2004 Election

[stoli_sambuca]

I'm guessing that many of members in this forum or all members in this forum read the following article "Was the 2004 Election Stolen?"

Like many Americans, I spent the evening of the 2004 election watching the returns on television and wondering how the exit polls, which predicted an overwhelming victory for John Kerry, had gotten it so wrong. By midnight, the official tallies showed a decisive lead for George Bush -- and the next day, lacking enough legal evidence to contest the results, Kerry conceded. Republicans derided anyone who expressed doubts about Bush's victory as nut cases in ''tinfoil hats,'' while the national media, with few exceptions, did little to question the validity of the election. The Washington Post immediately dismissed allegations of fraud as ''conspiracy theories,'' and The New York Times declared that ''there is no evidence of vote theft or errors on a large scale.''

But despite the media blackout, indications continued to emerge that something deeply troubling had taken place in 2004. Nearly half of the 6 million American voters living abroad never received their ballots -- or received them too late to vote -- after the Pentagon unaccountably shut down a state-of-the-art Web site used to file overseas registrations. A consulting firm called Sproul & Associates, which was hired by the Republican National Committee to register voters in six battleground states, was discovered shredding Democratic registrations. In New Mexico, which was decided by 5,988 votes, malfunctioning machines mysteriously failed to properly register a presidential vote on more than 20,000 ballots. Nationwide, according to the federal commission charged with implementing election reforms, as many as 1 million ballots were spoiled by faulty voting equipment -- roughly one for every 100 cast.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

If you read the article, what do you make of it? If you think that this is just a baseless conspiracy, what are reasons why you believe that? If you think that the article asks many legitimate questions, then ... what's your take on 2004 Election over all?

[greenpeace_mike]

Sorry stoli_sambuca but 2004 is a loooong time ago.

[Christoph]

i am not an American but the whole election was quite fishy. But cheating or not. Bush is the president till the beginning of apocalyps.

[stoli_sambuca]

Sorry stoli_sambuca but 2004 is a loooong time ago.
Here's the thing though. It appears that there were many problems in 2004, and problems were far worse than 2000. So, there is a trend here. What'll happen in 2006? We never know. For example, Diebold voting machine delivered a rather questionable result. The machine will be used more widely this year. Isn't that concerning? Many critics said that the article is about what happened in the past. But the fact of the matter is that the article is about the future ...

[Christoph]

I completely forgot about the 2006 elections!

You are right. And you are not the only one who thinks so...

Race to Adopt Electronic Voting Raises Concern Over Elections
By Catherine Fisher

Aug. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Electronic voting machines are coming to Centre County, Pennsylvania, and residents see a mess in the making.

On a recent morning, more than 30 constituents -- twice as many as usual -- attended a meeting of the county board in the locality of 136,000, home to Pennsylvania State University. One after another, 16 people rose to denounce the county's purchase of the machines. After hearing reports of malfunctions elsewhere, residents said they are worried the technology is unreliable.

``I'm an angry citizen,'' said Ben Brewer, 21, a county poll worker attending the meeting. ``I like to vote, and I'd prefer that my vote be counted.''

Centre County is just one of thousands of areas across the U.S. scrambling to update voting equipment in time to meet a January deadline set by the Help Americans Vote Act, the law enacted by Congress following the disputed 2000 Florida vote count that eventually gave George W. Bush the presidency.

The measure allocated $3.86 billion for state and local governments to improve election systems, in many cases by switching to electronic voting machines from the punch-card systems that plagued Florida, and provides funds for technology to eliminate errors and create more handicapped-accessible methods.

Instead of reassuring voters, the transition has many communities up in arms -- and is stirring warnings from computer experts about the impact on this autumn's midterm elections.

`Likely to Have Problems'

``You've got a third of our country going through this for the first time,' said Douglas Jones, a computer science professor at the University of Iowa in Iowa City. ``Inevitably, the first time someone makes a change with equipment, you are more likely to have problems.''

There are two main types of electronic voting machines: direct-recording systems usually require voters to push a button or touch a screen to cast their votes, which are instantly recorded; optical-scan systems require them to mark ballots that are then scanned into a machine.

Most of the complaints and concerns so far focus on direct- recording systems. Lawsuits have been filed in at least seven states, including California and New York, to prevent the purchase of the electronic machines. The suits claim the machines aren't sufficiently secure and their counts can't be adequately verified, according to Voter Action, a Berkeley, California-based nonpartisan organization that brought some of the cases.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=aTrz304l11pA&refer=home

[stoli_sambuca]

I'm basically quoting the referenced article here, but there were significant differences between exit polls and actual votes counted in 2004. Funny thing is that exit polls were very accurate in places where this voting machine was not used. Exit polls weren't that accurate in places where the voting machine was used. Guess who those inaccuracies favored consistently?

[Gee_Queen]

The 2006 elections will be awful. Both parties are full of deception, aren't they? As long as we don't get a third party, nothing will change.

[stoli_sambuca]

The 2006 elections will be awful. Both parties are full of deception, aren't they? As long as we don't get a third party, nothing will change.
The biggest problem is the campaign funding problem. Candidates who do not have money simply cannot win, so they will get funding from corporations and wealthy individuals. Candidates call them "constituents", and if they're elected, they basically whatever campaign contributors tell them to do. A third party won't magically solve this problem; if the party is also funded similarly, the party will behave just like two existing parties.

[Christoph]

There is simply no solution to the problem. Except we would get a decent president for the next election 2008. Maybe feingold...

[stoli_sambuca]

Actually a couple of whistleblower lawsuits have been filed, and this is the latest one (http://www.webwereld.nl/articles/42277/whistleblower-lawsuit-filed-against-e-voting-industry.html). The problem needs to be addressed, but this needs to be reported more widely before that. As of right now, a story like this is categorized into "conspiracy."

[Christoph]

Kennedy, son of the late New York Sen. Robert F. Kennedy and nephew of the late President John F. Kennedy, gained attention with a recent story he wrote for Rolling Stone magazine in which he questioned the outcome of the 2004 presidential election. The whistleblower lawsuit is not related to the allegations in Kennedy's analysis.


Do you have the article Kennedy wrote for the Rolling Stone magazine?

Lawsuits won't do anything! The costs for the machines and all the work to get them at the place are too high. The point-of-no-return has already passed.

A closer investigation and public control would do the job.

[stoli_sambuca]

Do you have the article Kennedy wrote for the Rolling Stone magazine?

If you check the original post in this thread, you can find the link, but I'll post the same link here for your convenience.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen

Lawsuits won't do anything! The costs for the machines and all the work to get them at the place are too high. The point-of-no-return has already passed.

A closer investigation and public control would do the job.
The lawsuit has been filed exactly for that, and this is a whistleblower lawsuit, so DOJ can't just step in and reject it. Diebold's internal documents have not been made public yet, but the lawsuit should facilitate to disclose documents and other related information if it's done successfully.

[stoli_sambuca]

FYI,

the followings are two Podcast programs related to this.

http://www.ringoffireradio.com/show.asp?jid=124

- Election attorney Lowell Finley describes his legal battles to limit electronic voting state by state.

http://www.ringoffireradio.com/show.asp?jid=121

- Robert F. Kennedy Jr. discusses his article.

If you're interested, check podcast programs between these two dates. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Mike Papantonio discuss the lawsuit.

[Christoph]

Originally Posted by Christoph
Do you have the article Kennedy wrote for the Rolling Stone magazine?

If you check the original post in this thread, you can find the link, but I'll post the same link here for your convenience.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/sto...lection_stolen

Sorry, I confused your article with another article about Presiden Bush, also published in Rolling Stones Magazin. :o

Any chances that ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. will be a candidate for 2008??

[stoli_sambuca]

Any chances that ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR. will be a candidate for 2008??
Funny ...

I work for myself, so I listen to many podcast programs when I'm working on some mundane task. Ring of Fire is one of programs I listen to, and I recently finished listening to most of its archived podcast (actually radio) programs. Listeners phone in and ask questions and make comments in Ring of Fire, and quite a few listeners asked the same question.

I think that the short answer is No for variety of reasons.

[Christoph]

Feingold is the only person left who had enough balls to stand against the Patriot Act.

Feingold or Kennedy. Or Bush gets a third term:eek:

[stoli_sambuca]

Feingold is the only person left who had enough balls to stand against the Patriot Act.

The most ideal candidate is someone who's never been a US senator or Congress man/woman, but ... we'll have to see ...

Feingold or Kennedy. Or Bush gets a third term:eek:
Kind of scary to imagine that, isn't it?

[Hetric]

The most ideal candidate is someone who's never been a US senator or Congress man/woman, but ... we'll have to see ...

I hope you are kidding. A CEO is the LAST thing we need in the oval office.

[stoli_sambuca]

I hope you are kidding. A CEO is the LAST thing we need in the oval office.
I never suggested a CEO. I was thinking about people like governors, mayors and others who have been working in the area of public service. Current Senators and Congress men and women have taken too much contributions from too many companies and trade organizations, and this is why I don't think that we can expect much from them.

[Christoph]

stoli_sambuca do you have any suggestions?

Why is Kennedy for 2008 a "No for variety of reasons"?

[stoli_sambuca]

Why is Kennedy for 2008 a "No for variety of reasons"?
It's quite unfortunate, but it costs a tremendous amount money to run a Presidential campaign. Both Bush and Kerry raised about $100 million in 2004. I'm not so sure if Kennedy can raise that much money. The thing is that those who are currently in the Senate and the Congress have easier time raising money. Governors and mayors also can raise money. For example, Hillary will have about $10 million left AFTER November election. That's huge. Can Kennedy compete? I'm not so sure.

Kennedy is a kind of brand name, but Robert F. Kennedy Jr. himself is not as well-know as people like Hillary Clinton, Rudolph Giuliani and John McCain. How does Robert F. Kennedy Jr. manage to get the name known? It costs time and money.

[Christoph]

How aboute "Kennedy is Back!" ??? With some decent marketing who knows...? But maybe you are right. Hilary for presidnet. Yipeee:o

[stoli_sambuca]

Hilary for presidnet. Yipeee:o
That's the rumor and also given the fact that she'll have $10 million left after the upcoming election makes you wonder what she's up to.

Mitt Romney is going to run probably. Also Pataki. It's believed that Kerry and Edwards will run again. ... not too many fresh faces, but we'll see ...

[Gee_Queen]

Certainly not Kerry.

Hillary has some chances but nobody is really ecstatic about her.

[stoli_sambuca]

Hillary has some chances but all people I know are not really ecstatic about her.
Her voting record shows that she leans toward right, which is contrary to the image that the main stream media projects. It doesn't seem that she speaks with conviction, which is just like all other politicians, but, you know, it's disappointing. It seems that she lacks emotional intelligence. Bill had great emotional intelligence. Reagan also.

[Gee_Queen]

She is cold. No warmth and enthusiasm.

[stoli_sambuca]

She is cold. No warmth and enthusiasm.
That's what I mean. Many people didn't agree with Bill, but many of them didn't hate Bill. Many people didn't agree with Reagan, but many of them didn't hate Reagan, either. Hillary is not like them. Putting her intelligence, voting record, ideology and what have you aside, she needs emotional intelligence if she wants to win. She can probably get Democratic nomination, but she needs to be able to crack a good joke if she wants to go forward as a politician, if she wants to become the next President ...

[Christoph]

It is interesting too see that there are no "impressive" polticians at hand.
Most of them are dull or boring. No charisma or charme. Nothing that makes you jump and say: "He/She is it!"

Or they are in hide mode. Who knows?

[Christoph]

As long as I count the votes what are you going to do about it?’ --William Marcy (Boss) Tweed during the 1871 New York City election

In one way, I live in a very historical voting region of the United States. Just a few miles down the road was a little known incident called the Hispanic Massacre. In the early 1900’s, several Hispanics attempted to vote and were gunned down and murdered. Nearby is also the county that produced Ballot Box 13, a mysterious box filled with hundreds of falsified ballots that landed Lyndon B. Johnson a seat in the Senate. When several individuals protested the ballot and election, they were jailed.

http://cgi.wn.com/?action=display&article=49115122&template=worldnews/index.txt&index=recent

[Christoph]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Wednesday took responsibility for his party's losses on Election Night and said he is willing to work with congressional Democrats on the major issues during the last two years of his presidency.

"I'm obviously disappointed with the outcome of the election and, as the head of the Republican Party, I share a large part of the responsibility," Bush said during a East Room news conference at the White House.

"I told my party's leaders that it is now our duty to put the elections behind us and work together with the Democrats and independents on the great issues facing this country." (Read a transcript of Bush's comments)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/08/election.bush/index.html