Reply #68: Fraud

[wussoch]

Yes, I read what I could of RFK Jr.'s lengthy article. I am sure that fraud is rampant locally in many elections, in precincts controlled by both Republicans and Democrats. I did a Google search and found any number of articles delineating Democratic voter fraud and Republican voter fraud.

Simply put, I choose not to believe (without incontrovertible evidence) that either political party SYSTEMATICALLY fixes elections. If one really believes that elections are stolen, how can there be any faith left in our government or political system, regardless of who is in power? I don't know what to say about Diebold, except how could Congressional Democrats have allowed it to be instilled nationally if there were so many problems with it? I am assuming it was a federal (not state-by-state) contract and that it had to have Congressional approval in order to be activated... if there were questions, a filibuster could have derailed the whole prospect.

I think sober arguments and positions about POLICY win and lose elections... yes there are a number of ill-informed voters who see nothing but the (D) or (R) after a candidates name on a ballot and vote accordingly across the board, but there remains the so-called "swing voters" who presumably weigh the positions of each Presidential candidate and vote based on these considerations.

If everybody spent their finite energies on debating policy more effectively, rather than advocating stolen election theories and anti-Bush "Herr Chimperor" rhetoric, the public would be better served. I am still waiting for the Democratic Party to advance an alternative and specific list of policies to be undertaken if the House and/or Senate are recaptured, rather than the "things would be different if I were President" vagaries of John Kerry. A solely anti-Bush, anti-Republican agenda is not an effective long-term strategy.