Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

All the President's Votes?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
 
AtLiberty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-16-05 11:54 AM
Original message
All the President's Votes?
This excellent article was published a year and a half ago in the UK... Let's ask Gumbel to keep up the good work.

All the President's Votes?

A Quiet Revolution is Taking Place in US Politics. By the Time It's Over, the Integrity of Elections Will be in the Unchallenged, Unscrutinized Control of a Few Large - and Pro-Republican - Corporations. Andrew Gumbel wonders if democracy in America can survive


by Andrew Gumbel
Monday, October 13, 2003
lndependent/UK


Something very odd happened in the mid-term elections in Georgia last November. On the eve of the vote, opinion polls showed Roy Barnes, the incumbent Democratic governor, leading by between nine and 11 points. In a somewhat closer, keenly watched Senate race, polls indicated that Max Cleland, the popular Democrat up for re-election, was ahead by two to five points against his Republican challenger, Saxby Chambliss.

Those figures were more or less what political experts would have expected in state with a long tradition of electing Democrats to statewide office. But then the results came in, and all of Georgia appeared to have been turned upside down. Barnes lost the governorship to the Republican, Sonny Perdue, 46 per cent to 51 per cent, a swing of as much as 16 percentage points from the last opinion polls. Cleland lost to Chambliss 46 per cent to 53, a last-minute swing of 9 to 12 points.

Red-faced opinion pollsters suddenly had a lot of explaining to do and launched internal investigations. Political analysts credited the upset - part of a pattern of Republican successes around the country - to a huge campaigning push by President Bush in the final days of the race. They also said that Roy Barnes had lost because of a surge of "angry white men" punishing him for eradicating all but a vestige of the old confederate symbol from the state flag.

But something about these explanations did not make sense, and they have made even less sense over time. When the Georgia secretary of state's office published its demographic breakdown of the election earlier this year, it turned out there was no surge of angry white men; in fact, the only subgroup showing even a modest increase in turnout was black women.

There were also big, puzzling swings in partisan loyalties in different parts of the state. In 58 counties, the vote was broadly in line with the primary election. In 27 counties in Republican-dominated north Georgia, however, Max Cleland unaccountably scored 14 percentage points higher than he had in the primaries. And in 74 counties in the Democrat south, Saxby Chambliss garnered a whopping 22 points more for the Republicans than the party as a whole had won less than three months earlier.

Now, weird things like this do occasionally occur in elections, and the figures, on their own, are not proof of anything except statistical anomalies worthy of further study. But in Georgia there was an extra reason to be suspicious. Last November, the state became the first in the country to conduct an election entirely with touchscreen voting machines, after lavishing $54m (33m) on a new system that promised to deliver the securest, most up-to-date, most voter-friendly election in the history of the republic. The machines, however, turned out to be anything but reliable. With academic studies showing the Georgia touchscreens to be poorly programmed, full of security holes and prone to tampering, and with thousands of similar machines from different companies being introduced at high speed across the country, computer voting may, in fact, be US democracy's own 21st-century nightmare...

For the full story, click:

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1013-01.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Wilms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-16-05 02:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ouch. That hurt. n/t
:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtLiberty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-17-05 08:48 AM
Response to Original message
2. *bumpity bump*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Shark Donating Member (225 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-17-05 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
3. Obviously a test run for 2004 ...and beyond.
How realistic does this sound?

Hypothetical Rove/Bush Nov. 2 Discussion...1:00pm EST

...But Mr. President we are getting our asses kicked.

So I can see.

Its time for Plan B.

I dunno...Jeez what if it doesn't work?

Well if it keeps going like this we are gonna get slaughtered. That asshole is even close in Virginia and the Carolinas.

God...the Carolinas?

And the exits show he's up by four clicks in Florida AND Ohio. I think we gotta give `em Pennsylvania. Nothing we can do there I'm afraid. Look...think about your Dad....do you really want to lose this thing? Can you imagine that asshole sleeping in your bed?

But what if...

Nah,... I got it covered. The machines are set, I got the laptops in my office ready to go. Jeez Mr. President...even your Vegas line is starting to tank. We gotta do something now. That pig-fucker Zogby already called it for him with 311 electoral votes.

Its just that...what is wrong with these people? Jesus don't they know he is the number one liberal in the Senate. And God...John Edwards...he's just so pretty I wanna puke.

Sir? Just say the word.

What if someone gets wise?

Who's gonna get wise? We make sure the popular goes way high...say three or four million and we just flip Ohio and Florida. Who's gonna touch it. NOBODY wants another 2000. If you win the popular by say 3 million-two the prick will cave like the house of cards he is. Nobody will be able to prove anything. The records aren't there...that is the beauty of the system. AND it worked to a tee in 2002 when we knocked off the gimp.

I don't know.

Believe me...Fox will call it and the fag will cave and that will be the end of it. Hell we may even be able to claim a MANDATE.

Yeah...I like that!

Well?

Fuck...no pain no gain!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-17-05 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. It sounds so realistic I'm wondering
how you got hold of the tapes.

Enjoy that...thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ISUGRADIA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-18-05 01:11 AM
Response to Original message
5. Zogby had the final numbers at Cleland 46, Chambliss 44, 10 UNDEC
with a 4% margain of error. So a 53-46 Chambliss win was not outside the realm of possibility. And there was only one poll on the governor late in the race, it could have been an outlier or it could have shown a trend towards Perdue.

Polls are only a snapshot in time and as good as their sampling. African American turnout was down from 1998 across the south. Dirty tactics were used in both races by the Repubs but I am yet to be convinced with statistical information that the vote was rigged.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-18-05 01:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. That's odd. With over 600 posts you'd think you'd be sold by now.
Where's your gold star?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ISUGRADIA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-18-05 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. So apparently you cannot answer my arguement about statistics
and chose to attack me instead. I'm sold on the fact that the Republicans use misconduct and intimidation to supress the vote. I'm skeptical of this idea of a massive vote rigging conspiracy via diebold and tabulators. Touch screens are another matter, but the poll numbers alone show no solid evidence of election tampering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 23rd 2014, 05:38 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC