BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)

Subject: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Genie
Date: 05 Nov 04 - 08:18 PM

All the info is in this thread:

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=75217&messages=10#1318411

but I wanted to draw attention to Nader's active push, under the Freedom Of Information Act, to have an open audit of the programming of the electronic voting machines in New Hampshire. NH is the one, so far this year, where there's the most evidence of out and out fraud, and Nader's goal is to force an audit of the black box (corporate controlled) voting machines in ALL 30 states that used them.

Please fax Ralph and lend your support.

Genie

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Padre
Date: 05 Nov 04 - 09:33 PM

Let's just let Ralph fade quietly away, shall we.

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Bo Vandenberg
Date: 05 Nov 04 - 09:48 PM

I don't have an opinion of Nader in this but you have to ask why this isn't being done automatically. This is the first time these systems are being used and there seems to be very little will to question them.

The United States might soon have an election that runs as smoothly and is as technically advances as INDIA. If that irks anyone from supposedly the most advanced country in the world you have to ask what is the agenda and what is the will to defend democracy in the US of A.

Guess they could approach the UN for election watchers. If I were Bush I'd insist on verification, if only to shore up his reputation overseas.


sigurd

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Genie
Date: 05 Nov 04 - 11:30 PM

Yes, Sigurd, it does boggle the mind that a "democracy" wouldn't automatically insist on free and fair elections. And yes, other "third world" nations are way ahead of us in this respect.

The "agenda," I fear is a corporatist agenda. A few corporations own most of our media (aside from the internet) and to a great extent BOTH major political parties. Now they own much of the electoral process too! As long as there's no free marketplace in the TV and radio media (even in the print media), the public, plainly and simply, is NOT going to KNOW what's going on.

Even Public Broadcasting, now that government funding has been taken away, is already showing the same dumbing down and lack of gutsy critiquing as the "commercial" channels. Watching "Washington Week In Review" is not much different now from watching "Fox News Sunday" or "Meet The Press."
As we speak, I'm watching correspondents on that show dissecting the "meaning" of the Republicans' "win" and "mandate" -- not a word about voting problems or the possibility that there was corruption involved. And Gwen Ifill is putting a Polyanna-ish face on the whole debacle.

Padre, I was as pissed at Ralph as anyone, both in 2000 and, especially, in 2004. But SOMEBODY'S got to mount this challenge to the theft of our democratic electoral process, and if Nader's the one stepping up to the plate, I say "More power to him!" He has a great track record as a consumer advocate attack dog!

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Bobert
Date: 05 Nov 04 - 11:43 PM

Go, Ralph!!!!

Bobert (and still Green, thank you...)

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: CarolC
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 12:35 AM

Ralph was my hero for a long, long time. I wouldn't vote for him for president, but I sure am glad he's back doing what he does best... public advocacy.

Go Ralph!

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Ellenpoly
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 12:42 AM

Yes, I agree with Genie's last statement and yours Carol.

If Ralph Nader gets the bit between his teeth, there is no stopping him from doing what he says he's going to do. It's why I've always admired the man, but didn't vote for him this time around.

..xx..e

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: GUEST,Chadwick
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 12:47 AM

I voted for Bush in a blue state on an electronic machine and Kerry won. If they are rigged, how come Bush didn't win?

Chad

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Ellenpoly
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 12:55 AM

I don't think this is about rigging as such, Chad. I think it's more about the glitches, some which showed no votes of any kind counted in some cases. Without a paper trail, it's pretty difficult to have a re-count, eh?

..xx..e

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: CarolC
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 12:57 AM

Either that, or they only rigged enough to win, but not enough to be obvious about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 01:41 AM

In Ohio Bush was awarded 4000 extra votes in one precinct that didn't even have that many registered voters. The machines were bonkers. They subtracted those votes and say he still won. But I am not at all surprised that the Diebold card is still hovering, waiting to be played.

Go, Ralphie! Bush--dangerous at any deed.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: GUEST,peeeecee
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 01:47 AM

Take half an hour to learn something quite valuable about touchscreen voting, Diebold, and the history so far -- the movie at the link below is in QuickTime format. It's excellent (the music is bad, however!).


Votergate

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Mudlark
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 03:44 AM

The bland acceptance of so much by the media is maddening...TG Nader is still out there, doing--as others have said--what he does best.

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 02:19 PM

As one of the few here at Mudcat who actually voted for Nader, I'm not the least bit surprised to see him pick up the torch. A lot of people who voted for Kerry were furious with him & the Dem party capitulating so quickly on Ohio, and not raising a stink about the voting irregularities.

Personally, I have been predicting all along that it would be over that fast, because I knew damn well that Kerry wouldn't fight for peoples' voting rights. The Kerry campaign and the Democratic party had long ago decided there would be no repeat of 2000, no matter what. It was all about "unity". My ass. It was capitulation of the most despicable sort. Because I saw it coming didn't make it any more palatable once it arrived.

We can see now who was willing to fight for voters rights, eh. Read it and weep Kerry supporters.

People might also be interested in Newsweek columnist Eleanor Clift's mainstream pundit spin on the election, in her article "Nader Was Right".

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 02:22 PM

BTW, Nader's focus on the minimum wage was also dead on right. Nevada, of all conservative Republican stronghold places, passed a referendum raising their state's minimum wage on Tuesday.

So much for the Democrats fighting for the working class. You didn't even hear the words "working class" in the spin or read it on Kerry's campaign literature. It was all "middle class values" for Kerry and his party.

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Big Mick
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 02:28 PM

First off, why don't you let a little air out of your bag. You are sounding a bit pompous.

Second, if Nader hadn't pulled his megalomaniacal crap in the first place, we wouldn't be dealing with all this now.

Third, I am very pleased he has picked up the torch on behalf of voter's rights. Consumer advocacy is what he is good at. I can't think of a better person to do this.

Fourth, your touting him as an example of how it should be done, and some kind of progressive god ignores two important pieces of data. This is the same man that employed union busters on his employees when they decided to organize. Also, this is the same man who employed the Republican Party and allowed them to spend their money and use their vol's in his campaign. Were he a principled person he would have come out against this. He is not. He is simply another political hack.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: CarolC
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 02:42 PM

Mick, do you know of any other efforts besides Nader's to get the voting machine issue dealt with? If there are any, I'd love to know so I can support them.

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Big Mick
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 02:56 PM

At this point, Carol, Nader's is the best hope. This really is his bailiwick, and the type of thing he does very well. I am, as we "speak" researching this issue.

More later,

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Bo Vandenberg
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 02:58 PM

From Slashdot.org

"Blackboxvoting.org has raised the largest Freedom of Information request in history. At 8:30 p.m. Election Night, Black Box Voting blanketed the U.S. with the first in a series of public records requests, to obtain internal computer logs and other documents from 3,000 individual counties and townships. Networks called the election before anyone bothered to perform even the most rudimentary audit. Among the first requests sent to counties (with all kinds of voting systems -- optical scan, touch-screen, and punch card) is a formal records request for internal audit logs, polling place results slips, modem transmission logs, and computer trouble slips."


blackboxvoting.org

Doing what the governmetn should be demonstrating it does.

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 03:10 PM

Here is Sigurd's link:

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

Here is the link to Nader's page:

http://www.votenader.org/

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 03:28 PM

Chadwick, they didn't rig it so Bush could win in ALL the states, because if they had it would be blatantly obvious that it was rigged! They are not that stupid. You only need 270 electoral votes to win...you don't need all of them and no one would believe all of them would go to Bush.

Without a paper trail it is impossible to provide any certification of the accuracy of voting tabulations. This makes it possible to cheat. Do you really imagine that a ruling government will NOT cheat if it can find a way to and not get caught??? Vote fixing and fakery is as old as democracy itself, and if there is a way to do it, they will do it.

These computerized machines are the ultimate way to fix a vote, because they leave no physical evidence of wrongdoing.

Here's to Ralph Nader! May he fight on for democracy!

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 04:02 PM

Sorry, I meant to include another link in my post above, to the Center for Voting and Democracy:

http://fairvote.org/

Subject: RE: BS: Nader demands NH audit (not for himself)
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 06 Nov 04 - 04:10 PM

"If I were Bush I'd insist on verification, if only to shore up his reputation

sigurd"

Sigurd,

If you were Bush you'd be telling the rest of the world to fall in line or face your wrath. If you were someone else you might do something reasonable.