrug:
Any more comments I make will be on this thread
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1464511

[Jo March]

114. "Hinky" - isn't that nice and innocent?

It's "election fraud."

[Donna Zen]

26. Take the names out of the equation.

Voter suppression matters to me. We must start living our values not just talking about them. Transparent methods of voting and counting the votes matter to me. Without a vote that is fair, verifiable, and legal, this democracy will end.

This is not about Dean, or Kerry, or Edwards. This is not about who won or who lost, This is about our country and the future of the rule of law. Telling me that none of this matters only increases my will to fight.

I have worked on this problem for several years and assure you that the system is broken. We can fix it if we have the will. Yes, it will take educating each other, and never ever giving in, but what else is there? Dictatorship...a sham process of fake ballots that lead to nothing?

I'm sorry that some people think that this is about one election or one politician; this is much bigger and more important than that.

[ashmanonar]

42. indeed

that's kinda how i feel...it doesn't matter WHO won, (well, it does, but not in that way) but it DOES matter that fraud is going unreported and unchecked...if bush had legitimately won the election, i wouldn't say that he had stolen it...i'd still look very closely at his actions, but that's just what you have to do with a conman...

[ChiciB1]

93. RIGHT ON, MAN!

I'm with you and I'll be here until I get JUSTICE!

JUST ICE??? That's what they're giving us now, and I want my country back!

[DaedelusNemo]

80. Democrats should take up the banner of electoral reform

regardless of the outcome of this election. It's clearly needed. In addition, if the repubs were to resist, it would become an almighty big stick to beat them with. "How can anyone be against a free and fair vote?"

Insist on total transparency of both the vote and the count, on verifiability of the ballot, and on non-partisan (or at least bi-partisan) oversight. (Perhaps citizen committees similiar to juries?)

I don't see any excuse for the democrats not jumping on it. What's the downside? And it would go a long way to re-presenting the democrats as the party of representation, as the party of the people.

[Johnny Noshoes]

94. Exactly

We are either a democracy or a pathetic banana republic. We either fight to set things right or resign ourselves to living under corporate feudalism.


"When you trade your values for the hope of winning, you end up losing and having no values....so you keep losing." Howard Dean 2004

[hraka]

29. Please explain this then:

From http://www.crooksandliars.com/2004/12/18.html#a1102

"The full Clint Curtis sworn testimony before members of House Judiciary Committee is now available here. (Previously, we only had links to a portion of his testimony, which did not include his naming of Rep. Tom Feeney (R-FL) as having asked him to write the "vote-rigging software prototype! This clip now includes all of Curtis' testimony!)"

http://movies.ziaspace.com/12-13Curtis.wmv

edit: quotes (") placed around copied text.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[femme.democratique]

32. I feel sorry for you. YOU are helping the cause of nailing the last nail..

...in the coffin of Democracy. Someone please explain why we should stop? If you don't like the work people here are doing, dont read the posts! You sound just like the fascists who want us to stop using logic and sound analysis to uncover the truth. You really think you're helping people here "see the light"? Get over yourself.

Oh, and we won't give you too much shit for being so naive when all of this turns out to have some real teeth.

[Jo March]

111. femme.democratique, I am with you

I am so sick and tired of having people tell me to give up or shut up and sit down and be a good little German. I am not going to the back of the bus just so some rethug won't think that I'm a "loser."

In the words of Bear Bryant, "I ain't never been nothing but a winner." That's the motto that I'll live by when it comes to fighting election fraud. I say fraud because that is what it is.

I'd rather be on the side with people like Conyers, Jackson, Faye, WillPitt, IAMREALITY, saracat, Patsy Stone and so many, many others (including you, femme.democratique) than on the side of people who think that it's okay to have their votes stolen.

Ignore is your friend. Freepers and naysayers are only obstacles to Democracy.

[Pithy Cherub]

39. Your logic boat has sprung an irreversible leak...

Voters who have had intimidation, suppression, and harrassment used against thm have civil and equal rights under the law to seek remedies. That there is a pattern of who this happens to most often and in large numbers should matter to anyone who values the core principles of democracy.

[Liberal In Texas]

46. I won't be satisfied with elections until we

count ALL the votes. Have machines that can be recounted, cannot be hacked, and have open source code.

Otherwise I'm not shuttin' up and movin' on.

[Lostnote03]

47. Bad Campaign, Bad Campaign, blah, blah.....no disrespect intended Moggie..

......This was the GOP echo chamber from 2000 as well.....until we as Americans confront the issue of "proprietary software" fundementally speaking, all reasons and rational are moot!!!....

[ChiciB1]

48. You Can Quote Percentages

All you want, however when THERE IS Voter Fraud the numbers will go down. I've said all along that just a few machines in various states or ALL states would have given El-Smirkle-Roy a larger popular vote!

Why do you assume it only happened in a couple of states? I feel in my bones that FLORIDA was scammed AGAIN!! I live here and watched on Election Night around 11:00 PM how about 40,000 votes got dumped into Cruella's column to give her a win over Jan Schneider! Then after that votes started being dumped in lots of counties FOR El-Smirk!!

Regardless, we MUST NOT let voter fraud happen again, whether or not Kerry is found to have been the winner. The Idiots won't leave the office anyway, but we need to show the world what WE'RE made of. I refuse to let the PUKES do it again and we MUST show them up for what they are! CHEATERS & LIARS! If they can live with it, so be it... I CAN'T!

You do realize that this isn't only the 2nd time this has happened, there was quite a hullabaloo about Chuck Hagel's Senatorial win! If we look the other way, they're just going to perfect what they do! Like, practice makes PERFECT!!!!

[hangloose]

50. I respectfully disagree with your assertion, Fraud was committed

and it was widespread enough to cause a reversal in the tally allowing Bush to win the election.

[Liberal In Texas]

52. I respectfully suggest that you've been living under a rock

on edit.
that is anyone who does not think fraud was committed.

[hangloose]

90. Please reread your post as you appears to contradict yourself

[Liberal In Texas]

142. Sorry

My post was kind of messed up.
Didn't mean to have it reply directly to yours, which I agree with.

[NoFederales]

55. Compelling Reason TO KEEP THE PROTEST ALIVE

If citizens allow the vote fraud to continue, how do progressives ever expect to get back into public office in a majority? My concern is not for Kerry, but for intensifying the heat to put integrity into the voting process. Why is it not worthwhile to expect a paper trail for elections? Supermarkets, ATMs, pay-at-the-pump gas stations--and other cases, where a receipt is a bona fide record that an exchange took place?

Personally, I want Bush and his minions stomped on for the mess they wrought. It's a shame about Gore and Kerry, but fixing voter fraud will secure integrity at the polls; it will take much more to set up an oppostion candidate that progressives will heartily endorse.

NoFederales

[zulchzulu]

56. This Monday Morning Quarterback Cliche brought to you by...

...people who don't understand that is was indeed (1) the corporate media that controlled the message so that Kerry's message could not get out and embraced SBVFT and Repug 527 ads without questioning the fact that they were LIARS and the fact that (2) it WAS Diebold and other electronic voting methods (controlled by Repugs) that handed the "win" to Bush.

Kerry ran a good campaign and tried to get the message out only to have these two huge factors make the election the way it happened, which was actually NOT a mandate for Chimpy. He was "reelected" by the smallest percentage of votes of ANY president running for reelection. Some have said it was the narrowest win for a sitting president since Woodrow Wilson in 1916.

Add the uniformed myth that Kerry has not been doing anything about post-election recounts and having legal teams looking into the mysterious "results" and you have a perfect combination for circular firing squad "solutions", which play perfectly into Repug hands.

[Hippo_Tron]

65. Bob Shrum is 0 for 7 in presidential elections

Long story short he's been doing campaigns before we had the corporate controlled media and his candidates STILL LOST. Shrum and Cahill did a piss-poor job running the campaign until September when they were placed on the bench and replaced with Lockhart and Sasso and to a lesser extent Carville and Begala. That's when Bush's bounce started to fall and the race became a dead heat again. The fact is that Kerry should've hired those people in March, not in September. Bush administration blunders that dominated the pre-convention new cycle were the greatest gifts that Kerry could've asked for. He could've used Dick Clark's testimony before the 9/11 commision and Abu Ghreib to slam Bush and go into the democratic convention at least 5 points ahead. But his strategists didn't advise him on the proper way to use these and thus he went into the convention slightly ahead but still within the margin of error. Then after the convention he recieved no bounce, because he let the Swift Boat assholes dominate the news cycle. Blunder after Blunder after Blunder, Kerry's people just moved on like it was no big deal. Eventually those blunders added up and made the difference on election day.

[Doctor O]

69. His record is now 0 -- 8

[zulchzulu]

76. So the corporate media get a free pass for ignoring the SBVFT LIES?

We can blame Schrum for the loss...but it gets down to WHY the corporate media refused to look at the Swifty Liars for what they were and shut them down.

I know for a fact that Schrum, Cahill and others within the Kerry campaign were releasing press releases and such demanding the media show some journalistic integrity for the Swiftboat lies while they were happening in August.

Begala, Lockhart, Sasso, Carville and others had media access and could have shut it down and perhaps they tried during that time in August when Rove's plan was hatched.

Kerry's message was shut down and left to 30 second sound bites by the media "covering" his campaign trail speeches.

Not to give Schrum any harbor on the issue, but it is clearly the corporate media that kept the lies the Bush campaign hammered in negative ads alive.

If you understand what happened with the Swift liars and how they and Rove released the ads during a period in August where the Kerry campaign had to keep the powder dry from August 1 to the GOP convention with the $75 Million to be spent to Election Day, you can see why the Kerry campaign had to assume the corporate media would do their job and be journalists. They didn't. Big fucking surprise!

If there was ANY analysis on what the Swifties were up to, the ads would have been discredited. However, that only happened in October when the damage was done. Kerry had done ads about the Swifites and had spoken in speeches. Max Cleland even went to Crawford to demand the ads be recused. Many Kerry surrogates like Wesley Clark and others screamed that the ads were lies. If you watched CSPAN, you may have seen the speeches. McCain even condemned the ads. But the corporate media kept the ads alive and even continued interviewing these people without calling them on their lies.

Blame Schrum if you want...that's the easy answer...but the real tragedy is the irresponsible corporate media. It could have been Superman in Schrum's place and the same result would have happened.

[DaedelusNemo]

82. Not enough

I largely agree with what you say, but the fact is the Kerry campaign didn't do enough, quickly enough to squash the swifties. They tried to keep it low-key when it had already gone beyond low-key and they needed to bring their biggest artillery to bear pronto.

Reports are that both Kerry and Edwards wanted to respond immediately and forcefully but were talked out of it by Shrum, who doesn't seem to understand how that plays out in red states.

[Hippo_Tron]

87. Here's the thing, WE CANT DO ANYTHING ABOUT CORPORATE MEDIA

You're right, it would be wonderful if the media were truly fair and balanced. It would be great if Wolf Blitzer would invite the Swift Boat Veterans on to his show and asked them REAL questions like "How can you claim this bullshit if you didn't ACTUALLY serve on Kerry's boat in Vietnam?" It would be great if CNN wouldn't assign assholes like Candy COWley to be senior correspondant to the Kerry campaign. It would be great, because people like George W Bush would NEVER WIN ELECTIONS. But unfortunately this is REALITY and media is owned by big corporations. Big corporations support Republicans. The fact is that the media is just as much the enemy as the GOP is. Carville, Begala, Lockhart, and Sasso know how to beat the media ENOUGH to win elections. Shrum doesn't have a fucking clue how to do that.

[moggie12]

89. Always Listen to Hippo(s)

That Hippo-Tron person whose comment appears right above this one is right on target: Campaign consultants need to know how to work the media. Carville & Co. did, Shrum & Co didn't. I don't see the media problem in quite such stark terms as the inimitable Mr/Ms Hippo, however. In the olden days (pre-24-hour news), the poor media people had time to think before they went on the air. Now it's a mad rush and they throw everything on there with apparently no analysis, fact-checking, or, God-forbid, historical context. Since many people get their news only while channel-surfing, this is a BIG problem. For some reason, Kerry camp thought media people would "correct" or "set straight" the Swifties lies. HA! HA! HA! WHAT DECADE ARE THEY LIVING IN?? By the time the media could do that, the story was old news and the average TV viewer believed it -- stories have to be chopped down in the same news cycle now or they become fact. People and the media have the attention span of gnats these days and most don't read newspapers. I don't see evil corporate conspiracy here, I see a whacko news system brought about by technological and societal changes. Shame on the Democratic National Committee for not recognizing this. We need a permanent platoon of kick-butt media specialists to get the Democratic message out every day, every week, every month, every year and to provide a backbone to help our Presidential candidate every four years. Not to mention, failing to mount an aggressive, pro-active media blitz only reinforces the perception that we are wimps which, in case the DNC hasn't noticed, is what the Republicans are always trying to make us out to be!

[zulchzulu]

95. Don't get me wrong about Schrum...

I remember seeing him when I was a van driver (passed the CIA test) in Spring Green, Wisconsin when the Kerry campaign was preparing for the first debate with Chimpy.

I saw it all. I saw the "shed" where the debate was being prepared by people that I personally drove, like Lockhart, Schrum, Cahill, his whole communications staff (where I got lost in the country road somewhere and they were cool about it) and can tell you that they were firing off many press releases and making announcements about the bullshit that was happening at that time. They had been doing it in August to deaf ears from the LAZY corporate media.

I personally got to talk to Cahill and Schrum to a limited extent about the Swifty ads while I was driving them from one place to another. Either that or I heard the many others there talking about the ads and such...

They were trying...hard. They weren't sitting back and puffin' ciggies and drinkin' lattes and ignoring the perception and lies that Bush had put upon Kerry with a VERY free ride from the corporate media.

I've worked in TV news in the past (during the first Gulf War) and can tell you that the news director would rather have the Swifty story first for the ratings and even accept blood money from the liars to run the ads. Journalism is another thing.

Not many pretty-faced J-School TV majors care a rat shit about Morrow-like journalism. They've been practicing like narcisstic Miss America contestants to make sure they look "good", not be good.

If I were running a campaign, I would probably NOT hire Schrum, but I would certainly ask him about certain strategies and maybe give him a chance to look at a speech. He's not a bad guy. He's pretty smart if you ask me. The record is a bit unfair for what he can offer.

Anyway...

Alongside with election reform, we need to look at how the corporate media trends toward the Right and counter that with either regulations or have our own channels to get the message out, including more video content on the campaign website that will be even more accessible as a broadband solution in 2008.

[Clark2008]

57. No - I won't stop and if you care about democracy,

you wouldn't ask me to.

[fooj]

88. You have my deepest respect!

No one...absolutely no one should be expected to abandon their moral end ethical values. Never!!! Integrity and honor is not a given. It is a sometimes difficult, yet honest CHOICE!!! STAND FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN! Do not waver...resolve isn't a word one can use as a catchy campaign slogan. It is a determined and decisive stand one takes in order to uphold truth and justice! PEACE!!!


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?????:think: :think: :think:

[Skittles]

61. hinky stuff - is THAT what you call the destruction of democracy?

go back to listening to Talk Radio

[corbett]

70. Kerry Won! Everyone In The Loop Knows It!

KKKarl knows it. The shrub knows it. Massive fraud, much of it racially motivated, took place. The Orange Revolution in the USA begins right here right now. The good Reverend Jesse Jackson said it best, "This is bigger than Selma":

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1015

Kicking for a Kerry victory!

[OneBlueSky]

71. the two are not mutually exclusive . . .

Kerry ran a lousy campaign AND the election was stolen outright . . .

[DaedelusNemo]

83. Precisely, and the thought should be more broadly applied.

What i see a lot of at this forum is people claiming that their particular interest actually comprises the totality of the matter, which is leading to considerable amounts of nonsensical argument.

There can be more than one factor involved, folks. There's no point in trying to convince everybody to abandon the factors they're interested in. There's lots of people, they can do lots of things, focus on lots of different aspects, and that's a good thing. The vote fraud absolutely should be hounded mercilessly. But the democrat style of campaigning also desperately needs an overhaul. Both can be done; no need to cut down each other over it. Each should get to work on what they're interested in.

[mattclearing]

79. These are Republican/MSM talking points...think about what you are saying.

I'm not trying to say anything about you or your beliefs, just that what you are saying is roughly the same thing that the parrots in the media are saying, and I think it is worth a rebuttal.

I don't see how Kerry handed Bush the election. I thought he responded quite well to Bush's unfounded attacks (lies, actually, like that global test nonsense and the Swift Boat Liars for Hire). The media coverage of the Kerry campaign was terrible, but I can't fault them for not running a good campaign.

People bitched about "Where is Edwards?" in the media. He was out there campaigning and not being covered.

80,000 people with Kerry and Bruce Springsteen a few days before the election, as well as the Vote for Change tour with PJ/DMB/EStreet/REM were a really big deal. I would say this puts Clinton and Fleetwood Mac to shame. Outside of the debates, this was a highlight of the campaign, and it got decent coverage.

It's hard to remember many other consensus points where Kerry even had an opportunity to win a media cycle. Perhaps on the day when he announced Edwards, and two days after any debate when the media finally realized no one was buying their "draw" bullshit, he was allowed to win a day. The willful neglect of national tv coverage of K/E '04 was shameful though.

Three debates won hands down was a real giveaway, too. I don't buy this about Kerry serving it up on a silver platter. He made Bush look like a total stammering idiot. He made me feel better about not having Dean up there to hammer Bush...at least I knew Kerry wasn't going to go easy on him after that.

Kerry's campaign didn't stink. I thought they ran an intelligent, aggressive, and overall effective campaign.

Everyone wants to say that Kerry's campaign had no message, and that the only way to win is to hammer home the same three sentences because that's how Bush won.

If Kerry had won (and really, in a fight with less manipulation of the system it would have been even closer), people would say it was because he had complex answers for a complex time, like they did about Bill Clinton.

These people in the media make whatever rationalization about an event after the fact they can without any real justification.

I personally think Howard Dean is trying to play his cards right in order to get the DNC chairmanship. That means not rocking the boat on election fraud. If he gets the chairmanship, I guarantee you he will be the first person to talk about the integrity of our voting processes.

I think the media coverage of K/E '04 was terrible, when it was happening at all. Kerry simply didn't get equal time. When he did get time at all, he was often countered by the Swift Boat Liars.

Overall, it was close. I don't think we lost. If anything, we fought to a draw. Bush won on a dirty, lying campaign, and even then, I don't believe he won fair and square.

Anyway, welcome to DU! :hi:

[DaedelusNemo]

85. Part of a campaign is to deal effectively with the media.

The repubs have a very serious, multipronged organization put together to influence the media. The democrats are lacking in this regard.

I think it's mistaken and fatalist to assume that you can't work with the media; just as it's mistaken and fatalistic to assume they'll give you a fair shake without you constantly riding them and badgering them about it.

[mattclearing]

98. It's not even like that though. Executives make editorial decisions now.

That's the problem. People in management know the kind of stories that are going to wind up causing them headaches. The media conglomerates that are owned by Disney/GE/Viacom/NewsCorp support Bush because he gives them what they want in the short term.

In order to win, we have to provide them with better stories, more interesting people, and somehow do that without rocking the boat or attempting to destroy the Republicans. It is a tall, tall order. Dean rocked the boat. Kerry didn't. Both lost.

There is no win for these people unless you fight dirty. Clinton fought dirty. So did Kennedy, Johnson, and Truman. By fight dirty, I mean threaten them with dirty laundry. I'm not into stealing votes or lying. Just holding them to a fair fight.

We need someone who will threaten these people with serious hell on earth in order to ensure a fair fight.

[moggie12]

100. Thank you for that thoughtful reply

Many of your points are well taken (by the way, thank you also for only implying I'm a "parrot" -- some replies I got used much more colorful language).

Anyway, I'm probably being a big bore but this subject is near and dear to my heart: Yes, you're absolutely right about Kerry winning the debates, BUT Kerry hurt himself by making that off-handed remark about Dick's daughter in the third one and blew all his post-debate momentum. Were CNN, Fox et al being unfair by replaying the clip ad nauseum all weekend? I think the 24-hour-news stations just go with what's most sensational at the moment with not much thought to it.

Honest, I still think Kerry would've been ten points ahead in the polls before election day had he spent the campaign hammering home two things: 1) How Bush's reckless foreign policy is leading us into the abyss, and 2) How Bush's economic policies are ruining this country. Forget about Dick's daughter, stem cell research, Halliburton, and everything else -- Kerry needed to convince the American people that he was right on those two issues and he didn't.

I'm sorry -- I'll shut up now. Thank you again for your reply.

[mattclearing]

105. No prob. Anytime.

But I think they deserved to be held accountable for trying to have it both ways on gay marriage. If anything, Kerry should have demagogued the issue, not tried to lamely bring it up in conversation like it wasn't a big deal. If I were up there, I would have taken them to task for trying to write discrimination into the Constitution. "Your Vice President has a gay daughter, and yet you want to ensure that she never has the same rights that you and I have with our families. That is un-American."

Kerry never called Bush the un-American bastard that he is. And to some extent you are right about him blowing it.

There's a lot of coulda woulda shoulda going on around here, and it irritates the hell out of me. We had a great campaign.

Our candidate was a little sheepish about letting Bush have it, but he is a statesman, and a gentleman. Bush is neither.

Bush is totally out of place in the pantheon of Presidents. Kerry would have fit right in. This country has run off the rails.

</rant>

[genius]

81. Polls weighted towards Bush showed Kerry winning. Kerry did win and only

traitors would fail to object to the Bush Residency. Personally, I would be fine with every Democratic member of Congress and the Senate, who fails to contest the election, receiving a lifetime prison sentence after the truth comes out and Bush is dragged out of the White HOuse.I am tired of Bush shpposrters trying to convince the Democrats to stop standing up for Democracy. In four years you'll be Republican, out of the country or dead. So if you really care about the Democratic Party, you'll help us stop Bush.

[fooj]

86. I'll even up the ante...If you really care about America and this country.

you'll help expose these lying bandits for what they are...


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?????:think:

[Jo March]

117. but fooj, it's "over". There's "no evidence of fraud" or haven't

you heard? We might as well give up now, turn in our computers and watch Fox.

:eyes:

[ChiciB1]

101. MEEEEEEE TOOOOOO!

Someone get that poll going. I have no idea HOW to attempt to do one! I don't even know what "eom" means or n/t. I'm new to the lingo, but not to the Democrats. I also don't even know HOW to start a thread, but I have lots to say!

[Jo March]

118. EOM = end of message

Once you've donated to DU, then you too can start a poll.

Welcome to DU if I haven't said it before. :hi:

[Jo March]

116. Genius post, genius!

Bravo!

There are way too many people out tonight who are waving the white flag. How very very odd. I guess so many are just tired after all of the hard work they've been doing - reading exit polls, poring over election results, investigating fraud, emailing and faxing their Congresspeople.

I'll give them the benefit of tthe doubt and assume that they are all too tired to see the truth.

[fooj]

84. Jan. 6th seems to have many people feeling out of sorts...

"cranky and mean-spirited" to say the least! All I can say is how much stronger of a case does one need...there is a MOUNTAIN of evidence that doesn't suggest...IT PROVES that the election was stolen. That's right. PROOF! Maybe Kerry's campaign was ill-advised, however, he still won this election! I live on the west coast and the numbers completely flipped at the EXACT same time as they did in 2000! I think the real tragedy lies in the complacency exhibited re: election fraud! And don't think for one second that Dean doesn't have his horses mounted!


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING????????

Our raw data, perhaps?

[Jo March]

119. fooj, I think that we should just give up.

It's all over. We can never win. We need to move to the back of the bus.

Sigh. I wish that we had some proof. Oh wait - we do!

:eyes:

[fooj]

134. You bet we do!

The negativity continues to escalate!!! We must be on to something...:bounce:


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???:think: :think: :think:

[ChiciB1]

91. I Have To Comment Again....

Stolen elections are at the core of what the movement is all about, not necessarily getting Kerry/Edwards into the WH. However much I firmly believe they won they election, I don't think it will happen.

First: Because El-Smirkle-Roy is too arrogant to leave!
Second: They need to maintain the "idea" that they actually won because unless we find real evidence, they will simply deny their criminality!
and...
Third: They have done this before and they are just keeping their fingers crossed and hoping nothing will be done.

Having said that... WE MUST keep the pressure on! If it takes until the NEXT election, I'll still be here waiting to find out the real TRUTH! So to all of you who think Kerry ran a horrible campaign, he must not have done all that bad... because he REALLY WON!

NO MORE STOLEN ELECTIONS!!!!

[amjucsc]

99. What is the best hard evidence for fraud?

That anyone can muster?
I haven't heard anything terribly compelling, but I fully admit that I might have missed something.

[w4rma]

106. Polling places with 3+ hour lines because they left most of their polling

booths in storage. These 3+ hour lines were only in Democratic areas. Republican areas had 0 wait time. A black box voting worker who was caught tampering with the machines (specifically the main database for all the votes, I believe).

[nascarblue]

102. While I agree with your #2, you're dead wrong on most of the rest

#4 for example, C-Span is another Republican mouthpeice. I know many people think they're impartial, and they seem to be, but look at their guests, do they ever really have a true lefty? Never. Centrist op ed columnists get attacked by callers for being "liberal" and they're not. The average Washington Journal viewer has got to be as ignorant as a Faux viewer. While their hosts appear to be bi partisan, they're message is always right wing. Their guests are always extreme neo cons. Heritage Foundation, Moonies, etc. Their so right wing that people actually think the NY times is a liberal paper! Just listen to Washington Journal on any morning. Do these people calling in seem well informed to you? Don't ever expect any real truth out of C-Span. They're nothing more than test grounds for politicians, lobbyists, and think tank organizations. We actually help them to frame their lies to the American public.

[robcon]

107. Nonsense. CSPAN is very impartial.

I have seen Noam Chomsky on CSPAN at least three times. The idea that "do they ever really have a true lefty? Never" is untrue IMO. They are unbiased and show all points of view.

CSPAN is a gift to America that should be treasured.

For example, one of the threads on DU started as

Somebody TIVO C-span right now. This forum that is on has an awesome
Edited on Sun Jan-02-05 06:59 PM by Pirate Smile rant near the end of it by Steve Jarding, Democratic Strategist from the south.

I saw it a few weeks ago. It was great.

[robbedvoter]

113. So is NYT then - Krugman writes for it, non?

The occasional liberal voice an impartial media doesn't make. C-Span deteriorated fast in the past 3 years.

[katinmn]

108. It's not just about Kerry

although I believe you already know that.

[buddysmellgood]

115. You're really struggling to make a case against democracy.

1.) Predictive polls conducted before an election are very different from Exit polls. Exit polls measure what happened, not what might happen. Consider that no incumbent president has ever won re-election with the numbers Dubya was getting. We need to see the exit poll raw data.

2.) Did you vote for Kerry? Everything you said about Kerry goes tenfold for Bush. More republicans voted for Kerry than democrats for Bush. Bush sucks. That really resonates with people. It's a clear message. You could vote for Kerry because you like Kerry, or vote for Kerry because you hate Bush.

3.) So it was close. Like you said, you voted for Kerry because you hate Bush. That Kerry didn't win by more does not mean we should bend over again and let republicans steal an election.

4.)"shenanigans." At what point are fun-loving shenanigans and "irregularities" enough to question the result of an election. We're talking about democracy here, not toilet papering the high school before the big game. We can have no faith in black box voting. We can't recount and we can't see the source code. That should be enough for you to question Florida, but if you take the time, you can find loads more to be disgusted with.

5.) So the standard is whatever Howard Dean does or does not do? I've never heard that one before. Oh well, I guess we should all just go to sleep and let democracy die.

[TheWatcher]

121. I'll make a deal with you.

I'll Stop.....

WHEN YOU MAKE ME.

Good Luck with that.

[moggie12]

124. Okay, you're right,, my subject heading was obnoxious

I wouldn't make you stop even if I could which, as you pointed out, I can't. I realize now (after getting several messages along the lines of yours) that my subject heading was rather obnoxious. I'm sorry about that. It was meant in more of a frustrated tone, not literally. I was riled up by some of the strident posts people have been writing about Senators being p***ies if they don't stand up on Jan 6th. Several said they would "never vote for a Democrat again" if no Senator objected. I thought that was way over the top since we've got nothing in the way of concrete proof -- the exit poll analyses are conjecture at best, for example. The fact that Diebold machines CAN be manipulated is different from having proof that they were. I hope the Dems make a big issue of election reform going forward -- requiring paper trails for electronic machines, etc. -- but in terms of reality, the 2004 election is water under the bridge. So, in sum, I got upset by people calling Senators cowards for not standing up and making allegations they cannot prove.

[Stephanie]

130. Why don't you read the proof and then post

I don't know why I bother. But if you are in fact sincere, go to the 2004 forum and read the proof. If you haven't read it, which you obviously haven't, you are really out on a limb here. If you care.

[TheWatcher]

136. The Proof WAS there.

And NOT ONE Senator stood up to challenge it. There is plenty of proof, and since you only have 33 Posts and are obviously ignorant to the WEALTH of proof that has been posted on this Site, you should actually do a little research beyond Right Wing Talk Radio and Fox News before you post your blather here.

But as far as I am concerned this post is wasted breath on you. Just another disruptive little mole trying to "warn us away" from the very issues that scare the crap out of you people the most.

I wonder what you people will do when it's finally time to face the truth and you have nowhere to run? When you finally have to ADMIT and FACE UP to EVERYTHING this cabal has done.

Quit wasting our time.

You aren't fooling anyone.

[buddysmellgood]

122. Here. Look at this courtesy of Truthisall. Kerry won.

Once again, the internal consistency of the first 80% of the
exit polls (before the final contaminated 20%) is confirmed.

Just weight the numbers. Kerry wins.
Every which way to Sunday.

Average of the categories (party, ideology, religion,
military background, most important issue, when the voter
decided):
Kerry: 50.81%
Bush: 48.01%
Nader: 0.98%

In the prior thread (Race, Gender, Education, Age, Income),
the average worked out to:
Kerry: 50.78%
Bush: 47.99%
Nader: 1.02%

I love the consistency, don't you?

Categ Bush Kerry Nader
PARTY 48.2% 50.2% 0.9%
IDEOL 48.2% 49.9% 1.0%
RELIG 48.2% 51.6% 1.2%
MILIT 47.6% 51.2% 1.0%
DECID 48.0% 51.2% 0.5%
ISSUE 47.9% 50.8% 1.3%

AVG 48.01% 50.81% 0.98%



HORIZONTAL WEIGHTED
PARTYID Vertical Bush Kerry Nader Bush Kerry Nader
Dem 38% 9% 90% 1% 3.4% 34.2% 0.4%
Repub 36% 92% 7% 0% 33.1% 2.5% 0.0%
Indep 26% 45% 52% 2% 11.7% 13.5% 0.5%

100% 48.2% 50.2% 0.9%

IDEOLOGY
Liberal 22% 12% 86% 1% 2.6% 18.9% 0.2%
Moderate 45% 41% 57% 1% 18.5% 25.7% 0.5%
Conserv 33% 82% 16% 1% 27.1% 5.3% 0.3%

100% 48.2% 49.9% 1.0%

RELIGION
Protestant 53% 56% 43% 1% 29.7% 22.8% 0.5%
Catholic 27% 49% 50% 1% 13.2% 13.5% 0.3%
Jewish 3% 23% 77% 0% 0.7% 2.3% 0.0%
Other 7% 20% 75% 4% 1.4% 5.3% 0.3%
None 11% 29% 70% 1% 3.2% 7.7% 0.1%

100% 48.2% 51.6% 1.2%


MILITARY
Yes 18% 55% 43% 1% 9.9% 7.7% 0.2%
No 82% 46% 53% 1% 37.7% 43.5% 0.8%

100% 47.6% 51.2% 1.0%


WHEN DID YOU DECIDE?
Today 6% 40% 53% 5% 2.4% 3.2% 0.3%
Last3 days 3% 41% 53% 4% 1.2% 1.6% 0.1%
Last Week 2% 51% 48% 1% 1.0% 1.0% 0.0%
Last Month 10% 38% 60% 1% 3.8% 6.0% 0.1%
Before 79% 50% 50% 0% 39.5% 39.5% 0.0%

100% 48.0% 51.2% 0.5%


MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE
Taxes 5% 53% 47% 0% 2.7% 2.4% 0.0%
Education 4% 24% 75% 0% 1.0% 3.0% 0.0%
Iraq 15% 23% 76% 1% 3.5% 11.4% 0.2%
Terrorism 18% 85% 15% 1% 15.3% 2.7% 0.2%
Econ/Jobs 20% 16% 82% 1% 3.2% 16.4% 0.2%
MoralVals 21% 78% 19% 3% 16.4% 4.0% 0.6%
HealthCare 8% 20% 79% 0% 1.6% 6.3% 0.0%

90.9% 43.5% 46.2% 1.2%

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[moggie12]

127. C-SPAN bother you?

That's what we do in the back of the short bus - figure out anagrams. See if you can get this one: TRELP ETH NFRED

Out of all that I wrote, why did the Florida sentence bother you? Because I mentioned C-SPAN or my general "puke" tone? It was the heads of two Democratic 527's I was quoting. C-Span didn't alter their brains and make them spout nonsense.

P.S. Don't spend too much time on my anagram. It's just nonsense letters. That's what the kids in the front of the bus do to tease me -- they've got IQ's 5 points higher than mine.

[LibertyorDeath]

132. You can thank me later.

http://www.gregpalast.com/

[Stephanie]

128. I like how you had to warn her to watch out for the anagram!

Otherwise she never would have seen it coming!

[LibertyorDeath]

129. It's only sporting what with the "uptake" problem....

[Stephanie]

131. Taking them on with one hand tied behind your back

Sort of how Kerry handled the debates. Not that it mattered.

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

135. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shiina]

137. Sorry, but we don't tell people to "Shut Up About..." here

[moggie12]

141. Sorry, not what I meant

Yes, several people pointed out the "fascist-like" tone of my subject heading. I'm sorry, I did not mean to sound obnoxious (but that's what I did unfortunately). It was more of a frustrated comment. I was upset by posts from people threatening to never vote Democratic again if no Senator stands up on Nov. 6. Sorry...

[alittlelark]

138. ......yawn.......

[Tinoire]

140. Sigh. Just sigh. & this from Kerry's biggest, most unforgiving critic n/t

[rucky]

143. Hey Moggie, What If You're Wrong?

Is it not worth investigating?

[moggie12]

144. I very well could be, but that's not

actually the point I was trying to make. I was trying to say, "We should have won that election by 10 million votes (because Bush is such a glaring reckless dope) but we didn't because Kerry didn't make an effective case." I definitely think the charges are well worth investigating and that we need election reform to stop the "hinky stuff", such as went on in Ohio. That said, I've looked at the so-called "proof" and there's nothing conclusive there to merit people posting things to the effect of, "I'm never going to vote Dem again if a US Senator doesn't have the guts to stand up on Nov. 6." Statements like that drive me crazy because they're so over-the-top and they distract us from critical things likes electoral reform and the Dems running better campaigns (e.g., stop being such wimps and start fighting back against slick Republican opinion-molding, etc.)

oops, sorry, starting to run off at the mouth again. In any event, yeah, you're right -- it's definitely worth investigating.

[ArkDem]

146. I'm sorry but you make

too much sense to post here.

[formernaderite]

147. Unfortunately many politicians win on personality....

...and Kerry isn't the most approachable of candidates. Clinton won on personality, and I voted for him even though he was way too centrist for my blood. Bush, appealed to the masses, even though most of us here probably don't care for that personality type. Although I think there were voting irregularities and probable fraud, I am not in the contest the election mode either. We are in for a fight within the party itself....and I'd rather see us fight for a DNC chair who's representative of this party rather than the perceived middle of America.

[bowens43]

148. Stop? No. Hell no.

Maybe you don't mind fraud but I do.