Could this be the way they rigged the votes for Bush?

[glarius]

Something I'm wondering about.....In the election Bush got about 3,500,000 more votes than Kerry in the popular vote. I've heard pundits say that because of this large margin, there is not much likelihood that Kerry could pick up enough votes in recounts to change the outcome.(The Republicans counted on the pundits thinking this way)....What I'm wondering is this....1/ .If the voting machines are bogus and capable of doing tricky things, why could not a Republican fixer add millions of votes into the total of popular votes for Bush to make it look good....2/..Is there a way for anyone to add up all the votes cast for Bush, in all the states to see if they add up to the total popular vote he is credited with?.....I don't know if I made myself clear?...:shrug:

[Quakerfriend]

1. It is def worth doing

I would not put anything past these thugs. BTW, I've heard recently on other threads that his so called "3.5 mil mandate" is now down to ~2.6 mil.

[lonestarnot]

6. He's on a Man Date alright with dick and bush what do you get....

a man date made with a black box....

[aquart]

2. We think they shaved votes from Kerry

in heavy Kerry states to up Bush's totals.

So, yes.

[glarius]

5. What I'm getting at is that by hacking into the computers

they could just add in as many votes as they want for Bush to give him that big margin of popular votes...without taking anything from Kerry....Do I make any sense?

[Higans]

7. Never again let the computer steal your vote.

The most important discovery in Human History.
The elections are rigged. All of them are.
They don't even count paperless votes. They have trapped your Voice inside a computer. The only way to break their stupid game is to write in "peace" on paper ballots and make them count them in front of you.
Do this in every election and only Humans can be the winner.
We don't care who the puppet is, we care that the puppet is peacefull.
Send this message to every Human. Ever Man, Woman, and Child.
Send this message to your Grand Children.
This is the only way Humans will ever have peace.
We must be allowed to ask for it. Every Human wants peace.
Never again give your voice to a computer that dosn't count your vote.
Don't let them take your voice away from you.
This is the most important piece of information ever discovered.
This information can set all humans Free.
Never let your technology fool you again.
Never let them divide you into Red, or Blue, or Black, or White, or Cristian, or Jew, or Muslim, or Hindu, or Pagan, or Conservative, or Liberal.
None of the issues they talk about are important enough to let them prevent you from voting for peace.
Demand Paper Ballots. demand they be counted.
Never let them steal your voice again.

[newyawker99]

22. Hi Higans!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Carolab]

8. Makes perfect sense to me because

for example, in my own state of Minnesota in certain precincts I checked (only a few that were of interest to me), I discovered the "more votes than voters" phenomenon that others have cited from other states. In precincts I checked, when I totalled signatures and ballots, the sum was less than the reported number of total votes.

Therefore, I concur with you. If all votes were counted, the Bush lead would disappear. They not only shaved votes from Kerry but also padded the vote totals for Bush.

[DFLforever]

12. But Minnesota has same day voter registration

and while those votes are included in the precinct totals, same day registrations have not yet been added to the totals registered for the precincts. I just checked the SOS site for my precinct in St Paul and it stll only shows registratation numbers as of 7 am Nov. 2)

[sandnsea]

15. You checked signatures?

You checked the actual poll book? That's what I've been interested in because that's where any problem could be found. The number of signatures would have to match the number of votes at the precinct level. Counting up from there, I don't see how somebody could just add votes to a machine. They'd have to switch them from one candidate to another.

[NMDemDist2]

3. and the MSM told us every day how "close" the election was n/t

[lonestarnot]

4. Cliff the Lawyer in Ohio says

that votes were subtracted from Kerries tallies and added to bushitbitch.

[Carolab]

9. Yes

but they also padded the votes, per Madsen.

And there is empirical evidence that this is so right here in my own state of Minnesota. "More votes than voters" = there were votes added to Bush's totals.

[Warpy]

10. well, since more than 100% of registered voters

voted in counties across the country, I'm sure this is exactly what they did. In other words, every so many votes for Bush, a hacked optical scanner or video voting machine would count 2 for Bush.

It's probably all buried somewhere deep in the code.

Let's face it, when a district has 107% turnout, something is very, very wrong.

[indigonation]

11. They should check the math on everything...

...to see if state numbers adds up to national, etc. Did the actual percentage of voter turnout nationally jive with the actual numbers?

One of the tinfoilhat theories I'm entertaining:
That on the eVoting machines with no paper trail, the machine code sends an extra vote to Bush for every -say- 4 votes Kerry gets everywhere. Either in the machine itself or the GEMS tabulator. That's just a number, I don't know how accurate. In precincts with low Bush numbers, he still wouldn't win there, but it would inflate his overall state total. In precincts that were tight, he would win, by a slightly higher margin, and in precincts that were pro-Bush he would win with a higher margin anyway.

The point here is that the better turn out for Kerry, the more insurance of a win for the Shrub. That also explains the fairly uniform deviance from the exit polls where these machines were used.

I pray we will ever learn the truth...

[thanatonautos]

13. the machine code sends an extra vote to Bush for every -say- 4 votes Kerry

1 in 4 votes is way too much. In Florida the official margin is
about 5%, with 1% for Nader, thus about 1 in 20 votes. About
1/2 the votes were recorded on machines with no paper trail,
so you only need to flip 1 bush vote in 20 to Kerry
on these machines to produce the margin.

It could certainly have been less than that since many other
methods of reducing Kerry votes were likely deployed.

That this could be done is obvious ... the hard to impossible part,
unfortunately, is proving that it actually was or was not done.

[newyawker99]

23. Hi thanatonautos!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[ClintCooper2003]

14. I think the easiest way to pad Bush's total would be to...

add Bush votes in the major cities - even in the democratic strongholds, like Los Angeles and Cleveland. They would need to add votes in cities with enough people where it wouldn't be noticed.

Just think, if you took every county in the country, subtracted 500 Kerry votes, and added 500 Bush votes, you'd be taking away approximately 1,750,000 votes from Kerry and adding 1,750,000 votes for Bush.

Of course, in the bigger counties, like Los Angeles, you could get away with taking about 20,000 to 50,000 Kerry votes and putting them in the Bush column and no one would bat an eye. I believe something like this happened in Columbus, Ohio.

[NVMojo]

24. this was my point about Las Vegas with those paperless old

Sequoias...

[skids]

16. Yes, the theory is they did pad in non-battleground states.

Most people working on this for a while have suspicions about Texas. Madsen lists California as well. My work with EIRS independently suggests Texas (and NM, FL, OH.) Though why they would make these defects user-visible... seems like they didn't hire the best coders.

Anyway it isn't a new theory.

The only way to find evidence that this is the case, other than recounts where it is possible and where they haven't managed to back up the initial tally fraud with forged ballots (it's been a month, folks) is obtaining actual voter rolls and looking for people voting who shouldn't be. And that's assuming they didn't just flip votes away from Kerry. In that case, it could be untraceable by now, or may never have been traceable in the first place in the case of e-voting.

Of course, there is the chance they just aren't expecting us to do a recount someplace and we could still catch it.

All we have left is the statistics to speculate over, and whatever Bev and Madsen and Arnebeck and Conyers have dug up, and whatever panicked butt-covering bureaucrats will fess up to to save their own skins.

Then there are the "better statistics" than what we can come up with. Mitofski and Zogby and Harris and NBC have data from their exit polls/tracking polls with early voters that may be quite convincing, especially if applied to particular precincts.

We should still keep cranking out the stats, even though our information isn't as good as some of the insiders. There is *plenty* of stuff to be analysing. Practically no work has been done really on the EIRS records and the othe sources like it. Everyone seems to be all bent on working with raw exit poll numbers which are just as dubious as the "cooked" ones, given we don't know what weights were applied to them before publication, the methodology, or anything.

We also need to figure out how to put pressure on the other side, as they start to make it seem like Dems did a lot of fraud by hunting down the handful of people that abused the system and voted twice. We need to be ready to point out their hypocrasy, ad hominem if possible.

Especially if what they are planning to do is point at the fake voters that their hackers allegedly added to the rolls via the caging list system, claiming that they were used to add democratic votes.

[Niche]

17. Easily could have padded California without notice.

[jbond56]

18. The results as polls closed.

Below are the results as they came in 2004. We are working on getting this data for 2000 and hope to have it soon. This is a work in progress.
I thought it could provide a different view on this discussion.

<img src="">

[bj2110]

21. This needs its own topic. How anomalous is that trend?...

Shouldn't it be randomly distributed around his final margin?, i.e. hover right around a 2.8% margin?

What better way to get the story out there of Bush's "decisive" victory which gave him a "mandate" than to pad the reporting of the totals. As people watch the election coverage, they consistenly see a large Bush margin, and it's easier to swallow hearing that he had a "mandate"!

Good work, any luck on seeing the trend in 2000?

[glarius]

19. CNN just had a "report" on the voting irregularities complaints

Their final conclusion was...the margin was large enough, that it would not effect the outcome!".....I really think this is what has been done....They just added a whole lot of more votes in the popular vote total!

[McCamy Taylor]

20. Yes, they padded the vote in nonbattle ground states.

No worries about recounts there. Which is why we need recounts everywhere, because I'll bet the fraud is really sloppy and the lies really glaring in places like Texas. Just look for anyplace where Bush did better across the board than the exit polls suggest and where electronic tabulation was used.

They had to win the total vote or people would have demanded recounts. The Big Lie only works if it is BIG.

[adolfo]

25. Most possible...

My guess is Kerry's votes were skimmed and given to bush by a low percentage to avoid suspicion. This would only apply to optical scan machines. There is much more freedom with electronic machines. The only method of detection is a manual recount. Anyone in Orlando Florida want to join me in recounting Orange County?

[seaclyr]

26. kick! n/t

[seaclyr]

27. Numbers show how popular vote changed over election night

I've worked through how the popular vote changed over election night using cnn numbers that jbond56 made available. It looks like there were two discrete waves of votes for Bush. Each, remarkably enough, totaled about 1.8 million votes (i.e. about 3.6 million votes total, enough to provide the final Bush margin). The first wave came in early and was over by the time 20% of the popular vote was in (i.e reported by cnn). The second wave came in significantly later, beginning at about 60% of the vote and was over by about 80%. There are a lot of data to look at, so we will show them in a new thread.