Skip to main content

The Boston Globe has an excellent article, accompanied by one of the best graphics I've seen so far, regarding nationwide voting errors.

I'm a scientist. I like hard numbers and statistics.  I don't like wild speculation, so I won't engage in that here, because you can't simply look at a map and say "FRAUD!" or even "SUPPRESSION!" without knowing much more about that specific state.

Anyway, look below the fold for the graphic and excerpts from the article.

Voting errors tallied nationwide

More than 4,000 votes vanished without a trace into a computer's overloaded memory in one North Carolina county, and about a hundred paper ballots were thrown out by mistake in another. In Texas, a county needed help from a laboratory in Canada to unlock the memory of a touch-screen machine and unearth five dozen votes.

In other places, machine undercounting or overcounting of votes was a problem. Several thousand votes were mistakenly double-counted in North Carolina, Ohio, Nebraska, and Washington state. Some votes in other areas were at first credited to the wrong candidates, with one Indiana county, by some quirk, misallocating several hundred votes for Democrats to Libertarians. In Florida, some machines temporarily indicated votes intended for challenger John F. Kerry were for President Bush, and vice versa.

In the month since the election, serious instances of voting machine problems or human errors in ballot counts have been documented in at least a dozen states, each involving from scores of ballots to as many as 12,000 votes, as in a North Carolina county. On Election Day, or in later reconciling tallies of ballots and voters, local officials discovered problems and corrected final counts. In some cases, the changes altered the outcomes of local races. But in North Carolina, the problems were so serious that the state may hold a rare second vote, redoing a contest for state agriculture commissioner decided by fewer votes than the number of ballots lost.

After the disputed vote in Florida four years ago, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act of 2002 and authorized $4 billion so states could create central computerized voter lists and replace outdated voting systems such as punchcards by 2006. But many states have not completed the overhaul, and this year's election unearthed enough problems -- both with older technologies and newer electronic touch-screens -- that two federal agencies plan unprecedented nationwide inquiries. The investigations by the Government Accountability Office and US Election Assistance Commission will begin early next year and be completed by mid-2005, at the earliest.

In addition, minor presidential candidates requested recounts in four states -- a partial one completed yesterday in New Hampshire, and statewide in Ohio, New Mexico, and Nevada.

None of the recounts or inquiries is expected to affect the results of the presidential election, which Bush won by more than 3.3 million votes.

Apologies if someone has already posted this.  I did a search and didn't find anything;  I'll delete if someone has posted it.

Originally posted to Page van der Linden on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 08:46 AM PST.


This map shows:

16%32 votes
22%43 votes
60%115 votes

| 190 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tips! (4.00)
    And recommendations, if you are so inclined.  However, neither will help my jetlag.
  •  Curious how battleground states have the highest % (4.00)
    Solid red states mostly have low numbers of incidents.  Battle-ground states have the highest.  Correlation is not causality - but if it smells like a rat...
    •  Quantity vs Quality of problem (none)
      Seems that four "battleground" states -- Minnesota, West Virginia, New Hampshire, and Iowa -- fall into the "very low" category.  What might it be about those four states.

      As well, a "question" that seems uncertain here.  What about the scale of the problem -- are the cases of Sproul staff potentially ripping up 10,000s of (Democratic) registrations counted as 1 incident per state or is there some attempt to count as thousands.  The Republican students in Madison, WI, who provided false information in the dorms -- one incident or an incident for every resident?  E.g., it is interesting to examine the question of how many problems per voter, also critical to understand how important those problems were.

      •  MN, NH & Iowa (none)
        "Minnesota, West Virginia, New Hampshire, and Iowa -- fall into the "very low" category."

        A guess: they have clean and clear electoral processes and regulations that are less amenable to the sorts of corruption and infringement the Repugs needed to rely on.  I don't know anything about WV, but MN, NH & Iowa all have long-standing traditions of active civic involvement in local electoral politics.  I wonder what party the AGs belong to in these states.

      •  NH: paper ballots, allows same day registration (none)
        I hear our SOS is a 14 term Democrat. In any case when I contacted his office about the need to keep paper ballots I was assured that this was the NH plan. They are all marked by hand and counted either by hand or by optical scanner.

        We also have same day registration, which eliminates provisional ballots and all that goes with them.

        So this may explain some of why our problem rate was low.

        •  I was actually just wondering... (none)
          Whether we even HAD an SoS... I don't think I've ever seen anything about NH's Secretary of State anywhere.. thanks for clearing it up though!

          In Afghanistan, they call them the Taliban. Here, we call them Republicans

          by ragnark on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 05:07:54 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  I would say that... (none)
      There may have been problems that weren't reported.  Maybe in the Red States, people didn't care because it "didn't really matter."

      Also, I am sure there was a lot of advertising and people running around in the battleground states giving out the numbers for where to report problems.  Therefore, more problems were reported.

      Just a thought.

    •  Not Necessarily All That Curious (none)
      As others pointed out, there was probably greater likelyhood of reporting problems in closely contested states.  Another factor may have been all the registration activity by the 527's and the parties.  Note that by far the highest % by category was registration; that could be a lost registrations, new registrants not showing up on lists, etc., and there's no proof that it's Repub malfeasance, since most of the voter registration work Dems and 527's did was in heavy dem areas, especially urban areas, where the local clerks were often Dems.

      Also, note that several closely contested states had few problems, and some that weren't closely contested--SC, AL, NY, CA--had lots of problems.

      If there's any trend to the numbers, it's mostly higher in states with a higher minority popoulation.  

    •  Wisconsin (none)
      For the most part our process was clean, but with all the attention focussed here the small problems were more likely to draw attention.

      the biggest issues, both in Milwaukee, seem to have come from incompetence by democratic officials, the too late delivery of absentees to prisoners in the County jail, and the nondelivery to precincts of completed absentee votes by the City election supervisor. Those were finally cleared for counting a couple days ago, and official tabulations revised.

  •  Thanks Pluto and (none)
    Wow weee. Oh Mon Dieu....

    educate 'em when they're young

    by Chamonix on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 08:53:03 AM PST

  •  And vice verse? (none)
    In Florida, some machines temporarily indicated votes intended for challenger John F. Kerry were for President Bush, and vice versa.

    This question has been bothering me for a really long time and this is the first time I have ever seen any indication of a Bush voter having their vote register for Kerry on a machine. So is this just plain sloppy writing on the part of the author who is assuming that this particular error was bi-partisan and cut both ways when it didn't? Or is there some actual evidence Bush votes popping up as Kerry votes?

    •  and vice versa (none)
      I have never once heard of one single reported instance in which a voter pushed the button for Bush and the machine indicated a vote for Kerry.

      Every single instance of this type of error, that I have ever heard reported by any voter in any state in this election, without exception, has been reported as an attempt to vote for Kerry that was almost hijacked as a Bush vote.

      The problem is, how many voters didn't notice, proofread, check, compare their vote with their intention before pushing the "VOTE" button?

      •  not sure we'd hear it (none)
        someone would have to visit
        the dark side blogs to find out
        if anyone claimed votes intended
        for Bush were showing up as
        headed for Kerry. those stories
        would not usually surface here
        at kos.

        only first person account I got
        in North Carolina. my friend said
        when he punched Review, it
        showed Bush. he called the
        election official who exclaimed,
        "You mean it did it again!?!"
        yeah, it did.

        I'd be very interested to hear if
        vice versa was ever actually
        reported, or just 'fair and balanced'
        reporting gone into the ditch.

        •  I agree this is a paramount question (none)
          are we just cherry-picking results here? I too haven't heard of any misguided votes going to Kerry instead of Bush...but, on the other hand, my safari browser can only point to

          if this thing picks up more steam, then we better have our answers in place...because that's the first thing that any skeptical journalist or individual is going to ask.

        •  We'd Hear It (none)

          IF voting machines had been switching Bush votes to Kerry in any kind of systemic way, the right-wing bloggers would be trumpeting it from the rooftop. After all, it would be proof that Democrats are "as bad" as Republicans about stealing elections, and it would be proof of the Vast Liberal Conspiracy!

          No, the only explanation for their silence that I can see is that there simply wasn't any significant number of Bush-to-Kerry changes.

          Its like the media listened to Weird Al's "Dare to be Stupid" and said "Yes! This is how the world should be!"

          by RHunter on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:48:33 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  During early voting (none)
          There were a number of reports of Bush votes getting switched to Kerry during early voting in either New Mexico or Nevada (I forget which) on touchscreen machines. Also, straight ticket votes marking the wrong party's candidates (in both directions).

          Remember that sometimes the echo chamber you're standing in will drown out other noises.  Also, I think the wingers will be a lot less up in arms about any irregularities, since they won.

          -- Want to make a difference? Join the taskforce! --

          by fwiffo on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 01:18:04 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Even if the count were fair... (none) could the election be deemed fair when the Republican agenda was misrepresented throughout the campaign, Kerry was smeared throughout the campaign, voters were brainwashed with color-coded fear tactics and big bad wolf commercials  throughout the campaign?  

        This is not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.

    •  Sloppy Writing (none)

      Not only that, but they claim it was "temporary". It was, from the reports I've heard, anything but! The voting machine often indicated that the voter had voted for Kerry, then switched to a vote for Bush when they looked at the summary screen. In some cases, it apparently even registered the "Kerry" button as if it had been the "Bush" button.

      Its like the media listened to Weird Al's "Dare to be Stupid" and said "Yes! This is how the world should be!"

      by RHunter on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:44:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  this is new right? (none)
    i'm 54. i can't remember a similar volume of discrepancies & anomalies in a national election. oh sure, people rose from the dead to vote in cook co., but they didn't have to wait 6 - 10 hrs. have i been missing this electoral dysfunction all these years?

    i'm an agnostic, i'd be an atheist if it weren't for mozart

    by rasbobbo on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 09:03:37 AM PST

    •  My guess (none)
      is that, first of all, the touch-screen dealies are a recent phenomenon. Secondly, when was the last time elections were so close? Truman/Dewey maybe?
      •  Four recent elections closer than Dewey-Truman (none)
        IIRC, that was a 4.4% margin nationally, more than 2.1 million votes over Dewey.  Since then, we've had 1960 (100,000 vote margin), 1968 (<0.7% margin, 510,000 vote margin), 1976 (2% margin, 1.7 million votes), and of course 2000 (540,000 vote margin).  Interesting how nobody seemed to think Nixon lacked the authority to govern when he had a vote margin over Humphrey that was smaller than Gore's over Bush in the other direction.  

        Certitude is not the test of certainty. We have been cocksure of many things that were not so.-- Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

        by Steady Eddie on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:04:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Nixon + Wallace (none)
          adding the Nixon vote and
          the George Wallace hate vote
          together -- and now, isn't that
          pretty much how things have
          evolved for the Republican Party
          since 1968? -- clearly Nixon
          had authority to govern.

          and you know, Nixon met with
          the Democratic leadership of
          the Senate and the House regularly.
          he worked with them in a bipartisan
          way and appointed a couple of
          Democrats to his Cabinet.

          to his credit Nixon actually kept
          the quasi-KKK wing of his base
          under good control, unlike ...

          •  In 1968, N+W not quite automatic (none)
            Back then, a lot of the Wallace voters outside of the South were working class people who would never, at that point, have voted for a Republican because of their fear of Rs being anti-labor.  Nixon's Southern Strategy combined with economic opportunism (hell, he even instituted "socialist" wage and price controls along with creating agencies like EPA and OSHA), along with McGovern's rampant ineptitude, gave a lot of those folks their first time of overcoming those constraints.  

            Of course, Johnson foresaw the Southern Strategy part when he signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964.  And then trashed liberalism's last chance to function when he flushed the funding for the Great Society down the tubes in Vietnam.

            Certitude is not the test of certainty. We have been cocksure of many things that were not so.-- Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

            by Steady Eddie on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:23:02 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  nixon + wallace < gore + nader (none)
            If you're gonna add Wallace's count to Nixon's, you'll have to add Nader's count to Gore's.
    •  I'm About That Age and (none)
      I remember the Kennedy election allegations. Plus I used to hang out with a politically active ethnic group back in the 70's and in that region I'd say that questionable deals and manipulations were the norm not the exception.

      I think elections have always been crooked, most of the time aimed at rigging local results more than the nationals.

      This doesn't make it right of course. This isn't rocket science: we've known how to count to 200 million since before the founding of the Republic.

      Maybe next time we can bring in some Iraqi observers.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy....--ML King, "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 12:31:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Twilight Zone! (none)
    A major newspaper is reporting there were widespread voting problems in this election? Did I wake up in Ukraine?

    We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we now know that it is bad economics. —Franklin Delano Roosevelt

    by Utah for Dean on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 09:06:10 AM PST

  •  We should make a stink about (4.00)
    Election fairness.  Drum home the fact that we don't make fraud charges without sufficient evidence, but there is evidence of unfairness.
    This unfairness, or inequality, was revealed in 2000 when the presidentail election was close, and is revealed again in 2004.

    If we want voter participation in this country, we better make it a credible endeavor, standing in long lines has got to go, Vote-O-Matic for minorities and poor communities has got to go, sweet elderly well-meaning but ultimately unhelful poll workers have got to go, shiney new toys, i.e. hackable computer voting has got to go, partisan hackery voter intimidation has got to go...

    I'd like to see a strong case made by the Democrats for this.  I truely want something done about it, so I want good government people on board with us, even if they are Republicans.

    "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine

    by Cathy on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 09:12:16 AM PST

  •  Some resources for those interested... (none) attempts to understand the 'if' and 'scale' of systemic disenfranchisement in the 2004 National Election:

    You may find the analyses of "truthisall" reasonable [just scroll down the rather long list].

    "Halt, Audit, & Prove My Vote Counts, Now" -- for those of us really interested in numbers and a comprehensive review of hw/sw/fw and network access activity, the only way we are going to even begin to understand what happened in this election is force a comprehensive comparison of actual ballots to central tabulation center records and gain access to a variety of other records [many of which, unfortunately, are readily discarded w/o a trace].

  •  Low-fraud battleground state (none)
    I'm pleased to see that our fair state of Oregon, while a great example of the rural vs. urban divide (overwhelming support of ban on gay marriage but Kerry won by a decent margin), and arguably a battleground state, still had a very low fraud index.

    I would pose that our voting system carries a lot of that responsibility. All mail-in ballots. While people can still go to polling places, most people can take as much time as they want/need to read their voters pamphlets, study the issues and cast their votes, all in the comfort of their homes. I was happy and relieved to be able to cast my ballot 2 weeks ahead of election day.

    It's not a perfect system, but it apparently helps keep fraud/intimidation/supression down.

    •  mail 'n burn... (none)
      Hmmmm... People mail in their tax returns, so why not vote the same way?  Then we could make a big honkin' bonfire with all those Diebolical machines!  Yeah!  And bankrupt those f&#%@rs!  YEAH!!!!  I can smell it now...

      Nunc pede libero puisanda tellus... (Now is the time to beat the earth with unfettered foot...)

      by a2jean on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 07:30:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Fraud! Suppression! (none)
  •  what nader is saying (none)
    In an email to supporters, dated today, Nader says:

    Big corporations have both political parties under their collective thumb.

    Washington, DC is corporate occupied territory.

    We cannot continue to delude ourselves into believing that the Democrats will be able to break this stranglehold.

    In 2004, a handful of well-meaning wealthy individuals spent $100 million on private efforts to defeat President Bush.

    They failed because they resisted this simple truth - the frozen Democrats are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

    It's time that we move on and create a nationwide grassroots effort to overturn the two-party corporate duopoly.

    Election fraud 2004 is just another chapter in a long history.  The difference today is, the parties are both controlled by pretty much the same socio-economic groups.

    Let's face it, business as usual isn't going to make elections more "fair" in this country.  It's only going to be fair people taking control of their government, town by town, county by county, state by state.

    •  Question to Ralph: Who is "We?" (none)
      When I see a significant economic or ethnic block other than so-called white liberal elites joining with Nader, I'll know there's a "we" that he might plausibly be talking about.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy....--ML King, "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 12:35:20 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The Democratic Party (none)
      can be taken over. It was in the 60s. Just join it and start the grassroots takeover from there. I think it already started to happen in this election.  The fact is I'm very sympathetic to the Green Party, but it would be easier to take over an established party than get everyone to switch to the Greens.  The Republican right wing took over their party. Surely progressives can do the same.
  •  Boston Globe reporter makes absurd statements (4.00)
    Here's his take on the Berkeley study:

    Then, a broadly reported second study by a team at the University of California at Berkeley, using an academic statistical method, asserted that ''Irregularities associated with electronic voting machines may have awarded 130,000 excess votes to President George W. Bush in Florida." In Broward County alone, the study said, Bush ''appears to have received approximately 72,000 excess votes." Palm Beach and Miami-Dade counties, which also use touch-screens, were also cited as anomalies.

    But if Bush had actually received 72,000 fewer votes in heavily Democratic Broward, his total this year would have been less than it was in 2000 -- even though nearly 132,000 more ballots were cast. Kerry won all three key counties, Broward by more than 209,000 votes.

    And this would be surprising why? A 'heavily Democratic' part of Florida comes to its senses after four years of horrific right-wing policies? Shocking!

    This article really made my blood boil.

    •  Me too (4.00)
      And this part really steams me:

      None of the recounts or inquiries is expected to affect the results of the presidential election, which Bush won by more than 3.3 million votes.

      Considering the whole point of the piece was to highlight an abundance of voting problems and "irregularities" how can they say whether or not a verified count would change anything or state how many votes Bush "supposedly" won by?

      Grrrrr . . .

      The polls don't tell us how a candidate is doing, they tell us how the media is doing.

      by Thumb on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 10:51:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  They always have to throw that in there. (4.00)
        "It doesn't matter, there isn't any smoking gun that would overturn the election."

        Well, maybe if it was investigated thoroughly, there would be.

        Really pisses me off.

        Resuscitate investigative journalism! Reality-Based does NOT mean investigations are wrong - it means investigations are essential.

        by nephalim on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:23:58 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Let's forget P/V (none)
        The statement that some candidate "won" the "popular vote" (P/V) is irrelevant under the present system (electoral colleage), where all that counts is who won the individual states.   What difference does P/V make?   We shouldn't fall into the trap of even discussing it.  

        Errors on the scale reported by the Globe are certainly enough to potentially change the results in several swings states (OH, FL, NM,...) so the election results should be fully audited as soon as possible.  

  •  Ukraine battleground and here (none)
    In Ukraine, the ultimate bargaining chip of the opposition is people power. A poll there (if it can be trusted) indicates that a new election wouldn't even be close; 48% to 32% in favor of the opposition candidate. And so all parties negotiate with that in mind. A strong bargaining chip indeed giving the opposition side a strong hand.

    Close elections like the one here are not over until the last vote is counted. When Kerry bailed early on the process he denied our side one of the key ingrediants of such struggles, leadership.  Close elections are all about sharp elbows, doing everything you can (legal and otherwise) to tilt the vote your way. Our side ran a classic populist campaign and didn't prepare for, engage in or follow through afterwards on the kind of guerilla war that this election is really all about.

    Bush/Rove on the other hand used just such a strategy. The loyalty oaths which seemed so repellent and anti-democratic to us were actually appropriate strategy in a close and dirty election where you need everything you can get to not lose. They encouraged unity and secrecy for what became a clandestine campaign of voter supression, computer tampering and all the rest. I'm not suggesting we should have done the same, but I think we should have vigerously countered it before, during and most critically after the votes were cast. We weren't prepared.

    I believe the US election was a victory of the minority over the majority and unlike Ukraine, accomplished with little protest. I can't prove it, it's just my feeling. But before we condemn feelings too hastily, let's remember that it is feelings which create people power, the ultimate bargaining chip in Ukraine, not scientificaly proven fact.

  •  Hmm. This last bit sort of bugs... (4.00)

    None of the recounts or inquiries is expected to affect the results of the presidential election, which Bush won by more than 3.3 million votes.

    That's kind of a facile declaration to make, non?

    Bush actually appears to have won by x number of electoral votes. Er, how many was that again? Or does that not matter anymore?

  •  4.8% intimidation? (none)
    Ummm.... can anybody explain what this number means from the chart?  Is it supposed to mean that almost 5% of the 30,000+ complaints were about intimidation?

    I don't know about anybody else, but I read through more than a handful of the "complaints" that were logged and available online, and many of these jumped out at me as only marginally significant.  Such as "I haven't received my absentee ballot yet".  I never got mine either, so I went down to the courthouse and voted early so I could go to a swing state.

    But if you weed out all that stuff, the percentage of something I consider significant.... intimidation... goes up.  Besides, isn't 5% of 30,000 = 1500 formal complaints of intimidation enough to warrant action anywhere in this country?

  •  what i've been saying for a while now (none)
    the data collected there is not indicative of fraud. only intimidation and voting machine errors would be considered fraud. the vast majority of complaints are people complaining about non-fraud related things, usually voter mistakes.
  •  Speaking of Election Errors... (4.00)
    That's being corrected right this minute in Ukraine

    "Calmer than you are Dude....calmer than you"

    by sula on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:23:13 AM PST

  •  One thing I just thought of... (4.00)
    We see a higher frequency of "incidents" in NM, OH, and FL, among others.

    This doesn't necessarily mean that the "incidents" were greater in those states.  Maybe it's just that people were more vigilant in those states or were looking harder.

    But I don't know.

  •  Calling all Senators (none)
    Please stand up for us on January 6th to investigate the "reasonable suspicion" evidence offered here that the Bush win just might not be legit.

    Separation of Church and State AND Corporation

    by Einsteinia on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 12:01:05 PM PST

  •  If the Ohio recount (none)
    shows that Kerry won Ohio, are we ready to hit the streets in protest? Will the media support us?
    •  I don't think the Media will (none)
      support us on anything. Their silenced is deafening. But we can each act as individual citizens for what we feel is the best thing for our country. If enough people take this responsibility on themselves we too can be like the Ukrainians. Imagine having to look to an ex-Russian satellite for guidance on democracy.
    •  good question (none)
      bushco might try to ignore it. i don't know who could force him out. but, i'm sure he'll know before we know, so if something crazy happens, he's scared.

      we can't take it to the supreme court. i think the senate is the only recourse. again, they don't have an enforcement branch.

      i think the only way is maybe a military coup if bushco doesn't want to leave peacefully.

      for nixon, there was overwhelming senate disapproval, so an impeachment was guaranteed. this time, i dunno. i think repugs could still pull this one out with a majority vote.

      •  McCain: Over My Dead Bleeding (none)
        body.  The man in an opportunistic bottom feeding bastard.  A hollow man with absolutely NO moral center.

        And a suckass besides.

        You can't always tell the truth because you don't always know the truth - but you can ALWAYS be honest.

        by mattman on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 09:29:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  to get repug senate support (none)
      i think we need to offer a different solution than kerry. i would happily take mccain or bradley.
    •  Texas shenanigans (none)
      Hey, it's my first post! How exciting. Anyway, going back to the touch screen/hijacked votes issue, I was a poll greeter for Martin Frost one day during early voting in Dallas, and a woman came out after voting and said she had voted straight Dem, except when it came to the 32nd Congressional District race (between Frost and Sessions), Sessions' name was highlighted. She was able to manually change it back to Frost, but God knows how many people didn't check first. The Frost campaign had affidavits from 10 people who said the same thing happened to them, but since the race wasn't close (Sessions spanked Frost by something like 10 points), the campaign didn't pursue it.

      Of course, as a Democrat and somebody who plans to vote in Dallas for the foreseeable future, I'm concerned, but nobody else seems to be. I'm going to write a letter to the Elections guy and cc the reporter at the Dallas paper who covered the race, as well as their political editor. But, beyond that, anybody have any suggestions about what I should do to get to the bottom of this?

      •  Early voting in Dallas (none)
        Sessions' margin of victory in the early voting (on touch screen machines) was substantially higher than in the final tally (the election day voting on optically scanned paper ballots gave Sessions a much smaller margin). Results are here:
        The polls had suggested Frost had a shot at winning, but then it was an instant landslide when the early vote totals were published at 7:00 p.m. Republicans generally got more of the early vote up and down the ballot in Dallas so maybe it's just part of that pattern. In the Sessions/Frost race, the number of early voters was more than the number of election day voters. That's the reverse of most other Dallas County races.  Of course the new 32d district is gerrymandered to pick up Republican parts of the county.  Still, it seems kind of odd--do Republicans really prefer to vote early more so than Democrats? Or do Republicans feel more comfortable with the touch-screens than Democrats?  I can't really figure why that would be so.  It's a little wierd.  
        I assume the Frost campaign folks have at least turned the information over to Election Protection ( the GAO so it can go into the vast hopper of election "irregularities."  It may also be worth a letter to the congressmen who asked for an investigation (sorry can't remember who they are & I've got to get off the computer now!)
      Come join us at our Rally this Saturday!

      Citizens' Alliance for Secure Elections  Dedicated to secure, reliable and voter verifiable elections in Ohio!                              

      Columbus, Ohio
      Saturday December 4, 2004

      1:00 PM, Ohio Statehouse Lawn,
      East Broad & South High Streets,
      Columbus, Ohio
      Symposium with Reverend Jesse Jackson to Follow Rally
      Investigate All 88 (counties), Coordinate, Litigate, Re-Count, Recuse

      Greg Palast (journalist and author of The Best Democracy Money Can Buy)
      State Senator Teresa Fedor (D-Toledo)                                          
      Bill Moss (former Columbus school board member)
      Bob Fitrakis (Columbus Free Press)
      Reuben Herrera (Adelante - Latino/Latina Democrats)
      Anita Rios (Green Party)
      Cliff Arnebeck (lead litigant in the Contest of Election suit)
      Jad Hummeidan (Council on American Islamic Relations)
      Ian Solomon (Yale Associate Dean & Law professor) (invited)       
      Petey Tallie (Ohio AFL-CIO) (invited)
      Dave Lytel (Redefeat Bush) (invited)
      Bill Burga (Ohio AFL-CIO) (invited)
      Rev. Mylian Waite (Antioch Baptist Church, Cleveland, Ohio) (invited)
      Charleta Tavares (Columbus City Council member) (invited)           
      Thom Hartman (Journalist) (invited)   
      Lynn Landees (Journalist) (invited)
      Emcee: Susan Truitt (founder of Citizens' Alliance for Secure Elections)


      Saturday December 4th, 2004
      6:00 PM - 9:00 PM, Africentric Middle School
      300 E. Livingston Ave., Columbus, Ohio
      Stand Up and Be Counted: A C.A.S.E. for Democracy Keynote speaker: Reverend Jesse Jackson
      Featuring: Greg Palast and State Senator Teresa Fedor
      Music/poetry with Gil Scot Heron (invited))                                                                                                        
      Contact Evan Davis (614) 437-2039 cell (614) 946-3834

      Thousands of Ohio citizens had difficulty voting on November 2nd.
      Despite thousands of complaints, a planned recount, statewide public hearings, several lawsuits, a Congressional  investigation and the outcry of voters rights groups, this fact has been dismissed or underreported by the mainstream media. Even Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell claimed the Ohio election was a huge success, saying, "We came through with flying colors." Washington Times, 11/04/04
      We need thousands of people to attend the FIGHT FOR DEMOCRACY RALLY to draw attention to voter issues AND to support the Congressional probe of allegations of irregularities in the November 2nd presidential vote.

      Please plan to attend and bring your friends!

    •  Cuyahoga County Turn Out (none)
      Check out this article which compares the voting turn out in Cuyahoga County over the last twenty years, arguing that long lines kept thousands of people from voting.  Almost as many people voted in Cuyahoga County in 1984 as in 2004, even though 25,000,000 less people voted nationwide in the 1984 election:

      Ohio Voter Turn Out Turned Off

  •  Results unaffected? huh? (none)
    "None of the recounts or inquiries is expected to affect the results of the presidential election, which Bush won by more than 3.3 million votes."

    How has that been prejudged? Crucial battleground states seem to have been uniformly affected; We learn today, states like WA seem to have swung one way by as few as 46 votes. At 3.5 million in voter-turnout in WA that makes it upto 150 incidents in WA state alone, using the legend at the top of the chart! quite enough to 'affect the result of the Presidential elections' it seems to me!!
    I feel a tremendous surge of pride for the people of Ukraine, in whom the 'soma' has yet to take effect. As for us - are we a lost cause?

  •  the poll is bunk (none)
    Don't take that personally, Plutonium Page. . . I loved the diary.  But the way these polls are set up allow us to vote for only one item.  I would have voted for all three, if I could have.

    As far as I'm concerned, most voter suppression quite often involves fraud (for example signs in black neighborhoods telling people that if they show up at the polling booths they can be charged held liable for old parking tickets).  And where exactly does malfeasance on the part of election officials shade into fraud?  

    Also, there is of course inefficiency.  Without a good measure of this, no one would be able to get away with suppression and other forms of fraud.   Heck, a system that allows fraud and suppression to go in is by definition inefficient.

    Not only that, but it helps to have a surplus of general inefficiency in order to provide plausible deniability and cover for the real cases of fraud, etc.  I'm not saying it's a deliberate strategy or anything, but it certainly does help explain the intertia and general lack of political will to fix these things.  Everyone knows that a more efficient system that gets more voters to the boths in and generally makes it easier for people will --on balance-- help democrats.

    "Every man is guilty of all the good he didn't do." -Voltaire

    by Nate Roberts on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 09:35:29 PM PST

    •  Ha! You're right. (none)
      I was only semmi-serious with the poll, and posted this diary after an 8.5 hour plane flight to Amsterdam (that didn't count the 3 hours to get to the east coast of the US before that).  So I was a little jetlagged when I set up the poll.

      Next time, I'll give an "all of the above" option if I post such a poll.

  •  How Democrats Enabled Republicans To Steal (none)
    "Since the presidential election, there have been hundreds, perhaps thousands, of stories on the Internet (and even a few in the mainstream news media) about voter fraud and how easily the 2004 presidential election could have been rigged by the Bush Administration and their corporate allies, Diebold and ES & S, the companies in charge of counting a majority of all the votes in American today. What isn't being discussed, however, is the Democratic Party's complicity in this year's presidential election farce."-from "How Democrats Enabled Republicans To Steal the 2004 Presidential Election," in Online Review.

    Howard Martin -- -- sent this out tonight.  I'm reading the article at Online Review, but I had to stop reading to send out this link.  

    Susan in Port Angeles (my cat)

    by SusanHu on Wed Dec 01, 2004 at 11:22:34 PM PST

  •  Rather than rely on a mainstream newspaper (none)
    you can look at more than 36,000 election incidents here EIRS database.

    For you Kossians that dismiss the allegations of systematic voter suppression I invite you to look at the incidents in Cuyahoga County, Philadelphia, all of Florida, Kings County New York, Bronx New York, New Mexico, Texas, especially Bexar and Travis County. Do a search for Rock the Vote in the nationwide registration incidents.  Take a look at where the most missing absentee ballots were. Look at the ballot problems.

    And by all means, take a good long look at the machine incident data.  A good, long look.

    Take your time browsing through these incidents.  If you really care to look at eyewitness evidence of widespread fraud, you cannot come away dismissing this data as 'voter mistakes.'

    The United States has around 3200 counties.

    How much is 3.3 million votes?

    That is 33,000 votes for Kerry in 100 counties, which is 3% of all counties.  Where did Sproul operate?

    Do the math.  If only half a million registrations weren't processed, and half a million absentee ballots weren't sent, we are down to 22,000 Democratic votes suppressed in 100 counties.  Is that possible?

    If Cuyahoga county has 900 precincts, that is 24 people per precinct who couldn't vote or were misclassified.  That's 2 walk-aways per hour in a twelve hour voting day. Or two spoiled ballots per hour.  Or two votes misclassified per hour.

     How about Philadelphia.  Or Broward,  Or Miami-Dade.  or even Bernalillo. or Mercer County.  or North Carolina.  or Clark County.

    You'll find that around 41% of the machine incidents nationwide involved ES&S, either with e-voting, central tabulators, or optical scan. The thing about machine incidents, is that only very vigilant people detect misclassification.  And perhaps no one can detect central tabulating incidents.

    A reasonable person can not come away from this data, if you spend some time reading through it, understanding what it is, with the conclusion that there wasn't widespread systematic suppression of Democratic votes.  

    Now try to remember the Iraq war scam with non-existant WMDs with Colin Powell up there at the UN lying his ass off, and the Torture memos, and how The Air is Safe to Breath at Ground Zero, and tell me that the Republican Party isn't capable of this.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site