Election Fraud - Is this a realistic theory?

I know it would have been relatively easy for GOP operatives to perpetrate election fraud, with subtlety and no chance of detection, in Ohio and Florida.  And I realize that the results in Florida and Ohio were out of sync with the exit polls of those states.  But the exit polls appeared to have oversampled women and they did become more tight as the day wore on.  The unfortunate truth is that Kerry performed worse than Al Gore in almost every state in the country.  Much as it pains me to acknowledge it, the results in Ohio and Florida were, by and large, consistent with what we would expect there, given the national popular vote trend.  That begs the question: was the national popular vote the result of tons of mini-conspiracies?  

I know it would have been relatively easy for GOP operatives to perpetrate election fraud, with subtlety and no chance of detection, in Ohio and Florida.  And I realize that the results in Florida and Ohio were out of sync with the exit polls of those states.  But the exit polls appeared to have oversampled women and they did become more tight as the day wore on.  The unfortunate truth is that Kerry performed worse than Al Gore in almost every state in the country.  Much as it pains me to acknowledge it, the results in Ohio and Florida were, by and large, consistent with what we would expect there, given the national popular vote trend.  That begs the question: was the national popular vote the result of tons of mini-conspiracies?  I wouldn't put it past B/C but I don't know how possible this would be to execute.  Can we really say, with a straight face, that tens of thousands of precinct results were rigged from Connecticut to Colorado, to Ohio and Florida, from New Jersey to Pennsylvania, to Michigan and Virginia?  Despite all the power, money, and media behind the Republicans, I don't think anyone would be capable of such mass scale election fraud on a pragmatic level.  

I don't doubt that something shady could have happened with the Diebold election machines, but the margins of defeat in Ohio are credible and believeable, especially considering this is a state that voted for Bush by almost 4% in 2000.  Same goes for Florida, where a lot of "not quite seeing the big picture" simple folks really appeared to be swayed by GWB's "heroic" post-hurricane relief cameos.  

In the future, there does need to be a paper trail, I agree.  But I can't say, right now, with any moral certainty that the election results in Florida or Ohio were the consequence of mass fraud.

•  Go to www.blackboxvoting.org

  and read some of the more informed threads on the subject.

  by moon in the house of moe on Fri Nov 05, 2004 at 12:36:38 AM PDT

•  I agree, you need facts, and

  Blackbox voting has promised real evidence.  And that's what we need to move forward.  

  by 2lucky on Fri Nov 05, 2004 at 12:49:12 AM PDT

•  Great Diary

  There are two explanations for what happened:
  

  1.  The exit polls were wrong
     
  2.  There was voting fraud

  The fact that the NATIONAL Exit poll was wrong (it predicted 51-48 Kerry, when it was 51-48 Bush) suggests to me that the exit polls were wrong.

  by fladem on Fri Nov 05, 2004 at 12:54:47 AM PDT

•  The fact that you even have to question it...

  ...should give you great concern.  I don't trust Diebold.  I would know.

  http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/11/5/14846/7562

  by d3n4l1 on Fri Nov 05, 2004 at 01:52:36 AM PDT

  •  I don't trust Diebold either...

    Nevertheless, my point is that the Florida and Ohio results are consistent with the popular vote and the average +2.5 Bush trend that invaded almost every county in every state in the nation (except for Vermont, Oregon, Maine, and the Philly burbs which came through BIG TIME for Kerry).  I don't think it's realistic to blame the outcome on fraud at this point.  To pull that off, the Republicans would have had to give the fraud an aura of legitimacy.  The trends in the other states would have had to create the illusion of consistency with Ohio and Florida.  And they did.  The Ohio and Florida results are not anomalies in comparison to the other states.  Wisconsin was barely blue this year, even with no significant Nader Factor; same goes for Minnesota to a lesser extent.  New Jersey and Connecticut were under 10%.  Rhode Island was tigher.  We lost Iowa and we lost New Mexico (or so it seems).  Missouri, Virginia, West Virginia, and Arkansas were Bush blowouts.  

    Ohio and Florida were almost exactly where I'd expect them, given the national popular vote and the way it was reflected in other states.  And I'm not ready to say "the reason the Florida and Ohio results seem to coincide with the results in every other state, is because every other state was rigged too!"

    Of course, I don't doubt that Diebold may have robbed K/E of a few thousand, or even tens of thousands of votes.  But that wouldn't make a difference.  I don't see fraud as the determinative factor in this election.  I do, however, oppose black-box voting and hope it's done away with as soon as possible.

    by BPK on Fri Nov 05, 2004 at 02:07:15 AM PDT

    •  I have relatives all over Wisconsin..

      Unfortunately, Wisconsin did get a little purple this year.  
      I don't care that Kerry Lost. I do care that there is not an easy way to tell that for sure.  This is a problem that must be fixed before anything else.  
      Democrats should refuse to do anything until the vote is fixed.

      by d3n4l1 on Fri Nov 05, 2004 at 02:16:29 AM PDT