John F. Kerry KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED ON NOVEMBER 2ND

[RaulVB]

Didn't he make 2 very PRECISE comments regarding his numbers on the exit polls that day?

A poster reproduced them here few days ago. I can't find that thread now.

This country is about to go off a cliff, Kerry is making very prudent moves. Is all he can do for now but, HE KNOWS "*" STOLE IT.

You can bet on that. The last report endorsed by the experts on mathematics is undisputable. I'm sure he'll read it very closely.

He KNOWS WHAT HAPPENED.

(Edit) THOSE WHO WANT TO BASH KERRY, PLEASE DO NOT POST HERE!

Thanks!

[Cocoa]

1. he knows Bush won

[RaulVB]

3. No, that's false and you know it

Have a "happy" life.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[seito]

12. There is a very long list of people

for which your description is appropriate.

Know the enemy, and stop blaming the victim.

[SammyWinstonJack]

120. Rather, he knows bush** stole.

If there were one candidate that bushco could not afford to lose too, that would have been Kerry. President Kerry would have seen every single last one of these bush** criminals prosecuted/imprisoned, unless bush** pardoned them first. In that case, I don't think GW would have gone down alone.

[bywho4who]

126. That Twerp

Couldn't win a free prize in a cereal box!:dunce:

[WI_DEM]

2. I'm glad he knows it, but I wish he had fought it longer like

Edwards wanted to and as Gore did in 2000.

[RaulVB]

5. You want a bloody internal conflict in this country?

You know how dangerous is this regime?

[mhr]

6. If We Do Not Take Them Down - They Will Take Us Down

The writing is on the wall for all to see.

[RaulVB]

7. I know it...

But such a heavy prize...

I don't think many people would even dare to think on that possibility.

[rainy]

71. Bush had to win at any cost. Losing was not an option

There are many in the world who know Bush is a war criminal. Lawyers are quite aware of his crimes. If he lost this election before he could rewrite history he would go down instantly. Winning buys him time to clean up his mess and change the outcome. They stole the election without a doubt.

[RaulVB]

78. I agree

They couldn't afford losing, true.

[genieroze]

116. clean up his mess?

How come he's trying to make more of a mess then? He's not going to clean up anything, he's like a destructive energizer bunny.

[bardgal]

140. I AGREE X INFINITY, and have been screaming this FOREVER!

[atxryan]

10. Do I want to take to the streets if necessary?

it's in our history, though oftentimes it is suppressed. we're not taught about the armed rebellions, mass riots, and dissension. We're told that, minus a few minor bumps and snafus, ours is a peaceful history and for the most part everyone has come to agreements based upon compromise. At one time in this country, citizens in the hundreds of thousands would take to the streets in defiance of their government! Whole cities would taken over. I think Seattle was taken over for a month while the national guard laid siege to it (side note: there was minimal crime, working police, fire, and civil services for the entire month).

In answer to your question, no, I do not WANT bloody internal conflict. But I want people to rise up in solidarity and find their voice. A few hundred dissidents can be easily crushed, even marginalized... but a few hundred thousand?

[RaulVB]

13. Agreed

But I guess the regular people will need to suffer some more on the hands of the regime before waking up.

[bobbieinok]

88. interesting US history info..... sources, links???? esp about Seattle

[dpibel]

136. Google "seattle general strike." Happened in 1919. n/t

[mod mom]

44. so what, we take their cheating forever? Greg Palast demonstrated

that the rethug shennagins of 2000 is what put * in the whitehouse. Kerry won and * is still in. We must stand up to the thugs!

[mod mom]

46. They have killed so many innocent people, caused generations

of new terrorists, left an enormous deficit to our children, shown disregard for our constitution, made the world a much less stable place and are now in the process of starting WWIII (Iran, Syria, and who know who else they will go after. Their hubris and total disregard for human rights is a disgrace for our nation. We must stand up to them!!!

[Carolab]

94. It's getting to a point

where it's "us or them"

[Wilms]

8. Hate to join a discussion about Gore/Florida.

But in order to show he had won Gore needed to ask for a recount in ALL counties.

He didn't do that.

[ROH]

52. But aren't you ignoring the voter lists disenfranchisement? (n/t)

[Sydnie]

62. What good did it do Gore?

Heck, you don't even hear about him making speeches for pay these days. Every previous elected official can always make money making speeches (except maybe Quayle) but you never hear about Al doing any.

He is not making news now and has lost his edge.

Yeah, that did him a lot of good ... not.

[uppityperson]

9. So do I.

And I'll be happily watching the Bushites lemmings go over that cliff.

[Last Lemming]

84. Watch it with that lemming stuff

[uppityperson]

90. Sorry for the bigotted writing LastLemming.

Not meaning the lemmings that can see ahead and understand that it'd be good to stop Before going over the cliff.

[hootinholler]

102. It's funny to call them lemmings, but..

Please realize that lemmings in general are rational and do not run off of cliffs en masse unless they are herded.

-Hoot

[uppityperson]

115. Perhaps "overly domesticated sheep"? or just the easily led.

[Old and In the Way]

11. I think he probably knows, too.

But the reality for Democrats is that we need a significant majority to overcome the institutional advantage that Republicans enjoy (mainly, the media) in stealing close elections.

Apparently, way to many Bush voters haven't suffered enough directly to make the connections....yet. They will.

[seito]

15. Unfortunately this is true

On the bright side, the arrogance of this administration is going to speed reality along. Buyer's regret is settling in. I predict the next election will be won beyond the margin of fraud.

[loudsue]

93. Seito, they own the voting machines. That's why their so arrogant....

well, one of the reasons.

This election was a landslide, had the votes been counted fairly, and had disenfranchisement not been an issue.

No election can be won, margins or no margins, until we get rid of these black boxes.

:kick::kick::kick:

[bardgal]

141. EXACTLY!!!!!!

[mistertrickster]

I agree, and I've been accused of "bashing" Kerry in the past.

I think if the election in Ohio had been free and fair, Kerry would have won. I think he knows that. But you're right, short of armed rebellion, what are his options?

On the other hand, I'm not convinced he lost the popular vote. And since I b*tched and moaned for four years about Bush winning the Elec. College and losing the pop. vote, I can't reverse myself now.

[MissWaverly]

25. Some of the people...

I do a lot of web surfing, three things that I have observed recently.
1. The republicans are waking up, they said that they thought a lot of negative material in the press was the "liberal" media just bashing GWB so a dem would get elected. And now the election is over and Guess What the news is worse. 2. Those VIPs supporters of Bush that came to celebrate the ignaguaration were treated like shit.
they had to go thru the same police state security checks as the "protesters." In other words, they were treated like just "nobodies." 3. At the balls, they were constantly watched with "minders." Now I think that reality is beginning to seep in, and there is the constant rant on the internet of the liberals who are getting stronger and more vocal as time goes on. The election was stolen, Bush lied, thousand died, etc. In addition, you have the Rice and Gonzales scandals, the pay per view pundits, George was in a plastic bubble after 911, I think that reality has begun to set in. The only way to have the election overturn is to expose Bush on something really big!!!! and I think that day is coming soon.

[ginnyinWI]

56. yeah, that plus the Fallujah offensive, then Mosul, etc.

The popularity and resolve about Iraq is sinking steadily. The media is printing more calls for withdrawing troops, it seems. Nightline did an extended town hall meeting show on it. People come on Cspan every morning and discuss it. So, yeah, once everyone admits that the "emperor has no clothes" he will no longer enjoy that media protection he's had and then more and more and more crap is gonna come out, election fraud included.
I'd watch for Rummy to step down--that would be the first definite sign--Bush's last ditch effort will be to throw him to the wolves.

[mojaverose]

14. Look, The Wrong Guy Got Nominated

Dean leads in all the polls and then doesn't win One primary? Sorry, I don't believe it. Either the media was building him up so they could tear him down, or somebody played fast and loose Somewhere.
I remember the media pounce the day after Dean made his spirited speech. There was nothing wrong with that speech; To call him Unbalanced because he was enthusiastic was a Maneuver by somebody. I know we are being manipulated, but by whom? Who's behind the Media? Who comes up with this stuff that "everybody thinks", or "Everybody knows"?
The media said that we were nominating Kerry because he was winnable. They began saying that crap even Before the caucuses. Were they Trying to produce a specific result? I think so. Mass mentality; Well, if everybody else is voting for Kerry because they think he can win, maybe I better, too.
Dean was the most popular, and the most polarizing, Democrat. A Dean/Clark ticket would have taken on Bush in every area of his campaign and nailed him. Did Somebody not want that to happen? You betcha.
Like Donald Sutherland's character said in "JFK",
Who stands to Gain?
Who has the power to do it?
Who has the power to cover it up?

Answer all three questions, and you will know what happened.

The stealing of the election began Long Before Nov. 2.

[mistertrickster]

16. Well I was in Iowa pounding pavements for Dean, and I was hearing

a lot of support for Kerry. So unfortunately I have to come to the conclusion he really won it.

On the other hand, Dean was getting hammered in the press about being to "leftist" and "angry," and that had to have hurt him in the staid, white-bread heartland.

Also, the caucus system is f*cked royally. I talked to literally dozens of servers and clerks (all young people leaning to Dean) who weren't going because they didn't want to stand around and bullsh*t for two or more hours on a school and work night.

Also the weather was beastly cold. Try and get a representative sample out on a night in mid-winter in Iowa. Yeah, good plan.

[mojaverose]

24. I don't Think The Vote Was Tampered With

I think the vote was manipulated. If you can manipulate people well enough you don't have to tamper with anything. They will just go and, voluntarily, do what you want them to.

I don't doubt that there was support for Kerry, although I'd like to find out just whom it was talking him up.

And I do agree that the caucuses are F***ed. On paper they sound great; a real excercise in democracy. In actuality they are way too vulnerable to manipulation by Big Interests who can afford people to go chat up their neighbors, or are in a position to know how their employees voted. Too bad.

[Peace Patriot]

42. mojaverose: You need to go here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x310321

and here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=309316

...and start getting informed on this issue ("I don't think the vote was tampered with.")

[mojaverose]

45. Thank You, Thank You

I had no idea this was out here. I'm rather new to boards, and had been spending (wasting) my time over on another board (No Names Mentioned) which purports to be a discussion board but which really is a hatchet board for Cons.
I had heard some rumors that some "Crazy Diehards" were questioning the election but, silly me, had faith in American Democracy. If votes were counted, and Shrub got more than Kerry, how could there be Real election fraud? After all, Florida was just one state, and was given to Shrub by the Supremes; how could Anybody steal the election country-wide?
So everything I came up with was just me, questioning and reading between the lines, watching cable news. I Knew Something was weird, but couldn't put my finger on it. And, as I said, everybody who disagreed with Bush, although they in fact make up a majoriy, thinks that he/she is alone (Polls Prove That). That meant that I didn't have any way to check my suspicions.
Thank you for showing me that my suspicions were Not without foundation. Now, I've got to see how this was done.

[Peace Patriot]

67. Glad to be of help, mojaverose! The urls I gave you are just the tip of..

...the iceberg that's going to sink the BushCon Titanic! The evidence for election fraud is truly overwhelming. Here's some more stuff, if you want to get into it in depth:

Exit poll analysis: astronomical odds against Bush win

Dr. Steven Freeman 1st study: http://www.truthout.org/unexplainedexitpoll.pdf
(also at: http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm)
Dr. Ron Baiman: http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/997
Dr. Webb Mealy: http://www.selftest.net/redshift.htm
Jonathan Simon:http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00142.htm

(1/29/04-Nine Ph.D's from leading universities call for investigation of 2004 Election)
http://uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/US/USCountVotes_Re_Mitofsky-Edison.pdf

(Florida: 130,000 to 230,000 phantom votes for Bush--paper vs. electronic voting:)
Dr. Michael Haut & UC Berkeley stats team: http://ucdata.berkeley.edu

ignatzmouse:
(North Carolina: absentee ballot vs. electronic, inexplicable 6% edge to Bush in electronic:)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x45003
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/12/233831/06

Johns Hopkins report on insecurity of electronic voting (general): http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00196.htm#5

Ohio vote suppression: http://www.bpac.info

TruthIsAll: "To believe Bush won, you have to believe…"

Part 1
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1316010

Part 2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1358806

Part 3
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x197878

[Amaryllis]

80. If you want to know how it was done, go here:

Just curious-How did you find DU? This forum has been a haven for many who knew the election was stolen. Welcome.


Chuck Herrin is a republican white hat hacker (breaks into computer systems for a living to find security glitches)computer security expert who is doing a lot to educate people about the vulnerabilities of electronic voting and tabulation of votes.
He calls himself first an Anerican and then a republican and he is working as hard as any of us on election reform and on exposing the fraud and the dangers of e-voting.

http://www.chuckherrin.com/ConservativeEmpathy.htm
Empathy Training for Compassionate Conservatives: Why the Democrats Are Still Whining About the Election (and Why Maybe We Should Be, Too)
which is the best and most convincing election fraud article I have seen
http://www.chuckherrin.com/paperballots.htm
http://www.chuckherrin.com/hackthevote.htm (he does a hack the vote demo)
http://www.chuckherrin.com/evotingquestions.htm
http://www.chuckherrin.com/hackthevoteFAQ.htm
http://www.chuckherrin.com/smarterrepubs.htm

This is a DU thread that has some of the best election fraud articles:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=304579

[deacon2]

132. Chuck Herrin is the real deal

exchanged a few e-mails with him in the dark despair of November. A real patriot and a crackerjack hacker. Motive and opportunity, motive and opportunity... lather, rinse, repeat.

[Amaryllis]

142. This is what all the techs I've talked with say; you just don't design

systems with that many security flaws unless you intend to use them.

[bobbieinok]

89. in IA for 72 thru 88....all ages showed up at caucus each time

especially young people

[seito]

17. OK

Maybe by 2008, we will be through fighting the 2004 primaries??? Maybe not... :crazy:

[DETERMINEDPROGRESIVE]

31. As Much as I respect Dean,

He would've been slaughtered handily. Kerry was the right man, and still is the right man. His voice is intellectual, powerful, and full of wisdom. And it shows he was the right man. After all, he won the past election.... well, at least until it was stolen from him.

Honestly? AFter the electoral challenge and Rice/Gonazles battles for the first time I can say I actually look forward to the next 4 years. Call me a hopeless optimist, but I just feel these coming years will be filled with the exposure of this fascist regime like we've never seen. Piece by piece things are falling apart, and piece by piece we are making ground. But the battle will take some time to fight. I'm looking forward to seeing it fought, and I think Kerry will be an integral part of it, from the inside. It is going to be the best reality show out there these next 4 years, mark my words. (honestly, the rice hearings/debate was some of the best tv I've seen in god knows how long!)

[mojaverose]

48. I Like Kerry

I come from MA so I know what he's done. He's very Presidential, and he has the knowledge to back up the look. In the first debate he won, hands down, on style And points. Actually, I think he won all three debates.
I don't think he was a Bad choice at all. What I Do think is that Somebody was playing in Our Primaries who had no business there. It's That fact, rather than the final outcome, that bothers me.

[ginnyinWI]

55. me too--it's gonna be good

This is the same strategy Newt Gingrich applied, and how they took the Congress away from the Dems. You just keep fighting and opposing and criticizing everything they do, and it finally sticks. No more playing nice-nice and rolling over! I'm gonna enjoy it. It may be a far mor effective way to win control from the repubs than the presidency would have been (although I'd trade just about anything to have had Kerry in the WH).

[Laurab]

85. You're a hopeless optimist

And I am too. I agree with every single word you said. I was thinking it was the best drama I'd seen in a long time (I really don't watch tv much), but it really is a REAL reality show. I too think things are falling apart, and at the same time, I see the dems putting them together. I do agree Kerry will be an integral part of it, too. He's a prosecutor who's never lost a case, he is now familiar with shrubco's methods, and he's armed with whatever he learned throughout the campaign and after, He THEN went on a fact-finding trip to a lot of places * would not have been welcome, and no doubt learned even more. For example, he learned of the countries who offered help and were rebuffed by bushit. Who knows what else he found out? I think we're in for some interesting times.

[glitch]

113. You are a hopeless optimist, welcome to DU and please keep posting

I need regular infusions of optimism right now, especially the hopeless kind. :hi:
P.S. I hope and pray you are right.

[Independent_Liberal]

145. Add me to the list of hopeless optimists as well...

Yup, things are falling apart now. Our Democrats want to know why this administration is governing backwards and why they show so much lack of regard for the American people.

Bush's extremely low poll numbers are getting them to wake up.

I heard Harry Reid speaking the other night on C-SPAN and he clearly is curious as to why Bush isn't searching for Osama Bin Laden and why we're sending our troops into countries that pose no imminent threat to us without the proper armor and equipment and with our borders unpatrolled.

Ted Kennedy wants the troops withdrawn from Iraq. He was really good in his speeches where he was speaking out against Gonzales. He's really bounced back.

Mark Dayton has been demanding accountability in our government and he's clearly sick of being lied to.

Kerry's trip to the middle east last month meant something. I think it's all part of his plan. He knows Bush stole the election and he is indeed pissed about it and wants to take him down. He's getting motifs and verifiable proof.

Kerry, Boxer, Kennedy, Conyers, etc. are our heroes.

It's all gonna come out anyday now. Lets make this the year the whole Bush presidency crumbles. It CAN happen.

I want to be a part of it when it all goes down.

[ginnyinWI]

54. well, Dean did win in

Vermont. :)

I was under the impression that the media was crazy about Dean, and preferred him over Kerry. That's why Kerry had such a hard time with the media all the way through to election day. They let him twist in the wind far too often, especially in August. He told Newsweek in November, "The pundits don't like me", and I agree.

I agree Dean was popular, especially with younger voters, but I don't agree that he would have beat Bush. If you go back and think about the fall of 2003, he undermined his own campaign by making mistakes in the way he said things--sure he was honest, but he wasn't politically savvy enough.

I liked Dean then and I still do, but I just didn't think he had what it takes to take on the GOP machine. Kerry did, and came closer to winning than any of the others would have, in my opinion. Kerry didn't need to bring Dean down! And he didn't. He only did what any politician would do--criticized his opponent's policies in stump speeches and debates.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

63. I agree totally mojaverose, and welcome to DU :)

[count_alucard]

18. What makes him an accomplice.

just as guilty of fraud as the criminals themselves.

Too bad we didn't have a real fighter as a candidate.

[RaulVB]

19. Your comments are quite ridiculous (n/t)

[count_alucard]

21. not as ridiculous as

Kerry's candidacy.

The man who promised to REPORT FOR DUTY ran like a rabbit 12 hours after the polls closed. Some of the votes were still being counted.

Even his running mate was disgusted.

[ginnyinWI]

57. question

How do you know Edwards was disgusted? Did you see an interview or something? :shrug:

[Amaryllis]

81. I've often wondered that too. People keep saying Edwards wanted to fight

and not give up so soon and I don't know where that is coming from.
Anyone know?

[sacxtra]

105. I dislike even suggesting this

But if Kerry won't communicate with us....

Anyone see where I am going?

Why bother anymore. Get someone NEW who DOES.

Pretty much goes for ALL of em.

Get this, I don't even KNOW what political party I am anymore.

I was Democrat since I was 18, then Recently when the Gun laws started getting passed, I went libertarian, however even though I still agree with their basic phillosophy, their party is perhaps currently worse off than the 'progressives' are although I am still registered as libertarian, I think you can see I am now a progressive. And it a really twisted irony, I support Barbra Boxer 99% (cept for the guns==1%) Lately there's been no gun issues, so I guess you can actually say 100%. She IS truly the only one with integrity. My fellow libertarians now pretty much hate me. I hear things like, that woman should have be jailed 10 years ago.

Oh well. Libertarians have sat on their hands in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, a libertarian is a much better bet than a republican or neocon.

I'd change back to Democrat again, but I see to many folks with a "D" in front that don't or aren't "D"

For now I guess I stay Libertarian, but I watch what folks do, and depending on their actions, they get my support. IN the case of A or B where both A and B are horrible, I won't vote for either one.

But you know what? Without Boxer and more like her, OUR VOTE is not going to matter anymore. And if our vote doesn't matter, then I've lost the right to vote, and if I've lost the right to vote then, I have to ask, exactly what kind of a country we are living in? Do we still want to be a Constitutional Republic?

[Democrat Dragon]

20. Your point is intrestresting

I am expecting a lot of denial and "you're crazy" from that comment.

[New Earth]

58. hi testy

oh wait shit....feels like de ja vu :crazy:

sorry wrong person!

[Democrat Dragon]

22. For those who say "It would have been impossible from the beginning"

Please consider that if Kerry fought it through and lost in the end, it would have improved his image for 2008, bring light to the issue of Election reform MUCH quicker and give it more attention, and reveal the true colors of the Repuke hijacking of the system.

Remeber, when people want a leader, they want a STRONG, VALIANT leader who fights through even if there no chance of winning, not a coward.

but I don't think Kerry knows this, so I would'nt call him a coward.

[count_alucard]

23. there's absolutely NOTHING

strong or valiant about Kerry, you are right.

[RaulVB]

27. Could both of you take the bashing elsewhere?

Thanks.

[Democrat Dragon]

30. I wan't really bashing

I was just pointing out something that Kerry probably dosen't know: Image is everything, especially when you have the public's eye on you.

[count_alucard]

43. why are you so afraid of the truth?

[seito]

33. You are right

The Navy just gives away Silver Stars.

:hi: count, welcome to DU :eyes:

[count_alucard]

35. that was in the 70's

the Kerry of 30 years later is a fake, aged, weakened version of that serviceman.

[New Earth]

36. and he's a fraud

and a coward, and a betrayer. right?




























:eyes:

[seito]

38. That's right

and don't forget about Skull and Bones

:evilgrin:

[sacxtra]

106. Skull n bones eh?

If your going to go there, then why does Bush call himself a Christian when he practices Druidism at the Bohemian Grove?

At least I call myself Wiccan!!!

[genieroze]

118. Well, running around naked pretending to sacrifice children at the

altar of a large wooden owl named Molek isn't illegal. Weird yes, hypocritical yes, illegal no. I hear the Urnold Da Gropenator goes there as well.

http://www.geocities.com/bohemiangrovecult/

[sacxtra]

134. I never said it was illegal n/t

[seito]

127. Hi sacxtra

LOL, I did not mean to go there :spank:

I just could not help myself. I think I shall nominate this thread for the DUDQ.

Welcome to DU :hi:

BTW, John Kerry :loveya: :loveya: :loveya:

[seito]

32. I want a leader that gets results

I want a leader with values

I want a leader with compassion

I want a leader that thinks before acting

I want a leader that places the needs of the people above his/her own

Yes, I want a leader that is strong, valiant and fights. I will not tell him how to fight, and I will not second guess every single move he makes. As for John Kerry, he gave us his word, and that is good enough for me.

BTW if as you say

"Kerry fought it through and lost in the end, it would have improved his image for 2008, bring light to the issue of Election reform MUCH quicker and give it more attention, and reveal the true colors of the Repuke hijacking of the system."

we would be in EXACTLY the same position we are today. The election reform battle will be fought, and I will support every person that takes the issue forward.

If you really want to find cowards, douche bags, hypocrites etc, they are all over the place. You don't have to rip apart the our allies to find them.

Know the enemy.

[Democrat Dragon]

34. Yes we would be in the exact same position

but at least more people would have KNOWN how courrpted the system is and election reform would become a big issue in future elections.

[seito]

37. More people knew in 2000

Look how far that got us.

I understand the frustration. I would have liked to watch a good fight after Nov 2nd. However, I am not sure that would have done anything but hurt the cause. In the end, we would have been made to look like a bunch of unpatriotic sore losers that would betray our soldiers on the eve of their assault on Fallujah...The fix was in, and the trap was set.

For now, I am willing to give Congress and the grass roots movement a chance. I am so impressed with how much we have accomplished in such a short period of time. We are making the corporate media obsolete. The people will learn the truth. Investigations will continue. When the time is right, we will bring this issue to the table on our terms.

[Democrat Dragon]

40. Imagine the reaction

If at least 80% of voters know that * did it again, ya know the whole "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shme on me" thing.

[ginnyinWI]

60. well how were they going to get the message?

The media had an absolute lock on all post election speculations. Maybe the better intentioned ones thought it would be good for our national security or something, I don't know. But you know only Keith Olberman would say a single word.

Unless we had some real evidence that a legitimate judge or authority could not sweep aside, it was going to go nowhere. And don't think the GOP wasn't ready with talking points and action plans designed to do what they did in 2000 in case anyone like John Kerry did raise an objection.

Look, I don't pretend to know everything, but I do know that John Kerry is not only smart, he has been around the political block more than a few times, and had the ability to make a well-informed decision about what to do. So I trust that he did.

[Laurab]

86. No, I think more people would have "KNOWN" Kerry was a "sore loser"

If he had done what you think he should have done. You can forget about any reasonable reporting of election fraud if he had done things differently.

Had Kerry fought, with no EVIDENCE, he would have made himself and the democratic party look like fools and sore losers. He would have had plenty of help from the right wing corporate media. They're doing it even though he DIDN'T act like a sore loser, but I guarantee you, they would have turned him into a laughing stock. He had NO EVIDENCE.

He had maybe suspicion, suggestions of fraud, but nothing that would stand up in court. He has retained his integrity (obviously not with you), but within the political arena, as well as the corporate media. Also with those of us who know what would have happened had he challenged, with no LEGAL reason for doing so.

John Kerry is a very intelligent man who knew EXACTLY what he was up against. I think time will prove you to be mistaken.

[Democrat Dragon]

124. So it would be foolish

to demand a recount because you are suspicious of something? A "just to make sure" and mentioning Dr.Freeman's paper and isn't good enough for you? If he said it persualevely enough, and demanded records from Blackwell publicly, he could have played it well. Although in the end it would be unsucessful, he would get the image of either a "helpless victim" thus demonizing the repukes or a "fallen hero", at least to those who voted for him.

During November, Kerry still had some media attnetion, why couldn't have used it in suprise manner? You know, even agree to an interview on the MSM.

Then again I don't think Kerry is good at dramitizing the situation. * is excellent at this.

[Laurab]

131. In my opinion, yes it would have

His image would not have been "helpless victim" or "fallen hero", it would have been SORE LOSER, with laughing stock added onto that. They did it to Gore, who had every reason to demand a recount, they would have made mincemeat out of Kerry. We are NOT dealing with a "fair and balanced" media. We are dealing with a RW spin machine.

[Democrat Dragon]

146. True but

If he'd AT LEAST mentioned or suggested fraud in one of his letters, thad be enough to stir things a little quicker.

I still have faith in John Kerry. Even if I blamed him for not fighting, I could not, with good conscience, refuse to support him now. He is fighting for issues that I believe in.

So do I, I hope he makes a lot of noise. His new bill on giving healthcare to all children and support for Boxer during the Contradicta Lies hearing seems to show he'd be doing another Iran-Contra stir soon.

[seito]

128. I agree 100%

The corporate media controls the message. That is changing little by little as we make them obsolete.

I still have faith in John Kerry. Even if I blamed him for not fighting, I could not, with good conscience, refuse to support him now. He is fighting for issues that I believe in.

[Sydnie]

59. Poppycock!

Perhaps you should be a candidate for the DNC chair then. You could enlighten them all.

Pffft!

[Democrat Dragon]

125. gimme 20 years

[Amaryllis]

82. You don't think Kerry knows what? Not clear from your post.

[Democrat Dragon]

129. I don't Kerry knows about

the whole "image is everything when the public is looking at you" thing. Part of appealing to people is to maintain a good image. For a politician, a "good image" is someone who is strong, bold, and valiant. Of course I am basing that on teh viewpoint of an average person according Machivallian principles.

[johan helge]

26. "The last report endorsed by the experts on mathematics"

- which one is that?

[RaulVB]

28. Link here:

http://www.uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/US/USCountVotes_Re_Mitofsky-Edison.pdf

[slackmaster]

107. Time for my favorite mathematician joke

Did you hear about the mathematician who was constipated?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

He worked it out with a pencil!

:hurts:

[politicasista]

29. "Let's hate on Kerry Day"

I love it. (sarcasm) But anyway, I am semi-disappointed in the early concession, (I still want to slap Ms. Cahill and Mr. Shrum :mad: ) and I wish he would come out and tell us what really happened so people can be at peace here but I guess that too greedy. The more you guys hate on him, the more I can appreciate him.:-)

[ginnyinWI]

61. Kerry on, then!

:) :) :)

[BlackVelvet04]

39. I saw Kerry on t.v. today

and I think that he never expected to win. I quite frankly think he was a sacrificial lamb, possibly without his real knowledge, but a sacrificial lamb nevertheless.

Kerry commented today that he did much better than anyone expected. Think about that. He also commented how presidents aren't voted out of office during a time of war. I honestly believe the leaders of the democratic party never intended for him to win and the republican party knew it....but along came the almost spoilers, the grassroots people. Just before the election the polls showed Kerry in the lead and somebody had to stop him from winning so they did. I believe the votes were manipulated and I have every idea the democratic party knew that and rolled over because they never, ever intended for Kerry to win.

There are so many ways that the election was bought....black box voting, disenfranchisement, paid commentators touting bushes agenda and here's another example:

The Faith-Based Fraud

By News Brief
Jan 27, 2005, 23:29

After its highly touted unveiling, President Bush's faith-based initiative has proceeded largely under the radar. But a lack of attention hasn't shielded the program's constitutional questionability, or its brutal effectiveness.

In 2003--according to White House data reported by the Los Angeles Times--Bush doled out $1 billion to hundreds of faith-based groups through a little-noted executive order. More importantly, the Bush Administration used the grants to sway influential African-Americans in key battleground states and reward longtime political supporters at taxpayer expense.

For example, after the Rev. Herb Lusk II delivered the invocation at the 2000 Republican convention, his Philadelphia church received $1 million in federal funds. Bishop Harold Ray, who offered the invocation at a rally for **** Cheney in Palm Beach, Florida, got $1.7 million for his South Florida ministry. In 2002 Bush personally visited Milwaukee's Bishop Sedgwick Daniels--who voted for Clinton and Gore--and later awarded him a $1.5 million grant. This fall, Daniels's face appeared on Republican Party fliers in Wisconsin, endorsing Bush as a man who "shares our views."
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/outrage?bid=13&pid=2145

Come on, how could the democratic party be so totally unaware that this was going on? I don't believe they were.

[rumpel]

49. strange that you say that, it also crossed my mind, that they never

intended to win, but then I thought, would that not really cross over into a conspiracy type theory?

and I am really not so convinced that the religious voters played such a determining factor, as the MSM and the WH wants us all to believe.

:think:

[Divine Discontent]

130. MORE PEOPLE NEED TO ASK THIS QUESTION

and your post needs further review akin to the PAYMENTS the white house has given to commentators, and now that's coming out... notice how they are BUYING OUT people of influence over the masses..


SERIOUSLY, if you're a black woman with 3 kids and no husband and you look up to your minister at your baptist church, who just so happens received x amount of money from bushco, and he says, Bush is the way to go with morals, protection, and God, are you going to question him???


THIS IS HORRIBLE and you opened up a big can of worms in my opinion.

SOMEONE MAKE ANOTHER POST ABOUT THIS IN DETAIL AND GET IT ON THE FRONT BOARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Donailin]

41. Question about the machines in the Iowa primaries:

It occurred to me today that no one has looked to see if the votes in the primaries were tampered with. It seemed like Dean was the one, and Kerry was a close second. I wasn't a particpant hereat that time, but was it discussed?

[bush_is_wacko]

47. Yes, I think he knows, but I'm not sure he will go after **** for that.

I think Kerry is looking for charges like treason, crimes against humanity, that sort of thing. If he takes **** down he needs all the ammunition he can get. He wants to insure NOTHING like this ever happens again and he knows he has to have mountains to insure that.

[Peace Patriot]

50. BlackVelvet04, I thought that was a really, really interesting comment.

"BlackVelvet04  (149 posts)
"Sun Jan-30-05 01:42 PM
"Response to Original message

"39. I saw Kerry on t.v. today
and I think that he never expected to win. I quite frankly think he was a sacrificial lamb, possibly without his real knowledge, but a sacrificial lamb nevertheless.

"Kerry commented today that he did much better than anyone expected. Think about that. He also commented how presidents aren't voted out of office during a time of war. I honestly believe the leaders of the democratic party never intended for him to win and the republican party knew it....but along came the almost spoilers, the grassroots people. Just before the election the polls showed Kerry in the lead and somebody had to stop him from winning so they did. I believe the votes were manipulated and I have every idea the democratic party knew that and rolled over because they never, ever intended for Kerry to win."

-----

I don't know if you have the whole story here, or have all of it right, but I think you're on to something. First of all, I remember before Dean got into the campaign that the general tenor of things from the Democratic leadership was, "We'll wait until '08," and they were already talking about Hillary in '08. This made me so mad--because I could already see the grass roots democracy movement starting, to throw Bush out.

Then--and here's the thing that really throws me--the Democratic leadership permitted this egregiously fraudulent election system--with BushCon companies owning the SECRET proprietary source code that counts all our votes--to be put into place, with hardly a squeak out of them.

When you think about, they should have been screaming bloody murder about this, and warning the voters, and making it a big campaign issue.

Nada. It drives me nuts.

Could be a combination of corruption ($3.5 billion in HAVA money to the states, and Diebold's infamous wining and dining), ignorance, inattention, laziness, vast dereliction of duty, and approval of Bush's war policy (some Dems).

I've thought and thought about it. And here is where I part company with both Kerry bashers, and those who want to squelch Kerry bashers and thus shut down the kind of criticism and strategic thinking we need to do.

Whom can we trust? Who is going to help us restore our right to vote? And, if we can get an honest election in '06 and '08, who will end this dreadful Mideast war? who will help us dismantle or at least rein in this dreadful global military-industrial machine so that it is never a temptation to fascists again? who will help us make this a good country again?

Kerry bashing we do NOT need. That's a whole separate issue--and calling him a coward or whatever is just useless talk. If he KNEW the election was stolen on 11/2, then--given the power situation in Congress--he had two choices: lead a revolution that could have ended up with blood in the streets, or shut up.

That's it. He could have taken ONE HUNDRED "SMOKING GUNS" INTO CONGRESS about the stolen election, and they STILL WOULD HAVE BACKED BUSH ANYWAY.

You know that. There is NO justice to be had from this Congress. Period.

So he chose to shut up. And I will not call him a coward for that. He was dealing with the most dangerous, murderous crowd of thugs on the planet.

And if he DIDN'T KNOW the election was stolen, why didn't he? How could a Senator in his position NOT KNOW what Karl Rove and Diebold and ES&S were capable of?

WE NEED TO KNOW HOW AND WHY this election system was put into place, and how to get rid of it. Who can help us do that?

The Democrats in Congress, with a few exceptions, seem to be either stupid or uninformed--about ELECTIONS, for godssakes! (that's what they DO for a living!)--and possibly some of them are scared and cautious (anthrax; Wellstone), or they're part of the War Party, and they don't really care how many Iraqis or US soldiers die, and they'd just as soon Bush take the rap for those deaths.

THIS is what we need to sort out. And the Condoleeza Rice vote was very interesting in this respect. And guess who voted against her--among the Heroic 13--JOHN KERRY!

Here's the full list:

Boxer (leader of the Heroic 13, absolutely brilliant strategist)
Kennedy (great speech)
Levin (speech)
Byrd (great speech)
Kerry
Reed (RI) (speech)
Durbin (speech)
Dayton (the greatest speech of the day, will live in history)
Akaka
Bayh (speech)
Lautenberg
Harkin
Jeffords (Independent)

Note: Biden, and Harry Reid (NV -minority leader), voted for Rice but did speak eloquently in defense of the Heroic 13, AND in defense of what they said about Rice's lying.

So here we have a core group of rebellious Senators, with their leader (Boxer) being more familiar than most with election system issues. They are only 13, it's true (a big victory on the Rice nomination, but still a small number of votes), but I don't EXPECT Congress to restore our right to vote. They took it away (the BushCons). They are not going to give it back--any more than they were likely to investigate Ohio.

No, what I want is INVESTIGATION and PUBLIC EDUCATION--from our core group of progressives in Congress. And Kerry is among them--which personally I was VERY HAPPY TO SEE!!! That vote took some courage on the part of all of them. He was silent--but others spoke so well, it didn't matter. He can bide his time.

I think we have to restore our right to vote, state by state. And from the look of things, we'd better get on that organization fast, because I believe BushCons are already trying to head it off, with bad legislation, and with items like their attack on Sec. of State Kevin Shelley in CA. (--the SoS who decertified Diebold and sued them for lying about the security of their voting machines.)

So...PA-LEEZE, everybody! Get off this need to bash this person or that person, or each other. That's not useful. We need real information, and some hard-nosed strategizing.

[BlackVelvet04]

65. You have some good points and

things I have thought about. How could the democrats possibly NOT know what was going on with the black box voting, with the disenfranchisement, with the funds to black faith based charities, etc? I don't believe they could ALL have been totally unaware.

I see no point in bashing Kerry. As I said, he may or may not have been aware that he was a sacrificial lamb. He may have only thought that he didn't have a chance of winning and maybe the support that he got has inspired him to greater things in Congress and that's a good thing. His vote against rice was refreshing to see.

I think we need to face facts......the two political parties are just two sides of the same coin. Many, many of the senators and congressmen are more interested in money and power than they are in protecting we the people. But I think there are some who do care. Byrd, who I am not all that thrilled with in many ways, has in fact taken care of his state. There are more things in WVA named after Byrd than you can shake a stick at and while I don't approve of how he accomplished what he has I do approve of the fact he put the people of his state first in what he does.

I don't know who we can trust. I have to say that of all the candidates the dems had I trust Dean the most. I'm not sure why, but
I do. I usually follow my instincts most of the time. I posted on another board over a year ago that I didn't think Kerry was meant to win and nothing has happened to change my mind. I worked for Kerry in spite of that belief and put everything I had into it but I never changed what I believed. Not only do we need to take our country back we need to take our party back.

[LiberalCompassionate]

70. PeacePatriot

Excellent points. We need strategies, not sniping. I have been writing to my Senators every week. I am proud that one of my Senators, Frank Lautenberg, voted against Rice. Write, Write, Write, meet-up with local organizations, don't be afraid to casually start a conversation on the checkout line about election fraud. Get passionate, not pessimistic. We can do it, we will do it.

"Do not try, do,..otherwise do not do" Yoda

[Quakerfriend]

79. Peace Patriot you are always RIGHT ON!

And, you've got great intuition!

IMO part of what has happened with our election system is tied in to 911, and there are those on both sides of the isle who do not want the truth to come out.

[SoCalDemGrrl]

91. Brilliant post Peace Patriot - thanks for putting all the

pieces together so succinctly. I especially can appreciate your concern for addressing the Secretary of State issue in California. If Aaahnold & Co. are successful in ousting Kevin Shelley as CA. SOS,a Republican replacement can be appointed and Diebold/ES&S will have carte blanche. Then we are up S*** creek without a paddle, they can take over California with their scumbag voting machines and Dems can kiss 2006 and 2008 GOODBYE!!!

[Stevepol]

51. I think the consensus is that Kerry won about 52% to 47%

if the machines hadn't skewed the votes. The other shenanigans added to the skewing, but the machines alone could have done it and they certainly IMHO were responsible for Kerry's loss. He was a fine candidate and wd have made a fine president, even better than Gore possibly. Who knows? Anyway, I don't think there's any doubt looking at the exit polls, which were certainly a more accurate indicator of the votes than the machine count, that Kerry won handily.

The thing that irks me is all these conclusions that the pundits draw from the supposed Bush victory. The majority of the American people did not vote for *, not this time, not last time, not in the future. But if the machines are not cleaned up, the Dems will continue to lose reps and senators and the next election will go to whatever goon the Repubs put up to run.

DEMAND A VOTER-VERIFIED PAPER BALLOT AND AUDITS FOR ALL ELECTIONS.

[Peace Patriot]

53. Yeah, Stevepol, that bothers me, too...

"...all these conclusions that the pundits draw from the supposed Bush victory."

It creates a noxious gray cloud of disinformation in everybody's heads.

[lonestarnot]

64. BLOODHOUND TOOK BIG DOG OF THE YEAR! Best in Show!

Still on it....

[Raksha]

98. 52% to 47% in Kerry's favor...weird that you should use those figures.

That's exactly the result I predicted on another forum a few days before the election, after tracking the various opinion polls for several weeks.

I'm just as fed up as you are with the conclusions the pundits draw from the supposed Bush victory. Since there never was any Bush victory, any "conclusions" to be drawn from it are as fraudulent as the election itself.

[Sydnie]

66. I agree -- he knows and he's pissed

He has a long memory and a never ending well of patience. Just like a spider ... he will wait them out and catch them in their own net.

Thanks for posting this Raul.

[MadSal]

68. Lets get back to the subject of whether Kerry knows about the fraud

If Kerry knows about the voter fraud, what can he do? And was the trip to Iraq for any reason other than 'fact finding'?

The comments above about the Repukes possibly fiddling with Dem primaries (in terms of fraud) is interesting in light of the common assumption that they most likely caused Janet Reno to lose the FL primary because Jeb Bush couldn't have beat her in the main election.

Meanwhile, they seem to be getting more powerful by the moment and the questions remains, does Kerry know and can he do anything about the building Repuke powerhouse.

[New Earth]

69. it's NOT VOTER FRAUD

IT'S ELECTION FRAUD.



and welcome to DU :hi:

[count_alucard]

73. what's this game of words of yours accomplishing?

voter fraud, election fraud, we all knew Bush was going to steal it. Kerry knew it and chose to run like a rabbit. A real fighter doesn't run.

[New Earth]

75. LOL!

MY game of words? not quite dude. it amazes me that you throw in a punch at Kerry in every single one of your posts. please keep it coming, tis quite the entertainment.

[Joe Chi Minh]

114. Your constant

invaluable reminders are clearly a real thorn in their side, Faye. I was going to say, keep it up... but, thank goodness, it doesn't look as if you need reminding!

[SoCalDemGrrl]

92. Are you sure you belong here? Sounds like you've been reading too much..

of the "SWIFT BOAT LIARS" book. Like Faye said, it seems like you're getting off on bashing Kerry in every post and frankly you are not going to find too many sympathizers here. Most DUers, like Democrats everywhere, were united in their support behind Kerry as the best man for President of the United States. He is BRAVE, intelligent, compassionate and most certainly NOT a coward.

[count_alucard]

108. Kerry turned out to be just another Swift Boat Liar, didn't he?

He promised that 'every vote must count' but quit before all votes were counted.

You cannot call a quitter that surprised even his running mate BRAVE.

You cannot call a candidate who allowed an idiot, brain damaged buffoon like Bush be reelected INTELLIGENT.

You cannot call a senator who voted for a war that killed thousands of innocent COMPASSIONATE.

But you can certainly call a man who didn't fight when he was most needed a COWARD.

[Peace Patriot]

133. You know what? It just doesn't do any good at all to use words like...

..."brave," and "intelligent" and "compassionate" and "coward." Those are personal judgements, and they are also "hot button" words aimed at arousing emotion not thought.

Our country is in an extremely grave crisis. This is not the right time to be doing the "circular firing squad" thing. It's extremely counter-productive. And I urge DUers who want to save this democracy, and who are working toward that purpose, to ignore posts like this.

Facts are one thing. Strategy is one thing. But emotional posts like "count_alucard"'s simply arouse anger or defensiveness. Rational discussion of allies/enemies, who we can count on, for what?, how to get things done, what should be getting done, etc.--this is what we need to be doing.

[count_alucard]

137. this 'rational discussion'

sweet lamb attitude of yours is what Karl Rove wants. It's worthless.

You can't convince anyone of your views without PASSION.

[electropop]

109. Kerry's a good man and I worked hard for him

but it appears he hasn't kept his central campaign promise: to protect our votes. He may yet surprise us by revealing a massive secret investigation, but my hopes of this are dimming.

[MadSal]

72. Faye, What do you see as the difference betw election and voter fraud?

I think both definitely happened but it is hard to tell the two apart.

By the way, how can you tell it was my first post? (I'm still trying to figure everything out.)

You must sleep here, I have read your posts many, many times and saw your photo with those who protested in Washington, DC. You're a woman after my own heart.

[New Earth]

74. thanks for the nice words.

and please read through these threads for the answer:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=306119&mesg_id=306119

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=306090&mesg_id=306090

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x309442

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x309127

[IndyPriest]

76. Kerry's an inkblot

No one actually knows what he knows. So we're all guessing. We are fond of asserting that he MUST know this or that because he's a senator or because he's fought Bush before in the BCCI or whatever. But actually, we don't know what he knows. And that's a big part of the maddening predicament we've been in for more than a month. If we knew what Kerry knew, we could make much better decisions, take better stands, etc. But we don't know. So we guess. It would be a MAJOR benefit to the country for someone to find out what Kerry knows. I can't believe there isn't someone here who knows someone who knows someone who could find out. But that hasn't been done, yet.

[LittleClarkie]

95. And if it has

we weren't sure if we could trust that one person amongst the noise. And how many levels is too far away. I know someone who knows someone who knows someone is too far away if they're playing this close to the chest and only talking amongst inner circle folk.

So we play lassie games and "interpret." Until I know better, I just go with his statements at face value.

When you said inkblot, I thought you'd say that he's an inkblot because everyone sees what they want to see, and that this says more about the person talking than it does about Kerry.

Johnny Rorschach... lol!

[IndyPriest]

110. Yes, we do see what we want

That is what I meant. And it's because we have no solid info about what he knows and doesn't know. In that context, yes, it's a correct conclusion that what we write does end up being more about us than him.

A month ago, there may have been very good reasons why we didn't know what if anything Kerry knew about the election fraud, or why he wasn't telling what he knew. But in the absence of solid info now, we continue to guess. And my larger point is that it seems silly to me that 6 weeks have gone by and we are as in the dark as we were. There are well connected people around here, and somebody's got to have an entry to Kerry that could settle some important questions. We expend a lot of energy reading tea leaves.

I love John Kerry. I think the guy has a core of integrity that won't give up. But in response to Raul's thread, I think the honest answer is that we don't know what Kerry knows. We don't know IF Kerry knows. And that seems odd to me, but fixable.

[MadSal]

77. LOL!! Okay, I give, I give! You are right. It IS election fraud!

It seems like a detail but I agree it is an important difference.

I must get the family headed in the direction of bed.

Good night, y'all.

salpal

[Amaryllis]

83. I didn't hear anything in that inteview that would cause me to think he

knows the election was stolen. Not that he can just get on Meet the PRess and say "I lost because it was stolen," but I have yet to hear him say anything anywhere that would indicate he really gets the level of the theft. HAs anyone else heard him say anything other than acknowledging problems in Ohio?

[ROH]

87. A poster reproduced them here few days ago. I can't find that thread now.

You wrote: "Didn't he make 2 very PRECISE comments regarding his numbers on the exit polls that day?

A poster reproduced them here few days ago. I can't find that thread now."

Have you located that thread?

It would be very interesting to see the precise comments that were made.

[loudsue]

96. The answer to "what do we DO about it" is being addressed here:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/

This is an organization that Dean has started, organizing people in every community across America, to work from the local level on up. The republicans started doing this in the late 70's early 80's, and it takes time, but it is the ONLY way.

The difference is, we have to restructure the Dem party from the local level all the way to the top, and we have to do start making headway within the next year. We have to become EXTREMELY active, coordinated, and focused. The Democratic party has been HEAVILY infiltrated with republicans, at all levels.

For instance: In North Carolina, the woman who was the State Chairman of the Dem Party is someone I knew well....I worked in an office next to her for many years. She was a republican, plain and simple. It did not matter that she was "registered" Dem as a front. The corporate interests that sponsored her and made sure she got to the head of the Democratic party in N.C., supported her in every way you can imagine. So....when we have elections, most particularly the Dem candidates who would be headed to Washington never seem to have enough signs, bumper stickers, coordination. Things are sloppily organized, or not given support from the State Dem Party Hdqtrs. Therefore, there are a LOT of Dem candidates that never get to Washington! The ones that do.....well, let me say I suspect many of them, and the ones that do get there that are worth their salt have their own little election machine thing going.

Dean's organization is helping build on the grassroots activism that Dean built up during his campaign, and they give you direction, organization, and make it easy for you.

They have groups in every state, and if you don't have a local chapter, they can help you get started.

THIS -- in the state and local governments -- is where we can fight the election machine fraud war in the most effective way. If we plan to wait for Washington to do it, especially with the vast right wing control of all things Washingtonian, we'll be waiting for another 20 years.

These Democracy for America (DFA) organizations are helping people get behind the right candidates, helping fund candidates, and encouraging people to run who are on board with the traditional Democratic values (not the corporatists that have ended up rubber-stamping the neocons).

Everyone needs to hear about this group, and everyone needs to get involved NOW, so we can avoid another fraudulent election, and so that we can begin turning our party back into a party of the people.

:kick::kick::kick::kick:

[Melissa G]

97. kick

[KoKo]

119. Great Info, Loud Sue...all new activist DU'ers should follow that link if

they haven't been involved but want to do something NOW! :hi:

[Tiggeroshii]

99. Well if he knows or even strongly suspects that there was widespread fraud

...in the 2004 for election, that would explain all the money he has saved, and why he's kept a low profile. Saving up political capital is an important thing, and in the next election, if he could say "We won in 2004 and will win AGAIN" without the shame of being smeared by the conservative dominated media, wouldn't that be the best? If there is proof he won with a 3 million vote margin but accepted otherwise from lack of evidence and popular appeal, I think he deserves no less but to become President, even if it's in 2008. If Gore had done the same, he would have no trouble in 04.But if he had helped congres in 01, he'd be President...

Kerry did all he could and i'm confident, despite the small evidence of fraud; he'd have been shot down tragically if he had been as loud as us...

[garybeck]

100. not bashing, but if he knows, why does he keep saying he lost?

just wondering

[RaulVB]

121. OK, he goes and says:

I'M THE ELECTED PRESIDENT YOU CORPORATE MEDIA LIARS, SELL-OUTS!

Your deals with the regime's crooks are beyond the pale!

Ready for a civil war?

He can't...

[Tiggeroshii]

101. Personally, I don't think anybody KNOWS there was widespread fraud........

I and much of us strongly believe there was fraud because of the little evidence that leads us to blieve so(i.e exit poll discrepancies and so on). But to KNOW there was widespread fraud in this election, is to have solid, indisputed evidence with tons of leaks attributed to it. Of course they shouldn't have certified the electorate, but if the majority of his supporters and Americans in general, believe this election was clean; Kerry is forced to believe the same...

[sacxtra]

104. In this case Electronics are different and so should Burdon of Proof

The burdon of proof should be on the folks running the electronic boxes.

With electronics data can be manipulated, and no check or balance can prove it wasn't manipulated. A 1 can be changed to a 0 by adding +5VDC or a 0 to a 1 by setting GROUND. It don't matter if it's by software code, by swapping hardware, by telco switch, by building wire, by EM Pulse, by power glitch, or by keyboard across modem.

The MSM can't even stop their own websites from being defaced. The banks can't stop fraud either. Why would voting across modems using security by obscurity be any different?

Ask the IT people that run your networks. Ask the OLD BBS Sysops. Ask the guys that physically build your networks. They ALL know.

It don't matter if the software is closed source.

The Crux of the problem is the Paper (IF ANY EXISTED) will NEVER be compared to the actual electronic vote tabulation for even a sanity check to make sure things worked right.

And now when such requests are made they aparently cost money, and are obstructed, delayed, or not produced, tampered with, specifically chosen for known results, and a myriad of other nasty tricks.

I watched the Kerry Interview with Russert. Could you hear me screaming at my TV? "Bring up the Electronic Voting Fraud Issue!"

About the only way this is going to get fixed, it by raising awareness. Go to the places where the media hangs out, and hold up your signs, force their camera's to SEE your signs. Trick the cameramen into covering your issues. If your going to discuss how to cook eggs on a cooking show, bring up electronic fraud. If your being interviewed on the street for ANYTHING bring it up.

I don't see anything else but mayhem in the streets down the road, because if the vote is rigged and nobody can prove it, then the Congress/senators can not be threatened with being "not voted for."
And More little piddly measures will snip away at our rights.


Please don't bother with "Welcome to DU" I know I am welcome ;o)

[garybeck]

112. there is a ton of evidence, it's not just exit polls

first of all, we shouldn't be saying "just the exit polls". Exit polls are very significant things and they are so far off in so many states that they show that SOMETHING is definitely wrong.

there is a lot of other evidence, state by state, much of which has been submitted as sworn testimony.

I think it's acceptable to say that one "knows" there was fraud if one chooses to say so.

We need to stop being so gunshy in our language. Listen to Limbaugh O'Rielly, etc... all day long they lash out things as facts that are blatant lies.

In our case, at the worst we're making rational conclusions based on the real evidence. A far cry from blatant lies.

If we want people to listen we need to start saying what's on our minds and as long as it's based on fact it's fine with me.

Gary

[Peace Patriot]

147. "Proof" of election fraud has never been required. The election was...

...INVALID. Here is why...

1. The election system was almost completely non-transparent, and the results were controlled with secret, proprietary source code in the central vote tabulators, owned by partisans of the Bush regime.

2. There is overwhelming evidence that the result was wrong, including...

a) Nearly 60% of Americans disapprove of the Iraq war; 63% disapprove of torture with no exceptions; Bush's approval rating is incredibly low --43% (Rasmussen), 48% to 51% (others)--altogether an unprecedented "vote of no confidence" by the American people for a recently inaugurated 2nd term president

b) Numerous Ph.D.'s and other top experts have analyzed the election on various sets of data not just the exit polls, but also paper ballot vs. electronic voting, absentee ballot vs. electronic voting, top of the ticket vs. lower ticket, 2000 voting patterns vs. 2004, and also with a predictive model of the probable vote based on repeat voters (who voted in 2000), the big switch from Nader to Kerry, and new voter registration which favored the Democrats 57% to 41%, yielding a probable vote for Kerry that is 4 million to 8 million more votes than he received in the official electronic tally.

c) The odds against the Bush win, using various criteria, run to 1 in 10 million (the latest calculation).

d) The election was further characterized by massive vote suppression and suspicious machine malfunction (f.i., touchscreens changing Kerry votes to Bush votes, never the other way round)--57,000 complaints to Congress--much of it in Ohio and Florida, critical battleground states; and in addition, one observer calculated that 3 million African American votes had been suppressed nationwide.

With a non-transparent election system controlled by partisans of one side, and a highly suspicious result, you have an INVALID election. There doesn't need to be "proof." A fraudulent election system is DESIGNED to hide the proof!

How fraudulent elections are detected is by exterior criteria like those above. Most countries do it with exit polls. Our exit polls showed a Kerry win by a 3% margin (and that was after massive vote SUPPRESSION--people who never got to vote). But the exit poll result was hidden from us on election night. The TV networks CHANGED the exit polls to fit the "official result." That's why everybody thinks Bush won.

Kerry had the problem of the widespread public perception that Bush won (created by the TV networks). But he had an even worse problem than this--and that is a Congress controlled by Bush partisans (many of them likely elected in fraudulent elections). Kerry could have taken a hundred "smoking guns" to Congress, and it would have made no difference. They would have favored Bush anyway. And there was just no way that they would have done the right thing regarding this INVALID election (refuse to certify the results, and mandate a re-vote). These partisans were involved in setting up the fraudulent election system in the first place. So Kerry had a stark choice: Lead a revolution that might have resulted in blood in the streets, or shut up.

Exit poll analysis: astronomical odds against Bush win

Dr. Steven Freeman: http://www.appliedresearch.us/sf/epdiscrep.htm
Dr. Ron Baiman: http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/997
Dr. Webb Mealy: http://www.selftest.net/redshift.htm
Jonathan Simon:http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0411/S00142.htm
(9 Ph.D's from leading universities call for investigation of 2004 Election:)
http://uscountvotes.org/ucvAnalysis/US/USCountVotes_Re_Mitofsky-Edison.pdf

(Florida: 130,000 to 230,000 phantom votes for Bush--paper vs. electronic voting:)
Dr. Michael Haut & UC Berkeley stats team: http://ucdata.berkeley.edu

Democratic Underground (ignatzmouse):
(North Carolina: absentee ballot vs. electronic, inexplicable 6% edge to Bush in electronic:)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x45003
(also at:) http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/12/233831/06

Johns Hopkins report on insecurity of electronic voting (general): http://www.scoop.co.nz/mason/stories/HL0307/S00196.htm#5

Easy demo of the how insecure voting machines are:
http://www.chuckherrin.com/hackthevote.htm

Ohio vote suppression: http://www.bpac.info

Documentation of widespread machine fraud and dirty tricks in over 20 states:
http://www.flcv.com/ussumall.html

Democratic Underground (TruthIsAl)l: "To believe Bush won, you have to believe…"

Part 1
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=1316010

Part 2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132_id=1358806

Part 3
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x197878

In progress compilations of various articles and materials on 2004 Election Fraud:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x311105

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=304579

[Freddie Stubbs]

103. Any idea when Kerry will break his silence and speak the truth?

Or will he take it to the grave?

[RaulVB]

122. He would speak up, if,

This country suffers a massive defeat on Iraq or elsewhere or if a terrorist attack takes place and "*"'s negligent handling of the office is responsible for it.

[Freddie Stubbs]

138. So he'll only speak up if Bush is in political trouble?

:shrug:

[NationalEnquirer]

111. Maybe all the Kerry bashers..

Can eat some major Crow shit!
Maybe his gracious speech after the election is EXACTLY what the doctor ordered.
He lets others look "the kook", so when the proof comes out, he comes out smellin like a rose!

[andyg]

139. I agree

people need to chill out and look at the how classy his response was!

[LeahD]

117. His statement on Meet the Press let me know that he knows...

MR. RUSSERT: Let me show you a photograph from Inauguration Day. Here is George W. Bush giving his second inaugural address. And there watching is John Kerry.

SEN. KERRY: I was in the wrong seat there, wasn't I?

and later in the Meet the Press interview, Kerry says, "....and if you add up the popular vote in the battleground states, I won the popular vote in the battleground states by two percentage points. We just didn't distribute it correctly in Ohio."

Has anyone else noticed the similar wording he used in the speech on MLK Day regarding the problems with the election in Ohio?

"Voting machines were distributed in uneven ways. In Democratic districts, it took people four, five, 11 hours to vote, while Republicans sorted through in ten minutes -- same voting machines, same process, our America," he said.

[RaulVB]

123. Thanks for pointing that out!

The tone of those comments is pretty clear, IMO.

[ClintCooper2003]

135. Please visit Oscar-Buzz.com right NOW to see what really happened...

to the poll numbers after the Bin Laden tape aired.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

143. Oscar-Buzz.com-- Very Interesting -- Faux News Had it Right

Clint -- Patched it in, Thanks for finding this !!! Remember Fox had Kerry winning the election !

http://oscar-buzz.com

Oct. 31, 2004 (Halloween) Bush's Numbers Slide Following Bin Laden Message
If Osama Bin Laden was somehow trying to "put the whammy" on incumbent President George W. Bush, it appears to have worked so far. In two separate tracking polls, Bush suffered a relatively sharp decline following the release of Osama bin Laden's "October surprise" videotape in which the Al Qaeda leader taunts Bush over his handling of the War on Terror.

In the Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll, Bush's support among likely voters has slid from 50% to 46% whilst Kerry has moved up one point from 45% to 46%. In the Washington Post/ABC News poll, Bush has skidded two points, from 50% to 48%, whilst Kerry has moved from 47% to 48%. In another, prominent tracking poll, by Zogby/Reuters, Bush and Kerry remain deadlocked at 48%. Thus, in all three of the nation's most closely watched tracking polls, Bush and Kerry are simply tied among likely voters.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

144. Well Why are Kerry and Clinton making a point of saying in

public that there was a switch to Bush 100 hours before the election?? This is obviously not true. So are they trying to tell us something? A clue??

[Peace Patriot]

148. I don't know what Kerry or Clinton think, and I don't think it...

...matters, as to what WE need to do now--get back our right to vote.

Clinton, and to a great degree, Kerry, are very much a part of the Establishment--the military-industrial complex that approves of the war in Iraq, and wanted war, in order to keep the huge private military corporations larded with public money, to grab and control the last supplies of easily obtainable oil, and to surround Israel with US military protection. If Kerry were against it, he would have voted against it, and made the point THEN that the President does not have, and never did have, the power to declare war. I'm not saying he wouldn't have been a far, far better president than Bush. I think he would have been. That's why I supported him. (He's not a damn thief, for one thing--and would have run a decent government, maybe even a great one, as US governments go).

So...for all I know...Clinton, Kerry and the Democratic Party pro-war leadership may have decided not to oppose the fraudulent election system, and not to ight the massive and quite predictable fraud, when it occured, because they would just as soon Bush take the rap for the 100,000+ Iraqi deaths, the 1,300 US deaths, the 10,000 US wounded, the war crimes and the absolute disaster that is Iraq.

You may have noticed that Kerry NEVER criticized Bush's invasion of Iraq. He only criticized Bush not providing sufficient troops to prevent chaos, and Bush's handling of post-war Iraq. This is a quite typical Democratic leadership stance.

I said above that I thought Kerry had a stark choice between revolution and shutting up. I still think that's true. But I think he could have won that revolution--and without bloodshed--if the Democrats had really wanted to. The BushCons, who seem to have all the power, actually have very brittle and vulnerable power. They do not have the support of the American people--as polls are time and again showing, on every issue, and on Bush himself. The majority of the country would have cheered the Democrats on, and would have supported them.

That's the sad part.

But I don't think it's cowardice. I think it's that most of the leadership approves of the war.