Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What is our best evidence/indicators of HOW it was stolen?

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
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-05 08:40 PM
Original message
What is our best evidence/indicators of HOW it was stolen?
We have plenty of evidence to indicate the election WAS stolen. It ranges from the USCV election poll discrepancy report, statistics to show that the anomalies favored Bush, states (like Wyoming) had more votes than registered voters (106% turnout), etc. And we have substantial links we can point people to that contain this evidence.

We know the scenario of WHY it was done (motive). The scenario on election day: By mid-day the Bush camp is despondent, and the Kerry camp jubilant the exit polls clearly show a Kerry win. It fact, it has been documented that Karen Hughes informed Bush that he had lost. But Karl Rove wasn't worried. He went to work on the phones. By that evening, everything reversed, and Bush had a most "improbable" victory. (Watch the recent episode of PBS' FrontLine if you want to see most of this unfold.)
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/architect... /

But HOW was it done? This is thrown up as a most common obstacle to even accepting the POSSIBILITY the Bush didn't really win.

I don't agree that it should be an obstacle to having a serious investigation to determine IF Bush really won - the existing body of evidence (mentioned above) should be MORE then enough to justify it. If there is a "reasonable doubt" (and there certainly is), it should be investigated.

But, it still would help to trigger this needed investigation if we could provide more specific details as to how they may have pulled it off. What was actually done?

The speculation runs the gamut from: many people were involved, and they did what was necessary without centralized direction; to Karl (and company) hacked it at the central tabulators, there was secret code on the machines to carry it out (Curtis testimony), the machines were manipulated through wireless communication, etc.

I thought I'd throw this out there in case anyone has found links that rise above the level of speculation as to how it was done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
vince3 Donating Member (224 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-05 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. Great Post n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
berniew1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-05 09:50 PM
Response to Original message
2. That there was large conspiracy to manipulate the vote is documented

by the hundreds of thousands of reports of irregularities by voters on election day to the Election Protection, Common Cause, VoteWatch, TrueVoteMd, hot lines and SOE officies. There is documentation of vote switching in 18 states, thousands of glitches in electronic machines, large scale suppression of minority voters in even more states, manipulation of polling places, ballots, absentees, registrations, systematic dirty tricks, etc. that are documented by the voter reports to have swung many hundreds of thousands of votes. This has been dealt with by Congressional Hearings, its hard to believe that there are serious reporters and people who have been following the election who are not aware of the documentation.

A summary of the voter reports and documentation by researchers in the various states based on the recount discovery in Ohio and audit and vote, registration, and demographic analyses in other states is given by the following:
http://www.flcv.com/ohiosum.html
http://www.flcv.com/summary.html
http://www.flcv.com/fla04EAS.html
http://www.votersunte.org messups and myth breakers
voteprotect.org
etc.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. Thanks for the input/links berniew1.
You are right, on all counts. I've listed in a post below, similar info I uncovered in a relatively short search (including yours ;) ).
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

However, it doesn't answer the "unifying question" as Bill Bored put it below. WE shouldn't have to answer that question to get a serious investigation (with equally serious resources), but as much as we can, it can only help the situation.

Thanks for all your hard work, it is very much appreciated. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Melissa G Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-05 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
3. Check out these threads..
Edited on Mon Apr-25-05 10:09 PM by Melissa G
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. Thanks Melissa. "put the whole picture together"
Those links are definitely helpful. I will be working through them.

Also, I think there was a "What's your best theory" thread in the last few months. If anyone has the link, there are probably some "nuggets" in there too.

Thanks again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-05 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
4. is there a
doc that you know of, outlining the irregularities. as you say "statistics to show that the anomalies favored Bush, states (like Wyoming) had more votes than registered voters (106% turnout), etc".

I know a lot of this gets tossed around but is there a document summarizing the facts? It would be a good thing to distribute.

If you've seen VotersUnite's 14 paged doc outlining problems with DREs on election day, I'm thinking something similar to that except for one thing. Theirs is written in non-partisan language. When they talk about vote switching or vote jumping they say, from "one candidate to the other." I'd like to see somethink like that doc, but focusing on the fact that malfunctions favored Bush.

does a fact sheet like that already exist? if not, maybe people could post more "factoids" (with references) here. if it takes off i'll start a new thread on it.

then we'll just need to PDF-ize it and start passing it around.

i think this is a worthwhile project if one such doc doesn't exist already. if one does, please point me to it.

peaceout
gary
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. I did some research. No single doc captures it all
<Here's what I found in a couple hours search. After locating the original Wyoming article, I just posted here what seemed relevant, in the order I found it. I think you're right, it would make a useful doc if someone compiled something like this. Feel free to copy any or all of this to a new thread if you think it would be useful.>

http://watchingthewatchers.org/index.php?p=176
Voting Irregularities in Wyoming: State-By Analysis #50
November 24th, 2004 : Filed by ~A!

Im working on a project together with Ron over at Why Are We Back In Iraq? to document any and all voting irregularities in the 2004 elections on a state by state basis. This is my first salvo.

Why #50, if this is my first? Well, Ron and I talked about it, and Im starting from one end of the alphabet, and hes already done a few from the front. At the end of the whole thing Ill put a PDF together of all of the irregularities, and make it available for download from our sites.

Meanwhile, back in Wyoming, voter turnout was an astounding 106%. According to the Secretary of States Website, there were 245,789 ballots cast in Wyoming in the 2004 election. The trouble with that is that the State of Wyoming only has 232,396 registered voters. Thats a difference of over 13,000 votes, which means 106% of registered voters turned out on election day in Wyoming.

For those of you who hate reading numbers, that is impossible. Most provisional ballots were thrown out, so there would have been more if they had been counted.

By contrast, in the primary elections in 2004, a very respectable 56% of registered voters turned out. Why the discrepancy? The Wyoming Secretary of States Office did not return my call for a comment on the situation.
<more>
----------------------------------------------------

Did Bushco even bother to refute (i.e. lie about) this?

Apparently, this is what they have completed of their "state-by-state" project (no pdf yet):

Voting Irregularities 2004:
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
New Mexico
Ohio (1)
Vermont
Washington
NEW! -- West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
http://watchingthewatchers.org /
<In the right-hand column.>

BTW: there is an RSS feed available there ( RSS Feed (2.0) )
-------------
This is probably the biggest collection of irregularities (over 40k reported):

Election Incident Reporting System

The Election Incident Reporting System (EIRS) is a web-based software application designed to help voter protection organizations identify and respond to situations preventing voters from voting or from having their votes recorded as intended.

Update: Results of EIRS gathering of e-voting incident reports are listed here: http://www.verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5302

Incidents maps and reports are available online in the public portal at voteprotect.org under the Research / Maps link. The system will be used before, during, and after the nationwide general election on November 2, 2004.

Currently, the main users of the EIRS are the more than 60 member organizations of the Election Protection Coalition, including the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and People for The American Way Foundation (PFAWF).
more
http://www.verifiedvotingfoundation.org/article.php?id=...
---------
Election 2004 E-Voting Incidents
from the Election Incident Reporting System
Summary:

# Significant e-voting problems
# Almost all vendors' products and models
# Most jurisdictions where e-voting installed
# Impacted at least tens or hundreds of thousands of voters

# Notable Incidents / Clusters
# Florida: Broward, Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach Counties
# Louisiana: Orleans Parish
# New Mexico: Bernalillo County
# North Carolina: Carteret County
# Ohio: Franklin and Mahoning Counties
# Pennsylvania: Dauphin, Mercer, and Philadelphia Counties
http://verifiedvoting.org/article.php?id=5331
----------
Here you can search the reported incidents by state:
https://voteprotect.org/index.php?display=EIRMapNation&...
<Maybe someone has compiled this info into a report like you describe> (pfaw - sited below - is listed as a user of EIRS)
--------------------
Here's a good prototype, but it's before the2004 election:
America's Election Snafus: 2001-2002

Election and Voting Problems: State by State
http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=6434
----------------
Election Protection Trouble Tracker - lists state-by-state reports of Election Day problems (2004)
Also: check out our problem reports by topic:
Voter Intimidation & Suppression | Voting Machines | Polling Place Problems

Missouri: Black Voters Reportedly Singled Out by Poll Challengers
While waiting in line to vote, Republican challenger challenged the black voters by requesting more proof of identification, residence, and signature match, while asking nothing from white voters.
(November 2, 2004 10:16 PM )

Allegheny County: Polling Problems Lead to Extended Hours
Many voters in Allegheny county, PA have called in with problems with provisional ballots not being available, provisional ballots being denied to registered voters, and uncooperative poll workers. At least a dozen Allegheny County precincts ran out of provisional ballots altogether. Due to these problems, Allegheny County, PA has announced that it is holding polls open for an extra 1 1/2 hours.
(November 2, 2004 08:49 PM )

Disability Access Problems Reported in Many States
Disabled voters have continued to have difficulty gaining access to the polls, and many report having been denied curbside voting alternatives.
(November 2, 2004 08:42 PM )

Georgia: Voters mistakenly denied vote; Election Protection Helps Resolve Problem
Several voters in Forsyth County, Georgia were reportedly informed that they had already voted when they, in fact, had not.
(November 2, 2004 08:38 PM )

More stories:
Election Protection Volunteers Help Poll Worker Shortage in Arizona
Colorado: Racist Comments Reported at Polling Place
Florida: Dirty Tricks Reported in Pinellas County
Arizona: Numerous Problems Reported at Polling Sites in Maricopa and Pima Counties
Ohio: Westlake Mayor Reportedly Orders Kerry Campaign Signs Removed Near Polling Place
Alabama: Police reportedly stood by as voter was intimidated by other voters
Wisconsin: Voter Reportedly Threatened to Lose Government Assistance, Depending on Her Vote
Colorado: "It makes you feel good for democracy."
Election Protection Helps a First Time Voter in Colorado
Ohio: Punch Card Problems Reported
Ohio: "State Inspectors" Taking Names of Ohio Voters
Colorado: "Its a shame things have gotten so bad that you need to be here, but Im glad youre here to help."
Registration Gone Missing in New Jersey
Pennsylvania: Voter Reportedly Denied Language Assistance
Fighting for a Provisional Ballot in Florida
Pennsylvania: Philadelphia Reports Widespread Voting Machine Problems
North Carolina Voters Worry Polls Will Close while Still in Line
New Mexico Machine Speaks for Itself
Disabled Man Denied Assistance in Florida
Massachusetts: Book Speaks Volumes
South Carolina: Reports of Disinformation Flyers in Black Communities
Student Registrations Go Missing
Long Lines and Broken Machines Frustrate Voters
Ohio Ruling Gives Voters Affected by Late Absentee Ballots Right to Cast Provisional Ballots
Washington Votes Pre-Cast by Machine?
Closing the Doors in Michigan
Florida: Minority Voters in Palm Beach Report Harassing Late-Night Calls
Pennsylvania: Philadelphia Poll Watchers Scuffle
Michigan Poll Workers Reportedly Mock Illiterate Voters
Georgia: Voters Reportedly Turned Away Early From Line
New Mexico: Sec. of State Reverses Decision Barring Parties From Monitoring Votes
Florida: DJ Reportedly Gets Many Calls from Voters Turned Away at Polls
Arizona Democratic Voters Given Wrong Polling Place Information?
Minnesota: Misleading Calls - Wrong Information
Alabama: Voter Reportedly Denied Opportunity to Vote for President
Iowa: Voters mistakenly identified as felons
Pollworkers Reporedly Giving Voters Time Limits in Many States
South Carolina: Voting Systems Reportedly Down Throughout Greenville
Michigan Reports Three-Hour Waits at Polling Places
Louisiana: Massive Polling Place Failures Reported
Georgia: Long Lines, Voting Machine Malfunctions
Re-Registration is Effectively "Literacy Test"
Milwaukee Polling Place Turning Away Voters?
Tallahassee: Ballot Problems and Misdirection
Ohio: Long Lines at Polls, Some Voters Reportedly Leaving
New Jersey Polling Place: A Fire Hazard?
Technical problems thwart some South Carolina voters
Phoenix Bomb Scare Causes Poll Relocation
Pennsylvania: Voters Reportedly Being Challenged at Polls in Philadelphia
Partisan Poll Workers in Texas and Pennsylvania?
Ohio: Numerous Reports Cite Lucas County Polling Station Chaos
Ohio: Black Voters Reportedly Being Singled Out for Identification
Minnesota: Hotline Calls Help Resolve ID Problems
Lawsuit filed in Toledo over absentee ballots, long lines at Ohio polls
Elderly Florida Woman Reportedly Denied Curbside Voting
Florida Voters Report Missing Polling Sites
West Virginia Eastern Panhandle Democrats allege vote suppression by phone
Arizona: Maricopa County Polling Place Reportedly Closed
Arizona Polling Place Reportedly Displays Picture of President Bush
Lines, lines, lines: Long Waits Reported Nationwide
http://www.electionprotection2004.org/edaynews.htm
-------------
database on vote fraud/suppression in Election 2004
http://vote2004.eriposte.com /
--------------
ABC original report
Ballot Watch: Eyes on the Election
State-by-State Listing of Irregularities Reported at Voting Stations

Colorado

The organization FairVote said it received more than 500 calls on its hot line. Its representatives said the biggest problem was people being turned away in some precincts in Boulder and Denver because the address on their identification didn't match the address on the voter registration logs. It didn't have to match, according to the Colorado Guide for Election Judges.

After Colorado Republicans complained of allegedly improper activities by workers from the left-leaning group MoveOn.org, the secretary of state's office sent a notice to all counties saying state law bars any "election-related activity" within 100 feet of the building where voting is taking place. Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org, denied the allegations, which were made in multiple states, calling them "scurrilous" and "false," and said, "we appear to be a victim of orchestrated effort to create a phony storyline if the election is close."
<more - 14 states listed>
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2004/story?id=216032...
---------------
2004 Election vote fraud
incorporating former Black Box Voting page
general commentary
Florida
Indiana
Nebraska
New Hampshire
Ohio
North Carolina
http://blatanttruth.org/election2004.php
-------------------
Evidence Gathered and Analyzed by Citizens:
Colorado
Florida
Indiana
Maryland
Nebraska
New Hampshire
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
Texas
Washington
http://shadowbox.i8.com/stolen.htm
-------------------
Patterns of Touchscreen Voting Machine Vote Fraud
Identified and Documented
in Florida, Ohio, New Mexico and Elsewhere
http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html
<See berniew1 post above for similar/related links:>
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #7
13. nice job! we have a start.
somehow we have to sift through the "irregularities" looking for the "evidence of fraud." for example, in wyoming with the 106% voter turnout. is there any way to find out if the phantom votes favored Bush? I wonder if we can figure out which precincts, or maybe which counties had the phantom votes, and if there is a correlation, like all the areas that had phantom votes went for Bush.

Evidently there are other people working on this type of thing but I'm not sure if anyone is only looking for fraud stuff, and not including generic irregularities. I think there's a big difference. I think it calls for a new thread. I'll start one later today.

This may turn out to be an important document when we get it finished.

excellent work!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rumpel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #7
20. Verified Voting also has reports of precincts in CA, where people were
Edited on Tue Apr-26-05 12:03 PM by rumpel
not told to sign in. Other precincts had pencils for this ritual.
So hundreds of votes may have been invalidated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chi Donating Member (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #7
25. Just a quick note on Wyoming...
Edited on Tue Apr-26-05 06:23 PM by Chi
A found an elections page earlier today, where they showed the stats on pop., voting age, registered, and %voted.
There was asterisk next to the 106%, and at the bottom was a note stating peeps in that state can register AT the polls.
So extremely unlikely turnout numbers, but not impossible.
Only 2000 and 2004 broke 100%.

Just didn't want you getting caught off-guard with the BOE.

ON EDIT -- Just found it again....
"* There were 232,396 registered voters in Wyoming prior to the General Election and 245,789 voted. This was possible because Wyoming state statute allows voters to register and vote at the polls on General Election Day."
http://soswy.state.wy.us/election/profile.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Interesting, but still VERY suspicious
Can you imagine that Wyoming is so patriotic that ALL the registered voters show up, plus an extra 6%? You're right, "extremely unlikely... but not impossible". Carter/Baker should go study this state since their so concerned that 40% don't vote. ;)

Good research, though. (I always like to see the "explanation" (spin), if for nothing more than a good laugh.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill Bored Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-05 11:53 PM
Response to Original message
5. You mean like a Grand Unified Fraud Theory? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. Somewhat.
Not only is it useful to "put it all together" as Melissa's <linked> thread says; but the right theory would also "weight" and quantify the various elements' importance in accomplishing the "grand theft" (In other words - apply the 80/20 principle ;) ). Again, we shouldn't have to do it, but as much as we can it can only help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 01:13 AM
Response to Original message
6. Best one I could come up with
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. For some reason, that link isn't working
If you can fix it, I would like to look at what you found.

Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #11
24. It comes
up when I click on it,I did the url and also cut and paste its just a photo that my daughter photoshopped that I wanted to share.I,ll try again.

http://us.f3.yahoofs.com/users/419efb58z5f0d56b1/7321/_...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chi Donating Member (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #24
33. Still doesn't work...
Edited on Wed Apr-27-05 08:55 AM by Chi
Heya kster
Error message...
'phvrf.yahoo.com could not be found...'

Which seems odd since your link does not say phvrf.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #24
35. Can you copy and PM me the article?
I can't PM you (yours is disabled).

Thanks
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #35
45. sent pm.nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
12. I wonder if that isn't part of the elegant design.
I'm sure the freepers will have a field day with this conspiracy theorist, but the diverse methods for achieving the goal certainly muddy the waters, don't they?

Which begs the question, does there have to be a master plan or just a master suggestion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. "master plan or just a master suggestion?"
Edited on Tue Apr-26-05 11:19 AM by tommcintyre
Well.. that's part of the puzzle. Was it mainly a small group doing a lot of damage (master plan), or a lot on "minions" doing things here and there that would favor Bush (master suggestion). No doubt, there was a mixture of both. So it was a "death of a thousand cuts". But which one(s) were most lethal (fatal)? Which argument(s) (of HOW the fatal blow(s) were most likely delivered) are most soundly based in fact (most plausible)?

We can speculate here in this forum 'til the cows come home - and there is a certain value in that. But, I'm hoping someone with "the credentials" (like a David Dill, etc.) has (or will soon) stick their neck out and propose a theory of what was done that delivered the fatal blow(s). But most importantly, theorize HOW it was accomplished.

This certainly isn't easy for many reasons, but with ALL the evidence we now have collected, I think it's time it was unified as much as possible to show the most plausible "big picture" possible of how it was accomplished. As I said previously, this should be the job of a serious MAJOR commission; but I'm not going to count on that happening.

If the evidence was tied together in the most credible/plausible manner, it could only help to convince more people. Like berniew1 said above, it shouldn't be necessary, but that seems to be the way it is.

EDIT:
The "freeper factor": First, no worries, they probably wouldn't believe the election was stolen even if Moses came back and delivered the news on a new set of tablets. ;) (Look what the say about the USV report, for example.)

And besides, always remember, we don't have to PROVE anything. All we need to do is create legitimate "reasonable doubt" that Bush really won. They are most afraid of this. Look how they keep talking about restoring and maintaining the confidence of the public in the election system. Of course, they'd rather continue with the "illusion" of a fair system; but our job can be accomplished just by creating legitimate doubt in that same "faux" system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pacifist Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. I completely agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #16
18. Thanks. I just added an edit ;) n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chi Donating Member (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
14. I'm sure the ongoing...
Heya Tom
I'm sure the ongoing 'Election Reform, Fraud, & Updates Thread' would get you volumes of articles.

If your looking for particular articles, I'd be glad to help search.

I would include some pre-election follies, like the Repub voter registration co. that trashed Dem registrations. Or the repeating story of people being duped into changing their party affiliation to Repub. (college students, new citizens, etc.).

Feel free to ignore, sometimes I miss the big picture 8)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. Have you seen any articles that have attempted to "tie it all together"?
I've probably read over a 1,000 articles, and have yet to find any that really do this. We have tons of "what" was done (the machines were hacked, etc); but I DO think there is enough such evidence for a credible theory of HOW it was done. For example, the USCV report indicates what was done (many millions of votes stolen); but does not go on to explain HOW those votes were stolen. Again, I think enough is known now, that a credible theory of this how could be advanced. And, I think such a theory would help advance our case significantly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chi Donating Member (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. Actually, No..I don't think I have.....
But I certainly agree your 'Master suggestion' is the most reasonable place to start.
But I think some of the strategy was broad, mainly the suppression of registrations, the disinformation of when to vote, and possibly the 'absentee ballot lost in the mail' one too.

I remember a site which saved email sent to the WH, that was sent to them by mistake (dead letter office?), searching through that might yield some clues.
I remember one of the emails stating 'if the Dem's find out what we did in Ohio, God help us' or some such thing.

I'll see if I can dredge that up if your interested.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 07:50 AM
Response to Reply #19
29. Yes, I think those emails could help build the case. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chi Donating Member (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #29
39. OK
I emailed the contact person from the website to see if I could get a complete collection of all the emails collected by their mail server.

Will let you know when I get a response.

Items I saw when scanning (not thoroughly) what they had...
1) Very interested in AB & PV ballots (where, when, and who counts them & observers)
2) Contact lists for churches
3) Lists of voters who they singled out for possible fraud (invalid reg's (their conclusion)on account of lack of response by mail)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chi Donating Member (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #29
41. So much for that idea....
:(
"There are several hundred more e-mails, but we scoured them all at the time,
and posted the only ones of interest. Many of the others contain the
personal information of private figures, and as such we cannot in good
conscience distribute them to third parties.

Thanks.
- John"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. Do you have the link to the letters they released?
There still may be some useful info there. Maybe with the knowledge/experience we have now, new things may pop up as important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chi Donating Member (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. Sure...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rumpel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 12:08 PM
Response to Reply #14
21. yes, maybe a timeline of questionable events, pre-election, election day
and post election?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rumpel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 12:30 PM
Response to Original message
22. Yes, this is probably what we need. A thorough investigative report.
There is so much circumstantial evidence, someone who has prosecutorial background could really help compile the report into a document that can be widely distributed.

and people do get convicted on circumstantial evidence all the time...so all this denying for a real investigation based on the argument that there is no "actual" evidence, or persons we can point to, I don't buy.

Look at Blackwell's blatant abuse of power to manipulate the process, and then ignoring Rep. Conyers request for answers to his question.

This just one state, so it is a massive job.

We should all pitch in. Let me know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 08:17 AM
Response to Reply #22
30. Yes, it looks like a "unifying" document does not exist
If we had a "prosecutor" to build the case, that would be great. Who knows, maybe Kerry is doing it right now. (But I wouldn't count on it. If he does it, it will be a very happy surprise.)

I think something like this will develop naturally in the very near future. There are at least two books coming out on the subject (Freeman's and the free press one). I hope they DO speculate on how this happened. Also, I think the combination of the large body of evidence; and the impetus of the sham Election Reform Commission will stimulate more works like this between now and June 30th (the next hearing).

The best thing each of us can do is educate ourselves and others as much as possible; and be prepared to help when we are asked (as you say). I think the pace will be quickening from now, until at least the end of June. Sometimes it may not look that way, but I bet it will be just the same.

This has been one hell of a good month for exposure of the problem already.

ngu
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jen4clark Donating Member (812 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
23. You're right
I have endless links bookmarked and it's a bit overwhelming when trying to compose letters to the editor or to various elected officials. Yet this is exactly what we have to do and keep doing! It would be wonderful to have one source to point them to. With the amazing journalistic talents we have among our ranks I'm surprised no one has done this. Maybe someone has?

I agree they were able to pull it off with a combination of techniques - a few votes here and there with the pre-election strategy, a few votes here and there with election day shaningans, then the Coup d'Etat - the vote tabulators allowing any number of votes to be switched with no trace.

I'm assuming you've all read the article on the front page from The Crisis Papers, yes? He's got lots of links there as well.

Thank you to everyone working on this. We must not stop and I have to remind you guys of the Kerry staffer I spoke with the other day who did say "they" were working on this! I so hope it's true!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #23
31. "It would be wonderful to have one source to point them to."
I actually did that back in December. I had a short message in an express blaster, with a link back to the media reference page back at my site. I will most likely update and improve it before the next blast.

Here's the link:
http://www.independentmediasource.com/voteintegrity_med... link has only ever been "published" in the emails sent to the media. I was surprised how many hits it began to get immediately after the blast started going out - so I think it was reasonably well-received.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jen4clark Donating Member (812 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. Thank you
The link in your message didn't work for me, but the link in the scroll at the bottom of your post works.

Do you think this is as effective as sending individual letters/emails? Also, I worry that including too many links in a letter discourages very busy people from checking ANY of them. I'm not sure that what I've been doing is very effective - I try to keep the letter as short as I can and only include 3 or 4 links. Lately I've been sending Lynne Landes, Black Box voting and the Voter's Unite links.

Suggestions always appreciated!

:yourock:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #34
36. Here's the working link for a more recent media resource page:
http://www.independentmediasource.com/voteintegrity_med...

Here's the message it linked from:
http://www.independentmediasource.com/voteintegrity_exp...

You can see it's a VERY short EM. I use both. It depends on the individual situation. Sometimes I recommend no blasting, just individual emails (when they are "friendlies", and you just want to inform them). So, my experience is that it all works. You just have to choose the right tool for the right situation. <The MSM needs "shock and awe" treatment (massive blasting) to get the message through.>

See this post for more on what I personally send. I always customize it to the recipients, interest level, preferences and needs.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

If you choose to send a long email, just be sure to get to the point quickly, and put the most important info in the beginning. If you would like a reply, put your contact info at the beginning, since some email programs cut off messages after 500 words.

I hope some of this helps.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jen4clark Donating Member (812 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. This is perfect
Thank you again. This is exactly what I needed as a guide of sorts to determine what to send to who. Excellent job of detailing and targeting you've done!

I hope everyone checks out the DU thread you linked as it makes it very easy to put something together with the info you've posted there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roseBudd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
26. For a certain percentage of the population we won't have to prove it..
or explain how it was done. We just have to allege it. Please help spread http://bushcheated04.com to the very large demographic that is people who did not vote for Bush but who do not frequent lefty web sites and are hungry for information. If we want to reach them so as to inform them we must seek to entertain them. They absolutely will not read the Conyers report or any of the statistical analysis. But they will look at a funny web site that slams the republicans. And remember Thom Hartmann said we must learn to use mockery.

http://bushcheated04.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MontageOfFreedom Donating Member (633 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-26-05 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. Indeed for a certain percentage of the population, a large percentage...
One only needs stick to the straight facts, such as all the fraud reports found on the official reporting database that cover each and every city.

http://www.votersunite.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roseBudd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #28
32. Many a true word is spoken in jest...
http://bushcheated04.com while obviously satire is replete with facts:

http://bushcheated04.com/links.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #32
37. Well... there is certainly a place for both....
Afterall, us progressives DO have a BIG TENT, don't we? ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
roseBudd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #37
40. There is definitely room for both but if we want to reach fark.com
numbers we have to try irreverent and mean.

And we must mock the opposition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-27-05 05:05 PM
Response to Original message
42. "How was this done? Simple..."
Edited on Wed Apr-27-05 05:28 PM by tommcintyre
<I think this article was done in November. I think with all we know now, we could expand on this, and start estimating (i.e. the importance/significance of) how much each theft method contributed to the whole. Also, I think, with ALL the evidence now collected, we could start filling in more of the details/specifics of HOW each act was caried out. Meanwhile, I'll keep looking.>

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/2004votefraud.html
snip
On November 2, 2004 President Bush defied both public opinion and history to win the election
51 - 48.

How was this done? Simple...

Vote suppression/voter intimidation and deception. Shortages of voting locations and ballot forms. Foreign monitors barred from polls. Unmatched exit polls/actual results - actual results always skewed to Republicans. Masses of e-Voting "glitches". Computers lost votes. Presidential votes miscast on e-Voting machines throughout the US. More recorded votes than voters. Republicans gained 128.45% in Florida counties using optical scan voting machines while Democrats lost 21% - some districts showed gains of over 400% while one, Liberty County, gained over 700% for Republicans.Warren County officials locked down the county administration building on election night and blocked anyone from observing the vote count as the nation awaited Ohio's returns. Bush had 'incredible' vote tallies. 7% turnout reported in Cleveland precinct. In Cuyahoga County different towns had the exact same number of "extra" votes. And on, and on...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-28-05 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
46. Conclusion: Multiple hypotheses should be proposed and tested
As I said earlier, we have collected PLENTY of the "What" (evidence); now I think it's time to start proposing more of the specific "HOW" it was pulled off (the ultimate theft of the Presidency).
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 Tue May 21st 2019, 01:56 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