Reply #113: Nederland,STOP TRASHING DU. That's enough support for me but there's more

[autorank]

Ned(erland) said: "Don't you realize that outside of DU, nobody agrees with you? Shit, even that well known right wing blog DailyKos makes fun of you guys." (I must say, you're getting a bit harsh.)

You know what, if it was only DUers who agreed with the positions on election fraud, I'd be proud to advance those positions forever, because DUer support is one Hell of an endorsement and because the positions are correct. You disparage DKOS aw well with the "right wing" tag but also by implying that they respond to the dictates of Kos and Armando. That is hardly the case. There was and continues to be some first rate election fraud research and reporting on DKOS. Unlike a dictatorship, DKOS members don't need to follow the commands of the blog owners. Simple as that.

Now for your point that nobody outside DU agrees with us, let me make a few points:


1) PROJECT CENSORED TOP 25 STORIES: (AUGUST 2005)

Each year this project has a juried competition on stories NOT covered or covered poorly by MSM or CM (corporate media as I like to tall them). Current/previous judges: Noam Chomsky, Susan Faludi, George Gerbner, Sut Jhally , Frances Moore Lappe, Norman Solomon, Michael Parenti, Herbert I. Schiller, Barbara Seaman, Erna Smith, Mike Wallace and Howard Zinn. This is what I'd call an expert panel.

They selected this as one of the top uncovered stories of 2005. Don't know about you Nederland and other naysayers, but I think that this jury is pretty impressive. Don't notice any hard core DUers there but you never know;)

No Paper Trail Left Behind: the Theft of the 2004 Presidential Election*
http://www.projectcensored.org/newsflash/voter_fraud.html

By Dennis Loo, Ph.D.

Cal Poly Pomona

[email protected]

Alice laughed: "There's no use trying," she said; "one can't believe impossible things." "I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was younger, I always did it for half an hour a day. Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." (Through the Looking Glass)

In order to believe that George Bush won the November 2, 2004 presidential election, you must also believe all of the following extremely improbable or outright impossible things.1
1) A big turnout and a highly energized and motivated electorate favored the GOP instead of the Democrats for the first time in history.2
2) Even though first-time voters, lapsed voters (those who didn’t vote in 2000), and undecideds went for John Kerry by big margins, and Bush lost people who voted for him in the cliffhanger 2000 election, Bush still received a 3.4 million vote surplus nationally.3

<snip>

---------------------------------
(Footnote 1: 1 Several of the items in this list feature Ohio and Florida because going into the election it was universally understood that the outcome hinged on these swing states.

'TruthIsAll' on the DemocraticUnderground.com offered a list that is similar in format to my highly improbables and utterly impossibles list of the 2004 election results and I have drawn directly from their list for items #7 and 8. (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x22581), retrieved June 4, 2005.(My comment: Here's a juried paper counted as a top censored story of the year juried by a distinguished panel. The author rightly cites the TruthIsAll work, which is ar the heart of the story. Ipso facto...)
---------------------------------
(continued)

<snip>

The Emperor (and the Electoral Process) Have No Clothes

The preceding list recounts only some of the irregularities in the 2004 election since it ignores the scores of instances of voter disenfranchisement that assumed many different forms (e.g., banning black voters in Florida who had either been convicted of a felony previously or who were “inadvertently” placed on the felons list by mistake, while not banning convicted Latino felons14; providing extraordinarily few voting machines in predominately Democratic precincts in Ohio; disallowing Ohio voters, for the first time, from voting in any precinct when they were unable to find their assigned precincts to vote in; and so on). A plethora of reasons clearly exists to conclude that widespread and historic levels of fraud were committed in this election.

<snip>

Killing the Messenger: the Exit Polls

Exit polls are the gold standard of vote count validity internationally. Since exit polls ask people as they emerge from the polling station whom they just voted for, they are not projections as are polls taken in the months, weeks or days before an election. They are not subject to faulty memory, voter capriciousness (voters voting differently than they indicated to a pollster previously), or erroneous projections about who will actually turn up to vote. Pollsters know who turned up to vote because the voters are standing there in front of the exit pollsters. Because of these characteristics, exit polls are exceptionally accurate. They are so accurate that in Germany, for example, the winners are announced based on the exit polls, with paper ballots being counted as a backup check against the exit polls.15 Exit polls are used, for this reason, as markers of fraud.16

2) In addition to DUers, who unlike you believe that election fraud today is like it was in years past, present and accounted for, there are a number of national organizations who share views expressed here:

(For links to these organizations go to http://www.solarbus.org/election/links.shtml, a great resource offered by DU's own Garybeck -- SolarBus.Org -- a priceless resource.)
* 51 Capital March
* ACT
* Alliance for Democracy
* Audit the Vote
* Be the Media
* Beyond Voting
* Backbone Campaign
* BlackBoxVoting.com
* BlackBoxVoting.org
* Bush Cheated '04
* Citizens Act
* Citizen Advocacy Center
* Citizens for Ethics
* Citizens for a Fair Vote Count
* Coalition Against Election Fraud
* Coalition for Visible Ballots
* Cobb for President
* Code Pink
* Common Cause
* Computer Scientist for Social Responsibility (CPSR)
* Constitution Project
* Count Every Vote
* Election Deception Dollar
* Electronic Fraud 2004
* Electronic Frontier Foundation
* Election Online
* Electronic Privacy Information Center
* Election Protection Coalition
* Election Reform Now
* Electronic Vote and Democracy
* Electoral Integrity
* ExitPollz
* Fair Elections
* Fair Vote
* Global Exchange
* Help America Recount
* Hunger for Democracy
* Investigate the Vote
* Juice for Justice
* Just a Fly on the Wall
* Justice Through Music
* League of Women Voters
* Left.org
* Mercury Coalition for Honest Elections
* National Ballot Integrity Project
* National Coalition for Verified Voting
* National Committee for Voting Integrity
* National Voting Rights Institute
* No Confidence Resolution
* No Mandate
* Nov 2 Truth
* Nov 3
* Open Voting Consortium
* Perfect Voting System
* People For the American Way
* Progressive Democrats of America
* Project Vote Smart
* Reign of Error
* SAVE Democracy
* Solar Bus
* Stolen Election 2004
* The Dean People
* This Time We're Watching
* True Majority
* Truth in Voting
* Up for Democracy
* US Counts Votes
* US Voting Integrity Project
* Velvet Revolution
* Voter Confidence Resolution
* Verified Voting
* Voice 4 Change
* Vote America
* Vote Scam
* Vote Trust USA
* Votergate Resource Center
* Votergate Movie
* Voters Unite
* Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club
* We Do Not Concede Coalition
* Where's the Paper?

3) Here are some great people who are on record as supporting the fraud arguments. None of they disparage DU or the arguments here, like you do, and everyone who I talked to (and I wrote the following articles) were clear on fraud being detected by exit polls.

The National Summit to Save Our Elections Convenes in Portland, Oregon Day 1

]
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00003.htm
Report By DU & PI Poster autorank
On special assignment for
"Scoop" at the conference


"Whenever there is electronic vote counting, there is no basis for confidence in the results of elections. You have no right to believe in those elections." - Paul Lehto, Attorney.

"Lehto is currently suing Sequoia voting systems as a result of clear failures to produce an accurate vote count during the 2004 presidential election. He outlined a simple syllogism: the software used by voting machine companies to capture votes on electronic voting machines is "proprietary" software developed and owned by the companies; these companies keep the software and methods a trade secret; therefore, the results of our elections can no longer be trusted or accepted as legitimate since we have no way to review software, performance, and security guarantees."

The National Summit to Save Our Elections Continues in Portland, Oregon Day 2-3

Days 2 & 3: The Ghost You’ll Never See in the Machine (“electronic voting”); Outsourcing Elections to Corporate America; Methods of Monitoring Elections; plus State and Community Level Action.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0510/S00082.htm

Report By DU & PI Poster autorank
On special assignment for
"Scoop" at the conference

Corporate Control of the Final Vote Count: Centralized Voter Registration Databases

"Matthew Pascarella offered a clear reason for concern about the imminent privatization of state-wide centralized voter registration databases. Section 303 of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA),, requires that states complete this process within the next three months. These databases will be the gateway to voting and the fences that keep people from the polls. Given the 2000 Presidential Election in Florida where (there were 2 lists in FL 2000 purge the first one was of 57,000(TK) and the other, more complete one that came up from the court case had over 90,000 individuals listed) 50,000 voters were disenfranchised due to state computerization activities; there is real cause for concern. Pascarella is a researcher, writer, and producer for Greg Palast. Greg Palast broke the major story on the Florida “felon purge” which removed over 57,000 Floridians from the voting rolls before the 2000 elections."

Verifying Election Results Panel

Thom Hartmann presented a brief but persuasive review of the use of exit polls in election monitoring. He reviewed the process begun in Serbia and successfully carried forward to the nations of Georgia, and the Ukraine. Voting rights activists formed a core group of election specialists who publicized the effort and tracked exit polls carefully. At the exact point of the final exit poll, a decision was made to immediately challenge the election if the poll indicated election fraud or stand down if the election seemed free and fair. Hartmann transitioned to the conduct of exit polls in the U.S. These had become increasingly more accurate until the 2004 election. The national exit polls showed a Kerry victory (until the very last national poll was adjusted and coincided with the actual results). The state exit polls, conducted by the same poll takers, were not adjusted and also showed a clear Kerry victory. Why didn’t Americans react the same way the Ukrainians did, Hartmann asked? His point was particularly telling since the margin of difference between Ukraine exit polls and US exits was only about 1%. The reaction by the voters was entirely different. The Ukraine had a revote and selected a different candidate for President.

4) Some additional names, just a sampling:

Rev. Jessee Jackson
Rev. Moss
Fitrakis
Wasserman
Keefer
Hartmann
Lampley
Rhodes
Vidal
M.C. Miller
Conyers
The entire Black Congressional Caucus
Barbara Boxer
Kerry (if he'll fess up;)
and many, many more...