obrador supporters promise siege

[sgxnk]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4797113.stm
Supporters of Mexico's left-wing presidential candidate have pledged to place his rival "under siege" if he is declared winner of the disputed poll.
A spokesman for Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador's party said Felipe Calderon would not be able to operate outside his office if he was made president.
...
If declared the victor, Mr Calderon "will be a president under siege... he will not be able to operate outside his office", said Gerardo Fernandez, of the left-wing Democratic Revolution Party (PRD).

[corkhead]

1. what Americans should have done in 2000 and 2004

[keta11]

2. Give it up!!

I am tired of this -because Obrador did not win, "the election was stolen" crap. It just appears to the world they are sore losers and anarchists.

[Dora]

3. What? Clarify, please.

Do I understand you correctly? You're saying that the results of the Mexican election are indisputable, correct?

What do you think of our elections of 2000 and 2004?

[keta11]

4. The polls and the results were close. Obrador demanded a recount

and got it but that did not reverse the results. What does he want now. Its not like he was polling in a landslide before the election. IMO, it looks unseemly -Every loser in a close election can charge fraud and the result would be anarchy!!

About 2000 and 2004 elections, I do not know have any evidence to say they were stolen.

[Webster Green]

5. There is plenty of evidence that 2000 and 2004 were stolen..

Exit polling data was changed in the middle of the night.

Ohio was stolen with the help of the bush-licking Secretatry of State Kenneth Blackwell.

Machines were screwed up or non-existent. Lots of voter suppression took place in Ohio.

You haven't heard about any of that? :rofl:

[keta11]

6. I have heard all of that. Are they very credible?

Why did the Kerry and leaders in Congress not challenge them?

I dont know what I would think if every time a Republican lost, they alleged fraud

[Dora]

8. That's an INTERESTING perspective.

It appears you're saying that the evidential credibility of election-tampering is dependent on the resultant action or inaction of political figures. That's a pretty skewed way to look at evidence, IMO.

By your standard, the August 2001 memo warning Bush of Al Quaeda's terrorist threat to the U.S. should be discredited because Bush and his minions ignored it.

[keta11]

10. I believe its a complertely reasonable question to ask

If John Kerry and the Democrats in Congress thought they could prove fraud, they would attempt to do it since they stood to gain a lot more from victory than you or I.

[Dora]

12. Conyers has done a lot re: election fraud.

I don't understand why you're so focused on Kerry as a solution to the issue of election fraud. He was a victim of fraud, and he laid down for it and took it, even though he promised he wouldn't. Many of us were disappointed in him and still have a beef with his inaction, but you don't see us throwing up our hands and saying, "Oh, there must not have been a problem because if there was Kerry would have done something about it."

Apparently you aren't aware of all the hard work our fellow DUers have been doing researching election fraud issues.

Take a look! http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=203

[never_get_over_it]

15. Your ignorance on this topic is stunning

for someone who has been on this board for a while.

It is quite simple why so many of the Dems have not spoken up on election fraud or a whole host of other topics - many of them are spineless. I believe Kerry did not fight it because he had future political aspriations and did not want to be seen by wrong headed people like you as a sore loserman. Just because the Dems haven't fought this doesn't mean it didn't happen. There were loads of irregularities in OH and other states and oh conveniently EVERY FREAKING ONE OF THESE IRREGULARITIES favored the idiot in chief.

As for 2000 it is indisputable that Gore won FL. The law in FL at the time stated that if you could discern the intent of the voter that the vote must be counted. With that in mind the overvotes were enough to give the state to Gore. There were 10s of thousands of over votes where a voter wrote in the candidates name and also marked off their name on the ballot - these votes were NOT counted. They have since been counted - these types of votes happened for BOTH the idiot in chief and Gore - and Gore came out over 30,000 votes ahead in this count.

I see by your profile that you live in NY and I believe that NY still has lever voting machines - with a move to go to electronic - well consider yourself lucky because I live in a state - oh FL by the way WHERE I HAVE NO FAITH that my vote will be counted as I intended.

We have a right to KNOW and BELIEVE that our vote is being counted fairly - as do the Mexicans - even if you want to call people who question sore losers

[keta11]

16. I have not followed these "it must have been stolen threads"

Maybe its me - I just assume the voting system is fairly secure and dont begin to think of conspiracy every time a progressive loses an election. And this coming from someone who would rather see Kucinich become President before Kerry.

[never_get_over_it]

18. Well I was a Kucinich supporter too

and I LOVE HIM....but I have followed the stolen elections both via DU and other sites and I have to tell you NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING is more important than this - no other issues will matter if we do not have fair elections - because our side will never be in a position to change anything.

Thinking the elections were stolen is not some crazy tin foil hat thing. I would recommend you go to www.bradblog.com. I am in Tom Feeney's district in fL - there is a man Clint Curtis - running against him for Congress who was a life long Republican - worked for a company and - Tom Feeney came to this company and asked them to write code to steal elections - Clint was asked to write a protype program and because he came from the Chicago area assumed that they wanted to write this code to stop the Dems from stealing elections - when he asked his manager why they wanted the program he was told that it was needed to control the vote in South Florida. Clint has taken a lie detector test and passed, he has testifed to a Congressional committee and given his history I TOTALLY BELIEVE HIM. Do you know what Tom Feeney's response to Clint is - that he is a nut case conspiracy theorist. Information on Clint and much more is on the Brad Blog.

There is plenty of evidence to question what is going on with the voting fraud. It is a tragedy that more Dems including Kerry have not screamed about this - but just because they haven't doesn't mean its not going on. I am worried sick that it will happen again in November - by every indicator November should be an absolute political blood bath for the repunks - and I am very worried and pretty convinced that it will not be. This country will be totally lost if we don't get some investigative power over this criminal administration.

When people look at me funny or tell me I'm crazy for thinking that elections are being stolen I say ONE thing to them - that there have been plenty of efforts to get paper trails and safety measures on these machines and the repunks fight these efforts like crazy. - my question WHY would anyone object to paper trails Democrats, repunks, independent whatever - WHY would anybody object to this UNLESS THEY INTENDED TO STEAL these elections....and you know what that usually gets people thinking....hmmmm maybe she is right.

I can not even put into words the effect it has had on me to think that I cast a vote in 2004 and that it might have been counted for that lying murderous freak in the White House - it has actually made me sick.

Well I could go on forever but I won't thanks for "listening"

[Webster Green]

9. Yes they are credible!

And, I think Kerry didn't challenge because he was afraid you would call him a sore loser.

I fault him for that, but he still won Ohio.

If the same sort of midnight exit poll fluctuation occurred anywhere on the planet, and a left leaning candidate claimed victory, we would be sending in the troops.

[smomfr]

11. I ´ve been living in Mexico since 1982.........

although I´m not allowed to vote or be active in politics I do follow elections closly. When the presidental election was obviously stolen in 1994 by the PRI the Mexicans created the IFE. This independant commision oversees and validates all elections here. One of the things they do is have a representative from each political party appointed by each political party at every polling place. One of Obrador´s complaints is many party observers were bought. In other words he´s calling members of his own party corrupt. Another gem from Obrador is that the international observers -who, by the way, all called the election clean- observed but they didn´t see, see what? In my opinion Obrador is good for mobilizing people for demonstrations that will not influence the final outcome of this election but are in fact tearing the country apart. Also these demonstrations are against the law, a law enacted when Obrador was mayor of Mexico city. He´s geting away with breaki8ng this law because his party controls Mexico city government. Remind you of anyone?

[liberalpragmatist]

14. Yeah, that's how it looks to me

I'm sorry the left-of-center candidate didn't win, but I read several articles that noted several Obrador supporters debunking his video of alleged ballot-stuffing by saying it was just a campaign worker transferring ballots to another box.

Now, I do think there ought to have been a full hand recount, but I believe in the rule of law. International observers, UN observers, EU observers, have all said the election was fair and it doesn't look like there is much evidence that Obrador is willing to follow the law.

I could be wrong as I'm no expert on this topic, but I think DU'ers should be careful of crying "fraud!" every time a progressive loses.

[Ghost in the Machine]

13. I hope you're joking...

Although the linked article isn't very informative, I read yesterday that there was something like 79% of the recounts done in the 9% of overall precincts that were recounted and it was PROVEN that there was rampant fraud, ballot stuffing and ballot purging. The Elections Board has until Sept. 6th to either declare the winner, or because of the PROOF of fraud, to nulify the elections in those districts, which would also clearly give Obrador a win.

"I am tired of this -because Obrador did not win, "the election was stolen" crap. It just appears to the world they are sore losers and anarchists." :wtf:

I don't know about the rest of the world, but they appear to me as people who care about their Democracy and the right to have their VOTE COUNTED properly.

[Jed Dilligan]

17. Oh yeah, the party in power would never tamper with

the results of a Mexican election... Democracy is sacred down there.... And it's almost impossible to round up any corrupt officials to do the dirty work...

:sarcasm:

[Annces]

7. Power to the People

I hope you can win this one Mexico!