BS: Election results

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 08:44 AM

If Webb does carry Virginia--(which is still unclear--may be so til December)--you will have to give your fellow Virginians a bit of credit, Bobert.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Charley Noble
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 08:50 AM

The local election officials and volunteers in my small Maine town still count the votes by hand. There was a 66% turnout which meant it took them over 4 hours to count 1524 votes. As Town Democractic Chair I was there until they were finished, around 12:15 AM, so I could report back to the candidates I'd been working with, and to the County and State officials.

We were gratified that our new young Democrat won 60% of the vote to the Maine House, helping keep a Democratic majority there. This is not an easy town for Democrats to win as it is almost equally divided between Democrats, Republicans, and unenrolled "Independents." And about 10% of the voters supported the Green Party candidate for Governor or other anti-war independents in other races. Our Maine Senate candidate won our town but may not win his district; a major town still hasn't reported in and it is heavily Republican; that candidate was a moderate Republican who two years ago switched to the Democrats and there is no love lost between him and his former party members.

Olympia Snowe, the Republican U. S. Senator, handily won re-election. She appears to be unbeatable.

Our two Democratic Congressional candidates also won re-election by comfortable margins.

Cheerily,
Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 09:14 AM

60% of the independents swung for the Dems this time around.

No matter how deserving an impeachment would be there will not be an impeachment: unless Bush - Cheney strike another country with a pre emptive invasion without permission, or if they are caught on camera in a gay relationship.

Bush Cheney said 2 days ago that they will not listen to the people or Congress regarding their plans in Iraq. Taking the hard strident line in stepping up aggresion is their only plan. Not even the James Baker panel seems to be a workable plan to step back or change course. These lame ducks do not pan to go gentle into that good night.

In two years they could dump a pile of goo on the capital steps and call it the remains of bin Laden and it will still not save their eternal war plans and globalization/corporate rule tactics.
What they could run with would be another great terror disaster.
Emergency rules could go full goose bonkers and the fears of even the most polemic 'guest' could be realized.


What ought to happen:


Republican military industrial people should feel satsified that they have wrung all the money they possibly could out of the system.

Those with indescribable wealth should content themselves with sitting on their accumulated pile for at least 6 years.

As for trying to get any of the stolen funds back...not a chance.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Rapparee
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 09:16 AM

Olympia Snow, from a couple thousand miles away, doesn't appear to be a goose-stepping member of the Party. More of a moderate.

Idaho has apparently defeated an attempted land grab ("Protect Idaho land from the Supreme Court's Eminent Domain Decision!") by outside developers by over 76% of the vote. The initiative wasn't needed, since the Legislature (a rational act! huzzah!) dealt with it last Summer.

Looks like a Republican governor, senator, and reps -- maybe! Some of the optical scanning machines have broken down because the company who sold them recommended marking pens with too much red color in the ink! This area will again be Democratic, annoying the Idaho Republican Party greatly. Of course, this is also a stronghold of...(gasp!)...labor unions.....

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 09:50 AM

Yeahn Ron, I really do feel that way. I very rarely say things here that I don't mean.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 09:56 AM

Yeah, Ron, I will have to give credit to my fellow Virginians, especially those in Northern Virginia who seem to bee too educated to buy into Bush's simplistic and dogmatic thinking... And credit to Richmonders... You take those two regions outta the equation and Allen wins in a landslide...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Grab
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 10:54 AM

Not sure Bush will be a "lame duck", since Dems have only got equal pegging at best in the Senate, and IIRC Cheney gets the deciding vote. Still, barring major changes it looks like the result in 2 years time is a foregone conclusion.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Peace
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 10:57 AM

The House can investigate. I think Bush and Cheney are going to be prosecuted. They are GOING DOWN! HARD!

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 11:05 AM

"It is beginning to look as if the USA may (2 seats in the senate may need to go to 100% manual recount) have recovered its liberty from a tyranny worse than George III!"

Actually, rather fittingly, Dubya is George III. His father was the only President since George Washington to have the name.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Amos
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 11:16 AM

Democrats will destroy the soul of the country

John:

Undermine the rights of free assembly, free speech? Oh, the Republicans have beaten them to it.

Oh, perhaps turn the nation's soul away from balance, love of fair play, and tolerance into a power-driven warmongering country that has no conscience about unilateral invasions and wreaking death for political reasons? Hmmmm....I think the Republicans got that one.

Undermine the freedom of religion that can only be assured by keeping religion out of issues of state? Whoops, already done.

Undermine the right of privacy by allowing any communication to be tapped at the will ofunidentified government operatives? Oooh, the neocons took care of that one.

Oh -- maybe destroy the soul of the country by trying to dilute the Constitution and making it a vehicle for short-sighted moralist autocrats? Nope, been done.

Well, there's always habeas corpus and the individual absolute right to due process under the law....oh, never mind.

So exactly what is it, in your view, that constitutes the soul of this country that is left for the Dems to have a swing at?

Sexual tolerance?

Sorry to be a bit bitter here, but these last eight years have hammered the soul of this country into a blind spin and left it reeling like a blind man walking across a merry-go-round.

The soul of this country stands in need, I agree. But not because it has been threatened by Democrats.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Wolfgang
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 12:20 PM

I'm pleased with the results, of course, and even my conservative countrymen are, though they might not say so if they are in office.

But please could the USAmericans tell me one thing: Before the elections, I have read here and elsewhere a lot about cheating and vote rigging by the Rebulicans. So what do I make now of these allegations?

(1) It was just paranoia on the left.
(2) The Republicans have cheated, but the swing was so large that it didn't matter.
(3) The evil men controlling the country in the background have decided not to use the vote rigging power this time for no one could have believed such a result.

Or is it another reason I have forgotten to think of?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 12:24 PM

It's still a race for control of the Senate & will stay that way until Nov 27. Senator Allen of Virginia is behind & looking to beat Webb but is down 7000 or so votes & claims to have picked up 1000 on side of the road somewhere, I'm smelling a rat somewhere looking for the cheese. Still at 49 to 49
Tester (D) is still up by around 10,000 vote which is only a 1% lead over (R) Burns. The Senate needs both of these seats to win control but it looks as if it not gonna be decieded soon.

Good bye to 12 yrs or Rep control of the House, good-bye to bad trash & good-bye to Has-shit & hello to Nancy Pelosi. At present it 195 (R) to 227 (D) with 13 still unaccounted for.

So far there's 26 D Governors to the R's 20

America has spoken, will he lame duck listen. If he doesn't there's a possibility that there'll be no republicans left after the 2008 elections. Of course if the dems don't take the bull by the horns in the following 2 yrs there might be a purge of all incumbents, everywhere.

If it walks & talks like a duck with a limp in both legs it's gotta be the lamest duck that ever crawled out from under of the Bush.
Good-bye Shrub you've now been declared "USELESS"

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: catspaw49
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 12:24 PM

I'd get a laugh out of that wonderful post Amos if it weren't so sadly true. Well done. I was completely without words for the statement that Dems would destroy the soul of the country. Ranks high on the Dumbest Statement list...........

Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 12:44 PM

Well, lets keep in mind that the Dems will need to have their chops busted on a regular basis to be an alternative voice in the discussion because the board rooms all up and down K Street are filled with folks ready and willin' to put lots of cash into Dem PAC's, Campaign Committees, 401(c)'s an' any other place they can find to stuff money...

So, yeah, enjoy the dismantlin' of the Repub stranglehold today but be leary of the "new boss"...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Rapparee
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 01:00 PM

Wolfgang, it's just politicians throwing accusations at each other. Not that it can't and doesn't happen, but usually it's a local sort of thing -- like Daley in Chicago or McGinn county, Tennessee. Eventually their sins do catch up to them, either legally or politically.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: GUEST,PeteBoom (at work)
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 01:00 PM

Wolfgang - Fair questions. I'll try to summarize.

In general, the concerns focused on technology issues. Most notably, the lack of a physical paper trail for voting transactions in some machines was top on the list of the professional software folks I know. That is, there is no way in some of the systems to work back to track precisely how a given voter cast their ballot. This is heightened by comments of a former CEO of Diebold on how he'd "deliver" the election for the Republicans.

Some of the systems generated a paper "receipt" (which corresponded to a "transaction record" within the file containing voter activities) that could be presented to the person voting. This was to act as a certainty of how they voted - it also was to be a confirmation of the summary displayed on the screen of the voting machine for the voter to approve the action ("Yes, I really am certain this is how I voted.") These systems are incredibly expensive, and were not deployed in many places at all as a result.

Other systems used a similar process, displaying a confirmation of votes to be cast on the voter's ballot and then saving the transaction - but not generating a paper receipt. These were not as expensive and were more commonly used, however, there were also concerns that some models of this type of machine and some releases of software were open to hacking.

Rather infamously, a Computer Science professor demonstrated what it took to hack into one model in a Congressional hearing - He succeeded in something like 90 seconds. Diebold claimed that it was an older system and was not current. However, there was no satisfactory answer on how many of these "obsolete" systems would be in use on election day.

The least expensive, and least technologically cool, systems were the straight optical scan machines. The trusty fill in the oval or complete the line and feed the paper ballot into a reader. The most advanced versions will scan the ballot for errors or improper marks, or in some cases spoilt ballots, and reject the ballot to be corrected by the voter.

This system gives an absolute paper trail that can be manually verified if needed - and the individual ballots can be tracked to a specific voter. This means that the voting records, recorded by hand by the election workers, can be matched by voting location to every single vote cast.

These machines are also more difficult to hack, as most systems are not actually recording votes - but presence or absence of complete records. These transactions are then fed to a central machine to interpret and tally the results. If there is a challenge, the paper ballots will be available for the purpose of auditing the transactions recorded by the machine.

The use of the new technology was central to the unrest. That combined with varying reliability of audit processes and political comments made by a business eejit fed into the maelstrom.

The simple fact is, old-fashioned electioneering and dirty tricks still work better than any of the high-tech solutions right now. There is also enough room for plausible deniability where these will be around for a while.

Regards -

Pete

Subject: RE: BS: Election results - Rumsfeld Out!
From: GUEST,PeteBoom (at work)
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 01:12 PM

NBC is reporting that the Montana senate seat has gone to the Democratic challenger and that Donald Rumsfeld is being replaced.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Charley Noble
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 01:23 PM

To capitalize on the "Democratic Wave" of 2006 in 2008 will require real leadership on the part of the Democratic Party, in success in overcoming whatever obstacles the Republicans and their President place in their way. If the voters who swung this election for the Democrats are frustrated by what the Democrats are able to achieve, they could easily rally behind a moderate Republican presidental candidate and sweep the Republicans back into majorities on his or her coat-tails.

It's always hard work to win elections, and harder work to accomplish something significant once in office.

It's going to be very difficult to unravel the international mess that Bush and his cronies have gotten us into, and the domestic mess could be equally challenging.

Time to catch up on some much needed sleep!

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Grab
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 01:38 PM

Beg pardon - got it wrong about the Senate before.

BBC results:-

MONTANA - 99% COUNTED
John Tester (D): 194,914
Conrad Burns (R): 193,179

VIRGINIA - 99% COUNTED
Jim Webb (D): 1,170,564
George Allen (R): 1,162,719

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Sorcha
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 01:40 PM

Wyoming House still too close to call. Many, many recounts...ad nauseum. Sigh....

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 02:00 PM

The Democrats have won the necessary number of seats for control of the House of Representatives, and have won enough seats in the Senate so that it hangs on the race in Virginia, where Webb, a Democrat, leads Allen, the Republican candidate by a slender margin. That race will not be resolved for a few weeks, because according to Virginia state law (as in Washington State where I live), a margin of less that 1% requires a recount.

Nancy Pelosi is now Speaker of the House.

As I type this, Bush is acknowledging the Democratic victory and is trying to put a good face on it. And he has just announced that Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, is resigning.

Now, who was it that was saying that a Democratic victory wouldn't change anything?

And I would also point out to those who like to blame me personally for the state of the country because I prefer to vote for the candidates who a) most closely represent my views, and b) actually have a chance of winning, rather than vote idealistically but unrealistically for a third party candidate who doesn't have a snowball's chance in Hell, and is only pulling quite possibly crucial votes away from progressive candidates that actually do have a chance. Example:    in the contest between Washington State Senator Maria Cantwell, Democrat, and Republican candidate Mike McGavick, Maria won with 57.59% of the vote to McGavick's 39.31%. The other candidates, Libertarian, Green, and Independent, garnered a total of 3.1%. Had the margin between Cantwell and McGavick been closer, Washington State might have a Republican Senator for the next six years. I'm not totally happy with a few of the decisions Maria has made (although I do believe that she now has her act together), but having heard McGavick speak, I would be a lot less happy had he won.

Jim McDermott, 7th District Congressional Representative (Democrat, very progressive, and royal pain in the ass to the Bush administration) won re-election by a huge margin. Something like 78% of the vote. Hosanna!!

Interesting note:   Pierce County, just south of King County in which Seattle resides, has started a Charter Amendment to eliminated Washington State's controversial primary election system and replace it with instant run-off voting. Go for it!! If so, I could make happy (or at least get them off my back) those who scream at me for advocating voting for viable candidates rather than the odd collection of Don Quixote candidates that they (and I) I may really prefer, but who don't stand a chance.

Just finished listening to Bush's press conference. He seems far more articulate than he's been in the past, but he did quack and limp quite a bit.

It's a pretty good day.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Wesley S
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 02:09 PM

I wonder if Rumsfield had fallen on his sword and resigned last weekend if the results would have been the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 02:21 PM

It's just confirmed Tester has taken Montana that puts the Senate at Dem's 50 to the Repub's 49 & it's gonna be awhile for the Virginia race to be settled, though it looks as if Allen is the loser which will give the control of the Senate to the Dem's.

RUMMY HAS BEEN SCUTTLED. Though the bad news is that Gates has been selected to replace Rummy, depending on he's ok'ed by the Dem's which may be doubtful seeing that he's an etreme rubber stamp for Georgie. To bad Ducky.

It doesn't seem that George gets it. The country just spoke but Bush is somethin else. He still thinks the nation is looking for victory in Iraq, what a thick headed idiot & the tone on his speech was still resistent to changing, he's still spouting "stay the course". He doesn't know he's been dumped. A bigger fool can't be found, anywhere.
It'll good to see him as a duck waddle off, "fuck the duck" is the new cry. Impeachment now would be the best course of action for him & his VP, that would give us a dem president & the 1st female in the White House, President Nancy. Sounds good to me. But I'm afraid it would look like a coup rather that the feather that it should be. She is 3rd in line now.


Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 02:36 PM

Robert Gates, whom Bush has nominated to replace Rumsfeld, is not in yet. He has to be passed on by the Armed Sevices Committee, and if he gets by that, he must then be approved by the Senate. And right now, control of the Senate looks like it might go to the Democrats, but it's still up in the air.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Sorcha
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 03:24 PM

Wyoming House still too close to call, but Our Town has a new mayor. Blessed Be!

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: DougR
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 03:34 PM

Yes, you have, Wolfgang. Republicans do not own a franchise on corruption. There are corrupt Democrats too. From all reports I have heard, there was a lot of noise generated about voting fraud but nothing has been substantiated at least as far as I know. I doubt the Democrates will want to delve too deeply into charges of voter fraud. An investigation might show that they didn't really win the election. :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Big Mick
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 03:36 PM

Dougie ..... where is the smugness? ...... sounds a little like sour grapes, buddy. A simple "congratulations" will do.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 04:06 PM

The answer Wolfgang is your number 2.

A landslide was needed, and a landslide was had.

I think we will see a lot in the coming weeks about the last minute robo-calls.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 04:39 PM

Wolfgang -- There is only one party at the national level in the US. The wealthy elite. Some belong to the Democrats and some to the Republicans, but there is no real difference between the parties. In this election, the Democratic side was allowed to make some gains. The Republican side will now pretend to be "in trouble." There will be threats and counterthreats while the elite continues its destruction of the country. For example, Democrats are "for the aliens" in the US. 20-30 million criminals wandering my country will now be legalized by George Bush as one of his final bowel movements on the US. See how the two sides help each other? Both parties are owned by the same people...the same people (international banking consortiums) who financed both the Axis AND the Allied powers in WW2. Unfortunately, few Americans are able to admit they're controlled by murdering gangsters. We're going down the same road Germany traveled under Hitler. And that's sad, because we SHOULD have learned from history.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 05:07 PM

"She is 3rd in line now."

Not yet awhile. None of these changes take effect until into the new year. At this point, if Bush and Cheney both choked on a pretzel tonight, your President for the next two years (at least) would apparently be a bloke called Dennis Hastert. "President Dennis"...

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 05:25 PM

Actually looking at the two of them on the box tonight it occurred to me, why on earth is Hilary Clinton seen as a more plausible presidential candidate than Nancy Pelosi?

I mean Cherie Blair is very probably at least as bright as Tony, but nobody is going around suggesting that she should inherit the mantle of PM.

There does seem to be a real appetite for dynastic succession in the American system sometimes.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: GUEST,Rich (bodhránaí gan cookie)
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 05:33 PM

We've done our part in PA.   Santorum got destroyed and we did a good bit to help paint the house blue as well.   


Rich

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 05:49 PM

Doing good after evil will never atone for the evil.

Internationally speaking anything less than offering W's head on a plate will be too little too late.

Remember the good old Roman tradition of exile?

Where could we exile W?

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: alanabit
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 05:52 PM

Don't you go dumping your riff raff over here - we have got enough of our own!

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Rapparee
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 05:57 PM

The one scene that sticks with me is that of Santorum's son during his father's losing speech. The kid, who looks to be about 12, was doing his best not to cry and even ducked down a couple times. HIM I felt sorry for.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 06:14 PM

Wolfgang,

4) The Democrats controlled the machines, but that is an "acceptable" result, and will not be questioned.



As many here have said, the use of Diebold machines makes the actual vote counts suspicious, if not unknowable... It just happens the "right" people got elected, so the use of those machines , with no verifiable checks, is OK at this time. ALL of Maryland used Diebold machines- but since it was a sweep for the Dems, of course they worked perfectly... Just like they had been programmed to by the local Democratic election boards.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 07:00 PM

IF the Maryland machines had been tampered with, the tamperers would NOT have been so obvious as to program "Republician victory, no matter what"....IF there were tampering, it would have to be subtle, to 'tweak' close races one way or another....or to 'invalidate' a certain number of voting attempts.

You see, no one has proven absolutely that tampering HAS been done, only that it is possible and hard to prevent the way it is currently set up. And, since Diebold IS on record as being very much to the right, it is not hard to imagine which way any tampering would go.

If exit polls showed a nice Democratic victory and the machines said something else, it WOULD be cause for concern. You know & I know that IF the potential for cheating is there and no safeguards are in place, eventually someone will exploit those flaws.

It may be that no Diebold machines were 'adjusted'....or it may be that the margins were not within the parameters of adjustment.

We DO know that a number of other 'dirty tricks' were attempted to trick, discourage or prevent Democratic voting in a number of places...(phone calls telling them to go to the wrong polls...etc.)

What we see is Rove's plan to ensure Republican victory for the forseeable future is beginning to unravel a bit, but we STILL need to design the voting procedures so that **NO ONE** can manipulate elections directly!!

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 07:14 PM

I just listened to Howard Dean's interview & the subject of faulty machines came up as well as any fraud or complacations. The Dems had 7500 lawyers on call so as soon as a problem was phoned in a lawyer was sent strait over & Dean mentioned that the problems were straiten out right away. So he believe many of the problems were nipped in the bub before they became rel problems. He admits that there were plenty of faults of all types to go around but that this time it was held to a min.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 07:24 PM

Sorry, the major fault is now being played out in Virginia. They vote for the machines. Now they've got Senator Allen (R) losing by 7000 votes & he's looking to hold out for a recount. He's losing by 3/4 of 1% & all he's gonna get is a retally of what was already counted. The machines leave no paper trail. I guess this election is telling the same story what most people already knew. The machines are no good with out a paper trail & that there's plenty that goes wrong with them, aside from fraud. So why is Allen holding out? Why do we need to wait until Nov 27 for the same results? Will the country (government) still favor these machines? Probably! "When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn"?

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Maryrrf
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 07:27 PM

I wish Allen would just go ahead and concede the election!

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 07:35 PM

I suppose we can expect that there'll be mobs of Democrats besieging the place where any recount might be carried out in order to disrupt the process and stop the recount?

Or is it just the Republicans who do that kind of thing?

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 07:47 PM

It's really a dead issue. The pressure is on Allen to concede so it looks like a noble step on the Republicans part towards a bi-part-sons of bitches work together policy & if Allen holds out it's gonna be looking like sour grapes on the party's part.

The retally (not recount) is being attended be Dems & Reps both with lawyers from both parties overseeing each other.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: GUEST,jaze
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 08:26 PM

Bush should be exiled to Iraq, of course. They'd love to have him.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 08:37 PM

They could put him on trial maybe. But I suppose they'd have to wait till the occupation armies have left.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 08:48 PM

Well Beardedbrucie,

Amongst mudcatters, I will bet that I will see people like kat here who I would guess is democrat still arguing that the lack of a paper trail is unsafe even if it could be suggested (fairly or otherwise) that dems could have benifited from fixings.

The lack of recognition of the underlying and real problem has, at least on Mudcat, seemed to come from republicans who have never wanted to question a poor system but instead seemlingly have not been able to get thier brains beyond "you only say that because you lost".

Perhaps an oppertunity for all Americans to want "accountable" voting systems?

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 09:09 PM

It became very clear during the aftermath of your 2000 election that for a lot of people the important thing wasn't to get the correct result, it was to get the right result.

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Peace
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 09:13 PM

I wish to say to my Republican friends on Mudcat that y'all fought a good fight and over the years I have listened to you when you have chortled and laughed and been real smug. I ain't about to return that to y'all. I'm thankful your country has at last got a mechanism and possibility of impeaching Bush and Cheney. Now, let's see if the Democrats have the balls to do just that, because those two bastards have GOT to go!

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 09:37 PM

Wolfgang (and others), there may be a reason that we haven't heard much about voter fraud this time around. HERE. Move On and several other organizations have put a bounty on people responsible for trying to cobble the election.

This, however, didn't stop the Republicans from "robo-calling" (automatic dialing with a taped messages) independent and undecided voters, and voters registered as Democrats, with a message urging them to vote for Democrat candidates in the middle of the night (like two or three o'clock in the morning) in an effort to make them so angry that they either wouldn't vote at all or vote Republican. This was only one of a number of dirty tricks that have been reported.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Charley Noble
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 10:24 PM

Don-

I really like your posts. It sounds like you really got involved and worked hard, and helped make an impact on your statewide elections.

Now if we could get more Mudcatters herded together, we might just take over the country in two years. Amos for President! And suggestions for Czarina?

Cheerily,
Charley Noble, logging off for more sleep

Subject: RE: BS: Election results
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Nov 06 - 11:23 PM

BB--

I wonder if you remember what the CEO of Diebold said in 2004. Clue: he said he would deliver Ohio.

Did he say

1) To the Republicans?

or

2) To the Democrats?

When you've figured that out, ask yourself how likely it would be that Diebold machines would be rigged to deliver all Maryland races to the Democrats.


And, by the way, please be sure to also share with us sources, impeccable-- as your sources always are-- which prove your assertion.


Thanks so much.