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 #18: A bit of speculation "support" [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 » Topic Forums » Election Reform Donate to DU
Senator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-05 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. A bit of speculation "support"
A saw another item of support for my (election night-cursory view of FL returns) speculation on how it was done in Bob Fitrakis's latest fraud/coverup roundup article. Since I'm not one of those who's had their head in the numbers perhaps it was rehash for most of you, but to me it was another small revelation of what I think was perhaps the most important/tangible nefarious activity.

Fitrakis mentions a ChristoFascist college with 186 registrations from the same (business) address; out of which 46 votes were tallied. This dovetails with similar "ghost voter" findings and "overtallies" in other states.

But the crucial factor for numbers crunchers is the role that fraudulent registrations (voted or not) may well play in data analysis.

My hypothesis is that they artificially pumped up registered "R voters" so that pumped up tallies would not be as noticeable. But it also makes such numbers unreliable in general.

This was also buttressed by the anonymous election worker quoted by Fitrakis who revealed that ballot boxes (with log books?) were secreted in a separate area where she feared signatures could have been forged (her suggestion).

The reason to use this method is that it would only be (systematically) detectable by labor intensive comparison of actual people with tallied totals. Something not even the GAO is likely to undertake, even at a spot-check level.

But for our purposes I think it would be of great help to establish it as far as we can, even if only anecdotally because:

  • it allows us to bootstrap onto their similar (but unfounded) accusations that are sure to be higher profile in the Euphemedia (among which are still some who are well aware of the neofascist tactic of "projection")

  • it personifies the fraud by simply saying what people did, and doesn't require any math

  • it is more "believable" in the sense that phony registrations can be accomplished over a long period of time and can be rationalized as a "lesser crime" (shenanigans, gamesmanship, etc)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Election Reform 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