Nader attempts to challenge results

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

For all those that are whining about Nader being an egomaniac, let me remind you AGAIN, that the Democrats are actually PUSHING NADER to do this.  They are having people write letters to Nader urging him to challenge the ballot counts, and just overall fraud in general.  Stop acting like Nader is just doing this out of the blue.  Nader and his people will basically be doing the work, and then not getting the credit on the radio talk shows, when these democrat supporters start stealing his material and using it as talking points on their shows.  If you listened to Air America for 5 minutes last week, you heard the hosts giving out Nader's email and address to write letters begging him to challenge the fraud.  Of course these were the same hypocrites that said Nader is "insignificant" or does not deserve to have a voice etc........cause yes, this 70+ year old man, is just REEKING of ego

If I was Nader I'd probably tell them to go eff themselves.

Well what the democrats fail to realize is that Nader would just as prone and happy to report their fraudulent ways also. Nader is not in this to WIN an election, or try and help Kerry in anyway. Nader is just concerned about voter fraud across the board, and he doesn't care who is causing it.

Amen. That's what I've been trying to say.

 

I would have told the Dems to go to hell.

 

Ralph is a bigger man than me.

[CheesalaIsGood 0]

Because it's unnecessary bullshit at this point.  It's for the Democrats own good that they just except what happened and not pull any of this recount bullshit.  The party is going to get hurt with every person that bitches about this.  If there's some kind of mass recount you can kiss the Democratic party goodbye shortly after.

 

I for one have been sick of the election since August and I'm ready to move on.  I'm sure most people are as well.

Again, if it kills the Dems, why would you care?

Because a one-party state is very much not in anybody's interests.

-=Mike

This makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

[Guest MikeSC]

Two quick points...

 

1. The exit polls first showed up at 'The Corner', also known as The National Review's blog. Not exactly a left wing blog. They were then pretty much sent out among all the blogs, if Bush had been shown winning in those polls, I bet LGF would've hyped them more than dailykos.

 

2. The Democratic Party's portion of the popular vote dropped one percent. I know Mike dreams about a world with 65 GOP Senaters and 300 GOP House Rep's with the Democratic Party being kept around like the Washington Generals, but it's not going to happen anytime soon.

No, it actually FIRST appeared on Wonkette and Daily Kos (suffice to say, not pro-Bush sites). Drudge got it from there and it spread from that point. But don't let that slow down your theory.

2. The Democratic Party's portion of the popular vote dropped one percent. I know Mike dreams about a world with 65 GOP Senaters and 300 GOP House Rep's with the Democratic Party being kept around like the Washington Generals, but it's not going to happen anytime soon.

And for the 2d straight election, the Dems lost an election they were "supposed" to win. If you are unable to notice a clear downward trend, then there is nothing I can do for you.

-=Mike

[cabbageboy 0]

Just wondering but why of all places would Nader challenger NH? Was there really all that much in the way of tampering or fraud there? I guess he can't challenge OH since he wasn't on the ballot there...but what about FL?

 

To be honest I'm not all that worried about FL right now. There may well have been some shady doings there this time, but hardly enough to cover 377,000 votes.

 

OH is another matter. I watched Keith Olbermann's show last night for the first time since he was going to report on some curious election numbers. I think to some extent this stuff is conjecture and bullshit: FL counties that are heavily registered Dems going for Bush, the locked doors while counting in Warren, OH, etc. With those it is entirely possible that in those panhandle areas of FL and the GA border that the registration is technically highly Democrat...it's just that they haven't voted that way in years (much like rural KY...heavily Democrat but they don't VOTE that way). Also, there really is no evidence in Warren, OH that they manipulated votes or anything, just that they had some goofy terror warning and locked things down.

 

There ARE some aspects in OH that need to be looked into however. The nearly 3900 votes that Bush got extra in Columbus is a good example. Was this a one precinct fluke, or did it happen in other places across the state? Also, the 93,000 extra votes in Cuyahoga Co. (Cleveland) than actual voters seems curious to me, it'd be nice to have a legit explanation of this. Also, Olbermann mentioned 92,000 "spoiled" ballots, which I assume are akin to the hanging chad ballots of FL in 2000. OH actually has a standard for such ballots I believe, so is there a plan to count these?

 

I am not asking the Democrats to ask for recount after recount like Gore did in 2000. But an accurate final count might be nice.

[Guest MikeSC]

There were cases in Detroit of GOP observers being removed from any semblance of the counting process, while Dems were allowed to stay.

 

There are numerous things one can complain about when it comes to the election. Nothing is enough to change the result.

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

The sexual breakdown (what was it, 57% female?) indicates a serious flaw.

 

Nope. The pollsters release data presenting male and female preferences seperately--this automatically weights sex appropriately.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

So why are we even discussing. Any sane human being will tell you the exit polls don't mean shit. Just leave the election as it is. The longer the Democrats are in denial about losing the longer it's going to take for them to actually get a clue.

This phD suggests that the exit polls might, as you so eloquently put it, "mean shit."

 

http://www.legjoints.com/AmericanElectionF...lained-exit.pdf

[Guest BDC]

Just because someone has a PhD doesn't mean they aren't a fool.

[Guest MikeSC]

So why are we even discussing.  Any sane human being will tell you the exit polls don't mean shit.  Just leave the election as it is.  The longer the Democrats are in denial about losing the longer it's going to take for them to actually get a clue.

This phD suggests that the exit polls might, as you so eloquently put it, "mean shit."

 

http://www.legjoints.com/AmericanElectionF...lained-exit.pdf

1) Ph.D's have an unending capacity for buying into idiotic theories.

 

2) Any statistician worth his or her salt would say that the actual vote totals are more legit than exit polls.

 

If the vote was hacked, you'd have seen a definite pattern to it --- and you'd have to have thousands of people involved and keep it quiet (since you'd have to have county AND state officials on board with this --- and anybody they asked and who refused had to not say anything).

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

So why are we even discussing.  Any sane human being will tell you the exit polls don't mean shit.  Just leave the election as it is.  The longer the Democrats are in denial about losing the longer it's going to take for them to actually get a clue.

This phD suggests that the exit polls might, as you so eloquently put it, "mean shit."

 

http://www.legjoints.com/AmericanElectionF...lained-exit.pdf

1) Ph.D's have an unending capacity for buying into idiotic theories.

 

2) Any statistician worth his or her salt would say that the actual vote totals are more legit than exit polls.

 

If the vote was hacked, you'd have seen a definite pattern to it --- and you'd have to have thousands of people involved and keep it quiet (since you'd have to have county AND state officials on board with this --- and anybody they asked and who refused had to not say anything).

-=Mike

Did you even read the article? What was the idiotic theory?

 

The article didn't have anything to do with fraud--it just showed that the exit polls would be hard to eff up.

 

Speaking of idiotic theories, did you hear that liberal groups spun the exit polls?

[Guest MikeSC]

I've heard numerous reasons.

 

The author was attempting to prove fraud because the exit polls did not agree with the ACTUAL VOTE totals --- ignoring that there is not a statistician on Earth who'd claim that exit polls would be more valid than US election totals.

-=Mike

...They, as they ALWAYS do, understated the Republican turnout and oversampled women. Pretty simple stuff...

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

The author was attempting to prove fraud

 

Read the first sentence right under "Summary and Implications"

 

"My purpose in this paper...has not been to allege election theft"

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

They, as they ALWAYS do, understated the Republican turnout and oversampled women

 

Read the quote by Dick Morris on page 8.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

They, as they ALWAYS do, understated the Republican turnout

 

Read the "Under-representation" section.

[Guest MikeSC]

They, as they ALWAYS do, understated the Republican turnout and oversampled women

 

Read the quote by Dick Morris on page 8.

And Dick has also said THESE polls were completely wrong and should be investigated by Congress, as it reeks of an attempt to suppress the Bush vote.

 

If you want consistency.

Read the first sentence right under "Summary and Implications"

 

"My purpose in this paper...has not been to allege election theft"

Just that the discrepancy is a legit issue that warrants public attention. And that the press needs to answer the fraud charges.

 

The only thing that should be investigated is why this was even leaked in the first place.

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

And Dick has also said THESE polls were completely wrong and should be investigated by Congress, as it reeks of an attempt to suppress the Bush vote.

 

If you want consistency.

I would support that.

 

Just that the discrepancy is a legit issue that warrants public attention. And that the press needs to answer the fraud charges.

I would support that, too.

 

I want clean elections. I don't care if it benefits my side or the bad guys.

[Guest MikeSC]

And Dick has also said THESE polls were completely wrong and should be investigated by Congress, as it reeks of an attempt to suppress the Bush vote.

 

If you want consistency.

I would support that.

 

Just that the discrepancy is a legit issue that warrants public attention. And that the press needs to answer the fraud charges.

I would support that, too.

 

I want clean elections. I don't care if it benefits my side or the bad guys.

The VOTE isn't the problem. The vote was fine and dandy.

 

The POLLS are.

-=Mike

[2GOLD 0]

The bad guys?

 

Just out of curiousity, which side is the bad guys? Cause from where I sit, both sides are exactly the same only one seems to overreact without the backbone to back it up.

 

If the Democrats are the good guys then I guess the line between bad and good has been erased only to be replaced by a fine paste of bullshit.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

I was joking. I was playing on the fact that Mike seems to think that only the other side is capable of chicanery.

[Guest MikeSC]

I was joking. I was playing on the fact that Mike seems to think that only the other side is capable of chicanery.

No I do not.

 

Thanks for playing, though.

-=Mike

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

And Dick has also said THESE polls were completely wrong and should be investigated by Congress, as it reeks of an attempt to suppress the Bush vote.

 

If you want consistency.

I would support that.

 

Just that the discrepancy is a legit issue that warrants public attention. And that the press needs to answer the fraud charges.

I would support that, too.

 

I want clean elections. I don't care if it benefits my side or the bad guys.

The VOTE isn't the problem. The vote was fine and dandy.

 

The POLLS are.

-=Mike

There's a lot of these...

 

E-voting irregularities raise eyebrows, blood pressure

 

Thu Nov 4, 6:58 AM ET

 

 

Concern over electronic voting technology was not assuaged Tuesday as glitches, confusion and human error raised a welter of problems across the country, even while e-vote watchdogs prepared to file suits challenging the results derived from the controversial machines.

 

 

New rules, new voters and a tight presidential contest combined to create "a recipe for problems," said Sean Greene, who was watching Cleveland polls for the Election Reform Information Project, a nonpartisan research group on election reform.

 

 

Nearly one in three voters, including about half of those in Florida, were expected to cast ballots using ATM-style voting machines that computer scientists have criticized for their potential for software glitches, hacking and malfunctioning.

 

 

In South Carolina, problems were reported in a handful of precincts in two counties using electronic machines. Officials said voters were forced to switch to paper ballots while technicians got the iVotronic touch screens from Electronic Systems & Software up and running within about 90 minutes.

 

 

And in Volusia County, Florida, a memory card in an optical-scan voting machine failed Monday at an early voting site and didn't count 13,000 ballots. Officials planned to feed the ballots, in which voters fill in a bubble, and count them Tuesday.

 

 

Many of the problems with electronic voting - whether accidental or intentional - may not be known until well after Tuesday, if at all. Most of the ATM-style machines, including all of Florida's, lack paper records that could be used to verify the electronic results in a recount.

 

 

The Electronic Frontier Foundation's VerifiedVoting.org, which has been monitoring the implementation of e-voting machines in the U.S., warned on Monday that over 20 percent of the machines tested by observers around the country failed to record votes properly. The organization recommended that voters choosing to use touchscreen voting methods be sure to double-check the summary screen to confirm that their votes had been properly registered.

 

 

BlackBoxVoting.org, the site organized by e-voting activist Bev Harris, announced early Wednesday that it plans to conduct what the site describes as the largest Freedom of Information Act request in history, requesting internal computer logs and other documents from 3,000 individual counties and townships using electronic voting machines.

 

 

According to a release posted on the site, "Such a request filed in King County, Washington on Sept. 15, following the primary election six weeks ago, uncovered an internal audit log containing a three-hour deletion on election night; 'trouble slips' revealing suspicious modem activity; and profound problems with security, including accidental disclosure of critically sensitive remote access information to poll workers, office personnel, and even, in a shocking blunder, to Black Box Voting activists."

 

Source: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...wsbloodpressure

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

So, in conclusion, what was the problem with the exit polls?

 

1. Kerry voters as a whole were oversampled

a. Women voters were oversampled (and tend to go for Kerry)

b. Republicans were undersampled

2. Exit polls are unreliable

3. Vast Left Wing Conspiracy to manipulate the exit poll numbers

 

I guess if you throw enough crap at the wall it will eventually stick.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/041118/sfth040_1.html

 

UC Berkeley Study Questions Florida E-Vote Count

Thursday November 18, 1:23 am ET

Research Team Calls for Immediate Investigation

 

 

BERKELEY, Calif., Nov. 18 /PRNewswire/ --

When: Thursday, November 18, 2004, 10:00 a.m. PST

 

Where: UC Berkeley campus, Survey Research Center Conference Room --

2538 Channing Way (intersection of Channing/Bowditch). Parking on Durant

near Telegraph.

 

What: A research team at UC Berkeley will report that irregularities

associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded

130,000 - 260,000 or more excess votes to President George W. Bush in

Florida in the 2004 presidential election. The study shows an unexplained

discrepancy between votes for President Bush in counties where electronic

voting machines were used versus counties using traditional voting

methods. Discrepancies this large or larger rarely arise by chance -- the

probability is less than 0.1 percent. The research team, led by Professor

Michael Hout, will formally disclose results of the study at the press

conference.

[Dr. Tom 0]

Hey, 2000 called... it wants its sour grapes back.

[Big Ol' Smitty 0]

 

Again, I'm not arguing about the results of the election, but about the transparency of the electoral process.

 

Democracy is not in voting, but in vote counting.