Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Dear Dr. Dean:

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
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 09:34 AM
Original message
Dear Dr. Dean:
Edited on Wed Jun-29-05 10:01 AM by TruthIsAll
Dear Dr. Dean:

Remember last summer when Bev Harris and YOU demonstrated on
live television how easily the voting machines could be

So how come there is no mention in the DNC report of vote
switching as another possible factor in Kerry losing Ohio? 
Instead, the focus of the report is "voter
suppression". Well, if you press Kerry and it comes up
Bush, is that not voter suppression? 

We know about voter suppression. That obviously occurred. But
what really concerns us here is suppression of the truth.

There are many ways to skin a cat. And Ohio voters were
skinned many different ways on Election Day.

On Edit: Removed inappropriate comment 


If you believe the Exit Poll, Kerry won OH by 160,000 votes.
If you believe the Vote, Bush won by 119,000 votes.

If Kerry won this solid Republican state by 51-48%, you just
KNOW he had to do 1-2% better nationally.

Which means he won the election by 6-8 million votes.

1,963 Respondents
Updated: 12:21 a.m.		


GENDER	      47.94%	52.06%
RACE/GENDR	47.99%	51.01%
RACE		47.86%	50.14%
AGE		48.31%	51.39%
INCOME	      45.91%	51.62%

EDUCATION	48.77%	50.94%
PARTY ID	47.18%	51.20%
IDEOLOGY	48.03%	50.97%
HOWVOTED    49.30%	 50.70%
RELIGION	49.08%	50.66%

DECIDED	48.22%	49.68%
BUSH JOB	48.42%	49.10%
COMMUNITY1	48.94%	51.68%
COMMUNITY2  48.42%	51.33%
REGION      48.58%	52.07%

VOTESENATE	48.04%	51.96%
AVERAGE	48.19%	51.03%
VOTES	       2.711     2.871
ACTUAL	        50.82%    48.71%
VOTES	       2.859	2.740
MoE		2.21%	
PROB		1 IN	106

Male 	  47%	49%	51%
Female	   53%	47%	53%
Total	 100%	47.94% 52.06%
WM 	40%	53%	47%
WF	45%	53%	47%
NWM	6%	25%	75%
NWF	8%	18%	82%
	99%	47.99%	51.01%
White	86%	53%	47%
Black	9%	16%	84%
Latin	3%	28%	72%
Asian	1%	*	*
Other	1%	*	*
	100%	47.86%	50.14%
18-29	21%	40%	60%
30-44	30%	49%	50%
45-59	29%	49%	51%
60-	20%	55%	45%
	100%	48.31%	51.39%

0-15	7%	27%	73%
15-30	16%	34%	66%
30-50	25%	46%	53%
50-75	22%	55%	44%
75-100	15%	50%	50%
100-150	9%	56%	44%
150-200	4%	61%	39%
200-	2%	*	*
	100%	45.91%	51.62%

No HS	      4%	40%	60%
HSGrad	29%	46%	53%
College	28%	50%	50%
ColGrad	25%	53%	47%
Postgrad   14%	47%	53%
	     100%	48.77%	50.94%
Dem	38%	8%	91%
Rep	37%	94%	6%
Ind	24%	39%	60%
	99%	47.18%	51.20%
Lib	21%	13%	87%
Mod	47%	39%	61%
Con	31%	87%	13%
	99%	48.03%	50.97%
No	14%	45%	55%
Yes	86%	50%	50%
	100%	49.30%	50.70%
Prot	57%	54%	46%
Cath	26%	53%	46%
Jew	1%	*	*
Other	6%	24%	76%
None	11%	28%	72%
	101%	49.08%	50.66%
Today	5%	40%	60%
3Days	4%	36%	64%
Week 	2%	*	*
Month	10%	37%	62%
Before79%	52%	48%
	100%	48.22%	49.68%
Appr  50%	93%	7%
Disap	48%	4%	95%
	98%	48.42%	49.10%
BCities	7%	49%	50%
SmCities    19%	38%	62%
Suburbs	50%	49%	51%
SmTowns	6%	43%	55%
Rural	      19%	59%	40%
	     101%	48.94%	51.68%
Urban	      26%	41%	59%
Suburb 	49%	49%	51%
Rural 	25%	55%	44%
	     100%	48.42%	51.33%
Cuya 	13%	35%	65%
NE	27%	45%	55%
Cent	23%	52%	47%
NW	12%	49%	50%
SW	26%	54%	46%
	101%	48.58%	52.07%
Dem	43%	7%	93%
Rep	57%	79%	21%
	100%	48.04%	51.96%

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Deep13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
1. "Howard if you are not with us, you are against us."
You raise a valid point about vote switching, but suggesting that the one guy who trying the hardest to shape things up is somehow the enemy goes too far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Frances Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Agree
If people on DU don't support Howard Dean, no one will. Although Dean is human and does make mistakes, he is the best fighter the Dems have.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
3. Missing in DNC Report, the TRUTH. Dean "rolled" by old staff.
TIA's analysis is getting better and better, if that's imaginable and this is just one example.

The DNC report "Democracy at Risk" is a collecting of various reports that were put together as a single document. Just looking at the PDF, you notice that it isn't serious. Blecher's chapter on why fraud didn't take place is, at times truly painful in its logic. Not one mention was made of Ohio exit polls. That's a glaring oversight.

Brazile (foR=friend of Rove) had this task prior to Dean's election and, IMHO, did a very weak job. After all, if Democracy is at Risk, shouldn't that risk, election fraud, be the top priority of DNC.

I believe that Dean is an independent operator. If he gets the right input and soon (which his DFA replete with election activists can provide) maybe he'll get pissed off and clean house.

But you're right, this is vital input for Dean and DNC and all Americans.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. hey, I agree with a big point here
The report is a mess -- as you say, a mere collation of separate work which is very uneven.

I don't know who "Blecher" is, so I don't know what chapter you mean.

And you can guess what I think about the Ohio exit polls.

But there is a lot of work left to be done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. "Cornell Belcher" -- political consultant
Had the name wrong from memory. Check out Part III and his analysis.

As I recall, really good consultants expect their work, at times, to be subsumed into an overall document format and integrated as part of the report. I'm not a fanatic on 'graphic qualities' but when you have letter head showing up in the body of a report, it's a tip off that it is a collation rather than a continuous narrative.

Nevertheless, they made the point about racism. They failed to bring forward the NAACP-State of Florida Consent Decree where FL admitted their wrong doing in the 'vote purge' which was hugely racist and COST GORE THE ELECTION. That would have been powerful.

See what you think of Part III and his take. I'd be curious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. ah, Part III
Well, there is a pretty good tip-off about what is wrong with "Part III." On p. 19 of the PDF (first page of that section), it says in the footnote that they did a survey of 1201 would-be voters.

On the next page, it says, "Two (2) percent of voters who went to the polls on Election Day decided to leave their polling locations due to the long lines. This resulted in approximately 129,543 lost votes. However, these potential voters would have divided evenly between George Bush and John Kerry. A smaller group of potential voters (0.08 percent) were not given ballots at all due to registration challenges. These approximately 4,798 voters favored Kerry, according to the poll (extreme sample size caution)."

Now, you may be wondering how they knew that those voters "would have divided evenly." Well, let's see. 2% of 1201 is about 24. So their "evenly" appears to be a back-of-the-envelope, umm, estimate based on somewhere between 18 and 30 interviews. (This 2% seems to become 3% later in the section, unless there is some distinction that I am missing. Maybe they had 30, and couldn't quite decide whether to round down or up? Whatever.)

The last bit I quoted is just embarrassing. 0.08 percent of 1201... umm, you and TIA can check me on this, but I figure that equals one. They interviewed one person in this category, and he or she favored Kerry. "Extreme sample size caution," indeed. The ground should open.

There are places where the writeup stretches one direction, places where it stretches another, but mostly I think the whole thing is a stretch. There are too many questions I, at least, want answers to for which a sample size of 1201 is ridiculously small. (And I would suspect that this survey would tend to lowball the proportion of people who left the polls due to long lines -- although I can't tell how much it actually did -- I don't want to take anything away from all the folks who gutted out those lines to the end.) There are of course a lot of questions about Ohio that no survey would get at very well.

By the way, make no mistake: I think that people who deliberately make it harder for other people to vote are disgraceful. I don't need to investigate the electoral impact first -- if someone messes with the franchise, that's about as low as it gets. People died for that right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
autorank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. 0.08 = 1 Maybe this is the "case study" approach. Thanks.
Thanks for the comments. They're revealing and helpful.

This is very curious. Here is what I don't understand. They say:

that there there is a 4 to 1 ratio of "ballot problems" for blacks;
that waits were twice as long for blacks than for whites (although I think that this is an average which is not the best way to express it);
that 0.83% of the voting population didn't go to the polls at all because they didn't get ballots or heard of problems;
and that a majority of people who didn't get ballots were black; and
that there was a 6:1 ratio for white:black confidence in "reliability of the election.

And then they'd have us believe that of the 120K people who left the polls, the result would have been 50-50 for Kerry-Bush. I realize that this claim is based on their poll but it's counter-intuitive when you consider all of the above.

They also go out of their way to say, at various points, that the election result would not have changed. I find this very strange. It seems to me that with all of this plus the Conyers Report which throws around hundreds of thousands of votes affected, the least they could have done, a cop out, would have been to demure on the issue.

And of course, my favorite fraud of all time, the report fails to mention Florida 2000 where the election was stolen when the state went through with a voting purge they knew was flawed.

People should be in jail for these voting rights violations but all we have is a PDF file. Maybe we're going to bury them with paper.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
OnTheOtherHand Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-30-05 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. yeah, it's a mess
I hope to clear a whole day at some point to try to figure out what I think about Ohio right now -- how many votes were 'lost' one way or another. I certainly don't think the DNC report settles the issue, although parts of it I find helpful.

I will send warm fuzzy thoughts from Europe. Try to keep TIA out of trouble while I am gone (grin).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
byronius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. Beautiful work, TIA. I bow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-05 06:07 PM
Response to Original message
7. kick.nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Peace Patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-30-05 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
11. Look at the exit poll stat on race.
Edited on Thu Jun-30-05 10:37 AM by Peace Patriot
Black voters: 16% Bush, 84% Kerry.
If most of the long lines (precincts that were shorted on voting machines) were in black precincts, then how could the number of people who were unable to remain in those long lines, and were thus denied the right to vote, be 50/50 Bush/Kerry?

I'm willing to believe that black voters were tougher than other voters, and stuck it out to the end in greater numbers. Black citizens struggled through many bloody decades, and were beaten, and blown up by bombs, and lynched for seeking their right to vote--not to mention being repeatedly lied to and tricked, segregated, impoverished, being required to recite the Constitution by heart in order to register to vote, and being charged a poll tax. And it took a decade of strenuous organization and highly risky protests, and a whole lot of jail time, to overcome all those obstacles. A long line is nothing compared to what they, and their parents and grandparents suffered to obtain the right to vote.

So, yeah, they STAYED IN LINE, and they VOTED--to remove that lot of thieves and mass murderers from the White House. I can believe it! But what I can't believe is 16% vs. 84% (Bush/Kerry) coming out as 50/50, in denial of the right to vote due to long lines. Black voters are also among the most oppressed of the poor--and have huge responsibilities for children, the elderly and the sick, and are the most likely to have several low-paying jobs, unsympathetic bosses, transportation problems, poor health and all sorts of other barriers to staying in line for four to ten hours.

Black precincts were of course specifically targeted on the shortage of voting machines BECAUSE they oppose Bush in such great numbers (16% vs. 84%)--as were other minority, poor and student precincts. Bush precincts (white, wealthy) did NOT suffer this crime. How could it come out 50/50? I simply don't believe it.

A total of 2% to 3% of the overall Ohio vote was suppressed in this way--and most of that suppression HAD TO HAVE BEEN Kerry votes. Has anyone heard of a SINGLE BUSH PRECINCT that suffered a long line? There are no such reports, as far as I know. Not one.

So there is something very wrong with that 50/50 stat. Like so many of the numbers in this election, it just doesn't add up.

Re: the student precincts. New voter registration was 60/40 Democratic, nationally, in 2004. I presume many of the new voters were students, and that a similar Dem blowout in new voter reg occurred in Ohio. New voters/young voters voted overwhelmingly for Kerry. Student precincts were ALSO targeted for a shortage of voting machines. And the combined black and student vote suppression had NO EFFECT on the vote? That is not believable.

Note: Kerry had a 70/30 edge in the exit polls, above, in low income; 55/45 among new voters; 60/40 among the youngest voters, and 85/15 among black voters. So, all of the precincts that were targeted for suppression by long lines voted overwhelmingly for Kerry.

As with the issue of how Bushite-controlled electronic voting machines got purchased and installed, with no objection from the Democratic Party, and often with the enthusiastic support of Democrats, the failure, malfeasance and/or corruption of Democratic election officials, party operatives and elected representatives must be looked at--with regard to individual items like the 50/50 stat, and the shortages themselves. THIS may be the key to the DNC report--and all its omissions and disinformation and wrong emphasis, and slapdash lack of care. The key to understanding it may be that it is a COVER-UP of Democratic Party malfeasance and corruption, in Ohio and nationwide--and, in specific places in the report, it may be hiding specific kinds of malfeasance and corruption, and protecting specific people.

It certainly has that smell to it.

I have to tell you, I've been blown away by what happened to Kevin Shelley in California--and the part played in his demise by Democrats, and particularly by Connie McCormack, a Democrat, head of elections in Los Angeles, and an advocate of paperless voting, with personal ties to Diebold (which, in addition to corrupting our elections, has OTHER government db contracts). McCormack was instrumental in getting rid of Shelley--who was riding herd on Diebold and had sued them and decertified their DREs, and who also, and not incidentally, was riding herd on "revolving door" employment between election officials and these private electronic voting machine companies. And this hogfest at the Beverly Hilton, sponsored by Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia, with McCormack as a featured speaker, this coming August, has really gotten under my skin.

See Amaryllis' post at:

I am certainly aware of the grass roots criticisms of the Democratic Party, which some consider to be hopelessly corrupt, especially on issues of military spending/war, corporate campaign contributions and tie in's, and global 'free trade' policy (i.e., piracy). I agree with these criticisms. The question is, where do you start cleaning house? Where do you aim your broom?

In 2004, we compromised, and agreed to support a pro-war candidate (Kerry), despite huge, nationwide opposition (60% at the time, 80% now) to the Iraq war. I understand that compromise. It resulted in a huge vote to oust the Bush Cartel--a landslide (that they had to really scramble around to overcome). (I have a friend who says that, if Kerry had been a populist and antiwar--in other words, if he had been Dean--he would have won by 20% instead of 10%, and they could not have stolen that many votes; however, I think their backup plan--"Plan C" (the "terrorist alert" plan)--would have been implemented, at that point; they were not about to give up the White House; but it certainly would have exposed them as the fascists that they are, for all to see.)

I digress. What I am getting at is, where do we aim the broom? We can't seem to dislodge pro-war Democrats--the whole thing is so entrenched and so corrupt (the military-corporate complex). And the players are so far above us--millionaire Senators and so on--who despise their constituents as peons and peasants. But what if we were to aim the broom lower--say, at the corrupt Democrats who are purchasing Bushite-controlled voting machines, and who pose a direct threat to our ability to vote for change.

It's kind of happening anyway. Election reform activists are coming up against these corrupt Democrats all over the country, in the local/state venues where election systems are being decided. But I'm thinking of a specific campaign to drive them from office--county registrars and so on. Electronic voting has made these people very powerful; and Dem office holders are beholden to them in ways that they never have been before (for instance, in merely understanding these systems, the new technological gobble-de-gook of voting). It's a much more doable campaign than, say, trying to get the Dem Party to stop colluding on the Iraq war. And if we succeed, and just sort of deconstruct the whole corrupt electronic voting system establishment, and get elections back into the public domain, then we will have achieved real power, as a citizenry. Honest elections are a terrifying prospect to the corrupt.

As for DEMOCRATS shorting BLACK PRECINCTS on voting machines, and going along with the plague of election crimes committed in Ohio, I don't know the answer. But I think that that malfeasance is related to the overall corruption at the DNC over the last four years, which INCLUDES corruption associated with the new electronic voting systems (lavish lobbying, bribery, job offers, et al). And if we knock out one pillar of that corruption, we can knock out all of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TruthIsAll Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-30-05 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Like all prior Democratic candidates, Kerry won 90% + of the black vote...
Edited on Thu Jun-30-05 11:28 AM by TruthIsAll
So I would throw out the 84-16% split on its face.

Lets calculate using 90-10%

White	     86%	53%	47%
Black	     9%	10%	90%
Latino	    3%	      28%	  72%
Asian	      1%	*	*
Other	      1%	*	*
      	    100%  47.32%	  50.68%
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
garybeck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-30-05 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
13. there is something going on with the Democratic Party
some of us are in denial

some of us figured it out a while ago

some of us are starting to suspect something

but the evidence is clear... in numerous cases, the democratic leadership on a state and national level has fought AGAINST real election reform. they have thwarted the efforts of the Ohio recount and investigations. they have put out lame "reports" that ignore the most important issues (like the DNC report last week). And the cherry on top is now Howard Dean, who we know is "in the know" about Diebold and election fraud, seems to be doing nothing about it.

I think those who suspect they "have something up their sleeve" are dwindling in number.

the answers are not clear, though. we don't know why they are not on our side. some evidence seems to indicate that state officials are getting cash paybacks. But that would not explain Dean's recent inaction, or the watered down DNC report.

something is fishy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LightningFlash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-30-05 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. It's the corrupt mother friggin DLC.....
They are in on the fix of course, and we need to fight these assholes out and with pure force.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
tommcintyre Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-25-05 08:02 PM
Response to Original message
15. kick - In tribute to his tremendous contributions - WHY??? :( n/t
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 Mon Jul 22nd 2024, 06:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]

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