Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Voting Files Manually Edited - Finding Proof

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
 
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 03:32 AM
Original message
Voting Files Manually Edited - Finding Proof
First of all, I dont claim to have any special knowledge, but I am a Computer Scientist and an Anthropologist, so I know about computers and people.



These are things that could ONLY HAPPEN if the files were MANUALLY changed.

1. New Mexico suddenly changed its votes by 10,000 for Bush around 1:00 am EST as reported by CNN shortly after Bush said he was waiting for the news networks to call New Mexico to make a victory speech. They actually said on air we dont understand what happened the numbers just CHANGED.

2. 4000 extra votes were given to Bush in one Ohio county. It was as simple as adding a 4 in front of the rest of the votes for Bush. This county only had a little over 600 registered voters.

3. Whoever was changing the votes made some small mistakes along the way leaving a trail of it all over the official web sites.

I took these screen shots myself off the official Ohio election web site the night of the election while votes were being tallied/changed
http://comp.uark.edu/~jsamuel/ohioHSmall.bmp
http://comp.uark.edu/~jsamuel/ohioPSmall.bmp



I guess we know why David Cobb got Kerry's votes at times during election night in Ohio. Whoever was MANUALLY editing the files accidentally gave Cobb the numbers instead of Kerry. That is the only way that could have happened. The program didn't do it. This is as easy as opening a file and changing 400 to 800 and then saving it. Wait it is opening a file, changing it, then saving it!

4. This leaves a discrepancy between the number of voters in a county and the number of votes if the person who changed the votes only changed one number and didn't change others.

Note:
They did not need to be changed by the election officials or the people who were working on the computer. These computers were most likely hacked into (a very simple feat) and those hackers changed the numbers. Any old hacker could have done this EASY. It could have been a group of 10 hackers in the same room who are Bush fans, one per battleground state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
nofurylike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 03:41 AM
Response to Original message
1. excellent info. please keep on it. thanks for the info, jsamuel. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DELUSIONAL Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 03:46 AM
Response to Original message
2. Good catch -- I'd like to hear their explanation for this
shift which gave Kerry 0 votes.

The foot prints are there I am convinced.

The main proof is that of all the errors -- none favor Kerry -- all break in bush's (or Cobb's in this case) favor.

Perhaps this hacker was in the process of the swap when someone check the vote totals?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imaginary girl Donating Member (345 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 03:47 AM
Response to Original message
3. In the case of the changed file,
Would there have been a trace of the old file remaining? Like would it be apparent somewhere if the hard drive was examined?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #3
21. All of the previous info. is still there, I believe
The equipment needs to be examined and the info. recovered from the machines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibertyorDeath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 04:07 AM
Response to Original message
4. A big Kick for this
Welcome to DU and thank You!

:kick::kick::kick::kick::kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerOstrich Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 04:39 AM
Response to Original message
5. I have been wondering about those screen shots...
I have meant to go back and look them up....

Here is what immediately came to my mind when I saw those (btw....this is sort of a geek description but I tried to make it user friendly...and we wonder how code goes wrong..lol). Keep in mind I have no pre-existing knowledge of the db schema so I may be way wrong.

I immediately thought someone was changing transaction level data, specifically the foreign key to a "candidates table". In other words, the transaction record might look like this.

**** Transaction Table ****
Ballot ID.................. 123456
President Selection........ 55

**** Candidate Master ****
Candidate ID............... 55
Candidate Name............. Kerry

Instead of changing just totals you would want to change the transactions. If you don't change the transaction you could just easily delete the total line and re-add the transaction lines.

However, it gets a little tricky when switching ids. For instance, lets say Kerry is 55, Bush is 56 and Nader is 57. Kerry had 2000 transactions, Bush had 1100 and Nader 0. I

f I said change all 55 to 56 then I would have all Kerry's and all of Bush's at 56 and I wouldn't be able to set all of Bush's 56 to 55.

So you have to use a "holding" bucket. Change all 55 to 57. Change all 56 to 55. Change all 57 to 56.

I am thinking they tripped themselves up changing the numbers and had to rebuild them somehow..

Long explanation for nothing but I'd almost bet on that's what you see happening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MikeNY Donating Member (242 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 04:58 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Interesting.. take this into account
Hi, I'm new here. Anyways, I think that what you really need to find out, if possible, is how these websites were hooked up to the official numbers.

Are they using an electronic system to directly give website users the live information and to have it posted to their website immediately, or do they receive the results, then manually put them on the website?

Also, many places that were using paper ballots that were optically scanned showed a massive turnout for Bush, even in counties that were something like 80% registered Democrat.

I have heard that in places where Bush won, demcoratic proposals on the ballot were also passed, in places that were largely Democratic counties. This is extremely unusual if true.

It seems really weird and I believe that something quite devious did occur on election night.

The big problem is the secrecy surrounding the procedures used by the media, the private media and election organizations that monitor and report the vote, as well as the things the state governments did on election night.

The scary thing is that I have heard on the news tonight that the exit polls showed Bush had strong lead in Ohio... this is a blatant lie, because anyone watching that night and actually paying attention would know that the reason it was "Too close to call" was the discrepency between exit poll and official results. (I.e. the official results were changing in bizarre ways while exit poll showed Kerry with a strong lead)

Also, check out the reports of Homeland Security locking down the polls in Warren OH and preventing monitors at the polling locations. This is quite gustapo tactic that I never thought would happen in this country.

When you add all of this stuff together, this is not a wild conspiracy theory...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucypher Donating Member (46 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #6
18. Good point!
Its not like the web page results are directly connected/fed from the voting machine tallying offices; its just some human editing a web page, and therefore does not count as solid evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donkeyotay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 12:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. Hi, Mike NY
"When you add all of this stuff together, this is not a wild conspiracy theory..."

That's right. The wilder theory is that there is nothing wrong with our democracy.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
newyawker99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #6
43. Hi MikeNY!!
Welcome to DU!! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 05:12 AM
Response to Original message
7. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
MikeNY Donating Member (242 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 05:20 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Hmm?
I don't know if you were responding to the original poster or to me. The reason why I bring up the point of finding out whether the data was manually entered onto the website(s) or given from a live feed sent directly to media is because this will give a better idea of whether or not it the discrepency shown was from input error on the webmaster's side or a broader problem from the official results.

I tend to think that in cases such as CNN its highly likely that they had some program rigged up to their website to let them put in the official numbers automatically as they received them, from the AP or whoever.

You know there really is so much collusion and secrecy surrounding the entire process that it is to the point that we can not even get accurate exit poll records, much less official record with a timestamp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
illuminaughty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 05:50 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Don't worry. Everyone is just getting a little paranoid
Welcome! I am an idiot who's trying to wrap my head around all these figures. But, I understand what you're asking and also what the original message is stating.

What I understood is that all networks were working with the AP. It's a whole other discussion about where we get our results from over the last 40 years, but anyway, if they are all getting their numbers from the same sources ,why was their such a discrepancy in the different networks. I watched this at a theater with multiple screens and that made it even more bizarre. Then when the numbers jumped around all the anchors were nervous.

CNN was the first one to pull back NM and remark about the jump in votes. This link puts an even more dismal face on our election process
http://www.ecotalk.org/VNS.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hippiechick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #7
30. Yeah Carl your post count's real high, too ...
Edited on Wed Nov-10-04 01:46 PM by hippiechick
:eyes: Pot calling the kettle black, maybe ?

Why the he** is everyone around here so farking intolerant ??


:hippie:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carl Brennan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 06:28 PM
Response to Reply #7
42. OOPS! I am very sorry. I don't know what happened here.
I was trying to post at a couple of topics.

This is a great topic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
10. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. I, for one, do not consider it a waste of energy to expose any irregularit
and to make sure that all votes are counted accurately.
Granted, we do need to have evidence and be careful NOT to call fraud until a complete analysis in done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. Thank you for your hard work! We have to do everything we can
to improve this system we have, starting with verifiable voting that can't be hacked and with a process that is transparent.

-----------------------------------------------------------
FIGHT! Take this country back one town and state at a time!
http://www.geocities.com/greenpartyvoter/electionreform.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. Not another one!
Another fly-by-night poster who doesn't know squat, coming in here telling us we are losers.

What that tells me is that we are on the right track.

Kerry On!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
txindy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #12
22. Think there might be an attempt at distraction happening hereabouts?
Hmmm? ;)

Kerry on, indeed! :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 11:07 AM
Response to Reply #10
19. "as long as the people have a voice"
Our vote is our voice. It'll happen again in 2006 unless it's exposed and the security issues resolved.

I don't understand "we didn't lose the House, and we didn't lose the Senate." Republicans are in charge of the House, the Senate, the Executive, and the Supreme Court and YES they will get another pet judge.

There's nothing silly about concern for democracy. There's no evidence "the count is going tally right" in 2006 right now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
molly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 08:07 AM
Response to Original message
13. There is a human being out there that either is very proud
of himself/herself or has a very guilty conscience. I wonder if they were paid?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
althecat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
14. Very good stuff indeed.... Got any more :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 10:45 AM
Response to Original message
16. mecklenburg county did hand entries
Questions started arising Wednesday when Republicans pointed out a significant discrepancy in the original unofficial results: more early votes than early voters. Elections officials immediately moved to audit the early vote totals and released new numbers Thursday. In response to Observer questions Friday, Dickerson said some vote totals were typed in by hand election night rather than electronically downloaded because of a computer glitch ...Dickerson said he believes the county's voting machines functioned properly.

...The audited vote totals issued Thursday derailed a Democratic sweep of the three at-large county commissioner seats -- for now, at least. It left the second, third and fourth vote-getters within fewer than 100 votes of each other.

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/politics/10113502.htm?1c


How do they end up entering numbers by hand because of a glitch on machines they say functioned properly?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cthrumatrix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 10:49 AM
Response to Original message
17. let's hear an explanation for this.... values? NOT....theft...YES
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Woody Box Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
20. I can confirm the Cobb/Kerry confusion

I was closely following the election count on the net and noticed too that Cobb and Kerry got the same amount of votes at some point. It didn't last for long.

This was not the only oddity. Another one is that with about 80% of precincts counted in Ohio, Bush was leading with 120000 votes. Cuayhoga County was 50% counted with Kerry leading 100000 votes here, so I thought he would get another 100000+ votes in this county, enough to make it a close race.

But this didn't happen. Bush kept his lead of 120000 (or a bit more) votes. Strange.

Indeed, there was BIG hacking going on during the count. You almost could smell it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #20
33. I remember that. He stayed ahead by almost the exact same amount
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElementaryPenguin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
23. Busheviks did the exact same thing in Volusia County in 2000!
At the end of the night, they shifted 16,000 votes out of Gore and into Bush - but then (after Fox, etc. declared Bushler the president-elect) - they shifted the votes back out - only they screwed up and put them into 3 obscure candidates (Harris, Brown were two of them) - who had virtually gotten zero up to that point. Washington Post was alerted that night - but didn't write about it for several days - and then buried it on A-22 or A-12.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rawls vs Nozick Donating Member (20 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
24. Who?
Who said on air "we don't know what happened, the numbers just changed"?

And is 10,000 votes enough to swing the state?

-RvN-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vanboggie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. Seems like it was the Wolf Blitzer n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #24
35. It was the blond woman (older)
She was the one that was on the screen, but not in the room.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #24
39. Judy Woodruf I think is her name - The lady that coved the election
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
26. TruthIsAll, nodehopper, althecat, Eloriel, please review this thread
Edited on Wed Nov-10-04 01:18 PM by Straight Shooter
:kick:

edit: I'm reposting this in PR&D forum for their attention
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. And also incorporate the great analysis from
Petrodollar Warfare in an earlier thread, which definitely deserves some real scrutiny and elaboration; maybe Eloriel can link to the needed exit poll sample size data?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=36314&mesg_id=36550&page=
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #26
34. And to the same group, don't miss this excellent straight-up
statistical analysis of the variance from the exit polls. It really takes makes for a clear picture, above the sound and fury of the massive quantities of data and anecdotal evidence.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=post&forum=203&topic_id=36855&mesg_id=36855
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomatrix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 01:43 PM
Response to Original message
29. Evidence of a Second Bush Coup
by Robert Parry

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/110604.html

"Theoretically at least, it is conceivable that sophisticated CIA-style computer hacking known as cyber-warfare could have let George W. Bushs campaign transform a three-percentage-point defeat, as measured by exit polls, into an official victory of about the same margin.

Whether such a scheme is feasible, however, is another matter, since it would require penetration of hundreds of local computer systems across the country, presumably from a single remote location. The known CIA successes in cyber-war have come from targeting a specific bank account or from shutting down an adversarys computer system, not from altering data simultaneously in a large number of computers.

To achieve that kind of result, cyber-war experts say, a preprogrammed kernel of brain would have to be inserted into election computers beforehand or teams of hackers would be needed to penetrate the lightly protected systems, targeting touch-screen systems without a paper backup for verifying the numbers.

Though there's still no proof of such a cyber-attack, suspicions are growing that the U.S. presidential election results were manipulated to some degree. Voting analyses of some precincts in Florida and Ohio have found surprisingly high percentages for Bush. Others have noted that the large turnout among young voters and the obvious enthusiasm of John Kerrys voters would have suggested a better showing for the Democrat."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomatrix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. Warren County OH closed door voter tally
Edited on Wed Nov-10-04 01:53 PM by nomatrix
because of Homeland Security fears.
Hacking computers as former Cyber warfare Czar Richard Clarke predicted.
Couple that with Bin Laden last video that he would drive the U.S. to bankruptcy as he did the Soviets.
Bush promised to "stay the course" and "spend all the political capital" as we see our U.S. currency hit a new low.

How is tin foil is that?
I'm not making that up, those are facts.

Now let's talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imaginary girl Donating Member (345 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #29
36. But wasn't there a single feed location
Set up and maintained by the AP? Here's an article related to that ...

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000670974

<snip>

This time, the news organizations contracted with two veteran polling companies -- Mitofsky International and Edison Media Research -- to conduct exit polls. They agreed that the AP -- which has been tallying votes in elections since 1848 -- would be their sole source for vote counts, and the news cooperative has significantly beefed up its system in response.

<snip>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imaginary girl Donating Member (345 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Oops, better clarify
Meaning that they wouldn't need to hack computers all over as the article suggests.

Also, I ran into this piece from Oct 22 -- really worth a look if you don't remember it (or haven't seen it):

<snip>

The Associated Press (AP) will be the sole source of raw vote totals for the major news broadcasters on Election Night. However, AP spokesmen Jack Stokes and John Jones refused to explain to this journalist how the AP will receive that information. They refused to confirm or deny that the AP will receive direct feed from voting machines and central vote tabulating computers across the country. But, circumstantial evidence suggests that is exactly what will happen.

And what can be downloaded can also be uploaded. Computer experts say that signals can travel both to and from computerized voting machines through wireless technology, modems, and even simple electricity. Computer scientists have long warned that computer voting is an invitation to vote fraud and system failure. An examination of Diebold election software by several computer scientists, including Dr. Avi Rubin and his staff, proved that secret backdoors can be built into computer programs that allow votes to be easily manipulated without detection.

ES&S, the nation's largest voting machine company that will reportedly count 50% of all votes, describe on their webpage how "accessible" their results are, "At ES&S, we know election administrators and the public want fast and accurate election results. That is why we have developed several election management system software solutions to make the reporting process easier, more reliable, and more accessible." Diebold, the second largest voting machine company, advertises a similar service. Both ES&S and Diebold have close ties to the Republican Party.

But, can't the AP be trusted? Isn't it an objective non-partisan news organization? Some say no. The AP is batting for a Bush presidency.

<snip>

http://www.ecotalk.org/AP.htm

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nomatrix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. Thanks for picking up on it
My point is think this through. We have been down this road before.

Gore had LEGAL grounds to take this to court. I used to have the list, more than 100 court cases fought in Florida alone. Who won? As any lawyer will tell you, whoever the judge favors.
The day the media recount was due out was September 11, 2001.

All these battles were watched, Seminole (GOP operative filling in absentee ballots) punch ballot produced different qualities for Dem/GOP counties, felon vote purge by Katherine Harris, etc. Screaming unconstitution/illegal. Proof, hard proof. Nothing, nadda, zip.

Think this through.....you find the numbers, really, that prove a hack.....where do you go with it? How do you prove who was involved, and WHAT GOP branch of the gov't will do anything about it? See why they are laughing.

Unless.....

Could this have been a cyber attack? I don't know. I am just going by what the government has told us. Especially with Warren County/ homeland security closed door vote count. Seems like the only way to get news to cover anything ........
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
32. Send this to Olbermann and Kerry's senate office.
Edited on Wed Nov-10-04 02:02 PM by mzmolly
:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
40. Kick!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mumon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-10-04 05:39 PM
Response to Original message
41. kick
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 Thu Dec 07th 2023, 05:35 AM
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