-
Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
"So you think Blackwell stole the election for Bush?
It was under his domain to have enough machines; the machine calibration, tabulation issue. You could rig the machines. We have reason to believe it was rigged.
What is your evidence?
Based on distrusting the system, lack of paper trails, the anomaly of the exit polls. In Ukraine, there’s an exit poll gap, they say, “Let’s have another election.”
Have you been in touch with John Kerry about the issue? Does he share your concerns?
His lawyers are now involved in a minimal way. We are appealing to him to get involved. We think it should be certified provisionally, until there can be a forensic investigation of these machines, and until there’s a random recount. In only two of the counties did they do any hand recounting.
What can be done now?
Thursday is when Congress is scheduled to certify the vote. Kerry should take the floor and ask for a debate on the subject. Kerry pulled out too early. The scrutiny pulled out with him.
If the election were held again with these alleged problems solved, would Kerry win?
Of course I think that. If we deal with the anomalies, a fair random count, the urban-suppressed vote, Kerry would get at least 60,000 more votes. At least! I believe that. I don’t know that. "
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
I accept he won this election (unlike 2000 where he was "appointed" rather than elected) however I am bothered by and skeptical of the voter machine companies being owned and run by staunch Bush supporters and Rep. campaign contributors, one of whom has publicly said he would do ANYTHING to make sure Bush won.
You may think I'm crazy to question these conflicts of interest but honestly I couldn't care less what a Bush voter thinks of my opinion.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Bush needs to be kissing Diebold's ass hard-core right about now.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Well, the evidence is circumstantial. Like:
The CEO of Ohio based Diebold pledged to "do anything I can to make sure Bush is re-elected.
As well as; every county in Ohio with severe voting irregularities in Ohio had electronic voting equipment made by Diebold.
As well as; several cities had massive irregularities. With the most prominent being one small town in Ohio, who's citizens were dominately registered as democrats, had apprx. 600 registered voters, but had thousands of votes cast for Bush and a couple hundred for Kerry.
As an American, you should be disgusted that a question of the legitimacy of our election is even made, even more so warranted.
I'm a registered republican (although I typically vote 3rd party, and Kerry this year).
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
If that was said by the CEO of a voting machine producer, it was a moronic thing to say - like a CPA who says he'll do anything to keep his client from paying taxes. Yeah, he probably doesn't mean cheat or break the law, but why raise the question in people's minds?
It's a bit of a stretch to think of one (out of many) voting machine companies selling electronic voting systems to counties, any number of whom have Democratic election officials, with the systems specifically designed, before the ballot is created, to guide a number of votes - just enough, not all - to one specific Republican candidate in one specific election. It could be done, but it sure sounds like a stretch, for any number of reasons (and yes, I understand all about dictatorships and fraud conspiracies).
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Zeno
It's a bit of a stretch to think of one (out of many) voting machine companies selling electronic voting systems to counties, any number of whom have Democratic election officials, with the systems specifically designed, before the ballot is created, to guide a number of votes - just enough, not all - to one specific Republican candidate in one specific election. It could be done, but it sure sounds like a stretch, for any number of reasons (and yes, I understand all about dictatorships and fraud conspiracies).
Stretch? In Georgia in the senatorial race in 02, the republican challenger bea the popular democrat. Voting irregularites were suspected in the Diebold equipment. In the source code of the Diebold software, the tag "rob-georgia" was found as well as physical evidence that the machines were tampered with. Not to mentioned the leaked Diebold internal document detailing how to access machines offsite. You are far too trusting of a corporate system and a party system that doesn't have you best interest in mind and far too quick to dismiss legitimate questions.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Well, the evidence is circumstantial. Like:
The CEO of Ohio based Diebold pledged to "do anything I can to make sure Bush is re-elected.
Actually that one is a cold hard fact. He did say it. Wally O’Dell’s exact words were :“we’ll do anything to ensure a Bush victory in Ohio.”
And there is other curious evidence to consider such as the lawsuit that Diebold settled about bait-and-switch tactics in selling unreliable electronic voting systems that lacked federal and state certification and were vulnerable to computer hackers and software bugs. And also one of their employees was caught tampering.
Add to that there are reports of shortages of voting machines in Democratic districts purposely curtailed by the GOP. Long waiting lines leading to droves of voters throwing in the towel in such precincts. And in Warren County, OH there was a “lockout” on election night where only GOP workers were left in control .
And why, Bush receive 4,258 votes in the Franklin County precinct of Gahanna—where only 628 people voted?
And how about the fact that exit polls showing a clear Kerry victory were examined by national expert, professor Steven Freeman of the University of Pennsylvania whose 11-page treatise is at a loss to explain the discrepancies but does refute those proffered by the established GOP mavens.
These type of things are tend to make people uneasy. Like I said before I accept that Bush is Pres for another long four years but I question many things about both the 2000 and 2004 elections.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
The list goes on and on. But it still is circumstantial. There still is not hard conclusive, empiricle evidence that it was an intentional broad conspiricy. I believe there was. But none of it is definitively conclusive. But, as a rational human being, you cannot look at all the data and not think something is very wrong. Even if someone is a Bush supporter and claims to be "patriotic" and "love America", their questioning of the election process should go far beyond their happiness that the party they support won the election.
Our elections should be without a doubt and without question. But I see few conservatives questioning the results, despite inconsistencies. This "party loyalty, before loyalty to the nation" is precisely why George Washington said in his farewell address that the party system has the potential to be the destruction of democracy.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
^ I agree.
And I just love how questioning mu government makes me not accepting of reality to some people such as the person who started this thread.
To each his or her own I guess.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate667
Stretch? ... You are far too trusting of a corporate system and a party system that doesn't have you best interest in mind and far too quick to dismiss legitimate questions.
Well, yes, I think it's a stretch, but it's a provable stretch, if the evidence is there. It's a stretch to think that a former football great would slash two people to death, but I believe that happened.
I don't dismiss it at all. Show me the best evidence, and I'll accept it as the probable fact.
I don't implicitly trust the powers that be with their machinations, any more than I trust their enemies with their suppositions and theories. I've learned that when you hear from one side, you've heard half the story. Whether you believe or disbelieve that half usually depends on what you wish to believe.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Zeno
It's a bit of a stretch to think of one (out of many) voting machine companies selling electronic voting systems to counties, any number of whom have Democratic election officials, with the systems specifically designed, before the ballot is created, to guide a number of votes - just enough, not all - to one specific Republican candidate in one specific election. It could be done, but it sure sounds like a stretch, for any number of reasons (and yes, I understand all about dictatorships and fraud conspiracies).
I agree with JZ on this one, not because I particularly trust those in power (of either party) or those who own and run big corporations; I am sure many would be happy to lie, cheat and steal to control the US govt if they thought they could get away with it. Rather, I am skeptical because it is far more difficult than most people imagine to pull off huge conspiracies and successfully keep them secret. For example, there is a long long way between owning the company that makes voting machines and programming them to steal an election without being detected. For the reasons JZ lists in the quote above, it is a complicated problem, and quite a lot of people would have to be in on it...any one of whom might end up outing you to some reporter in return for fame and fortune (and you had better bet that there are plenty of ambitious reporters out there looking to make a name for themselves). Remember how the Watergate conspiracy and the "Contragate" conspiracy and so forth came unraveled, for example.
It is not impossible, of course, and it could well be that there will be a "Dieboldgate" scandal in the news in the coming months, but I think that the "extraordiary claims require extraordinary evidence" threshold has yet been met on this one. Which, again in agreement with JZ, is not to say that anyone should stop looking into the possibility.
-Ww
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Heck, what about what the evil corporation did in the Manchurian Candidate???
......wait, that was just a movie.....;)
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraLove
^ I agree.
And I just love how questioning mu government makes me not accepting of reality to some people such as the person who started this thread.
To each his or her own I guess.
"Dissent is the highest form of patriotism"
-Jefferson
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Zeno
Well, yes, I think it's a stretch, but it's a provable stretch, if the evidence is there. It's a stretch to think that a former football great would slash two people to death, but I believe that happened.
I don't dismiss it at all. Show me the best evidence, and I'll accept it as the probable fact.
I don't implicitly trust the powers that be with their machinations, any more than I trust their enemies with their suppositions and theories. I've learned that when you hear from one side, you've heard half the story. Whether you believe or disbelieve that half usually depends on what you wish to believe.
Sorry, I misinterpreted your previous post. It is true that people believe what they want to believe and seek out the information that supports what they already believe, but truth supercedes all of that.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wwanderer
Remember how the Watergate conspiracy and the "Contragate" conspiracy and so forth came unraveled, for example.
-Ww
I wouldn't be surprised if there was a conspiracy buried so deeply that we'll never find out, or if what evidence was unearthed was ignored and scoffed at--like "Contragate", for all intents and purposes. What a joke that turned out to be...
I still can't believe the most impressive result of a scandal in which it was found that representatives of the President, and members of our top-level Intelligence organization, not only did negotiate with terrorists, but sold them guns, bought drugs (at a time when the American people were having their yachts confiscated for a roach), and funded "freedom fighters" who were killing nuns with the proceeds.
The result: thousands of "Ollie North for President!" bumper stickers, and not much else.
Maybe since Americans are getting killed in this disastrous war, people might actually stop and question the actions of our current f*ck-up President, and how he got into office.
Call me paranoid, but I think it entirely possible that Bush, et al, pulled off something we'll never see the bottom of. Do I believe it, no, but it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
On a side note, I am glad to see devilsadvocate667, who seems like a pretty cool guy, recognize Jay Zeno's intelligence and good judgement. I might wonder about this election, and anything else to do with the Bush family, but not about that.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djoser
I wouldn't be surprised
1 - if there was a conspiracy buried so deeply that we'll never find out, or
2 - if what evidence was unearthed was ignored and scoffed at--like "Contragate", for all intents and purposes. What a joke that turned out to be...
1 & 2 are quite different issues in the present context, of course. However inappropriate or inadequate the consequences may have been, there is little doubt of what actually happened in the Contra-conspiracy. The conspirators failed to keep their secrets; we (the general public) soon found out what was going on.
The point is that it is extraordinarily hard to keep something so important and dramatic secret for long if any significant number of people are "in on it". Cynics define a secret as "something only one person knows"...perhaps an exaggeration, but as a practical matter, it does seem to be nearly impossible to keep a "big" secret for long if more than a literal hand full of dedicated people are in the know. This is a major flaw that almost all the major popular "government conspiracy" theories have in common.
-Ww
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
But couldn't it be possible that if the balloting machinery was tampered with that only a few might know how?
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Cynics define a secret as "something only one person knows"...perhaps an exaggeration, but as a practical matter, it does seem to be nearly impossible to keep a "big" secret for long if more than a literal hand full of dedicated people are in the know. This is a major flaw that almost all the major popular "government conspiracy" theories have in common.
As told to me by someone who used to be in the business of making things happen overseas, the other major flaw in conspiracy theories is that in order for the end result to occur, everything has to go right. And that just doesn't happen.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djoser
But couldn't it be possible that if the balloting machinery was tampered with that only a few might know how?
Maybe, many things are possible, but I have trouble picturing it when I try to think about realistic scenarios in detail.
Presumably it would have had to be implemented by the programmers(s) and system designer(s) who conceived and constructed the machines and their software. And it could not have been anything simple when you consider, as JZ pointed out, that these machines are to be used in many future elections and with ballots set up in many different ways (in different localities) and subject to various tests and verification procedures, none of which could have been known to the conspirators in exact detail when they wrote the code. And it is routine procedure to have at least one, and often several, detailed reviews of any significant commercial software system by independent people/teams from those who wrote it. And usually there are multiple releases with various unexpected bugs being fixed...and so forth. And it would have to be undetectable (self-erasing?) after the fact. And the group of people doing it would have to be somehow identified and recruited by the company owners...and put into the key positions without raising undue suspicions of other workers, and...so forth.
To be clear, I am not trying to claim anything with huge certainty or reliability; it just doesn't ring true to me. Try this exercise; it might make my point clearer. Imagine that you have just bought the companies that make these machines and are determined to "fix" the next election so that the Dems win, or the Repubs win again or whatever. So, ask yourself, how do I do it? Who do I call or speak to? What do I tell them or ask them to do? How do I even investigate the best way to pull it off without risking getting caught? How/why can I trust anyone that I persuade to help me? Etc. I suspect that such things work much better in the movies than they would in real life.
Another example, even the Mafia cannot keep its secrets, not even with the very credible threat of violence against those that betray it. You can read in the newspapers who the Dons are and who works for them and what they "control", and any decent bookstore will have multiple nonfiction accounts of the details of the histories of the various families. Do you really think that the government or corporations can keep their secrets more effectively than the Mob?
-Ww
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
As for it being technically feasible, it is VERY easy. A single person could do it all with only a one line query. It would take all of 20 seconds to write it and update the number of required votes. They only use Access databases...
The machines doesn't need to be tampered with, you only need to access the data, run the query, and you're done.
A long time ago, I read up on how the system works...I was shocked at how insecure the entire thing was, no real protection, just on the surface stuff. Like a bank vault with a huge metal lock on the front-door, but the back-door left open and the walls made of wood.
Do these machines now upload the votes to a location or are the machines moved off-site and the votes looked up there? Have they changed these yet over the past 3/4 years?
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Thank you, Pryce, for your enlightening reply.
As I said, I don't believe it happened, but I don't trust Bush, and I'm not convinced there is no chance something has gone on in the election that we're not supposed to know about, nor that there might be secrets that are more easily hidden than might seem possible.
As far as other secrets being kept, no one has ever explained the "magic bullet" that apparently went wherever the hell it wanted to on November 22, 1963. There are those who scoff at the idea that there was some sort of conspiracy to assassinate the President of the United States, but there is a frightening amount of evidence that there very well may have been.
If you want to believe Oswald acted alone, fine, but I find it hard to believe that Ruby was acting out of sheer patriotism when he shot Oswald.
I think there are some very well-kept secrets out there, and a lot of them we will never know the answers to.
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Just a thought. Does it really matter who one the election. I feel that no matter if it was Kerry or Bush, the American people are getting screwed buy the Democratic and Republican parties no matter who wins. We need better choices to vote for. Why is it that, for the most part, it is only 2 options on the ballot. Why not 4 or 5. Make it intresting. Make it worth while. Not just one republican and one democrat.
Kermit the Frog is a better puppet to have as president.
Vote the Muppet party 2008
:peace:
Gabriel
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe448
Just a thought. Does it really matter who one the election. I feel that no matter if it was Kerry or Bush, the American people are getting screwed buy the Democratic and Republican parties no matter who wins. We need better choices to vote for. Why is it that, for the most part, it is only 2 options on the ballot. Why not 4 or 5. Make it intresting. Make it worth while. Not just one republican and one democrat
3rd parties were on the ballot in Michigan, but without funding and widespread marketing and publicity, they don't have a chance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe448
Kermit the Frog is a better puppet to have as president.
Vote the Muppet party 2008l
He could run on the Green Party. But he still might not have a chance, it's not easy being green!!
Yeah! I still got it!!!!
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by devilsadvocate667
3rd parties were on the ballot in Michigan, but without funding and widespread marketing and publicity, they don't have a chance.
There were only a few states that had 3 parties on the ballot. In texas there were only 2 but you had the option of a write in. Doesn't mean that everyone knows you can do that or know how to do it properly.
Yeah the other parties need more funding to get in to the public spot light.
Gabriel
-
Re: Some Democrats still won't accept reality ...
I think we should split into two countries . I don't think it would be a real civil war, as in warfare and violence everywhere. We are more of a nation that bickers than tries to kill eachother.
The way things are very few people are getting the govenment of their choice. I say let each state vote itself in to either a democracy or a republic and then let people move to the government of their choice. It's not like we dont have enough people, wealth or land to make it work.
It might just solve alot of problems and in fighting.