Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Electronic Vote Switching from Kerry to Bush - 9:1 swing state ratio

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
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 03:55 PM
Original message
Electronic Vote Switching from Kerry to Bush - 9:1 swing state ratio
In May of this year, I did an analysis of the U.S. Electronic Incident Reporting System (EIRS) database (for the 2004 presidential election), in which I showed that incidents of "electronic vote switching" that favored Bush outnumbered incidents that favored Kerry by a ratio of greater than 12:1 there were 87 incidents that favored Bush, and 7 that favored Kerry.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph... .

My conclusions were:
1. The probability of such a lopsided ratio in favor of Bush was extremely unlikely
2. Although it was possible that these results could be explained by a reporting bias, whereby Kerry voters were more likely to report incidents than Bush voters, it seemed highly unlikely that this could result in such a large ratio.
3. Therefore, election fraud (i.e., purposeful programming of the computers to switch votes from Kerry to Bush) would seem to be by far the most likely explanation for these findings.

Recently, mgr has suggested that another way to test these conclusions would be to compare the rate of vote switches in swing states vs. non-swing states. It seems probable that Republicans would target election fraud in states that were likely to have influence on who won the election. Therefore, if the rate is much greater in swing states than in non-swing states, that would provide confirmatory evidence that bias was a highly unlikely explanation for the lopsided ratio of vote switches in favor of Bush.



Methods

The source of all data for this project is reports to the Election Incidence Reporting System (EIRS): https://voteprotect.org/index.php?display=EIRMapNation&... developed by the National Election Data Archive Project. All reports to this System involve the U.S. national election of November, 2004. The EIRS database includes 28,734 reported incidents, including 2,115 machine problem incidents. The material for this analysis was obtained by searching these machine problem incidents only in counties that used electronic voting machines, according to a database provided by Voters Unite! (www.VotersUnite.Org ).

A report was categorized as a presidential vote switching incident if and only if it met both of the following criteria: 1) The report specifically referred to the presidential vote (unless referring only to third party candidates) OR to one or both of the two major parties (unless referring specifically and only to non-presidential candidates), thus implying reference to the presidential vote; and 2) The report noted that the voting machine made it easier or more difficult to vote for one of the two major candidates OR difficult to vote for president in general. Typically these reports involved a voter attempting to register a vote for one candidate, and then the machine noting that another candidate had been selected. These vote switches involved switches from one to the other major party candidate, from a major party to a 3rd party candidate, or vice versa. Other problems involved such incidents as attempting to vote for a candidate and the vote not registering at all.

There were two exemptions from the above noted criteria: 1) Reports where the only problem noted was that one of the candidates was pre-selected. These were not included in this analysis because these cases likely involved a situation where the previous voted failed to register his/her vote, and the situation could be easily remedied by clearing the screen; and 2) Reports where I found it impossible to decipher what the complaint was referring to.

Having determined that a report met the criteria for vote switching, the next step was to categorize the report into one of three categories, according to which candidate the incident apparently potentially benefited: Kerry, Bush, or neither. The incident was categorized as potentially benefiting Bush if it indicated either that: 1) The voter attempted to vote for Kerry (or Democratic Party), but the machine registered Bush (or Republican Party) or another candidate; 2) The voter attempted to vote for a third party candidate, but the machine registered Bush; or 3) The voters attempts to vote for Kerry (or Democratic Party) were made difficult by any other machine related activity. By interposing the words Bush and Kerry in the above noted criteria, we obtain the criteria for categorizing an incident as apparently potentially benefiting Kerry. And if the report failed to meet either of the above two criteria, then it was categorized as potentially benefiting neither candidate.

This comparison of swing states assessed only the 87 cases of vote switches that favored Bush, since the number that favored Kerry was too small to analyze. The number of vote switches in both swing states and non-swing states was divided by the number of official votes from those states that were reported from counties that used electronic voting machines (rounded off to the nearest 1,000 for each county.) Swing states were considered to be CO, FL, IA, MN, MI, NH, NM, NV, OH, PA, and WI.



Results

Comparison of swing states versus non-swing states
Overall, of the 87 vote switches that favored Bush, 67 were reported from swing states, and 20 were reported from non-swing states. Counties from swing states that used electronic voting machines accounted for 10,104 K votes, and counties from non-swing states that used electronic voting accounted for 27,713 K votes. The rate of reports per million voters in swing states was therefore 6.6 per million, and the rate in non-swing states was 0.72 per million voters. Therefore, the rate of reports of electronic vote switching that favored Bush was more than 9 times greater in swing states than in non-swing states.


Some specifics on breakdown by state and county
The distribution of incidents by state and county was very uneven. Of the 67 vote switches reported from swing states, all were reported from four states:

FL: 47 incidents, rate = 11.5 per million
OH: 8 incidents, rate = 9.1 per million
NM: 8 incidents, rate = 11.7 per million
PA: 4 incidents, rate = 2.6 per million

Three swing states, WI, NH, and MN, had no reports because they did not use electronic voting machines. And the other four, IA, NV, MI, and CO, simply had no reports even though some counties in those states did use electronic voting machines.

Of the 24 non-swing states that used electronic voting machines in some counties, only Washington exhibited a rate of reports that equaled any of the swing states noted above. Washington County had 3 reports, all from Snohomish County, for a rate of 8.2 per million for the state.

Distribution of incidents also varied greatly by county. Five swing state counties accounted for 58 of the 67 swing state reports (87%) and much higher rates than any of the other counties:

Broward, FL ...... 23 incidents, rate = 32.5 per million
Miami-Dade, FL .. 8 incidents, rate = 10.3 per million
Palm Beach, FL .. 11 incidents, rate = 20.1 per million
Bernalillo, NM .... 8 incidents, rate = 31.4 per million
Mahoning, OH .... 8 incidents, rate = 60.2 per million


Categorization of reports by voting machine type and vendor
Four voting machine vendors accounted for all but three of the 87 reported incidents that were favorable to Bush. These included Diebold (7 incidents, 8%), Danaher (14 incidents, 16%), Sequoia (19 incidents, 22%), and ESS (44 incidents, 51%). Although these percents were very different than the distribution of voting machine vendors throughout the United States, all four of these vendors were characterized by a significant excess of incidents favorable to Bush, compared with incidents favorable to Kerry.

The rate of reported incidents was much greater with touch screen machines than with other electronic voting machines. There were 74 reports out of 20,136 voters for touch screen machines, a rate of 3.7 per million. Other electronic voting machines were associated with 13 reports out of 17,681 voters, for a rate of 0.74 per million voters.



Discussion and Conclusions

Significance of the 9 to 1 ratio of report rates in swing states versus non-swing states
In the analysis I did in May I stated that I thought the 12 to 1 ratio of reported incidents favoring Bush compared to reported incidents favoring Kerry was due to election fraud. My reasoning was that chance could be ruled out statistically, and a reporting bias of that magnitude seemed quite unlikely. Coincidentally, we now see that we also have a 9 to 1 ratio of rates of reports favoring Bush in swing states versus non-swing states.

What are the reasons for these findings? It is theoretically possible that these reported vote switches were accidental. But if they were accidental, then why would the vast majority of these incidents tend to favor one candidate over the other? AND, why would they occur at such a higher rate in swing states than in non-swing states? In summary, the finding of a 9 to 1 ratio of the reported incident rate in swing states versus non-swing states, concurrent with a 12 to 1 ratio of reports favoring Bush, strongly points to election fraud as the cause of the vote switches. Especially significant is the fact that a very large proportion of incidents were concentrated in Ohio and Florida the only two states that were considered absolutely critical to a Bush victory.


Perspective for these findings
With John Kerry now considering withdrawing from the lawsuit to force a full and fair recount of the Ohio vote, it is especially critical that all evidence of election fraud be thoroughly considered.

This study adds one more piece to the accumulated evidence of compromised integrity of the 2004 Presidential election. Much of the controversy over this election has centered on the fact that the Mitofsky-Edison exit polls not only showed Kerry winning the national vote by 3%, but also showed Kerry winning Ohio by 4.2% (which official results showed him losing by 2.5%) and virtually tied in Florida (where official results showed him losing by 5.0%): http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/Exit_Polls_20... .

In addition to exit poll discrepancy evidence, there has been a good deal of more direct evidence accumulated of compromised election integrity, such as the Rep. John Conyers report by the Democratic staff of the House Judiciary Committee: Preserving Democ- racy: What Went Wrong in Ohio: http://www.truthout.org/docs_05/010605Y.shtml .

Evidence more directly pertinent to this analysis is testimony given before the House Judiciary Committee by an ex- Florida computer programmer, Clint Curtis: http://www.rawstory.com/images/pdfs/CC_Affidavit_120604... . Curtis testified that he was requested in 2000 by Tom Feeney, then Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives, to develop a prototype of a voting program that could alter the vote tabulation in an election and be undetectable. He did develop the program, after telling Feeney, however, that he could not make the program so that it would be undetectable if the source program were to be inspected.


What is the magnitude and significance of the problem is this the tip of an iceberg?
If voting machines used in the 2004 Presidential election were in fact programmed to make it more difficult to vote for Kerry than for Bush, or to switch votes from Kerry to Bush, what significance could that have had to the integrity or outcome of the election? 87 individual incidents in an election where Kerry lost Ohio by over a hundred thousand votes and Florida by a few hundred thousand votes doesnt seem like very much. But what if these 87 incidents represent only the tip of an iceberg the known part of a much larger problem?

In my May thread I proposed four reasons to believe that these 87 reported incidents represent only the tip of the iceberg. These reasons include:
1. Perhaps only a minute fraction of problems discovered by voters were reported to EIRS, since it is unlikely that most people were even aware of this reporting system, and even if they were aware of it most would have been unlikely to report incidents.
2. Most voters may not have noticed the problem, since noticing it would have required checking their ballots after they were done voting.
3. It could be that that many vote switches were not even accompanied by visual evidence.
4. Many of the individual reports note that the problem had been occurring all election day long.

Since this time, additional evidence has surfaced that supports the idea that these reports are only the tip of the iceberg: First there is a report by Paul Lehto and Jeffrey Hoffman which identifies 19 reports of electronic vote switching in Snohomish County, Washington all which favor Bush from the Washington State auditors office, the Washington Secretary of States office, and a Snohomish County voter complaint hotline. This compares with only three reports made to EIRS.

Even more compelling is an investigation undertaken by the Washington Post regarding electronic vote switching in Mahoning County, Ohio. This investigation identified 25 electronic voting machines in Youngstown, Mahoning County, which transferred an unknown number of votes from Kerry to Bush: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A64737-20... . The Post report goes on to state Due to lack of cooperation from Secretary of State Blackwell, we have not been able to ascertain the number of votes that were impacted or whether the machines malfunctioned due to intentional manipulation or error.


What can be done?
A better understanding of this problem can be obtained only by inspection of the implicated computers. Since this problem may have affected the election results, and since if that did happen, the problem may be repeated in future elections, it would seem to be of the utmost importance that the implicated voting machines be examined by qualified experts. To my knowledge, that has not yet been done. Hopefully this report could help target the voting machines that need to be examined.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Thank you, recommended. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fly by night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
2. This is phenomenal work, TFC. Please re-post on the 2004 ERD
Thanks very much for this analysis. And please send this report -- as is -- to John Kerry immediately, with a copy to Howard Dean and Donna Brazile.

The flood of election theft evidence is becoming a tsunami. This new analysis, using EIRS, is much more convincing than any rehash of the exit poll analyses that we keep slogging through. Again, please repost to 2004 ERD -- inquiring minds there need to see this analysis. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Yes, TFC, look for 'TruthIsAll''s posts on this here. He has done much
Edited on Fri Aug-19-05 04:11 PM by Al-CIAda
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. Thank you much Fly. I will send to Kerry.
I don't quite understand what you are suggesting regarding the repost. I have posted this on autorank's election update thread.

Did you mean to repost this as is or post as a link?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fly by night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. Post a thread with your title on 2004 ERD & a link to this thread
Some 2004 ERDers may not see your thread on GD or the dialy summary and all the ERD regulars really need to see this analysis.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Great, I'll do that, thanks n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #2
11. Here is what I just wrote to Kerry
Dear Senator Kerry,

I know your intentions are good, but I honestly don't understand how you can say that we "must do everything in my power to fight to restore responsible leadership in the House and Senate" and at the same time be considering withdrawing from the Ohio recount lawsuit.

To me and millions of others there is nothing more important in the political world (and what other world is there?) than having fair elections. Since last November I have devoted more time to that than any other issue, and I certainly will not contribute money to a Democratic party that does not take this very seriously. My money and time is much better spent on trying to expose what happened in the 2004 election and prevent anything similar from happening in the future.

A mountain of evidence has been compiled that says that you probably won the 2004 election. What possible reason can you have for withdrawing from this lawsuit? Here is a link to my latest research on this topic, which I just posted today: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I beg you to reconsider your position on this issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Up2Late Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Anything from Georgia? Yeah I know, why bother, most know Georgia
was the Beta site for Diebold Electronic Vote stealing. :argh: :banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Georgia
There were 6 reports from Georgia, for a rate of 1.8 per million. This was the third highest rate among the non-swing states, behind Washington and South Carolina.

Of course, Georgia didn't really need any help with vote switching for this election, but I guess that they're kind of expert at it for now, so it doesn't take much work for them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Up2Late Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. You can probably add a few Thousand more to the Georgia Total
But of course, we have no proof of that because we have NO Paper trail to check in ALL of Georgia. :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kerrygoddess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #10
39. I heard a rumor... that something is going to come out soon
About Georgia. Can't remember what exactly it was... voter fraud related.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
5. What is the EIRS and how do we contact them?
Do we keep people standing outside election places with cellphones to make calls to them? Do they need to be approached with lawyers? What's going on here?

And who are they? Are they neocon-controlled?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fly by night Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Election Incident Reporting System -- google them -- they have a web-site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. 1-866-OUR-VOTE (687-8683)
Sounds like we stand outside polling places with cellphones, hold up signs with the phone number, and so on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zan_of_Texas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #5
32. EIRS was mostly volunteers.
They covered as many precincts as possible, but couldn't possibly cover them all.

As far as I know, they are the good guys and gals. I knew some of them in my town, and they are good. Mostly African-American here, and looking for voter disenfranchisement of all types, not just machine problems.

My only question on the study would be, since EIRS likely sent its volunteers to swing districts and swing states, would that skew the results -- in other words, would more vote-hopping be reported in swing areas, because that's where their volunteer teams were?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. Good question
Reports of election day incidents were received by telephone, so there should not have been an absolute barrier to reporting from any state.

But it is certainly possible that if more education and information about EIRS was provided in swing states, that could have led to a reporting bias. There is not enough information about this process provided in the EIRS website (that I could find) to be able to get a good handle on this.

However, your theory can be tested by looking at other types of incidents, since electronic vote switching was only one of many types of incidents that were reported. Overall, New York reported over 3,000 incidents, and Texas reported almost 2,500 incidents, compared to a little over 5,000 from Florida. New York and Texas were not swing states, and Florida was a crucial swing state. There were more voters in Florida than in either Texas or New York, and yet the ratio of reports was not anywhere close to a ratio of 9 to 1. And the 2 to 1 ratio of Florida to Texas reports that we see could just as well (in my mind) be due to more problems encountered in Florida as to a reporting bias. So I would have to say that it does not appear to me that a reporting bias likely explains the 9 to 1 ratio of electronic vote switching incidents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
14. We must have election reform -we must have receipted Diebold's!!
we can't allow the republican party to count the votes - we should have an outside country be responsible for voter-count!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Aint that the truth
As long as the Repukes count our votes, I don't see how anything else we try to do is going to be very successful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
snot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 07:41 PM
Response to Original message
16. kick and nom'd -nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
17. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 07:09 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. I know that the lawyers are aware of the problem in Mahoning Co., Ohio
Bob Fritakis covered that in his book, "Did George W. Bush Steal the 2004 Election?".

I have sent this information to Kerry. I will also send it to the Ohio Project, who should make appropriate use of it. Thanks for reminding me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zan_of_Texas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #21
33. Time for Change --
Did you sent it to Fitrakis?

And, would you consider asking Voters Unite to publish it?

Then it would be somewhere easier to find than digging through DU archives.

Send to ellen@votersunite.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #33
35. I will contact Ellen Theissan at Voters Unite!
She is the one who provided me with the equipment information, and she has also been quite helpful in a number of other endeavors that I have attempted.

Do you have a good contact address for Fitrakis?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zan_of_Texas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. Here ya go.
Bob Fitrakis truth@freepress.org


Ellen is great. (Her last name is tricky - it's spelled Theisen)

By the way, www.VotersUnite.org is constantly helping hundreds of activists and election officials, and they in turn rarely ask for financial support, but it's always welcome, for those who are looking for bang for their bucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. I agree -- They've certainly been very helpful to my efforts
And thanks for the Fritakis address
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-23-05 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. I received a reply from Ellen Theisen
She said that they can't publish this because it would appear partisan. Voters Unite! is a non-partisan organization, and they can't afford to risk appearing partisan. She said that she didn't think the article actually was partisan, but that it very well might appear so.

I see her point.

Anyhow, but this was published on the Ohio Project's website -- see post # 40.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leanin_green Donating Member (823 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
18. I have been saying that all other issues are moot until this issue. . .
is exposed. Thanks TFC for continuing the fight. I wish I had your analytical ability and statistical knowledge. I have often felt like a voice crying in the wilderness about this. I seriously can't get serious about any future candidates until I know that "Tallygate" is brought to the light of day and a public outcry ensues. Until then I will continue to observe, prepare and work for Democracy to be restored to the United States.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-19-05 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. A voice crying in the wilderness
If you spend much time in the 2004 Election Results and Discussion forum you probably won't feel like a voice crying in the wilderness for very long. Most of us feel very similar to the way that you do about this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 01:12 AM
Response to Original message
20. Recommended - this is extremely valuable! Kerry MUST NOT WITHDRAW
from the Ohio vote court case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #20
22. I just don't understand it
I read another post in this forum that says that the case is weak.

How could anyone object to a recount? Especially when our electronic votes are counted in secret. I wrote him a letter saying that if he withdraws from this case it will be the worst mistake he ever made.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #22
23. I don't understand either. A lawyer says they might lose the case, so
he decides to give up despite its importance? Nope, does not compute.

Getting more voting machines into the Dem-rich areas is good, but unless ALL kinds of fraud are exposed and addressed, there will be NO CHANGE.

Here's the thread you are referring to:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Thread title: Latest kerry information about the lawsuit innuendos
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #23
29. Yes, that was a very interesting post
I just wish that I knew more about the rationale for Kerry considering getting out of this lawsuit. The fact that it may be considered a "weak case" just doesn't sound good enough to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
24. damn it Kerry/Edwards FIGHT!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ray of light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
25. Please forward
to suz@democracycellproject.net for the online election library there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #25
27. Done -- and thank you n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerRepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
26. This problem needs to be made far more public.
Something along the lines of 'the Government wants to prevent YOU from voting, and is willing to use voter machine fraud to do it.' Then the study of voter machine irregularity results to follow.

This goes way beyond party lines. Even if you're a rabid Bush supporter, it should be clear that fraud that goes your way this time around could steal your vote and cast it for the opposition next election. Fraud must be stopped regardless of who's committing it.

Americans have a trust that resists believing that our government could be this corrupt. We have to break through that resistance to get the message across so people understand that someone is trying to silence them and steal their greatest power - their power to vote.

It's about as unAmerican a plot as it gets. Vote fraud is an assault on core American values and a direct assault on Democracy itself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #26
28. I certainly agree with all that
And this is a vicious cycle. Election fraud begets the election of Senators and Congressmen who know that they depend on continued election fraud to remain in power. If we don't resolve this before too long we will lose our democracy entirely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr_Jefferson_24 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #28
46. And therein lies...
...the problem. Christo-republifascists know they'll be voted out if fair and honest elections are restored. I can't imagine them letting that happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-27-05 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. That's why we have to fight this every step of the way
Get out all the valid information we can on the 2004 election fraud.

And fight in Congress against the right wing conspiracy to have our votes counted by private companies, owned by Republicans, using secret (proprietary) software.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #26
31. Kerry? now I understand where they got the "flip flopper" tag!
Conyers busts his ass for kerry and unless Kerry is going to pull some amazing feat off in the near future?? - he remaons to me...mind boggling" I mean I'm from old school -- "actions speak louder then words"!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 01:46 PM
Response to Original message
30. Kerry says to Theresa, she's being parnoid about election fraud?
He actually said that, and even more disturbing was reading that; "it was kerry's opinion that the release of the Bin Laden video days before the election is what did him in" in 2004 election!!

Theresa believes in election fraud, but Kerry says don't get paranoid, especially after shananigans pulled off by Blackwell.

Kerry's postion on election 04 seems to vary quite widely!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-20-05 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #30
38. :^( I miss Teresa
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TayTay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-25-05 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #30
43. Geez, that's odd
I heard him speak about it in April, in person, without Teresa present and he made astrong case that there were problems with the election in Ohio. He specifically listed working on making sure that these problems don't come back as a top priority.

But, what do I kow. I only heard him say it with my own two ears. That's no match for innuendo and rumor, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. Also, from everything he ever said about Teresa
Edited on Fri Aug-26-05 10:28 PM by karynnj
before or after the election, I seriously doubt he would be rude and unkind enough to refer to Teresa as paranoid to others. I saw an early post and it was of the sort that someone said that a friend of the Kerrys said ... Why would anybody believe this. I seriously doubt Kerry would jeopardize his marriage by using unnecessarily loaded language if he wanted to indicate they disagreed on this. Even with people he dislikes, his comments are more nuanced, certainly it would seem he would be even more cautious with someone he cares about.

There have been quite a few times where Kerry has talked about voter suppression and he has called for a paper trail to allow audits in the future. Judging from one of the things Alex Kerry wrote she may be suspicious about Ohio too. John Kerry is in a different position than they are - he is a public official and he was a former prosecutor. The likelihood is that he considers the charge so serious he will not make it without ironclad proof. But, in parallel, he will work to insure it won't happen again. Hindsight being 20/20, Al Gore had the moral high ground to do this after 2000 and didn't.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-27-05 08:15 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. I believe that it did happen -- and here's why
I read about it on the DU several weeks ago from someone who heard it from a friend, who claimed to have been an eyewitness to the incident, when that person was dining with the Kerrys. I don't remember the poster's name, or even what the thread was. So the friend heard it first hand from Kerry, the poster heard it second hand from the friend, I heard it third hand from the poster, and you're getting it fourth hand from me.

I don't believe that it was necessarily rude of Kerry, or meant as a put down, to say that in a relatively private dinner conversation. We don't know the context of this. Calling someone "paranoid" can simply be a way of saying that they're being too concerned about something -- not necessarily a put down at all. And besides, he might have felt embarassed by the issue, or didn't want Teresa to talk about it because of the political stance on that issue that he's trying to maintain.

Furthermore, we know that Teresa is very suspicious about the election and that Kerry, for whatever reason, is trying to maintain a low profile on it. Yes, he does talk about election reform in public, but I very much disagree with his maintaining a low profile about the fraud issue, because I believe that the evidence for massive fraud is very convincing, and that unless and until a reasonable portion of the public also believes that, we will have no meaningful election reform. The great majority of the public has very little knowledge of this because the MSM has been silent on it, and one big factor that allows them to maintain silence on it is Kerry's silence.

I'm not bashing him or disrespecting him by saying that, but I do disagree with him, unless of course he's working on something or knows something about this that most of us don't know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
40. This thread has been posted by the 'Ohio Project' on
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mgr Donating Member (616 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-25-05 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
42. Not sure of the criteria but Colorado did report
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Time for change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-26-05 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. This report included only election day incidents
It never occurred to me to search for incidents occurring at other times.

Colorado lists 41 election day machine related incidents, and 45 total machine related incidents (the 41 election day incidents, plus 4 others). The one that you refer to was an early voting incident.
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 Wed May 22nd 2019, 06:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

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