Why has the Democratic leadership ignored ELECTION THEFT as an issue for almost eight years?

[bertman]

This topic has been discussed a few times on DU, but as of yet, I have not heard anyone offer a cogent answer as to why the party that narrowly "LOST" the last two Presidential elections--not to mention a few critical Congressional contests--has remained silent on this topic of immense importance to our republic.

There is lots of technical, factual, and circumstantial evidence to support the election theft "theory". There are individuals who were involved in these crimes who have stepped forward and spilled the beans. There are many many Americans who feel that election theft is undermining the very existence of self-government in America. Yet those who are in the leadership positions of our Democratic party have CHOSEN to treat this issue like it is the political equivalent of the bubonic plague.

I want to know why.

[lob1]

1. I want to know why, too. And why isn't Bush impeached??

[lob1]

2. Dupe. Sorry

[Marnieworld]

3. I want to know why, too. And why isn't Bush impeached??

Just wanted to join in. :P

[Buzz Clik]

4. Because it's a non-starter. This must be handled state by state, not nationally.

[Peace Patriot]

9. You think the Anthrax Congress giving our election system away to rightwing Bushite

electronic voting corporations, to tabulate all our votes using 'TRADE SECRET,' PROPRIETARY programming code, with no audit/recount requirements, by means of a $3.9 BILLION electronic voting boondoggle that corrupted election officials from the one end of the country to another, is a "non-starter"?

I think it's a "starter" myself, and requires ANSWERS.

And I would start with else the 'Blue Dog' (pro-war, pro-corporate) Democrats in Congress did that year, in the same month (Oct 02)--gave away their constitutional power to declare war to George W. Bush.

[Buzz Clik]

13. You tell me. Has it started?

[VAliberal]

5. I think some state Dems are on it (?)

Someone posted yesterday on DU that Virginia and Maryland will both be phasing out touchscreen voting machines between '09 and '14?

[panader0]

6. With the degree of technology that we have now

it is ridiculous that there is not a fool-proof method of voting. Why should the voting machines be privately manufactured? By Diebold, a right wing corp.? Our votes, one single vote at a time, are our greatest resource in a democracy. That there is not a
way to ensure that every vote counts is unbelieveable.

[Peace Patriot]

12. ES&S (a spinoff of Diebold) is even worse than Diebold, as to its ties to extremist rightwingers.

ES&S has, as its initial funder and major investor, reclusive rightwing multi-billionaire Howard Ahmanson, who also gave one million dollars to the extremist 'christian' Chalcedon foundation, which touts the death penalty for homosexuals (among other things).

That's two of the three major e-voting vendors. The third is Sequoia, which hired the former Republican California Sec of State, Bill Jones, and his chief aide, Alfie Charles, to peddle their machines, after they had brought the curse of privatized, 'TRADE SECRET' vote counting to California.

Now ask why/how our Democratic Party leaders went along with this, voted for it enthusiastically, in great numbers, in Congress, with most of them still supporting it, and covering up for it, to this day?

A real puzzler.

[mrcheerful]

7. Because its kind of hard to prove that the machines were designed to flip votes

with all the secrecy about how they work. I saw a show on HBO that went into everything that happened in Ohio 2004, how the random 3% of the votes were not random but recounts of recounts that Blackwell had given to the re counters knowing full well they wouldn't show any funny business. But the courts threw it out. I mean really out side of just voicing opinions on these tactics don't work well and it is up to the states to say which voting machines they use.

[indepat]

8. Lack of political balls? Afraid to provoke a constitutional crisis? Can't face up to the hard

facts? Guilty of complicity, aiding and abetting, and legitimizing the hostile take over of our constitutional Republic? Lily-livered cowardice? Fraidy-cats galore? Lack of courage to live up to their oaths of office? Any or all of the foregoing and maybe some more too? :P

Edited for spelling

[bigdarryl]

10. A lot of people are on it this time Rev. Al Sharpton is out in full force

I don't know exactly where though

[wundermaus]

11. Our national election and voting process is a disgrace

As bad or worse than any 3rd world farce.
50 different ways of registering and that's at just the State level... then there are county and local differences and hoops to jump through.
Electoral College verses popular vote verses proportional representation verse winner take all!
Key state results verses large population states verses small population states.
Same day voter registration verses national ID cards verses residency verification verses citizenship verification verses typo error disenfranchisement...
Special interest funding of candidates verses caps on donations or public funding

We need a national standard set for national elections.
We need to abolish the Electoral College
We need paper trail verifiable, auditable ballots.
We need weekend voting Friday through Sunday.
We need independent third party (neutral nation like Sweden or Denmark) observation of voting.

Otherwise we will continue to be the laughing stock of the advanced industrialized nations of the world.

More important than the war, the economy, or the environment: DEMOCRACY or nothing else can be addressed.

[melonkali]

14. That's also my greatest concern.

Are we unwilling or unable to effect change? Why is a state with a Repub governor (California) the only state to outlaw Diebold?

Until we eliminate election fraud, then all the pre-election hype is just "pageant" laying on a dung heap of unscrupulous "process".

[iceman66]

15. Unfortunately,

it may take an Obama "loss" to drive this issue to the forefront.

[bertman]

16. I was hoping that an Obama "win" would drive it to the forefront. With a Democratic

President and Congress, what better time to institute a national election process that is standardized, open, and verifiable?

But back to the main question, I'm leaning toward three possible reasons for Democratic complicity:

1) Lack of outrage from US voters. If it isn't a sexy issue they're not gonna push it;

2) Self Interest--Corporate influence has corrupted our reps to the point that they are more worried about keeping their financiers happy and their campaign finance funds flowing than they are about free and fair elections;

3) Blackmail. No, I'm not kidding. How difficult could it be to get a rep or senator into a compromising position and videotape it or audio tape it? That's a powerful tool to use in bending people to your will.

[Wizard777]

17. Too busy with the election reform in IRAQ.

[riqster]

18. They're scared shitless of losing their seats, that's why.

...if the legitimacy of the electoral process is called into question, so too is the legitimacy of all OFFICEHOLDERS who were elected by that process.

[ramapo]

19. Gore should've championed this issue

Yes he has done fine work on climate awareness but our voting system has gotten worse, not better, over the past eight years. How and why there can be a system with such disparity, with no audit trails, and growing voter disenchantment is beyond me. This is yet another area where the United States trails much of the civilized world.

[stillcool]

20. The Federal Government hasn't 'fixed'

anything in years. The "First do no wrong" thing needs to be applied to the federal government. But what about our state elections? Why is it our votes counting is only of concern every four years, and not until right before the election, when nothing can be done? More than half of us vote with some kind of paper record. Some of us live in states that have legislated standard audits after each and every election. I don't think anything will change unless the people in their respective states demand their state governments provide them with secure and accurate voting systems. Why should they care if we don't?

[bertman]

21. They did a fine job of "fixing" the '04 election--intentionally or unintentionally.

Your point about states fixing their own elections has some merit.

I recommend listening to people who monitor elections all over the world. What do they recommend for free and fair elections? Jimmy Carter should be able to give us some good input on this issue.