BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election

Subject: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack Campin
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 07:17 AM

This is fairly scary:

Free Press, OH story

more detail from Benzinga.com

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 07:27 AM

Old news.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack Campin
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 07:56 AM

Not reported anywhere I'd seen until I saw it on the RISKS digest last night.

If you've never seen it before it's not old news.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Stu
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 08:02 AM

Is this a Jack's only thread?

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 10:32 AM

The second link has "more detail"? It appears to be the same.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack Campin
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 11:11 AM

Yup. Copied the wrong link when doing the clicky. The first should have been:

Ohio Free Press article

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Stringsinger
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 11:16 AM

SCOTUS. They robbed the American people of the vote. Scalito and Roberts.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Mrrzy
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 11:43 AM

I remember this, I was shocked. I'm glad it's being brought out before the Republicans do something stupid, again.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Big Ballad Singer
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 12:23 PM

You know that election HAD to be stolen or fixed, somehow... that moron would never have carried the vote based on his fitness for the office.

Bushie was a puppet that was put out to move his mouth and say what the hand(s) up his arse wanted him to say.

Of course, that's what all the Presidents do... unless they make noise (Kennedy) or risk showing their hand (Nixon), and then they have to be eliminated, one way or the other.

Really, though... Bushie (as opposed to Daddy, his poppa) was and is a tool. Back then, he was just a tool of someone else. Now, he's just a tool.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 12:27 PM

Give it up, already!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 01:17 PM

Vote fraud in presidential (and other) elections is an old story. Both the Republicans and Democrats have been guilty of it on numerous occasions. The Republicans were the beneficiary of it in 2004, pretty obviously by computer fraud. The Democrats were probably the beneficiary of it in 1960 when Kennedy just barely (appeared to) beat Richard Nixon, very likely by vote fraud accomplished by the Daley political machine in Ohio.

Now, don't get me wrong! I'm glad Kennedy beat Nixon that year. I liked Kennedy a lot better than Nixon. However....I think that Kennedy was quite likely elected by fraud, just as Bush was in 2004. I'm also very sorry that Bush got elected in 2004. He didn't deserve to.

It's not who got elected, though, that I'm focusing on here...it's the practice of voting fraud itself, and I'm saying that BOTH parties have gotten away with it in the past, and I bet they both try do do it one way or another in every single election that occurs, and sometimes they are more successful at doing it than other times.

To imagine that it's just the Republicans who do this awful stuff is downright naive. But if it makes you feel good, because you hate them so.... ;-) Then you won't like what I'm saying here at all, will you? You'd rather I saw only white hats on one side of the aisle and only black hats on the other. If only the world was that simple! There are black hats on both sides of the aisle.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 01:22 PM

Its just a thing that they do in this country. Whatever party gets in power at the state level rigs the system as much as they can in their own favor. In other countries it would be a scandal. Here it is "just politics."

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 01:30 PM

Yeah, that's it in a nutshell, Jack.

One of the favorite tricks of the party in power (whichever one) is the old gerrymandering scheme. You just redraw the boundaries of various voting districts so you can manipulate the results...ensuring that the ethnic and cultural groups and neighborhoods who aren't inclined to vote your way get marginalized and split up to the point where their votes are basically rendered ineffective...and their voice is thus silenced to all intents and purposes.

This can result in some very oddly shaped voting districts if you look at it on a map! ;-) And there's no legal protection in place that I know of to stop elected officials from committing this scam upon the public.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack Campin
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 01:50 PM

In this instance it wasn't done by gerrymandering. It was done by computer fraud.

As long as the US continues to use mechanical voting it will be susceptible to fraud by criminal engineers. And it's obvious who's got the money to hire the most technically sophisticated crooks.

The civilized world votes on paper.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Amos
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 02:17 PM

This was not politically defensible tactical slime--it was straight out fraudulent political crime. Kerry should sue the whole lot of them, and file civil charges.

A

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 02:18 PM

Yeah, and Nixon's estate should sue Kennedy's

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: pdq
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 02:37 PM

(CBS) In future elections, political analysts may put a bit less stock in the inside track data from exit polls.

That's because some of the early numbers that got into circulation Tuesday turned out to be misleading.

      CBS News Correspondent Richard Schlesinger reports on the erroneous exit polls.


Natalia Busey and about 1,500 exit pollsters like her spent Tuesday gathering some of the most closely watched numbers in the political world.

"I'm taking a national election poll,'' says Busey, preparing to ask someone how they voted.

Yesterday a few of those early numbers leaked to some bloggers ... and today there are a few red faces in cyberspace.

It's not supposed to be leaked to the campaigns or to characterize who's ahead or who's behind. That's not the purpose of the first wave of exit polls,'' said Joe Lenski, with Edison Media Research.

It wasn't long before reports surfaced on the Internet showing a close race…but one that Kerry was on the way to winning. According to one post ... Kerry would win not just ohio, but Florida as well.

The networks, including CBS, struggled with the early numbers but resisted the temptation to call races based on exit poll.

CBS did report the optimism in the Kerry camp early in the night. Of course that optimism turned out to be misplaced -- based largely on early exit polls that are notoriously unreliable.

So why are they so unreliable?

"The first wave of data has a smaller sample size and is only interviewing people that voted that morning,'' says Lenski. "So they're not necessarily going to accurately reflect the entire day."

Election experts have warned for years that poll numbers are given too much credibility by a nation eager for quick information. This year it was Internet bloggers who learned the hard way not to consider those numbers a snapshot of voter attitude when they are really just a small part of a much larger picture.

Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack Campin
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 02:49 PM

It seems that the real reason exit polls are unreliable is that they can't predict after-the-count ballot-stuffing by rent-a-geeks.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: pdq
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 03:04 PM

The article cited in the initial post states that data was transferred to another server in the state of Tennessee, a place owned by the firm that was hired to oversee the election results.

That transfer was through some type of backup system designed to kick-in if there were problems with the initial site in Ohio. All very reasonable.

To say that the data "could" have been compromised is not a story at all. That is about as reasonable as saying "you own a gun therefore you kill people".

The Ohio Free Press needs to keep its Far-Left base aggitated. If it didn't, it would become irrelevant.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 04:15 PM

"you own a gun therefore you kill people".

Its more like "don't build me a safe if you can open it yourself at will."

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 04:21 PM

Uh-huh. But do you doubt, pdq, that both parties find ways to cheat on voter counts in both federal and state elections?

I don't doubt it. It's a very old story, and it goes way back in the USA, right back into the early 1800s if not before. Voting fraud is a well-established tradition in the USA, and there are many, many ways of doing it...both before, after, and as the votes are being taken. To do it with computers is the handiest way of all, because there is no paper trail. Do you really think that such a juicy method of falsifying voting results would be bypassed by the rich and powerful when they can secure such a result merely by having good friends in (or paying off) the private companies that set up the computers and software to record the votes?

If so, you're being a bit naive.

I don't have a partisan ax to grind in this. I detest both the Republicans and the Democrats (as parties...NOT as individuals). I bet you can't say the same. Your comments are driven by partisan consideration.

I remember watching an internet site on election night in 2004, and it was making projections all evening based on the exit polls. In those projections Kerry was heading to an electoral college win, because he was winning in both Ohio and Florida. The site mysteriously "went down" about an hour before the winner was announced! Very puzzling indeed. I tried to access the page many times, but it never re-opened. And an hour later Bush was announced as the winner, and he'd won in both Florida and Ohio!

How about that, eh? ;-) I was certainly not the only person who was very surprised by that result, given what had been happening for hours before...and more than a little suspicious about the "official" result. I think it was faked. Incument governments, whether they are Democratic or Republican, are the people poised to secure a fraudulent result, because they are better positioned to bribe people and control the process. All you need to do is bribe a few individuals at the top of a few organizations. If they were incorruptible, you couldn't do it. But how many of them are? Specially when about half of them probably loath and detest one of the two parties involved in the election..... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: pdq
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 04:48 PM

Carefully-crafted polling, as done by Rassmussen, will always be close to the actual results on election day.

The "exit polls" the CBS did are always cited by people who ant others to believe that Republicans are evil. I gave the link to an article by CBS who said their "exit polls" are not accurate.

Fact is that Republicans want different things from their government, such as a strong DOD, secure borders and a fiscal policy the will lead to prosperity, not bankruptcy.

Honest polls by all major non-partisan groups showed that George W. Bush would will Florida and Ohio in 2004. He did. It was the lame "exit polls" by "See BS" that were wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 05:01 PM

I do not believe that Republicans are evil, pdq. I think many of them are misguided and misinformed, but they're not evil. Many Democrats are misguided and misinformed too, but they're not evil either.

Fer Chrissake.....EVERYONE in the USA wants a fiscal policy that will lead to prosperity, not bankruptcy! The only problem is that there are a relatively few very extremely rich people at the top in banking and business who think that their personal prosperity is the only prosperity that really matters...when it comes to each specific decision that is made along the way. They're mistaken in that assumption, but they are doing what they think is "the right thing for the nation" by protecting their own personal interests, avoiding taxes, moving money and jobs offshore, and maximizing profits for themselves.

The problem is that it hurts everyone else in the USA when they do those things.

EVERY American wants a strong DOD. But your present DOD goes far beyond being merely "strong". It's a world-devouring monster. The USA spends more each year on military production than all the other nations in the world, invades more countries than anyone else does, and has bases all over the world on other people's territory, just like the British Empire once did. The USA is doing what people like Hitler and Napoleon only wished they could do...but they didn't have the material resources to. That isn't a "strong" DOD, pdq, it's a DOD that threatens the entire world.

EVERY American wants secure borders too.

You are naive to imagine that only Republicans have these things in mind.

You ALL want a strong DOD, secure borders, and a fiscal policy that will lead to prosperity, not bankruptcy...but you can't flippin' agree on how to do it. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 05:38 PM

Just to set the record straight... Roberts doesn't get in on this blame as he was appointed by the Thief himself...

But 7 of the 9 Supreme Court judges that decided in the 5-4 decision that Bush would indeed be harmed (loose) if the recount were allowed to continue were appointed by Republican presidents... It's amazing that 2 Repubs sided with Gore...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: pdq
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 05:58 PM

Actually, George W. Bush got 1884 votes more than Gore on election night in Florida, 2000.

The state law mandated a recount and it showed almost the same margin of victory for George W. Bush.

This is in spite of tens of thousands of "Snow Birds" who vote in their home districts in places like Chicago, New York and New Jersey, and again in their winter retreats in Florida. They are mostly wealthy, Jewish and Democrat. They cast thousands of Gore/Lieberman votes. Political experts say that Lieberman was the VP choice precisely for this reason. Democrat experts said Florida would be impossible to predict that year.

Just for the record, the Florida 2000 ballots were recounted by various government and private concerns. One count was paid for by the New York Times.

In all, the same ballots were counted nine times until they are now badly degraded (remember pictures of thousands of "chads" on the floor?).

George W. Bush won in every recount. End of story.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 06:34 PM

Yeah, I don't doubt that the Democrats picked Leiberman to get Jewish votes. Both parties always try to pick candidates strategically to get votes from this or that sector of the public. So what? That's politics.

What we're talking about here is voting fraud, not the other crass and manipulative games that both parties play in their search to land a big "fish" in the White House and cash in for the next 4 years. ;-) (And the fish is usually a sucker! Or a flounder!)

If you could remove the influence of MONEY from the equation, you might get an honest election. Unfortunately, that's impossible under the present social system.

By the way, I thought that "Snowbirds" just referred to Canadians who vacation in Florida. ;-) Does it refer to northern Americans too?

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 06:46 PM

"Actually, George W. Bush got 1884 votes more than Gore on election night in Florida, 2000."

This is why it is useless to discuss matters of truth and fact with Republicans. There was never a full recount of the whole state yet he has a specific number.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: pdq
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 06:56 PM

It's more than vacationing in Florida.

Many wealthy Jewish people get tired of cold winters as well as the noise and violence in citys like Chicago. They actually live in Florida and keep in touch with business interests in their home town by our wonderful modern communication systems. Some return home when it's nicer in the Spring of Fall. The ones who voted in person in Florida voted absentee in placeas like New Jersey.

There are entire condo communities, retirement parks, hotels, even residential neighborhoods that are over 90% Jewish in Florida. I guess that isn't discrmination by the modern definition.

Katherine Harris, long before the election, asked the states of Illinois, New Jersey and New York to give her the voters rolls so she could check for duplicate names.

New York's attorney general was then Eliot Spitzer. He told harris to "fuck yourself!" Nice people, eh?

The other states simply did not answer the requests.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 07:28 PM

More bull crap.

Do you believe it yourself or are you just a disseminator?

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Jul 11 - 08:04 PM

The most thorough book on the 2000 election is by legal scholar Alan M. Dershowitz entitle "Supreme In justice" which goes over the time line of the recount... As some (not pdq, of course) recall we were getting almost hourly changes in the Bush lead and it was dwindling fast as the votes were being recounted... Time was of the essence for Bush because at the rate the numbers were changing in Gore's favor had the Supremes not stopped the recount then there is a high probability that Gore was going to overtake Bush in a matter of hours, not days...

So the Supreme Court stepped in... This was equivalent to a ref stopping a fight that everyone but the folks who had bet on the winner knew was wrong... But since then the Repubs have had the luxary to rewrite and revise the real story for public consumption because they had the ******power****** to do just that...

Reality is that, yes, in the case of Bush V. Gore, Bush's lawyers were 100% correct that if the Supreme Court did not stop the recount that their client would be harmed... He would most definitely been harmed in that the American people would have won but thier client would have never become president...

This is not debatable using the facts that are known... Using the right wing lies then, hey, anything and everything is debatable...

Historian will get this one right...

Alan Dershowitz has...

Another interesting read is "Best Democracy Money Can Buy" by UK journalist Greg Palast...

BTW, neither of these men had a dog in the race...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 01:25 AM

People generally just believe whatever they want to believe, don't they? ;-) And they don't read books by people who contradict the things they want to believe, do they?

I predict that pdq will not read the books you have just recommended, Bobert! ;-D Thus he will be protected from the terribly "heretical" thoughts contained in them...

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 01:36 AM

Right. And God don't make little green apples.
It's amazing what some people will believe if they see something in print and on the Internet.

For anyone truly interested, there is ample proof on the Internet that Bush beat what's his name.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 02:12 AM

For anyone truly interested, Doug, there is ample "proof" on the Internet of absolutely anything.

And that keeps everyone happy. ;-) They just look up the stuff that is in accord with what they want to believe.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Naemanson
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 06:11 AM

I have never trusted the computer polls. Of course I don't trust the paper counters either. I guess I just don't trust anyone connected with politics.

This will make for an interesting year. I will be teaching government and civics! I hope I can suppress the cynicism.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 09:26 AM

I'm not sure why people would avoid reading the Dershowitz book??? The guy ain't overly political...

But, yeah, I fully understand that rather than take the time to read a 400 page book that is an in depth study of the 2000 election some flat earthers would rather just pull up some 2 page right wing bloogers "in depth" (hahaha) research...

Seems that the folks on the right have no use for scientists, economists, public administrators, etc., etc... They are down to only believing in finding the best doctor when they get cancer... Those other disciplines??? Nah, not our cup of tea (pun intended) so they allow people who really don't know squat from squat about science or economics or whatever to write policy...

There is a reason why the economy all but collapsed in the Fall of '08...

Just as there is a reason why cutting spending during a recovery stalls a recovery...

Impeach the flat-earthers!!!!

B~

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 03:45 PM

Hey!!! You sayin' that the people who don't agree with you about politics think the Earth is flat???????? That what you sayin', Bobertz????

Well, if you are gonna make them kinda wild allegations and suggestions, buster, then don't be surprised when they accuse YOU of bein' in favor of openin' the borders to ANYONE who wants in, disarming the U.S. of A. totally, surrenderin' to international terrorism, and lettin' Muslims (like Obama?) take over the government and install Sharia Law in little towns all across America!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

;-D

I mean, hey, if we can guiltlessly deal in ridiculous stereotyping of people on the Right, then why complain when they do the same back to us, right?

Ya with me on this, you ol' hillbilly? Go ahead, now...call 'em all "knuckledraggers" too. They deserve it, right? ;-D

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: DougR
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 05:00 PM

pdq is correct.
Bush won fair and square.
Fuggetaboutit.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 05:22 PM

pdq is correct.
Bush won fair and square.
Fuggetaboutit.

Yeah! It makes cheating easier the next time!

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 05:33 PM

Well, yeah, LH... It would be nice to have a sane immigartion policy... It would be nice if we only had enough nukes to nuke the world once rather than a hundred times... But those things are way down the road... Right now we have to stop the American bleeding and as fast as sensible people get one bandaid on the loonies converge like buzzards, pull the bandaid off and leave a few more slashes while they are at it...

It's kinda like going the the hospital with a head cold and a gun shot wound... Ya' gotta treat the gunshot wound first...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Little Hawk
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 08:37 PM

That's true, Bobert.

Up here "loonies" are dollars. The Canadian dollar is called the Loonie, because it has a loon on the front side. It is now worth $1.06 American, which is an alltime high. It used to be worth only about 75 cents American.

Subject: RE: BS: How Bush stole the 2004 election
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Jul 11 - 08:47 PM

My grandmother lived in Detroit and worked in a bar and got tips and some of the coins were Canadian... She loved it because of the values...

B~