You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #15: I agree, FRAUD explains the results of the 2004 "election" [View All]

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: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
texpatriot2004 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-10-05 09:19 PM
Response to Original message
15. I agree, FRAUD explains the results of the 2004 "election"
The way I read this, the GOP's 3 million "Evangelical" votes would not have put him over the edge but rather helped him close in on the Democrats and possibly, POSSIBLY win the "election" narrowly. Instead, he "won" by a "3 million vote majority where no such vote could exist." Which definitely explains the "moral majority" and "Evangelical" vote nonsense that the pundits spewed after the "election." Some Republicans were indeed "shocked" by this result, it was obvious to watch.

So, basically, this affirms the theory that some of us have had that Kerry won the "election" by about 8 million votes or at the very minimum 4.5 million votes.

I think that it does illustrate the realistic obstacles that the GOP faced going into the "election."

This would validate a person opinion of mine...Kerry ran a great campaign, so much so that he kept the Gore voters (who won in 2000), increased the Democratic votes (our voter registration drives were exponentially more successful), brought in the 3rd party votes who were screaming with the rest of us "anybody but Bush", and I know he converted Republican voters who were doubtful about this pResident being a TRUE CONSERVATIVE. I think the motivation against Bush has not been given sufficient weight in most analysis.

It seems to me then that Rove had to go to plan "D" - manipulate the central tabulator and use any other means necessary to achieve his end goal. Therefore, I agree with the statement here that the exit polls point to a logical conclusion that is the "election" results could not have been achieved without FRAUD.

Still, the KICKER is this, this Government CANNOT prove to me (or to anyone else) that they are legitimate. They cannot "prove" they were elected. They have the burden of proof in this matter, not I. Without being able to prove that they were indeed "elected" as they say they were, we have NO TRANSPARENCY IN OUR ELECTION AND NO DEMOCRACY!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
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