Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Busby/Bilbray race in doubt. BradBlog finding odd numbers. (Really???)

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 » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Mugsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:05 PM
Original message
Busby/Bilbray race in doubt. BradBlog finding odd numbers. (Really???)
Edited on Sun Jun-11-06 08:10 PM by Mugsy
When I heard (R) Brian BilBray won by a mere 5% in the San Diego special election to replace convicted felon (R) Randy "Duke" Cunningham in a "must win election" for the GOP, my Spidey senses immediately started tingling, and BradBlog is hot on the case:

BUSBY/BILBRAY ELECTION IN DOUBT: New Numbers Analyzed while Absentee Ballots Reportedly Increase Margin for Bilbray.

ODD ABSENTEE NUMBERS

"The intially reported 4,700 votes on Election Night has grown to some 6,100 votes at this hour."

and from a linked to site:

"I find it hard to understand how a full 35% of voters (6,914 out of 19,739 votes) in the Busby/Bilbray 50th Congressional District run-off election who did not vote in the primary (in the same election) would vote for Libertarian and Independent candidates.

This represents an increase in third party and independent vote of 1,143% in the Run-Off relative to these votes in the primary!" (link)


This election was a "canary-in-the-coal-mine" for the GOP as a harbinger for what Republicans might expect this November. So is it any surprise they poured $11 million into this race? Fortunately, even the GOP doesn't have enough money to finance every close election next November so heavilly, but that "mere 5% victory" stinks to high heaven to me. Another narrow victory in a race they should have lost with more phantom votes and absurd third-party turnouts? Sound familiar? Hmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Don't miss this thread: "CA-50: who is Paul King?" by FogerRox
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blutodog Donating Member (291 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
2. Diebold machines no less:
Run on DIEBOLD machines no less.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
3. Any word from the Busby campaign?
Is the silence still "deafening"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mugsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #3
20. Busby didn't trust Diebold. Urged absentee.
This seems to be the issue. Busby obviously did not trust the Diebold machines and urged her voters to vote absentee... which in my opinion was a big mistake. Those who wish to manipulate the returns have less trouble getting paper absentee ballots rejected for any of a half dozen reasons (damaged, wrong paper, came in too late, voter doesn't live in district, etc) than they do with a simple electronic vote which can only be ripped off one way: through deliberate tampering.

Also, I think it's easier to give yourself a moral "free pass" if you can get votes rejected "legally" than through deliberate electronic vote manipulation. I think fewer Repubs have the stomach to outright change peoples' votes and then look themselves in the mirror claiming to be "law abiding lovers of America" than if they can rationalize having votes thrown out on a (trumped up) technicality.

That's exactly what they did in Ohio and it's starting to look like that in this case too (nearly 2000 phantom votes overnight???)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. You are right about that. Voter Intent doesn't mean much to them!
If it did, then Donna Frye would be mayor now instead of Jerry Sanders, as her write-in votes would have been counted that got "thrown out" because the checkbox wasn't checked next to them filling in her name on the ballots that made the difference.

So these people are used to finding ways to slime their agenda through by rationalizing how they throw out votes. I really think this should have better scrutiny than it does now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blutodog Donating Member (291 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-12-06 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #20
24. Repugs wouldn't?
Remember whose district this was. Not only would they change the votes without any conscience or care but you can bet they'll do it this fall where ever they get the opportunity. The candidates don't even have to know. Diebold is in charge of those machines they COUNT the vote through their software. It only takes a tiny conspiracy of a few people to do this. So think Karl Rove and his buddies in these companies and then re-think your statement on intent. This is not a party anymore my friend it's a criminal enterprise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
4. Well I read on DU that Nathan Sproul's group "Move America Forward" ...
.... was "working" on this race.

He was paid 11 million by bush Cheney 04 for his help in defeating Kerry.

Clever tricks such as dressing up like America Coming Together and registering
voters but then discarding dem registrations an getting kicked out of
South Dakota for fraud.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
5. I sure hope this sheds a bright light on the shenanigans of the Repukes
Edited on Sun Jun-11-06 08:40 PM by BrklynLiberal
so the entire country can get a good, close look-see at what they do to win elections "the old fashion way" I.E. BY STEALING THEM!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
6. Although it's within the realm of possiblity that the huge increase
in third party votes represented that 16% who didn't vote for Bilbray because they are disgusted with the GOP but would rather poke their eyeballs out than vote for a LIBERAL, it's barely within the realm of probability.

Somebody needs to pick those damned machines apart, ASAP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
7. Kinda reminds you of "Jews for Buchanan" in Palm Beach Co,, eh??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Some return numbers
06/07/06 @ 8:01AM 68,500 ballots remain
Candidate Votes Percent
Paul King 1,875 1.53%
Brian P. Bilbray 60,319 49.33%
Francine Busby 55,587 45.46%
William Griffith 4,492 3.67%
TOTALS 122,273 99.99%

06/08/06 @ 5:00PM 66,500 ballots remain
Candidate Votes Percent
Paul King 1,995 1.53%
Brian P. Bilbray 64,554 49.50%
Francine Busby 59,021 45.26%
William Griffith 4,846 3.72%
TOTALS 130,416 100.01%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. delete; posted in wrong spot.
Edited on Sun Jun-11-06 09:43 PM by bleever
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. Kick & Recommend - We've All Got to Learn about Election Fraud (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:20 PM
Response to Original message
10. 30% turnout. So that is what happens when you don't show up to vote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Yep. We *must* vote - we ALL *must* vote - to overcome voter
suppression and to reveal election fraud - we ALL *must* vote.

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Um.. are you suggesting that people don't pre-vote or absentee ballot
vote or do whatever they can to register others and get the vote out?

Cause one thing is for sure.. if the turnout in Nov is the same 65% ..then it would be easy for voter suppression placed in a few places to take the election again.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndyOp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Huh? I am suggesting that we must all vote - and do everything we can
to get the vote out!

Should people vote early or absentee? Yes. I think that is an especially great idea whereever we are otherwise stuck with paperless voting (like my county).

If turnout in November is 65% it would be easy for voter suppresssion to take elections again - which is why I think we have to aim for 85% to 90% turnout. We need unheard of numbers of eligible, registered voters voting early or absentee or on election day. The more who vote early the less that long lines at the polls on election day will prevent voters from voting.

I think we are agreeing on everything...

:shrug:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. Good. I didn't know what * * meant. I've been on far too long today.
Sarcasm is everywhere.

Sorry! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #10
17. How do you know or have proof that that number is accurate?
Because people "say" it is? For all we know it could have been an 80% turnout.

Just like they say that Bilbray won the election?

Without the proof and the tangible back up to prove the numbers like precinct by precinct voter results, all bets and percentages are off.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
13. Has everyone here sent an email and phone call to busby?
Please do.
We need to get "our democrats" to stand up and start counting some votes!
Whomever has her info from the thread you posted to write to her, please post here again so more people will write and call.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
15. There are rational explanations for these numbers,
BUT THAT DOESN'T MATTER!

There are also rational explanations for the assumption of both the possibility of fraud, and intentional efforts to make it happen.

We shouldn't have to settle for "plausibility" in election results, anymore than we should be prohibited from checking our own bank balances or counting our change at the store.

So to everyone who says that these numbers are probably accurate, I say:

Prove it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. That's the bottom line.
So simple. Thanks. I'll remember that.




There's a lot hanging on this election. Busby has to stand up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
21. For Goodness Sakes ! Call in the Supreme Court and let them settle it !
We can't have any of this "count the votes" bullshit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-11-06 11:38 PM
Response to Original message
22. Griffith was endorsed by the Minutemen...
Believe me, I'd have loved to have these people vote for Busby instead, but many out here, including myself tried to at least point many disaffected Republicans to go to Griffith instead of Bilbray if they couldn't find themselves voting for Busby. That's at least a half vote lost. I'm not really surprised that Griffith got what he got. In fact I kind of expected around 4-5% for him and a lot of that from Republicans, who not only don't trust Bilbray on many issues, but many Republicans feel Bilbray's not conservative enough for them too. Griffith was an avenue for them to express themselves in this election.

I too have a problem with the Dems support of the McCain bill. They really need to state a third alternative and be more public about it that sides more with the way Thom Hartmann's position on immigration is, and that favors neither xenophobic "attack" of immigrants through big fences and criminalization, yet tries to find ways to send these people home to their countries instead of having a "guest worker" program that McCain and a lot of Dems are putting together, that sounds more in favor of corporatist agenda to some than it does being "fair" and not draconion to illegals here.

I told a lot of those independent and conservative voters here that if you really care about the immigration issue, and find you can't trust Bilbray to do right by you (I had an easier time doing that for some of these folks), then vote for Griffith instead, and hopefully Busby, in winning, would notice that substantial lot of people ih that category and move more towards a position of trying harden the terms of a guest worker program or move more towards the idea of penalizing heavily those who hire illegal immigrants instead. I think that approach would sell better to those reasonable elements of the anti-immigrant movement down here. There are some that are just plain racist and you'll never appeal to, but there are others that are genuinely concerned of the numbers of illegals here taking people's jobs.

If it were me advising Busby on this, though I know she's got a difficult time trying to get into congress and not trying to make big waves before she gets there that are counter to what both parties are doing, I think she should have been more saying something to the effect that we need to find ways of keeping people out before we start offering them "guest worker" status, and that the "burden of proof" is on employers to show that they can't hire people here in the U.S. for a decent wage before offering them to guest workers.

I'm still very concerned about the way this election was run by a totally Republican Board of Supervisors and Voter Registrar's office that seems open to fraud, but it's hard yet to get to any meat yet that shows fraud just yet. That Republican control was kept in place in a fraudulent way in and of itself, when they tried to masquerade Ron Roberts as a Democratic Party selection in one of the "fake" endorsement's mails that were sent around here, instead of the one real viable shot at unseating a supervisor in Richard Barrera. I hope we can make a case to make sure that we can recount the ballots to ascertain where the votes went with more eyes looking at them to ensure no funky business is going on. They aren't going to make this easy though!

Also, for you all saying she should "fight the fight", be careful how you want her to "fight" this. She's got to weigh what sort of strategy will help and not hurt her chances for the November election too. Though getting this election would have been really important for setting a positive tone for Dems in November, ultimately, winning in November is the bigger prize, and helping us with impeachment which will likely occur in 2007, etc. Let's not advocate a strategy that ruins any chances in November. But I'm all for trying to have us make SURE what happened in this election as much as we can.
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 Sun Dec 28th 2014, 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) 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