Skip to main content

View Diary: What happened to me in Clay County, FL, on Election Day, 2004 (298 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  We all write comments from time-to-time (4.00)
    that lack civility and grace.  I guess is was your turn.

    Kossacks: a large population of Medieval exegetes who each day grapple with the fabulistic opportunities of the early third milennium.

    by DCDemocrat on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 06:49:32 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  This person's story doesn't hold water (none)
      And I am not afraid to say it.

      A fair examination of the story shows too many discrepencies and contradictions.

      Including the most offensive ones to me, where she claims that she KNOWS that she has no proof, yet over and over again asserts that she KNOWS fraud happened.

      This is the same issue that Kos has with conspiracy theories over election fraud from other sources.

      The fact that a memory card was taken from a voting machine does NOT mean that election fraud happened, does it? Of course it does not. Yet she says she has formed an opinion that fraud did happen because the memory card was taken from the machine by a guy who she thinks, with no proof, conspired to disable the landline phone. Yes, I know that, as far as THIS diarist knows, he was the last person to use the phone. And she says that the last time SHE heard him answer the phone, she claims that she heard it stop ringing mid-ring, yet she heard no talking. Not only are those 'facts' not proof that he did anything to the phone, but if she remembers details like that, those are the relevant details, yet she tries to say that there is no point in going to authorities about this because she doesn't remember the exact times that things happened. The court could subpeona the telephone's records to find out exactly what time those phone calls were made. She somehow believes that it would be upon her shoulders to get the telephone records!

      I do not think it helps the cause of election reform to make baseless allegations of fraud when there is no proof. I think it hurts the cause of election reform. There's no proof of any fraud. None.

      It's fine to be suspicious of the circumstances. There's a difference though, between being suspicious and making the statements that she did, where she says that based upon her suspicions she is convinced that fraud happened. Making that kind of leap based upon the evidence available is the exact kind of behavior that I believe, and apparently Kos believes too, hurts the cause of election reform.

      ...but not your own facts.

      by slouise217 on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 08:53:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Each of us is entitled to her or his opinion (4.00)
        and each of us is entitlted to be treated with respect.  We can disagree without being disagreeable.

        Kossacks: a large population of Medieval exegetes who each day grapple with the fabulistic opportunities of the early third milennium.

        by DCDemocrat on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 09:09:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think I made myself fairly clear. (4.00)
        As an academic, I know that this is not proof. I do not have proof in my hand. I've admitted this from the beginning.

        Conclusive proof is not the only kind of knowledge that exists. You don't have to have conclusive proof to know that something is happening, you have to have conclusive proof to prove that something is happening.

        Those who were not there that night do not know as I do that fraud was happening, nor would I expect them to say so. Because they didn't witness the events. I know.

        That firm knowledge can't be transferred to people who weren't there because I do not have proof. What can be transferred to others is evidence that indicates that something bad was happening, something that should have been investigated.

        •  YOU said that you KNOW that fraud happened (none)
          And it was THOSE comments that I objected to.

          But the fact remains that YOUR story doesn't hold water.

          There are too many holes in it.

          And everyone IS entitled to their own opinion.

          But those people that craft their opinions upon shifting sands should have that pointed out.

          And that's what I did.

          You have NO basis for saying that you KNOW fraud happened, yet you do say exactly that. And if you KNEW that fraud happened, you sure didn't act that way 16 months ago.

          Saying that your only option to prevent fraud from happening was jumping on and perhaps even killing this man is ludicrous.

          Saying that you cannot remember times, and therefore it's too late to report this to the authorities, when you can remember the IMPORTANT facts, is not believeable.

          Saying that YOU don't know how to subpeona telephone records, when there would be NO expectation for YOU to do the investigation, and you should have NO expectation that you would HAVE TO do the investigation, is NOT believeable.

          Saying that since you don't live in Florida any more, you don't think you can participate in any investigation is silliness in the extreme.

          You say in response to the first post on the thread that you do not even know details about the vote totals. If you do NOT know them, HOW can you possibly know that the vote totals on the memory card that eventually got turned in for your precinct differed at ALL from the paper ballots that you secured? But even though you say you don't know details, you say

          "...they stole from that county." Not 'I think they might have stolen from that county', but a flat-out assertion that they DID steal from that county. You say that you should have investigated it yourself, but of course you, as a small worker bee, should NOT have investigated it yourself. It was YOUR job to report your suspicions. That's all.

          Later in the diary you say

          "...although the fraud I witnessed..." But you did NOT see fraud. You say behavior that YOU THINK INDICATED fraud. You did not see fraud, yet you clain you did. It's THESE comments that I have trouble with, and it's THESE kinda comments that hurt efforts for election reform. Making assertions that fraud DID happen without proof is detrimental. And that is what YOU did throughout this diary and in your comments in this diary.

          You say that you found out that the report you filed got thrown away. Yet you do NOT say that when you discovered this, you REFILED the paperwork. That's what someone who really thought they had something would have done.

          The likelihood is that you THOUGHT some fraud might have happened. Your allegation WAS looked into, and discovered to be without merit - the simple fact that someone TOOK a memory card does NOT mean that fraud happened, yet YOU assert that it does. That's your WHOLE case - that you think that this person disabled the phone lines (what if someone else had TRIED to use the phone in the church AFTER he disabled it mid-afternoon? that's a pretty poor plan on HIS part!) and then he took advantage of the downed phone line to take the memory card. But what if reality is that, since the phone line was down, the proper procedure WAS for him to hand-carry the memory card to election headquarters? And what if he didn't do ANYTHING to the memory card - after all, you have NO proof that anything was done to change the results on that memory card over what was secured by you on the paper ballots.

          It is the unsubstantiated allegations that you make, with liberal doses of assertions of fact - that you know that fraud happened - that I object to.

          It IS possible that fraud did happen. But your exposition of the evidence here leaves a lot to be desired.

          ...but not your own facts.

          by slouise217 on Wed Mar 01, 2006 at 09:03:57 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  It may not be evidentiary proof (4.00)
        But would we all agree that the situation cries out for further investigation?

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site