Reply #40: Perhaps because

[Febble]

its not a "simple" statement at all. Unless you say what you mean by "the case made by the people {which people?}, expert or otherwise, that massive {how massive?} fraud had occurred", and you don't.

What you do say, however, are things that are simply wrong:

All trends and exit polls showed Kerry winning, then, mysteriously, the tabulating servers and the SoS server went down. When they came back up again, the results had been reversed.

I don't know what you mean by "trends" because you do not say, but the pre-election polls did not have Kerry "winning", and what you say about the exit polls suggests that you know virtually nothing about the exit polls.

And who are you alleging are "dismissive and unwilling to listen"?

If you've got a case, then make it. But don't asssume that those of us who like assertions backed up by evidence are being "dismissive and unwilling to listen". My own view is that the case for electoral injustice is not best made by claims that are demonstrably unfounded.