View Full Version : **Official OHIO RECOUNT thread**
DLR'sCock
11-15-2004, 03:40 PM
Recount in Ohio a Sure Thing
t r u t h o u t | Press Release
Monday 15 November 2004
Green Party Campaign Raises $150,000 in 4 Days, Shifts Gears to Phase II
WASHINGTON -- November 15 -- There will be a recount of the presidential vote in Ohio.
On Thursday, David Cobb, the Green Party’s 2004 presidential candidate, announced his intention to seek a recount of the vote in Ohio. Since the required fee for a statewide recount is $113,600, the only question was whether that money could be raised in time to meet the filing deadline. That question has been answered.
“Thanks to the thousands of people who have contributed to this effort, we can say with certainty that there will be a recount in Ohio,” said Blair Bobier, Media Director for the Cobb-LaMarche campaign.
“The grassroots support for the recount has been astounding. The donations have come in fast and furiously, with the vast majority in the $10-$50 range, allowing us to meet our goal for the first phase of the recount effort in only four days,” said Bobier.
Bobier said the campaign is still raising money for the next phase of the recount effort which will be recruiting, training and mobilizing volunteers to monitor the actual recount.
The Ohio presidential election was marred by numerous press and independent reports of mis-marked and discarded ballots, problems with electronic voting machines and the targeted disenfranchisement of African American voters. A number of citizens’ groups and voting rights organizations are holding the second of two hearings today in Columbus, Ohio, to take testimony from voters, poll watchers and election experts about problems with the Ohio vote. The hearing, from 6-9 p.m., will be held at the Courthouse, meeting room A, 373 S. High St., in Columbus. The Cobb-LaMarche campaign will be represented at the hearing by campaign manager Lynne Serpe.
A demand for a recount in Ohio can only be filed by a presidential candidate who was either a certified write-in candidate or on the ballot in that state. Both Green Party candidate David Cobb and Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik will be demanding a recount. No other candidate has stated an intention to seek a recount and no other citizen or organization would have legal standing to do so in Ohio. The Cobb-LaMarche campaign is still exploring the possibility of seeking recounts in other states but no decision has been made yet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/1100428444286470.xml
Ohio Voters Tell of Election Day Troubles at Hearing
By Reginald Fields
The Cleveland Plain Dealer
Sunday 14 November 2004
Tales of waiting more than five hours to vote, voter intimidation, under-trained polling-station workers and too few or broken voting machines largely in urban or heavily minority areas were retold Saturday at a public hearing organized by voter-rights groups.
For three hours, burdened voters, one after another, offered sworn testimony about Election Day voter suppression and irregularities that they believe are threatening democracy.
The hearing, sponsored by the Election Protection Coalition, was to collect testimony of voting troubles that might be used to seek legislative changes to Ohio's election process.
The organizers chose Ohio because it was a swing state in the presidential election as well as the site of numerous claims of election fraud and voter disenfranchisement.
"I think a lot of us had a sense that something had deeply went wrong on Nov. 2 and it had to do with the election process and procedures in place that were unacceptable," said Amy Kaplan, one of the hearing's coordinators.
Kaplan said the hearing gave everyday citizens a chance to have their concerns placed into public record.
Both a written and video report on the hearing will be provided to anyone who wants a copy, especially state lawmakers who are considering mandating Election Day changes, Kaplan said.
Many of the voters who testified were clearly Democrats who wonder if their losing presidential candidate, Sen. John Kerry, was able to draw all the votes that were intended for him.
"I call on Sen. Kerry to un-concede until there is a full count of the votes," said Werner Lange of Trumbull County, who claimed that polling places in his Northeast Ohio neighborhood had half the number of voting machines that were needed.
"This caused a bottleneck at polling stations, and many people left without voting," he said.
Others said they were testifying not on political grounds but out of concern for a suspicious election system that should be above reproach.
Harvey Wasserman of Bexley said he tried to vote absentee with the same home address he has used for 18 years but was told he couldn't because his absentee application had the wrong address.
"But the notice telling me I had the wrong address arrived at the right address," he said. "I wonder, how many of these absentee ballots were rejected for no good reason?
"My concern is not out of the outcome of the election," Wasserman said, "but that this could go on and an election could be stolen. And we simply can't have that in a democracy."
-------
ODShowtime
11-15-2004, 03:43 PM
finally, some kind of action! :)
DLR'sCock
11-15-2004, 03:48 PM
Even though Nader was not supposed to be on the ballot in Ohio(I wonder how many ballots he was "accidentily" left on), he is calling for a recount also...
So we have Independent candidate Ralph Nader, Libertarian candidate Badnarik, and Green candidate Cobb all calling for a recount.....oh yeah, there are many many numerous organizations calling for a recount...
tick tock, let's see what happens...
John Ashcroft
11-15-2004, 03:50 PM
This just in!
Liberal's still whining over losing the last election.
Stayed tuned for updates.
DLR'sCock
11-15-2004, 03:58 PM
I didn't know Badnarik was a liberal...
Nobody won OR lost the election if the votes cannot be accounted for.
If you believe otherwise, then move to Iraq where such elections are accepted.
Originally posted by DLR's Cock
http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1100169336227680.xml
Kerry Campaign Scrutinizes Ohio
By Scott Hiaasen
The Cleveland Plain Dealer
Thursday 11 November 2004
Checks provisional ballots, other issues
Lawyers with John Kerry's presidential campaign are gathering information from Ohio election boards about uncounted ballots and other unresolved issues from last week's election.
Attorneys say they are not trying to challenge the election but are only carrying out Kerry's promise to make sure that all the votes in Ohio are counted. They describe this effort, which began this week, as a "fact-finding mission."
Unofficial totals give President Bush a 136,000-vote advantage over Kerry in Ohio, but the totals won't be certified until early next month.
Dan Hoffheimer, the statewide counsel for the Kerry campaign, said the goal is to identify any voting problems to prevent them in the future - and quell doubts about the legitimacy of the Ohio election being raised on the Internet.
"We're not expecting to change the outcome of the election," Hoffheimer said. "We want to be sure that the public knows what really happened."
The campaign's inquiries come against a backdrop of increasing hysteria among Internet activists who, in chains of e-mails and articles, claim that Ohio's election was so riddled with problems that the outcome may not be legitimate.
For example, a confusing counting method used in Cuyahoga County's election totals wrongly suggests that more than two dozen suburbs had more votes than voters. And a computer glitch in Franklin County added nearly 3,900 phantom votes for Bush in one precinct.
"There were enough problems reported around the state that undermined people's confidence," Hoffheimer said.
The Kerry campaign has compiled a list of more than 30 questions for local election officials, asking about the number of absentee and provisional ballots, any reports of equipment malfunctions on election night, and any ballots that still listed third-party challenger Ralph Nader as a candidate. (Nader was removed from the ballot by Secretary of State Ken Blackwell.)
As of yesterday, the attorneys had not yet contacted the Cuyahoga County's elections director, Michael Vu.
Election officials cannot begin to officially canvass the ballots until Saturday. But in Cuyahoga County, they have begun reviewing provisional ballots to make sure the voters are registered and did not vote more than once.
This review process is being monitored by representatives of both political parties. Mark Griffin, a Democratic lawyer, said he's worried that some provisional ballots - special ballots given to voters who believe they are registered but who don't appear on the voter rolls - may be discarded because poll workers failed to sign the ballot envelope as required.
But election officials said they would count these provisional ballots if the voter's signature matched the one in their records.
About 155,000 provisional ballots were cast in Ohio, including nearly 25,000 in Cuyahoga County. Whether these ballots are counted is a decision left to the local election boards, which are each made up of two Democrats and two Republicans.
DLR'sCock
11-15-2004, 04:03 PM
Also, supposedly Nader won his recount bid for New Hampshire....
Please post all articles related to the Ohio recount in this thread.
Thanks.
bueno bob
11-15-2004, 04:10 PM
sigh....
Guitar Shark
11-15-2004, 04:12 PM
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/forumfun/sucks13.jpg
Originally posted by bueno bob
sigh....
If you don't give a fuck now, when WILL you give a fuck?
When the death toll from Junior's war tops Vietnam?
When the economic disaster worse than the Great Depression finally arrives?
When China finally has enough of BCE/PNAC imperialism and sends an army of 100 million or so over here?
Will you give a fuck then?
If you're willing to allow those kinds of things to happen to this country, then the least you can do is prove to me that a slight majority of FUCKING IDIOTS actually voted in favor of enabling it.
McCarrens
11-15-2004, 04:30 PM
Ford, what the HELL are you talking about!?!
Originally posted by McCarrens
Ford, what the HELL are you talking about!?!
I'm talking about what's likely to happen under 4 more years of the BCE.
I'm talking about people who claim to be patriotic Americans but when faced with the question of whether votes were actually counted in a Presidential election respond with "Who gives a FUCK??"
I'm talking about the very goddamned existence of American Democracy itself being on life support right now, and some of you guys can't wait to pull the plug.
Remember the first rule of politics. The ballots don't make the results, the counters make the results. The counters. Keep counting.
First, don't fuck with me. I'm a desperate man! And second, I want some fresh coffee. And third, I want a recount!
Originally posted by Figs
Remember the first rule of politics. The ballots don't make the results, the counters make the results. The counters. Keep counting.
Sounds like a paraphrase of old Joe Stalin.
His version was "It's not who votes, it's who counts the votes"
I think Joe would have loved Electro Fraud machines :(
McCarrens
11-15-2004, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by FORD
I'm talking about people who claim to be patriotic Americans but when faced with the question of whether votes were actually counted in a Presidential election respond with "Who gives a FUCK??"
The people aren't asking if the votes were counted because they ALL KNOW THE VOTES WERE COUNTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Originally posted by FORD
Sounds like a paraphrase of old Joe Stalin.
His version was "It's not who votes, it's who counts the votes"
I think Joe would have loved Electro Fraud machines :(
Gangs of New York (2002) :confused:
Originally posted by McCarrens
The people aren't asking if the votes were counted because they ALL KNOW THE VOTES WERE COUNTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!
How do they know that? Because FAUX News said so? Because an Ohio Secretary of State who is a known Bush partisan said so?
Because Judas fucking Iskerryot threw in the towel?
None of that proves ANYTHING.
Show me the ballots, or everybody fucking votes again, using a ball point pen and a piece of paper.
McCarrens
11-15-2004, 05:19 PM
Ford, what are you trying to get done. By your own admission you hate "Judas IsKerryot." Even if their was a recount he would still lose, but if he did win, what would it accomplish?
Nothing.
We all know Kerry is nothing but a big BCE patsy.
Hell, "they" probably secured his Democratic presidential nomination just so Bush can have an easy win...
Nickdfresh
11-15-2004, 06:39 PM
Originally posted by Figs
Gangs of New York (2002) :confused:
THe script quoted Stalin in order to characterize "The Butcher" as a despotic tyrant.
Dr. Love
11-15-2004, 06:50 PM
I don't see how this is helpful. At least Kerry knew when to give up and move on instead of dragging this out. Others need to take a cue from that.
Cathedral
11-15-2004, 07:10 PM
No, no, This is a republic governed by a democracy, it is good to exercise their right to buy a recount if they want one.
I don't believe it will yield them the result they seek, but everyone gets their re-count.
Here's the ballots Ford wants, and all other Liberal's who can't sleep at night.
I want them re-counted, and then it will be put to bed regardless of the outcome as far as i am concerned.
You can re-count the whole damn country if you want to, as many times as you want to, until Inauguration Day.
As long as the man who has 270 or more Electoral votes takes the oath as scheduled, I'm still a proud muh-fuckin American, thank you very much.
Viking
11-15-2004, 08:19 PM
You liberals will cling onto any wild-hair-up-the-ass theory that comes along, won't you? LMFAO :D YOU! LOST!
http://blatanttruth.org/perc_chg.jpg
The odds of a snowstorm in downtown Hell are higher than the odds of these numbers being factual.
bueno bob
11-16-2004, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by FORD
If you don't give a fuck now, when WILL you give a fuck?
In about 4 years.
When the death toll from Junior's war tops Vietnam?
And I can stop that from happening how? I'm too old to enlist, and they wouldn't take me anyway. I feel sorry for the kids over there, but I have no family there, and I've got no vested interest either way. It sucks, but I'm in no position to do anything about it. My vote was, and I used it to the best of my ability. Unfortunately, the majority of America spoke louder than my singular little vote for Kerry. B.F.D.
When the economic disaster worse than the Great Depression finally arrives?
Isn't it already here? I'm out of a fuckin' job, too. Might as well be the Great Depression for me, considering I can't hardly afford to feed my three kids and continually wonder where I'm going to scrounge up enough money for macaroni and cheese or top raman.
When China finally has enough of BCE/PNAC imperialism and sends an army of 100 million or so over here?
China's got me concerned, and if they come over, I'll hit the streets with whatever weapons I can find and take as many of those fuckers with me as I can. Until then, I'm not going to sweat at night over it and lose sleep.
Will you give a fuck then?
As much as I do now.
If you're willing to allow those kinds of things to happen to this country, then the least you can do is prove to me that a slight majority of FUCKING IDIOTS actually voted in favor of enabling it.
Dude, I've said this to you before - short of recounting EVERY SINGLE VOTE, you will NOT be satisfied. I can tell that much just based on reading your posts. If you're willing to take it that far and go your own way, knock yourself out, obtain a lawyer and push it as far as the supreme court if you must. I'll warn you, the cost is going to be excessive...your call, though.
Until then, I love America, disagree with Bush, but am forced to live with the situation until 4 more years have gone by, short of anything miraculous happening.
bueno bob
11-16-2004, 02:36 PM
Originally posted by FORD
How do they know that? Because FAUX News said so? Because an Ohio Secretary of State who is a known Bush partisan said so?
No, because EVERY media outlet has reported, at this point in time, that George W. Bush won his bid for re-election. No one, outside of private parties, is contesting that.
Because Judas fucking Iskerryot threw in the towel?
He's a traitor because he admitted defeat in a timely manner when it was OBVIOUS to even the most simple-minded casual observer that he lost?
None of that proves ANYTHING.
Ford, no offense, but I think it proves a lot of sour grapes on your part. Life WILL go on, trust me on this.
Show me the ballots, or everybody fucking votes again, using a ball point pen and a piece of paper.
Ford, I'm voting for you in 2008 :)
McCarrens
11-16-2004, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by FORD
http://blatanttruth.org/perc_chg.jpg
The odds of a snowstorm in downtown Hell are higher than the odds of these numbers being factual.
No, what it really means is that people are getting smarter, both in how they detect bullshit (from the liberal media and the libs in general) and how they can choose the right man for the right job at the right time (Bush).
Yeah, and Hitler built the Autobahn. What a great guy :rolleyes:
McCarrens
11-16-2004, 03:51 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Yeah, and Hitler built the Autobahn. What a great guy :rolleyes:
Oh look, it's Ford not making any sense again.
I see him any minute now making up a thread about how the BCE hacked the site because he was getting a little too close to the "truth"...
Nickdfresh
11-16-2004, 04:28 PM
Originally posted by FORD
How do they know that? Because FAUX News said so? Because an Ohio Secretary of State who is a known Bush partisan said so?
No, because EVERY media outlet has reported, at this point in time, that George W. Bush won his bid for re-election. No one, outside of private parties, is contesting that.
Because Judas fucking Iskerryot threw in the towel?
He's a traitor because he admitted defeat in a timely manner when it was OBVIOUS to even the most simple-minded casual observer that he lost?
None of that proves ANYTHING.
Ford, no offense, but I think it proves a lot of sour grapes on your part. Life WILL go on, trust me on this.
Show me the ballots, or everybody fucking votes again, using a ball point pen and a piece of paper. ”
Ford, I'm voting for you in 2008
Keith Olbermann of MSNBC has reported on some of this election fraud stuff saying he believed the regular mainstream media conceded when Kerry conceded simply because they were tired from covering the story since March, wanted four days off, and wanted to avoid a repeat of 2000. He still thinks there MAY be a story in there somewhere.
McCarrens
11-16-2004, 04:34 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Keith Olbermann of MSNBC has reported on some of this election fraud stuff saying he believed the regular mainstream media conceded when Kerry conceded simply because they were tired from covering the story since March, wanted four days off, and wanted to avoid a repeat of 2000. He still thinks there MAY be a story in there somewhere.
He's just desperate for a story...
Nickdfresh
11-16-2004, 04:45 PM
Originally posted by McCarrens
He's just desperate for a story...
Would be a big one if it amounts to anything.
bueno bob
11-16-2004, 06:54 PM
Originally posted by Nickdfresh
Would be a big one if it amounts to anything.
If it DID...DID being the operative word...I haven't heard of anything short of one or two isolated polling areas that may have had a problem, but we (Oregon) went to Kerry anyway...
What confuses me is from what I heard from several different news channels the night of the election was that, even IF Kerry took Ohio, he was going to lose by a fairly large margin anyway unless he won every other single state by a landslide, and that didn't happen, either.
If Ford's right and there IS indeed some large mass-conspiracy afoot and America truly ISN'T divided between "The United States of Canada" that voted for Kerry and "Jesusland" that voted for Bush, I'll be the first to eat my hat.
Just from an outside, uninformed opinion though, I don't smell any real smoke on this, just pot-stirring.
DLR'sCock
11-17-2004, 03:17 PM
Well time will tell....
DLR'sCock
11-17-2004, 03:21 PM
Election 2004: Lingering Suspicions
By Greg Guma
United Press International
Tuesday 16 November 2004
The Internet, that wonderful engine of democracy, is rife with messages purporting to demonstrate how the U.S. presidential election results were manipulated in ways benefiting the Republicans.
To start, voting analyses of selected Florida and Ohio precincts conducted by the University of Pennsylvania's Steven Freeman and independent investigator Faun Otter have revealed surprisingly high percentages for Bush. Those skeptical about the results further suggest spoiled ballots and provisional votes, which may have a disproportionate impact on the results in the areas with high concentrations of minority voters, could have made the difference.
The earliest exit poll data released on Nov. 2 indicated Kerry - who had run narrowly behind Bush but within the margin of error for most of the race - was rolling to victory and carrying many of the battleground states, including Florida and Ohio, by higher than expected margins. These same polls also suggested the Republicans were ahead in most of the tight U.S. Senate races.
By the end of the night, however, the predictions in the presidential exit were wrong while the Senate projections were largely correct.
Exit polling by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International, which created the National Election Poll for ABC, AP, CBS, CNN, Fox, and NBC, had shown Kerry leading by 3 percentage points in Florida and by 4 points in Ohio. Kerry lost Florida by 5.2 percent, with Bush running ahead of his 2000 performance in 58 of the state's 67 counties. In Ohio, the margin was 2.5 percent.
Florida's 8.2-percent spread - between the early exits and the results - is more than double the standard error rate. In Ohio, the spread is 6.5 percent.
In Baker County, Fla. located near the city of Jacksonville and just across the border from Georgia, there are 12,887 registered voters: 69.3 percent are Democrats, 24.3 percent are Republicans. Yet 2,180 of county residents voted for Kerry while 7,738 voted for Bush - the opposite of what some election critics say was the typically pattern elsewhere in the United States.
In Florida's Dixie County, located on the Gulf Coast between Tallahassee and Tampa, 77.5 percent of the 4,988 registered voters are Democrats, 15 percent are Republicans. On Election Day, Bush carried the county with 4,433 votes vs. 1,959 for Kerry.
Nationally, few outlets have pursued the story of what happened in Baker and Dixie, why and whether it actually indicates a problem with the counting of the ballots. Most of the coverage of the alleged irregularities has focused on why the exit polls were so far off. Skeptics dismiss them as flawed or somehow favoring Kerry and say that, though they may have influenced the narrative of election coverage, they couldn't affect the outcome.
To explain the difference, some unconvincing theories have been floated including the one offered by the architects of the sampling system used for exit polling. They say Kerry voters were simply more willing to answer the questions. It's called the "chattiness thesis" and it sounds like a weak excuse - but so was the pollsters' earlier claims that the numbers were right, the media just read them wrong. In an article for Tom Paine.com, a liberal Internet publication, Greg Palast, an author and frequent critic of the 2000 election returns in Florida, goes farther.
"Although the exit polls show that most voters in Ohio punched cards for Kerry-Edwards, thousands of these votes were simply not recorded," he writes. Palast says he thinks the election was decided by "spoilage," the small part of the vote that is voided and thrown away.
In Ohio, as in Florida four years ago, a large number of spoiled votes were cast on punch cards, 54 percent of which were cast by black voters, according to statisticians investigating the issue for Verified Voting, a group formed by a Stanford University professor to assess electronic voting. Verified Voting has collected 31,000 reports of alleged election abnormalities.
Other factors also could have affected the vote count, including last-minute legal challenges filed in several states, both by Democrats trying to block Ralph Nader from appearing on state ballots and Republicans concerned about lax registration rules. Long lines at precincts in the evening and the large number of total provisional ballots cast across the United States also may have influenced the outcome somewhat.
Taken together, such factors could significantly change the vote in some areas, bringing the count more into line with the exit poll results.
Were the election results manipulated in some way? At the moment, the question invokes the same kind of polarizations generated by the election choice itself; a much more thorough analysis is needed - and will not be quick in the offing - before the Internet chatter can taken seriously, even though some will always believe it did in fact occur.
Even if the thesis can eventually be demonstrated to be accurate, that some form of manipulation did occur, the technology involved is so complex that those responsible will likely escape the consequences.
Postscript: There is as yet no solid proof that a cyber-attack occurred on Nov. 2. For one thing, it would probably require hacking into multiple local computer systems, presumably from one or more remote locations. Nevertheless, suspicions are mounting and evidence is emerging to suggest that the U.S. presidential election results were manipulated to some extent.
Could it be pulled off? As far as we know, the CIA’s successes in cyber-war include targeting specific bank accounts and shutting down computer systems. But stealing an election is considerably more difficult, requiring the alteration of data in many computers.
According to Robert Parry, writing for Consortium News, "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."
It’s a form of "information warfare," a hot item within the U.S. military since the mid-1990. The Pentagon has even produced a 13-page booklet, "Information Warfare for Dummies." Indirectly, this primer acknowledges considerable secret capabilities in these areas.
It also recognizes the sensitivity of the topic. "Due to the moral, ethical and legal questions raised by hacking, the military likes to keep a low profile on this issue," it explains.
So, did it happen here? Perhaps time will tell. But as the Pentagon readily admits, cyber-warfare has considerable advantages over other tactics. "The intrusions can be carried out remotely, transcending the boundaries of time and space," the manual explains.
And, best of all, if the fraud is ever discovered, there is such a technological buffer between those responsible and those doing the deed you might say it’s the state-of-the-art in plausible deniability.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Guma edits the Vermont Guardian, a statewide weekly, and Toward Freedom.
-------
ELVIS
11-17-2004, 03:31 PM
I just do not believe that any fraud occured...
Ohio is being recounted, and the results will hopefully put these paranoid delusions to rest...
I also predict that Bush's win margin will be greater after the recount, just as it was in Florida...
:elvis:
Switch84
11-17-2004, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by ELVIS
I just do not believe that any fraud occured...
Ohio is being recounted, and the results will hopefully put these paranoid delusions to rest...
I also predict that Bush's win margin will be greater after the recount, just as it was in Florida...
:elvis:
:D I believe that, too, Elvis! Do they REALLY want to know how badly Kerry came across to this country? It wasn't just Republicans that voted for Bush. Chew on that, Ford. Your own party members didn't even have confidence in your 'Golden Boy'.
Kerry's not the issue. Fraud is the issue. Voting machines that have no possible way to document their own accuracy are the issue. The very future of this fucking country is the issue.
ELVIS
11-17-2004, 04:45 PM
It's just not as simple as you would have us believe...
The machines are very accurate, they record their results on two independant hard drives, and votes can be recounted...
The logistics of voter fraud on the level you like to believe are incredible, and too many people would have to be involved...
Originally posted by ELVIS
It's just not as simple as you would have us believe...
The machines are very accurate, they record their results on two independant hard drives, and votes can be recounted...
The logistics of voter fraud on the level you like to believe are incredible, and too many people would have to be involved...
Dude, the machines upload their results into an ordinary PC running Microsoft Access. The phone line for the modem is available to anyone making a routine public records request, since all votes are counted at the county auditors office.
So changing the votes at the county level would not be difficult at all. Bev Harris & Howard Dean demonstrated how easy it is on live televison. If you know how to change values in an Access table, you know how to hack Diebold's central vote tabulator.
As far as the number of people involved, consider the states where the problems occur.
Florida's state government is the BCE's south branch. No further explanation needed.
Ohio's Secretary of State Blackwell is a state Bush campaign chair, as Kate Harris was in 2000, and Wally O'Dell of Diebold is also based in Ohio.
So yes, you have people involved and they are located right where they need to be.
DLR'sCock
11-17-2004, 05:29 PM
The thing is, the reuslts of districts using voting machines with touch screens pretty much matched the exit polling, but there are huge discrepancies with the results of the districts using optical scnning machines(these scnned the results from punch cards) and the exit polling....
These anomalies occured in New Hampshire and pretty much every county in FL that used them too.....
Switch84
11-17-2004, 05:37 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Kerry's not the issue. Fraud is the issue. Voting machines that have no possible way to document their own accuracy are the issue. The very future of this fucking country is the issue.
:rolleyes: Let's see if you will answer this TRUTHFULLY, Ford.
Say the results were in Kerry's favor, but the results were 'iffy'. Would you rant and rave for an accurate counting of the votes knowing that it could mean Bush actually won?
4moreyears
11-17-2004, 06:36 PM
A demand for a recount in Ohio can only be filed by a presidential candidate who was either a certified write-in candidate or on the ballot in that state. Both Green Party candidate David Cobb and Libertarian candidate Michael Badnarik will be demanding a recount. No other candidate has stated an intention to seek a recount and no other citizen or organization would have legal standing to do so in Ohio.
These guys ran for president? Who the Fuck are they?
JH
Originally posted by Switch84
:rolleyes: Let's see if you will answer this TRUTHFULLY, Ford.
Say the results were in Kerry's favor, but the results were 'iffy'. Would you rant and rave for an accurate counting of the votes knowing that it could mean Bush actually won?
Let's put it this way....
If the Busheep were asking for a recount, I would NOT post stupid bandwidth wasting attachments of crying babies repeatedly or tell them to "get over it".
I haven't gotten over 2000 yet, and I never will. It was theft, coercion and judicial manipulation, not democracy.
I can accept Republican presidents if they are elected legally and fairly. Junior was not the first time, and likely not the second.
lucky wilbury
11-17-2004, 06:46 PM
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Switch84
11-17-2004, 06:54 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Let's put it this way....
If the Busheep were asking for a recount, I would NOT post stupid bandwidth wasting attachments of crying babies repeatedly or tell them to "get over it".
I haven't gotten over 2000 yet, and I never will. It was theft, coercion and judicial manipulation, not democracy.
I can accept Republican presidents if they are elected legally and fairly. Junior was not the first time, and likely not the second.
:( And you're wasting bandwidth with endless bitching and dodging a simple, yet honest, question.
Originally posted by Switch84
:( And you're wasting bandwidth with endless bitching and dodging a simple, yet honest, question.
How did I dodge the question?
I said that Busheep would have every right to ask for a recount if the situation were reversed.
Now here's what I don't understand..... You are so quick on the draw to call somebody a "racist", yet you seem to ignore the real implications of this voter fraud stories.
A lot of the precincts with "questionable" election returns are NOT in the "white" neighborhoods, and about 90,000 or so African Americans were swindled out of their right to vote in Florida in 2000.
Shouldn't this make you a little more pissed off than a comment about Michael Jackson bleaching his skin.
I know it pisses ME off!
Switch84
11-17-2004, 07:25 PM
Originally posted by FORD
How did I dodge the question?
I said that Busheep would have every right to ask for a recount if the situation were reversed.
Now here's what I don't understand..... You are so quick on the draw to call somebody a "racist", yet you seem to ignore the real implications of this voter fraud stories.
A lot of the precincts with "questionable" election returns are NOT in the "white" neighborhoods, and about 90,000 or so African Americans were swindled out of their right to vote in Florida in 2000.
Shouldn't this make you a little more pissed off than a comment about Michael Jackson bleaching his skin.
I know it pisses ME off!
:rolleyes: You did not answer the question. You only spewed more bullshit. Like this post I've quoted.
I rest my case. You are incapable of being straight forward.
How do I make this anymore goddamned clear.....
I want a President of the United States who is ELECTED, without question, on ballots that can be counted and physically presented for a recount if and when neccessary.
Now where the Hell does that leave room for doubt about where I stand?
Guitar Shark
11-17-2004, 07:40 PM
Switch asked a simple question FORD, one that called for a "yes" or "no" answer. You provided neither.
Switch84
11-17-2004, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
Switch asked a simple question FORD, one that called for a "yes" or "no" answer. You provided neither.
:killer: :xmas: Thank you!
Geezus Matt, for a lawyer, you sure don't have much in the reading comprehension department.
Let me try this one more time:
The election of the President of the United States of America is a matter of extreme importance, not only to this country, but to the entire world.
Therefore, absoulutely any and all measures neccessary should be taken to ensure that a legitimate election has indeed taken place and that there is no doubt as to the winner of that election, regardless of party.
Guitar Shark
11-17-2004, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by FORD
Geezus Matt, for a lawyer, you sure don't have much in the reading comprehension department.
Let me try this one more time:
The election of the President of the United States of America is a matter of extreme importance, not only to this country, but to the entire world.
Therefore, absoulutely any and all measures neccessary should be taken to ensure that a legitimate election has indeed taken place and that there is no doubt as to the winner of that election, regardless of party.
Actually Dave, you appear to be the only one who is having trouble comprehending Switch's question.
Her question was: "Say the results were in Kerry's favor, but the results were 'iffy'. Would you rant and rave for an accurate counting of the votes knowing that it could mean Bush actually won?"
This is a simple question calling for a yes or no answer. In true "lawyer" fashion, however, ;) you answered with smoke and mirrors.
We all know your truthful answer would be "NO." You'd sit back and enjoy the victory, while simultaneously criticizing any Republicans urging for a recount as whining facsists.
John Ashcroft
11-17-2004, 08:21 PM
Ford, how do you expect anyone to lend credence to your gripe when you repetitively stated here that you wouldn't accept any Bush victory, as far as a year before the actual election???
Face it dude, Kerry lost. And deservingly so. I really believe Dean would've offered more of a challenge. Kerry was (and is) a first-class knob. He excited exactly no one (including his billionaire wife). He's got the persona of a potato (even if you spell it according to Quayle). Your party has simply been fucking up. And you know it. Look at it's leaders for crying out loud! You know that Terry McAwful is useless! You know that Kerry has the backbone of a amoeba! You know damn well your party has been lost for quite some time! Too many special interest groups running your party. No concrete message or platform from the bunch. No plan for America's future, just the future of certain constituency groups. The JFK days are over for your party. Hell, they've been gone since he. What do you have, Carter??? Clinton??? Carter was the most miserable failure of a President in the 20th Century, and all Clinton contributed to his "legacy" was the loss of Congress and a cum-stained blue dress.
You guys need to get new management.
Originally posted by Guitar Shark
We all know your truthful answer would be "NO." You'd sit back and enjoy the victory, while simultaneously criticize any Republicans urging for a recount as whining facsists.
The "payback's a bitch" part of me would be tempted to do exactly that.
But I am no hypocrite, so as much as I would enjoy watching Busheep suffer, I would recognize that 2 fucked up elections in a row are damaging to this country regardless of who is named the "winner"
Guitar Shark
11-17-2004, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by FORD
The "payback's a bitch" part of me would be tempted to do exactly that.
But I am no hypocrite, so as much as I would enjoy watching Busheep suffer, I would recognize that 2 fucked up elections in a row are damaging to this country regardless of who is named the "winner"
I think you'd be hard pressed to find a single person here who doesn't believe that the "payback's a bitch" side of your personality would win this battle. :D
John Ashcroft
11-17-2004, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by FORD
But I am no hypocrite...
Uh hum... hum, hum, hum... bullshit, uhhum, hum, hum....
:D
Originally posted by John Ashcroft
Ford, how do you expect anyone to lend credence to your gripe when you repetitively stated here that you wouldn't accept any Bush victory, as far as a year before the actual election???
What I said, and continue to firmly believe, is that a legitimate win by Bush Jr is mathematically impossible.
Face it dude, Kerry lost. And deservingly so.
Prove it. In any election before 2000, that would be an easy enough thing to do. The fact that it cannot be proven now IS the real problem. If we no longer have legitimate elections in this country, what DO we have left?
I really believe Dean would've offered more of a challenge. Kerry was (and is) a first-class knob. He excited exactly no one (including his billionaire wife). He's got the persona of a potato (even if you spell it according to Quayle). Your party has simply been fucking up. And you know it. Look at it's leaders for crying out loud! You know that Terry McAwful is useless! You know that Kerry has the backbone of a amoeba! You know damn well your party has been lost for quite some time! Too many special interest groups running your party. No concrete message or platform from the bunch. No plan for America's future, just the future of certain constituency groups. The JFK days are over for your party. Hell, they've been gone since he. What do you have, Carter??? Clinton??? Carter was the most miserable failure of a President in the 20th Century, and all Clinton contributed to his "legacy" was the loss of Congress and a cum-stained blue dress.
You guys need to get new management.
Aside from the Carter and Clinton bashing, I can't argue with the rest of that statement. The management of the party (DLC running the DNC) is indeed the problem, and just like the BCE wing of the Republican party, they are corporatist neocon shitbags who don't give a flying fuck about the American people.
Howard Dean should be the new DNC chairman. The only downside to that is that it would mean he probably couldn't run for President in 2008. Which means he would need to find another candiate worthy as himself. It damn sure will NOT be Hillary Clinton, and I don't think Barack Obama will be reaady. Besides (as the DLNC conveniently ignored this year) Senators do not win Presidential elections, Governors do.
Maybe I should take over from Dean as DNC chair in 2006 so he can launch his campaign :)
DLR'sCock
11-18-2004, 04:54 PM
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/news/110077402787260.xml
Democrats Take up Fight Over Ballots
By Bill Sloat
Cleveland Plain Dealer
Thursday 18 November 2004
Cincinnati - Seeming to brush aside John Kerry's concession speech, the Ohio Democratic Party has launched a federal court fight over nearly 155,000 provisional ballots by contending a proper accounting of those votes might decide who really won.
In Ohio, Bush now holds a lead of about 136,000 votes over Kerry.
County officials across the state began tabulating provisional ballots Friday.
"Given the closeness of the presidential and other elections," Ohio's provisional ballots "may prove determinative of the outcome," Democrats argue in a legal filing made public Wednesday by the U.S. District Court.
The lawsuit asked U.S. District Judge Michael H. Watson to order Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell to impose uniform standards for counting provisional votes on all 88 counties. Democrats want the judge to take action quickly - before the results of the election are certified.
Watson, who was appointed by Bush, has not set a hearing.
Don McTigue, a Columbus lawyer who filed the lawsuit for the Ohio Democratic Party, said the Democrats have concerns that different standards are being applied from county to county.
"Our action is not tied to some hope of changing the outcome of the election. We're being consistent with the Kerry campaign, and the Democratic Party's interest in seeing all eligible ballots are counted," McTigue said.
Carlo LoParo, a spokesman for Blackwell, defended Ohio's rules for handling provisional ballots as explicit. He said Blackwell, a Republican, is adamant that every valid vote will be counted.
In court papers, the Democrats cite Bush v. Gore - the Supreme Court ruling after Florida's contested election that awarded Bush the White House in 2000 - as a legal precedent for the Ohio lawsuit. That case was decided by a majority of five justices.
"In Bush v. Gore, the United States Supreme Court held that the failure to provide specific standards for counting of ballots that are sufficient to assure a uniform count statewide violates the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution," their court filing said.
In Ohio, Democrats argue, the state lacks clear statewide rules that guarantee provisional ballots are processed consistently from county to county.
Democrats intervened in an existing lawsuit filed by Republicans on election night. That case has been inactive," said Dan Hoffheimer, the Kerry campaign's chief lawyer in Ohio.
"I think the Republicans went to court first to protect their interests. Now, it looks like the Ohio Democratic Party is doing the same. Certainly, as far as I know today, the Kerry-Edwards campaign is not planning to file such a case," Hoffheimer said.
Provisional ballots are special ballots used by voters who believe they are registered but who don't appear on the rolls, those who could not provide proof of identity and others who had moved, but did not update their registration information. Once local officials verify that the voters were indeed registered and that they voted in the correct precinct, their provisional ballot can be counted.
Most of Ohio's provisional ballots were cast in urban areas where Kerry typically fared well. Cuyahoga County had the most - nearly 25,000. About 13,000 of those had been verified as of Wednesday, with about 8,600 of that group deemed valid.
Meanwhile, the presidential candidates from the Green and Libertarian parties have said they will demand a recount of all the ballots in Ohio - which could include a review of another group of votes; 92,672 "spoiled" ballots that recorded no vote for president.
Still, many political experts - including top Kerry campaign operatives - believe Bush's margin cannot be overcome.
"I think the Democrats are more worried about avoiding a controversy in 2006 or 2008," said Dan Takaji, an Ohio State University law professor who is an expert on election law. He views the Democrats' court action as a move to make sure that there are solid, court-approved guidelines for future elections.
"But there's no way the math is going to change," Takaji said. "The margin might shrink as the provisionals are counted, but if you look seriously at the numbers, the outcome won't change."
Gene Beaupre, a political scientist at Xavier University in Cincinnati, saw the suit as an effort by Democratic officials to assuage party loyalists who feel Kerry quit without a fight in Ohio.
"There's certainly a feeling out there that people were let down by the leadership," Beaupre said. "All you have to do is look on the Internet, and that sense of disappointment is a political reality among a lot of people who are Internet users."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go to Original
Ohio Finds Possible Double Votes, Counts
Associated Press
Thursday 18 November 2004
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Election officials in one Ohio county found that about 2,600 ballots were double-counted, and two other counties have discovered possible cases of people voting twice in the presidential election.
Prosecutors were trying to determine Wednesday whether charges should be filed against a couple in Madison County accused of voting twice. In addition, Summit County election workers investigated possible double votes found under 18 names.
In the other case, Sandusky County election officials discovered that about 2,600 ballots from nine precincts were counted twice, likely because of worker error, elections director Barb Tuckerman said.
Tuckerman believes the votes were counted twice when they were mistakenly placed alongside a pile of uncounted ballots. The room where the ballots were being fed into optical-scan machines on election night was so crowded that ballots had to be placed on the floor, Tuckerman said.
Under Ohio law, people who vote twice could be charged with election fraud, falsification or illegal voting, according the Secretary of State's Office. The maximum penalty for the most severe charge is 18 months in prison.
Double votes could have affected the result of a local schools income tax request that failed by one vote in Madison County.
In Illinois, thousands of provisional ballots cast on Election Day did not count, in most cases for lack of evidence the voters were actually registered. The Associated Press count was based on checks of several election jurisdictions. State officials were still gathering information Wednesday on provisional ballots cast statewide, a day after the deadline to count them.
-------
DLR'sCock
11-18-2004, 04:55 PM
http://www.salon.com/news/wire/2004/11/17/ballot/index.html
Ohio Provisional Ballots Seem Legitimate
By Mark Williams
The Associated Press
Wednesday 17 November 2004
Columbus, Ohio - The vast majority of provisional ballots cast in Ohio were legitimate, say election officials who are poring over thousands of presidential election ballots.
The ballots that are being rejected are invalid because people simply were not registered, did not give information such as addresses or signatures, or voted in precincts where they do not live.
"Some people thought because they had changed their mailing address at the post office, or had changed their utilities, that they had done everything necessary to be eligible to vote," said Nancy Moore, deputy director of the Belmont County Board of Elections. "They still have to change their address at the board of elections. We're not mind readers."
President Bush beat Democrat John Kerry in Ohio by 136,000 votes in unofficial tallies, and Kerry has conceded not enough outstanding votes exist to sway the election his way in the key battleground state.
Of the 11 counties that have completed checking provisional ballots, 81 percent of the ballots are valid, according to an Associated Press survey Monday. Counties that have completed partial tallies also said most of the provisional ballots were being counted.
Cuyahoga County, where Cleveland is located, has processed 40 percent, or 9,719 votes, of its 24,788 provisional ballots and rejected a third, according to a board tally. Most are being rejected because the voters were not registered.
In many counties, the smallest portion of rejected ballots were due to votes being cast in the wrong precinct. Before the election, Democrats lost a court appeal seeking to allow people to cast provisional ballots in precincts where they do not live.
Election officials said heightened public attention to the court case and the efforts of poll workers helped voters arrive at the right precincts.
Ohio voters cast 155,337 provisional ballots, which are used when voters names are not on the rolls for some reason or their eligibility is otherwise in doubt. Counties have until Dec. 1 to complete their final count. In 2000, about 87 percent of provisional ballots were counted.
Officials are determining voters' eligibility before counting each vote, so the result is not yet known.
In Colorado, the approval rate of provisional ballots was 76 percent, according to a survey of counties by the Denver Post. Nearly 24 percent of the state's estimated 51,000 provisional ballots had been rejected, the newspaper reported Wednesday.
Election officials had not yet compiled the reason for the rejections, the newspaper said. The rejection rate was 12 percent in Colorado in 2002, a non-presidential election year.
President Bush won in Colorado by more than 5 percentage points.
-------
Jump to TO Features for Thursday November 18, 2004
DLR'sCock
11-18-2004, 04:56 PM
How Much Fraud Does the GOP Need?
By Steve Weissman
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Thursday 18 November 2004
Give the Republicans their due. If they ever let all the African-Americans, university students, and other heavily Democratic constituencies vote without restraint, and counted all those ballots, George W. Bush would never be president. Nor would GOP fat cats get the lion's share of government give-aways. And, Lord help us, we would all go to hell without the "moral values" that right wing Christians want to shove down our throats, onto our genitals, and into women's wombs.
Whether for ego, greed, or God - or an intoxicating brew of the three - winning is all that counts, winning by any means necessary. "We are the champions. No time for losers."
For decades, big-city Democrats ruled by manipulating the vote. They even helped John F. Kennedy win the presidency in 1960, when Chicago's mayor Richard J. Daley organized votes from the dead. That was Democratic politics in the Windy City: Vote early and often. And if you happen to die, don't worry, the Daley Machine will pay someone to vote in your name. Think of it as a form of immortality.
Now the Republicans are taking their turn, and they make old Mayor Daley and New York City's Tammany Hall gang look like mischievous kids. Under Mr. Bush's political guru Karl Rove, the GOP campaigners have perfected nothing less than a nationwide effort to subvert the ideal of one person, one vote.
How far did they go?
We don't know. Despite an army of investigating Internauts, no one has yet proved overt fraud, the kind that puts people in jail, or should. The most sweeping charges come from Florida, where a failed Congressional candidate named Jeff Fisher - a self-proclaimed "Constitutional Progressive Liberal Democrat" - charges that the GOP electronically fiddled with the vote in numerous counties in Florida, Ohio, and New Mexico.
So far, Fisher and his story sound squirrelly. According to the charges that appear on his website, the Republicans used computers at Bay Point Schools, a juvenile detention and drug rehabilitation facility in South Miami, to hack into systems linking Diebold optical scanners and electronic voting machines. The hackers then inserted "software kernels" that instructed the systems to alter, switch, delete, or destroy votes, snatching victory from John Kerry and giving it to George W. Bush.
Fisher goes on to claim that the GOP first tested the scheme in 1999, and used it in the 2000 presidential election and Jeb Bush's race for governor in 2002. He also points the finger of guilt directly at Bush fund-raiser Mel Sembler, the U.S. Ambassador to Italy.
Fisher tells a superb story, lacking only the evidence. He claims to have internal memos, emails, and testimony from an information systems manager, who - he says - is now in hiding. But, to date, he has failed to produce any proof. He has it, he insists. He's just waiting - for the FBI, or a Congressional investigation, or what?
Given the seriousness of his charges, and the possible libel of Mel Sembler, I think the time has come for Mr. Fisher publicly to put up or shut up.
But wait, you say. What about all those articles that show how easy it would be to do exactly what Fisher alleges?
Fair enough. Many of us have argued extensively for an electronic voting system with a paper audit trail, one that allows voters to see for themselves how their votes will be recorded. We know that many, if not most, of the current systems lack such safeguards, and that we desperately need to make our voting system completely transparent and verifiable. But the possibility of crime, or even its likelihood, does not prove that a crime took place. Before we can honestly cry fraud, we need to know who, what, when, and how.
In the meantime, I put my trust in the approach taken by University of Pennsylvania statistician Steven Freeman, which appears in our Features section. Dr. Freeman looks at the divergence between the exit polls, which gave victory to Kerry, and the announced results, which swung toward Bush. The odds of that happening by accident in just three states - Florida, Pennsylvania and Ohio - would be 250 million to one, he calculated.
Possibly, the exit polls had serious flaws, More likely, the problem lies in the tabulating of votes, which could involve either systematic error or systematic fraud. At this point, we do not know, and will not know until Congress, prosecutors, good government groups, and the press pursue intensive investigations. Hopefully, the recounts in New Hampshire and Ohio will light a fire under our collective behinds.
But a word of warning: as crucial as fraud might have been to the election's outcome, questions of criminality should not blind us to the rest of what the GOP has been doing to limit likely Democratic voters. Their strategy has been to win elections before anyone counts - or miscounts - the first vote.
One dramatic example was Jeb Bush's effort to purge Florida's voter rolls of African-Americans suspected of being felons, while blatantly ignoring similar lists of Cuban-Americans, who he thought more likely to vote Republican. The GOP has long pushed for laws barring convicted felons from voting, knowing full well that our society puts a large proportion of African-Americans and other minorities behind bars. The party has similarly fought against efforts to make it easier for former felons to win back their voting rights, or to make it easier for everyone to register and vote.
In this election as in the past, the Republicans sent thousands of poll watchers into black and other heavily democratic precincts to challenge people's right to vote, generally because they might have been felons or could not prove their residence. This led to long lines, which caused large numbers of voters to walk away, and to provisional ballots, many of which officials later rejected for technical miscues, such as failing to have birthdates.
It's really quite simple. If everyone could register on Election Day, and if former felons could legally vote without having to jump through hoops, the Republicans would have a much harder time limiting the Democratic vote. But then, the Republicans would lose. No wonder they're so much happier talking about "moral values" than applying them to America's failing democracy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go to Original
"Confessions of an Unwitting Accessory"
By Ian Solomon
The Hartford Courant
Thursday 11 November 2004
A commentary by Assoc. Dean Ian Solomon, Yale Law School.
Could we have been so naive? Thousands of the country's most credentialed lawyers flocked to Florida to guarantee a fair election. Did we inadvertently miss an election debacle even greater than that of 2000 and negligently allow our client to concede?
I am a Kerry supporter and a Bush critic. I went to Florida because my mother, a Florida resident, asked me to help protect the right of all citizens to vote and to ensure that all votes counted. I walked the polling lines for early voting in Daytona Beach, distributing sample ballots and helping citizens understand their rights. I tried to ensure that poll workers obeyed the laws about provisional ballots and that ballots were correctly fed through the optical scanner machines. And by my presence, along with other Democratic lawyers, I lent an air of legitimacy to the voting process, which, by and large, seemed fair enough.
But one thing really troubled me: Who was checking to make sure the data contained in the digital memory cards actually matched the voters' intentions marked on the paper ballots? Could we take the accurate counting of computer votes for granted, since the CEO of the leading voting machine manufacturer promised to "deliver" Ohio's electoral votes for Bush?
At first, the question didn't matter, because I, like most others, thought Kerry would win. In fact, I was shocked when the official election results started coming in so different from historically reliable exit poll results and my own gut sense of the results in Florida.
But then the stories of voting irregularities poured in. There was the Ohio county where a memory card showed several thousand more votes for Bush than there were total votes cast. There was the machine in North Carolina that "lost" several thousand votes. There were the reports of several counties in Florida, all using optical scanner machines, where democratic precincts voted overwhelmingly for Bush. There was the realization that exit poll errors were correlated with the use of electronic voting machines. There was the sense that the data from the precincts where I had worked understated what felt like a Kerry landslide. And there were the increasing allegations of machine vulnerability to hacking made public by Blackboxvoting.org and others.
And that's when I realized that I might have been an unwitting accessory to fraud. Like every other Democrat, I had prepared to avoid the problems of 2000 only to be blindsided by new problems in 2004. We had been so worried about the safekeeping of paper ballots that we neglected the security of digital memory devices. We had been so worried about voting law that we neglected voting technology. Most important, we had been so worried about voter suppression in poor and minority areas that we didn't pay attention to voter inflation in Republican areas.
We should have had trained observers - computer scientists, not lawyers! - verifying the integrity of polling data from machine upload through the tabulation of countywide and statewide results. Somehow we neglected the most vulnerable step in the vote-counting process, leaving a gaping hole for error and fraud, casting in doubt the validity of election results in many states.
So what is to be done now? My client conceded the race on the belief that the results were clear. The results are anything but clear, however, and American democratic legitimacy requires an honest reappraisal of the events in Florida and around the country. Three members of Congress have already requested that the General Accounting Office conduct an investigation into the troubling reports of problems with voting machines. The mainstream press must immediately realize that this issue rises above partisanship and demands attention. The time is now for voters from all states that used electronic voting machines to request an audit of results and a manual recount of ballots if possible.
We have a duty as Americans to fix these problems for the future and make sure there is a transparent and trustworthy voting system. What's at stake is not merely the outcome of a close election; what's at stake is our faith in democratic government and the rule of law.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A veteran of the Berkeley Free Speech Movement and the New Left monthly Ramparts, Steve Weissman lived for many years in London, working as a magazine writer and television producer. He now lives and works in France, where he writes for t r u t h o u t.
-------
Jump to TO Features for Thursday November 18, 2004
Today's TO Features -------------- Steve Weissman | How Much Fraud Does the GOP Need? U.S. and Iraqi Troops Target Mosul Rebels U.N. Seeks Probe into Fallujah War Crimes Homeland Security Employees Required to Sign Secrecy Pledge A New Hawk in Bush's Inner Circle, Arms Exec Leads Army Iran's New Alliance with China Could Cost U.S. Leverage Colorado Snubs Coal for Renewables Arrests and Intimidations Radicalize Sunni Religious Milieus Greg Palast and Farhad Manjoo: Presidential Debate Spencer Ackerman | Killing the Messenger House GOP Moves to Protect Embattled DeLay Rampton and Stauber | Welcome to the One-Party State Majority of Ohio Provisional Ballots Legitimate Porter Goss Tells CIA Workers to Back Bush Chirac Questions U.S.-Led Iraq War Will Vote Recount Settle Doubts? Phantom Fury in Fallujah t r u t h o u t Home
Print This Story E-mail This Story
© : t r u t h o u t 2004
| t r u t h o u t | voter rights | environment | letters | donate | contact
DLR'sCock
11-18-2004, 05:02 PM
http://www.yubanet.com/artman/publish/article_15415.shtml
UC Berkeley Research Team Sounds 'Smoke Alarm' for Florida E-Vote Count
By UC Berkeley
Thursday 18 November 2004
Research team calls for investigation.
Today the University of California's Berkeley Quantitative Methods Research Team released a statistical study - the sole method available to monitor the accuracy of e- voting - reporting 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 - what the team says can be deemed a "smoke alarm." Discrepancies this large or larger rarely arise by chance - the probability is less than 0.1 percent. The research team formally disclosed results of the study at a press conference today at the UC Berkeley Survey Research Center, where they called on Florida voting officials to investigate.
The three counties where the voting anomalies were most prevalent were also the most heavily Democratic: Broward, Palm Beach and Miami-Dade, respectively. Statistical patterns in counties that did not have e-touch voting machines predict a 28,000 vote decrease in President Bush's support in Broward County; machines tallied an increase of 51,000 votes - a net gain of 81,000 for the incumbent. President Bush should have lost 8,900 votes in Palm Beach County, but instead gained 41,000 - a difference of 49,900. He should have gained only 18,400 votes in Miami-Dade County but saw a gain of 37,000 - a difference of 19,300 votes.
"For the sake of all future elections involving electronic voting - someone must investigate and explain the statistical anomalies in Florida," says Professor Michael Hout. "We're calling on voting officials in Florida to take action."
The research team is comprised of doctoral students and faculty in the UC Berkeley sociology department, and led by Sociology Professor Michael Hout, a nationally-known expert on statistical methods and a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the UC Berkeley Survey Research Center.
For its research, the team used multiple-regression analysis, a statistical method widely used in the social and physical sciences to distinguish the individual effects of many variables on quantitative outcomes like vote totals. This multiple-regression analysis takes into account of the following variables by county:
number of voters
median income
Hispanic/Latino population
change in voter turnout between 2000 and 2004
support for Senator Dole in the 1996 election
support for President Bush in the 2000 election
use of electronic voting or paper ballots
"No matter how many factors and variables we took into consideration, the significant correlation in the votes for President Bush and electronic voting cannot be explained," said Hout. "The study shows, that a county's use of electronic voting resulted in a disproportionate increase in votes for President Bush. There is just a trivial probability of evidence like this appearing in a population where the true difference is zero - less than once in a thousand chances."
The data used in this study came from public sources including CNN.com, the 2000 US Census, and the Verified Voting Foundation. For a copy of the working paper, raw data and other information used in the study can be found at: http://ucdata.berkeley.edu/.
-------
Diver Down NJ
11-19-2004, 09:39 AM
Fukcing pathetic. Get a grip already. Maybe if Kerry had spent a little more money in Ohio instead of stashing away millions, he'd have won.
Originally posted by Diver Down NJ
Fukcing pathetic. Get a grip already. Maybe if Kerry had spent a little more money in Ohio instead of stashing away millions, he'd have won.
Again, Kerry is not the issue. FRAUD is the issue.
ODShowtime
11-19-2004, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by Diver Down NJ
Fukcing pathetic. Get a grip already. Maybe if Kerry had spent a little more money in Ohio instead of stashing away millions, he'd have won.
That's an interesting perspective. Frugality lost Kerry the election?
Guitar Shark
11-19-2004, 10:51 AM
Originally posted by FORD
Again, Kerry is not the issue. FRAUD is the issue.
It's always about you, isn't it? ;)
Switch84
11-19-2004, 03:10 PM
Originally posted by Diver Down NJ
Fukcing pathetic. Get a grip already. Maybe if Kerry had spent a little more money in Ohio instead of stashing away millions, he'd have won.
;) :p Maybe the ketchup queen cut his allowance? LMAO!
DLR'sCock
11-21-2004, 12:18 PM
Ohio Recount Must Start Now
By David Cobb and Michael Badnarik
t r u t h o u t | Statement
Thursday 18 November 2004
Attorneys for Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb and Libertarian Michael Badnarik have sent letters to each Ohio county election director asking them to begin preparations immediately for the recount of the presidential vote.
Although a demand for a recount is usually not made until after the vote has been certified, there are concerns that waiting that long would not allow enough time for the recount to be completed before the Ohio presidential electors meet on December 13 in Columbus.
The Ohio Secretary of State's office has told the press that certification of the vote would occur around December 6, allowing only a handful of days for a full recount prior to the December 13 meeting.
In letters dated November 17 and sent by overnight delivery, Cobb and Badnarik's attorneys say that "{s}uch a timeframe will not allow for a meaningful recount and will undermine our clients' rights under applicable law, including Ohio recount law." Cobb and Badnarik will file the recount demand jointly.
The letters go on to say that "the lack of a meaningful recount will also violate the rights under federal and state constitutional and statutory law of all Ohio citizens who cast a ballot for President on Election Day. Immediate action is necessary so that the recount procedures may begin as soon as possible."
"This is consistent with our standing up for the right to vote and for each vote to be counted. What's the point of having a recount if it won't be completed in time? Everyone knows what happened in Florida in 2000 and no one wants to see that happen again," said Blair Bobier, Media Director for the Cobb-LaMarche campaign.
Bobier said the formal recount demand and the bond of $113,600 would be officially filed on Friday. Cobb and Badnarik are represented by John Bonifaz, General Counsel of the National Voting Rights Institute and Ohio attorney Nancy Holland Myers.
The Cobb-LaMarche campaign is now in the process of recruiting volunteers and raising funds for monitoring the actual recount process. Volunteers and donors should visit the campaign website for more information. Note: please contact holly@votecobb.org if you want to volunteer.
http://www.votecobb.org/
-------
DLR'sCock
11-21-2004, 12:21 PM
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/886
Hearings on Ohio Voting Put 2004 Election in Doubt
By Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
FreePress.org
Thursday 18 November 2004
Highly-charged, jam-packed hearings held here in Columbus have cast serious doubt on the true outcome of the presidential election.
On Saturday, November 13, the Ohio Election Protection Coalition’s public hearings in Columbus solicited extensive sworn first-person testimony from 32 of Ohio voters, precinct judges, poll workers, legal observers, party challengers. An additional 66 people provided written affidavits of election irregularities. The unavoidable conclusion is that this year's election in Ohio was deeply flawed, that thousands of Ohioans were denied their right to vote, and that the ultimate vote count is very much in doubt.
Most importantly, the testimony has revealed a widespread and concerted effort on the part of Republican Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell to deny primarily African-American and young voters the right to cast their ballots within a reasonable time. By depriving precincts of adequate numbers of functioning voting machines, Blackwell created waits of three to eleven hours, driving tens of thousands of likely Democratic voters away from the polls and very likely affecting the outcome of the Ohio vote count, which in turn decided the national election.
On November 17, Blackwell wrote an op-ed piece for Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Washington Times, stating: "Every eligible voter who wanted to vote had the opportunity to vote. There was no widespread fraud, and there was no disenfranchisement. A half-million more Ohioans voted than ever before with fewer errors than four years ago, a sure sign on success by any measure," Blackwell wrote. Moon's extreme right wing Unification Church has long-standing ties to the Bush Family and the Central Intelligence Agency.
Additional testimony also called into question the validity of the actual vote counts. There are thus serious doubts that the final official tally in Ohio, due December 1 to Blackwell’s office, will have any validity. Blackwell will certify the vote count on December 3.
While Blackwell supervised the Ohio vote he also served as co-chair of the Ohio Bush-Cheney re-election campaign, a clear conflict of interest that casts further doubt on how the Ohio election and vote counts have been conducted.
At the Columbus hearings, witness after witness under oath gave testimony to an election riddled with discrimination and disarray. Among them:
Werner Lange, a pastor from Youngstown, Ohio, who said in part:
"In precincts 1 A and 5 G, voting as Hillman Elementary School, which is a predominantly African American community, there were woefully insufficient number of voting machines in three precincts. I was told that the standard was to have one voting machine per 100 registered voters. Precinct A had 750 registered voters. Precinct G had 690. There should have been 14 voting machines at this site. There were only 6, three per precinct, less than 50 percent of the standard. This caused an enormous bottleneck among voters who had to wait a very, very long time to vote, many of them giving up in frustration and leaving. . . . I estimate, by the way, that an estimated loss of over 8,000 votes from the African American community in the City of Youngstown alone, with its 84 precincts, were lost due to insufficient voting machines, and that would translate to some 7,000 votes lost for John Kerry for President in Youngstown alone. . . ."
"Just yesterday I went to the Trumbull Board of Elections in northeast Ohio, I wanted to review their precinct logs so I could continue my investigation. This was denied. I was told by the Board of Elections official that I could not see them until after the official vote was given."
Marion Brown, Columbus:
"I am here on behalf of a friend. My friend came to my home very upset while she was away standing four hours in the voting, her husband passed away. The funeral was on yesterday, November 13th, at 2:00. Perhaps had she not stood so long in the line, she may have been able to save her husband."
Victoria Parks:
"In Pickaway County, oh, my goodness, in Pickaway County, I entered there, I was shown a table, 53 poll books were plunked down in front of my. I noticed there were no signature on file in any of the poll books, in any of the poll books, and furthermore, a minute later the director of the Board of Elections of Pickaway County came into the room and snatched the books away from me and said you cannot look at these books. I said are you aware that what you are doing is against the law? She said I have been on the phone with the Secretary of State and he has instructed me to take these books away and you cannot see them. I paraphrase very slightly here. She took them away. I was persona non grata. I did not want to risk arrest, and I left. . . . There were no signatures, and furthermore, the writing in the book seemed to have been written in the same hand, because that is a requirement."
Boyd Mitchell, Columbus:
"What I saw was voter intimidation in the form of city employees that were sent in to stop illegal parking. Now, in Driving Park Rec Center there are less than 50 legal parking spots, and there were literally hundreds and hundreds of voters there, and I estimated at least 70 percent of the people were illegally parked in the grass around the perimeter of the Driving Park Rec Center, and two city employees drove up in a city truck and said that they had been sent there to stop illegal parking, and they went so far as to harass at least a couple of voters that I saw, and when they were talking to us, they were kind. But when they didn't realize we were overhearing them talking to voters, they were trying to keep people from parking where they were parking. They went so far as to set up some cones, trying to block people from getting into a grassy area..."
"I calculated that I maybe saw about 20 percent of the people that left Driving Park D and C, I personally saw and talked to about 20 percent of them as they left the poll between 12:30 and 8 p.m. And I saw 15 people who left because the line was too long. The lines inside were anywhere from 2 1/2 to 5 hours. Most everybody said 4 hours, and I saw at least 15 people who did not vote, and I heard a gentleman who was earlier making some mathematical calculations, well, if this is going on across town, and, you know, in a precinct where it was going so heavily for Kerry, and me only seeing 20 percent of the people coming out, I saw 15. We could just do the math and extrapolate that out into a huge number of people who might have voted had they had a chance."
Joe Popich (entered into the record copies of the Perry County Board of Election poll book):
"There are a bunch of irregularities in this log book, but the most blatant irregularity would be the fact that there are 360 signatures in this book. There are 33 people who voted absentee ballot at this precinct, for a total of 393 votes that should be attributed to that precinct. However, the Board of Elections is attributing 96 more votes to that precinct than what this log book reflects."
Derek Winsor, Columbus:
"Out of the six total voting machines that were at 14 C, three of them showed some type of malfunction that at one point or another during the three our so hours that we were waiting, and between my wife and me, we had asked poll workers individually if they could explain what was going on and what kind of reassurances they could give us that, for one machine in particular that the votes had already been posted on, that machine would be counted, and the response was just, oh, they will be counted. And how can you be sure of that? What storage mechanism do they use to ensure that the votes are stored, and, again, the response was just, well, they just are. And that was a bit of a concern here."
Carol Shelton, presiding judge, precinct 25 B at the Linden Branch of the Columbus Metropolitan Library:
"The precinct is 95 to 99 percent black. . . . There were 1,500 persons on the precinct rolls. We received three machines. In my own precinct in Clintonville, 19E, we always received three machines for 700 to 730 voters. Voter turnout in my own precinct has reached as high as 70 percent while I worked there. I interviewed many voters in 25 B and asked how many machines they had had in the past. Everyone who had a recollection said five or six. I called to get more machines and ended up being connected with Matt Damschroder, the Director of the Board of Elections. After a real hassle -- and someone here has it on videotape, he sent me a fourth machine which did not dent the length of the line. Fewer than 700 voted, although the turnout at the beginning of the day would cause anyone to predict a turnout of over 80 percent. This was a clear case of voter suppression by making voting an impossibility for anyone who had to go to work or anyone who was stuck at home caring for children or the elderly while another family member voted."
Allesondra Hernandez, Toledo:
"What I witnessed when I had gotten there about 9 A.M. was a young African American woman who had come out nearly in tears. She was a new voter, very first registered, very excited to vote, and she had said that she had been bounced around to three different polling places, and this one had just turned her down again. People were there to help her out, and I was concerned. I started asking around to everyone else, and they had informed me earlier that day that she was not the only one, but there were at least three others who had been bounced around. Also earlier that day the polls had opened an hour late, did not open until about 7:30 A.M. The polling machines were locked in the principal's office. Hundreds of people were turned away, were forced to leave the line because they needed to be at school, they needed to be at work, or they needed to take their children to school. The people there who were assisting did the best they could to take down numbers and take down names, but I am assuming that a majority of those people could not come back because of work and/or because of school, because they had shown up to vote, and that was the time that they could vote, and that is why they were there. Also along the same lines, they ran out of pencils for those ballots."
Erin Deignan, Columbus:
"I was an official poll worker judge in precinct Columbus 25 F, at the East Linden School. We had between 1100 and 1200 people on the voter registry there. We had three voting machines. We did the math. I am sure lots of other people did too. With the five-minute limit, 13 hours the polls were open, three machines, that is 468 voters, that is less than half of the people we had on the registry. We stayed open three hours past 7:30 and got about 550 people through, but we had one Board of Elections worker come in the morning. We asked if he could bring more machines. He is said more machines had been delivered, but they didn't have any more. We had another Board of Elections official come later in the day, and he said that in Upper Arlington he had seen 12 machines."
Matthew Segal, Gambier:
"In this past election, Kenyon College students and the residents of Gambier, Ohio, had to endure some of the most extenuating voting circumstances in the entire country. As many of you may already know, because they had it on national media attention, Kenyon students and the residents of Gambier had to stand in line up to 10 to 12 hours in the rain, through a hot gym, and crowded narrow lines, making it extremely uncomfortable. As a result of this, voters were disenfranchised, having class to attend to, sports commitments, and midterms for the next day, which they had to study for. Obviously, it is a disgrace that kids who are being perpetually told the importance of voting, could not vote because they had other commitments and had to be put up with a 12-hour line."
Blackwell characterized Ohio’s Election Day as "tremendously successful" in the Washington Times. Several people at Saturday’s hearing said they’d like to hear Mr. Blackwell testify under oath, preferably under a criminal indictment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Fitrakis, Ph.D, J.D., a legal advisor for the Election Protection Coalition, convened and moderated the public hearings. Harvey Wasserman is Senior Editor of the Columbus Free Press and freepress.org. Audio from the hearings can be found at: www.theneighborhoodnetwork.org.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Go to Original
Document Reveals Columbus, Ohio Voters Waited Hours
as Election Officials Held Back Machines
By Bob Fitrakis
FreePress.org
Tuesday 16 November 2004
One telling piece of evidence was entered into the record at the Saturday, November 13 public hearing on election irregularities and voter suppression held by nonpartisan voter rights organizations. Cliff Arnebeck, a Common Cause attorney, introduced into the record the Franklin County Board of Elections spreadsheet detailing the allocation of e-voting computer machines for the 2004 election. The Board of Elections’ own document records that, while voters waited in lines ranging from 2-7 hours at polling places, 68 electronic voting machines remained in storage and were never used on Election Day.
The Board of Elections document details that there are 2886 "Total Machines" in Franklin County. Twenty of them are "In Vans for Breakdowns." The County record acknowledges 2886 were available on Election Day, November 2 and that 2798 of their machines were "placed by close of polls." The difference between the machines "available" and those "placed" is 68. The nonpartisan Election Protection Coalition provided legal advisors and observed 58 polling places in primarily African American and poor neighborhoods in Franklin County.
An analysis of the Franklin County Board of Elections’ allocation of machines reveals a consistent pattern of providing fewer machines to the Democratic city of Columbus, with its Democratic mayor and uniformly Democratic city council, despite increased voter registration in the city. The result was an obvious disparity in machine allocations compared to the primarily Republican white affluent suburbs.
Franklin County had traditionally used a formula of one machine per 100 voters, with machine usage allowable up to 125 votes per machine. The County’s rationale is as follows: if it takes each voter five minutes to vote, 12 people an hour, 120 people in ten hours and the remaining three hours taken up moving people in and out of the voting machines.
Once a machine is recording 200 voters per machine, 100% over optimum use, the system completely breaks down. This causes long waits in long lines and potential voters leaving before casting their ballots, due to age, disability, work and family responsibilities.
A preliminary analysis by the Free Press shows six suburban polling places with 100 votes a machine or less, and only one in the city of Columbus meeting or falling under the guideline.
The legendary affluent Republican enclave of Upper Arlington has 34 precincts. No voting machines in this area cast more than 200 votes per machine. Only one, ward 6F, was over 190 votes at 194 on one machine. By contrast, 39 Columbus city polling machines had more than 200 votes per machine and 42 were over 190 votes per machine. This means 17% of Columbus’ machines were operating at 90-100% over optimum capacity while in Upper Arlington the figure was 3%.
In the Democratic stronghold of Columbus 139 of the 472 precincts had at least one and up to five fewer machine than in the 2000 presidential election. Two of Upper Arlington’s 34 precincts lost at least one machine. In the 2004 presidential election, 29% of Columbus’ precincts, despite a massive increase in voter registration and turnout, had fewer machines than in 2000. In Upper Arlington, 6% had fewer machines in 2004 One of those precincts had a 25% decline in voter registration and the other had a 1% increase. Compare that to Columbus ward 1B, where voter registration went up 27%, but two machines were taken away in the 2004 election. Or look at 23B where voter registration went up 22% and they lost two machines since the 2000 election, causing an average of 207 votes to be cast on each of the remaining machines. In the year 2000, only 97 votes were cast per machine in the precinct. Thus, in four years, the ward went from optimum usage to system failure.
Jeff Graessle, Franklin County Election Operations Division Manager, told the Citizen’s Alliance for Secure Elections (CASE) Ohio voting rights activists that Franklin County does not use a simple 100 votes per machine guideline. Rather, they allocated their machines in the 2004 election based on a new criteria determined by ACTIVE registered voters. Hence, an affluent area like Upper Arlington which has shown a consistent pattern of voters is rewarded with more machines and fewer losses. A less affluent area of Columbus where voters miss voting at more elections and may only come out in a hotly tested election, like Bush-Kerry, are punished with fewer machines.
Of course, there’s a direct correlation between affluence and votes for Bush and below medium income areas and votes for Kerry. Franklin County, Ohio’s formula served to disenfranchise disproportionately poor, minority and Democratic voters under the guise of rewarding the "likely" voter or active registered voters.
-------
DLR'sCock
11-21-2004, 12:31 PM
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/899
Ohio Presidential Results to be Challenged
By Steven Rosenfeld
FreePress.org
Saturday 20 November 2004
Ohio's 2004 presidential vote will be challenged as soon as next week in the state Supreme Court, a coalition of public-interest lawyers announced Friday.
The lawyers have taken sworn testimony from hundreds of people in hearings in Columbus and Cincinnati, and will use excerpts as well as documents obtained from county election officials and Election Day exit polls to make a case that thousands of votes were incorrectly counted or not counted on Election Day.
"The objective is to get to the truth," said Columbus Ohio lawyer Cliff Arnebeck, coordinator of the Ohio Honest Elections Campaign. "What's critically important, whether it's President Bush or Sen. Kerry, whoever's been elected actually elected, is to know you won by an honest election. So it's in the interest of both sides as American citizens to know the truth and have this answered."
The challenge comes as the Green Party has plans to file for a recount of the state's 2004 presidential vote. The Green Party and the Ohio Honest Elections Campaign both believe the unofficial results announced on Election Day were wrong. Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell has not yet certified the Nov. 2 vote. The state's election law says an election challenge must show the wrong candidate was been declared the winner, or it can be dismissed without a hearing. The state Supreme Court's chief justice hears the case.
The Ohio Republican Party dismissed the challenge on Friday, the Associated Press reported, but the coalition announcing it said they were ready to litigate.
"The sworn statements that we've received should give everyone cause to go forward in terms of this inquiry," said Robert Fitrakis, a lawyer, political science professor at Columbus State Community College, and editor at www.freepress.org, at the announcement.
The 'Ohio Honest Election Campaign' is a coalition of public-interest groups and citizens interested in free and fair elections. The three lawyers announcing the challenge are associated with a variety of established groups. Arnebeck is the counsel for Common Cause's Ohio chapter and The Alliance for Democracy. Attorney Susan Truitt is with Citizens Alliance for Secure Elections-Ohio, www.caseohio.org. The boards of groups have not yet formally endorsed the election challenge but are expected to do so in coming days.
The Honest Election campaign is part of a populist groundswell to safeguard voting rights. The 2004 campaign saw the most new voters in a generation. Even though Kerry conceded on Nov. 3, many people were not satisfied with national media explanations of the Ohio vote. Scientifically designed nonpartisan exit polls taken during the day showed a different result from the result reported that night, when George W. Bush was declared the victor.
Moreover, on Election Day there were long lines and widespread accounts of people who did not get to vote in urban Democratic-leaning precincts across the state. These factors and other reports of voter frustration, computerized voting miscounts and still-changing provisional ballot counting rules left many doubts about the unofficial vote count and George W. Bush's 130,000 vote margin.
Those concerns coalesced into a grassroots campaign for an answer. Within two weeks following Election Day, Arnebeck had talked to the Green and Libertarian Parties about filing for a recount - if the funds could be raised. The Greens and the Honest Election Campaign started fundraising the same day, and in less than a week, the Greens had raised $150,000 via their website to file for the recount. The Ohio Honest Election Campaign raised about $90,000 via the Alliance for Democracy site, after two Air America Radio hosts, Laura Flanders and Randi Rhodes, embraced the cause and talked up the campaign.
Meanwhile, FreePress.org's Bob Fitrakis inspired Amy Kaplan and Jonathan Meier, two young members of the League of Pissed-Off Voters' Ohio chapter (www.indyvoter.org) to organize public hearings to gather testimony under oath of the people who saw or experienced what they thought was voter suppression or intimidation. Such intentional acts would violate the federal Voting Rights Act. Two hearings were held in Columbus and hundreds of people showed up and testified. Then activists in Cincinnati and Cleveland organized hearings.
At these hearings, scores of people said too few voting machines were put in Democratic-leaning inner-city precincts, creating long lines and deterring many people from voting. In contrast, Republican-leaning suburbs had plenty of voting machines and did not have the long lines. There were also reports of miscounts by computer voting machines, as well as errors registering the wrong candidate for president. Minority voters also spoke of disproportionately getting provisional ballots, including long-time residents.
Early in the weeks those hearings were being held, the Green and Libertarian Parties announced they would seek a statewide recount. By week's end, the Honest Election Campaign announced its intention to challenge presidential election result at the Ohio Supreme Court.
Others lawsuits may be announced next week, Arnebeck said, because there is limited time to hold a meaningful recount and to address election irregularities before the Electoral College meets in December.
-------
DLR'sCock
12-01-2004, 03:31 PM
bump...for shits and giggles
4moreyears
12-01-2004, 04:15 PM
I am not just gigling, I am laughing my ass off listening to all the crying beng done by the democrats. Enough of the recounts already; just move on.
JH
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.