OK, I'll ask the burning question...

[rucky]

Why didn't they cheat?

[k8conant]

1. Maybe they forgot to...

or didn't realize they would need to or maybe they just didn't cheat enough!

[bobbieinok]

2. they did - check out posts in 'election reform' and

the responses to Skinner's thread of numbers to call if you run into voting problems.

[Jackpine Radical]

3. They did.

Just not enough.

Too many people were clued in on electronic voting, etc. Nevertheless, there were a lot of discrepancies between final votes and exit polls, with the same mysterious tendency to favor Puggies. Overall, it looks like they were able to cheat their way into about 5% more of the vote than they actually got. It wasn't enough to stop the landslide.

[texpatriot2004]

7. Exactly. It's hard to steal votes when the turnout is so high and

against you.

[Pushed To The Left]

4. They may have tried

Randi Rhodes always says that Democrats have to win decisively enough that it won't be close enough to steal! That may very well have happened last Tuesday!

[ret5hd]

5. i'm of two minds on this...

option 1) they did, but it wasn't enough to beat our overwhelming numbers

option 2) they didn't, because they realize that printing $3 Billion per day for the last few years is going to collapse the economy and it is best if Dems are blamed.

[Stardust]

6. Who says they didn't?

We were told all along that if the number divide was large enough, they couldn't flip the votes. I've heard several times that the landslide was much greater than it appears because of electronic irregularities.

[porphyrian]

8. I'll kick this for the answer. - n/t

[seabeyond]

12. you have been given a number of answers above your post, so...

i have to assume you ignore it to keep saying.... waiting waiting waiting for an answer. no one gonna answer. so i was right and all were wrong

odd

btw, i think they tried with mo and vg at least.... time may tell

[porphyrian]

18. If nothing else, you are consistent.

I didn't say I was kicking it because no one had answered it. I said I was kicking it for the answer, as in so-people-can-see-the-answer. I thought the meaning was obvious.

[seabeyond]

23. i am lmao. i really dont look at names. you just

say the stupidest things. there was another thread, i read what you said, about all the liberal nanny threads. again another stupid. i was going to post on that one and caught your name. so i didnt post. didnt see it on this one. look,... you say you are waiting for hte answer. people have given it to you. what is it BUT stupid. can i help what you post. i cant. sorry. do better. but i really do not look at a name when i post

[porphyrian]

25. Yeah, I'm the one saying stupid things. Case in point. - n/t

[seabeyond]

26. so, tell me. did you read the other posts and get your answer? n/t

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

9. I'm sure they did. Just not enough.

[Straight Shooter]

10. Question doesn't even ignite a spark for me. You *know* they tried.

They couldn't overcome the numbers of votes against them. When Rove said he had "the" math, he was already throwing down the gauntlet that they were going to win and it would be because he was so savvy about the campaign.

Remember in 2004, Rove said, "Their (poll) numbers don't match my numbers." And Cheney said, "Kerry has the crowds, but we have the votes," as he smirked and turned away from the interviewer.

[BlooInBloo]

11. It's another benefit of the 50 state strategy. Cheating doesn't scale well.

That's another reason why the DINO strategy is so stupid - as long as Democrats focussed only on 15-20 seats, the lack of scalability of cheating wasn't a problem.

Rather like a football defense that has a great left-side, but weak right-side. If the offense never goes to the D's right, their weakness there doesn't hurt them. The offense has to stretch the field in order to exploit the D's weaknesses.

[gully]

15. Yep

.

[drm604]

13. I think it's possible that they did

and that we nearly lost the Senate because of it.

Why isn't Allen asking for a recount? Could it be because they fear their cheating would be exposed?

[gully]

14. The media was watching and they didn't expect to have to cheat

in as many areas. I don't think they had the infrastructure?

[leftofthedial]

16. they did

there is still an unexplained discrepancy of 4% to 15% between polls, exit polls and the results

[Jcrowley]

17. They did

and still lost. That's how much of a landslide this was.

Paper trail or bust in 2008.

[ellenfl]

19. ditto . . . i believe they cheated but, as i told my mom,

the opposing votes were so overwhelming that they couldn't respond without getting caught.

what's the deal with lieberman getting exactly the same number of votes this year as he did last election? any truth to that?

btw, one of the freepers on my other political site is crowing that lieberman is signaling he might switch parties. except for the war, joementum would be much too liberal for them.

ellen fl

[tinrobot]

20. Of course they cheated

...but cheating only works when it's close.

[donco6]

21. Like everything else - they failed. eom

[Zorra]

22. With all the corruption scandals, and media attention to evoting

and voter fraud, maybe they figured they couldn't get away with it this time.

We need to get rid of all electronic voting machines before 2008.

[jen4clark]

24. Who says "they" didn't?

http://www.bradblog.com/

http://votetrustusa.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogsection&id=2&Itemid=1032

[mw]

27. THey didn't think they had to. "The" math said they won. n/t

n/t